Chuck Mayer
Senior HTF Member
Well, film scholars, by their very nature, specifically target a TYPE of film. After all, for film scholars to be important, it follows that film must also be important. Not a knock, just an observation.
The good news is: film scholars don't get to determine what films become classics. The average filmgoer, chatting with his friends at Chili's, does that. The moviegoing, ticket-buying public makes that determination, and always will. By sheer virtue of numbers and enthusiasm.
The eighties produced plenty of classic films. Overall, there is a certain whimsy that some scholars might find distasteful, but it depends on where you are in the cycle. When the 90's become nostalgic (in about 5 years), no doubt film scholars will lament the "fun" and "spark" that 80's classics had. And canonize the 70's. Ten years later, we'll just move up one more.
Some "classic" films are awful. Some are brilliant. That's the beauty of art. WE get to decide for OURSELVES.
Take care,
Chuck
The good news is: film scholars don't get to determine what films become classics. The average filmgoer, chatting with his friends at Chili's, does that. The moviegoing, ticket-buying public makes that determination, and always will. By sheer virtue of numbers and enthusiasm.
The eighties produced plenty of classic films. Overall, there is a certain whimsy that some scholars might find distasteful, but it depends on where you are in the cycle. When the 90's become nostalgic (in about 5 years), no doubt film scholars will lament the "fun" and "spark" that 80's classics had. And canonize the 70's. Ten years later, we'll just move up one more.
Some "classic" films are awful. Some are brilliant. That's the beauty of art. WE get to decide for OURSELVES.
Take care,
Chuck