Why are older movies so much better than modern movies? Is it just nostalgia?

Why are older movies so much better than modern movies? Is it just nostalgia?

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The shitty movies of the past get forgotten.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      even the shitty movies of the past are better than movies coming out today.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I catch random forgotten films from the 30s and 40s on TCM and yeah, even the worst ones are better than 99% of movies released in the last 5 years

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >forgotten
          I actually have a few on VHS and have found others free on Youtube. So they aren't forgotten. Not by me at least.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous
      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Sure thing moron.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Watch never-ending story 2&3 and then come back to me.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I think he means the Golden Age, everyone knows the late 20th century had plenty of garbage

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            All the bad early stuff are lost media now though. If not, it's just random things like "Man jumping" to show off their new camera.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              The peak of cinema is early 30s to early 60s. While there are some lost films from that era, there are many thousands that are not.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >The peak of cinema is early 30s to early 60s
                It wasn't tho, Boomy.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It was though, zoomy

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Then why does no one watch 90% of those movies? In fact, most of them aren't even on the top 100 of anything.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The same reason everyone watches slop

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >everyone is wrong but me!
                Not quite the compelling argument you seem to think it is, fatso.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >"If it's so good, why isn't it popular?"
                Calling out someone else's reasoning when argumentum ad populum is coming out of your shiteating face. And now you pull the "YOU'RE JUST A CONTRARIAN!" card like a real turbohomosexual with nothing of substance to say
                >

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >can’t parse simple information and refute point
                >loses temper
                just can’t stop craving those (you)s, huh? Fat c**t.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I'm not even the person you were arguing with SHIT taste homosexual, why don't you go shit up a Marvel thread instead of embarrassing yourself

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Everyone but me watches slop
                Everytime.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        No way. Old BnW farces were unwatchable then and now, for the same reason. They're bad stage plays done as tax deductions.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Older movies had sovl.

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Filmmaking was more pure, more creative, with greater focus on storytelling, dialogue and characters, and less obsession with trying to WOW you every five seconds. Special Effects looked real because they were real, and not CGI trash.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >muh practical fx
      God you autists are the worst. CGI can be perfectly fine in the hands of a capable VFX department. Go jerk off to Heat some more

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        99% of cgi is shit

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >post image of actress from the 30s
        >accuse me of being obsessed with some boring shit "thriller" from the 90s
        are you moronic?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        CGI is only good when it's mixed with practical effects. CGI on its own always looks like shit

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      even the shitty movies of the past are better than movies coming out today.

      True.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Hey it’s the comic who taught Data how to be funny

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Older movies
    How much older OP?

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Editing was a pain in the ass when it was physical film, and cutting and splicing it. It punished mistakes harder in the form of time/limited material, so those doing it learned the hardest way best practices. And it was a younger medium in an industry less converged and systematized to other political ends.

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    in the past, people made movies based upon life experiences, and since it was important to impress upon the viewer the impact of these events, the result was movies were larger than life. Now movies are based upon other movies, and since people only have the frame of reference of those other movies, the result is lesser than even the other movies, even moreso the experiences those movies were based upon.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Can I save this for later it's very articulate

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      also true for vidya and anime

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Miyazaki said something similar to this about animation. Old animators drew inspiration from real life but new ones just get inspired from other anime.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Miyazaki is correct and weebs hate him for it.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        and there would be no Miyazaki without Walt Disney, and onward goes this thing of ours

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    For starters I think we need about 20 years to determine if aovie is 10/10 for example. So not really nostalgia but just letting them stand the test of time and be vetted etc.

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Classic films were based on literature, stage plays and history
    >Modern films are based on comic books, video games, board games and children's cartoons

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    People had to have talent back then.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  11. 3 weeks ago
    Dunkaccino

    because modern actors put in zero fricking effort into their roles.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Acting was far worse in the 1950s and 1960s than even a low-end movie today

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You've seen frick all movies from the 50s and especially 60s if you believe that.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Henry Fonda's acting in the 30s and 40s outclasses anything you see today. Only actor I might rank above him is George C. Scott

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >George C. Scott
          Kept Hamming it up. Nah

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous
  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No CGI. they had to make sets and portray scale and realism

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    COLOR

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Blows me away that directors look at the images on the right and think it’s acceptable. I’m fairly certain it’s a psychological thing where they’re unhappy with the film they’ve made and think dyeing it blue will magically make it good.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I miss color.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Scott is an old head too. You'd think guys like him would have some kind of reverence for the old boomer days.

      Or maybe he shoots his film.and the israelites in the studio do whatever they want after. There has to be some kind of psychological component to the filters.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It's almost hard to believe Scott made some of the most beautiful films ever made in his younger days

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Which one is webm related? I can’t believe I took so long to watch the duellists and I’ve been melancholy ever since knowing I’ll never create anything as beautiful

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I don't know if there's any truth to this, but Scott strikes me as the kind of guy whose only skill is berating people with actual skill into doing ridiculously good jobs. When he's deprived of the sorts of savants he had working on his older films, he's basically useless.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >There has to be some kind of psychological component to the filters.
        It's the reflection of a dying society, anon.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I mean a psychological reason the studios feel audiences respond to the filter. There's no way it's an artistic choice. It's a tactic. For what exactly I have no idea

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Modern cinema is just soulless goyslop that is immediately forgotten and only produced for tax write off or money laundering purposes

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >implying movies have ever been anything other.

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Propagandists were more subtle.

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Talented directors/writers/actors vs talentless nepotism charisma black holes

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Take a look at modern film crews and they're filled with blacks and women, instead of people with actual skill

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    People don't study the greats anymore. It should be mandatory to watch all the greatest films from 1900 to 1970.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Why do recommend from the 1900s and 1910s?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The Great Train Robbery
        A Trip to the Moon
        The Birth of a Nation
        Broken Blossoms

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I heard birth of a nation is racist

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            no but it is racial

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I watch kinos from the 80s. I've watched about 5 in the last week and they're all of higher quality, even low budget releases that never became well known

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Fortunately there are enough old movies that you can watch them for the rest of your life and you don't need to bother with new stuff, and even then we still get like at least 6 or 7 watchable/good movies every year, and that's not even mentioning foreign films.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Old westerns alone kept me busy for a good three years, and I've still only watched about half of the ones I want to see

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Even the shitty ones had professionists handling camera work, photography, sound etc.
    Today there's a nepotism singularity, there's no fricking talent either in front or behind the camera, it's absurd.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >nepotism

      I thought that was just an excuse for the shit tier level of things. But it really is true. One or two, coincidence. But once you look into it, it's really gotten out of hand. It wouldn't be a problem if they had the talent, but the talent is NOT there. It's sad. You'd think the family would be embarrassed of such trash their offspring produces

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Just watched pic related with my pleb wife in the room. She actually put down her low iq romance/fantasy book and watched the entire thing. Fully engaged. Laughing at the jokes and shocked by the twist.

    Point is yes movies were better on average and have gotten steadily worse. Or just dumber.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >She actually put down her low iq romance/fantasy book and watched the entire thing.
      At least her baseline was reading a shitty book rather than scrolling on her phone. She’s already better than the average person.
      I’m glad she liked Witness for the Prosecution.
      Does anyone have any similar movies to recommend, or is it actually really something that can only happen once in 50 years?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      trash-talking your own wife to a bunch of strangers online isn't too wholsome, bud

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        She's a pleb when it comes to media most of the time. You don't know anything else about her

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I know how to hit her G spot.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Please teach me

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Are you like an actual boomer?

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They used to know how to treat prostitutes back then

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Is that Walter Matthau?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yes

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    movies before 1990 are unwatchable barring a few exceptions like Waterloo.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      gay

      >She actually put down her low iq romance/fantasy book and watched the entire thing.
      At least her baseline was reading a shitty book rather than scrolling on her phone. She’s already better than the average person.
      I’m glad she liked Witness for the Prosecution.
      Does anyone have any similar movies to recommend, or is it actually really something that can only happen once in 50 years?

      If you look up a list of classic movies from the 40s/50s they're pretty much guaranteed to be good. I'm partial to noir. Snappy dialogue and clever twists etc. Witness is great because it's basically a comedy with high stakes. I also like seeing where all of the tropes and cliches we take for granted came from

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I buy the theory the whole onerous limitations on what you could write/have them say/depict meant you had to be more clever about it. It's a more elaborate example of the difference between some elaborate, story driven and intense erotica and "CUM GUZZLING FRICK HOUNDS DROWN FAT-TITTIED SEX-MEAT-HOLES IN DELUGES OF NUT"

        But it also meant real soullessly saccharine nonsense we just lost to time/don't know vividly the same way someone looking back on the 2000s won't remember the dogshit action movies or teen comedies.

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They were art instead of propaganda. Mostly.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Everything Hollywood has ever pumped out was propaganda but at least they upheld good old-fashioned values On which we used to rely.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You sound like a family guy.

  26. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because advertising campaigns ruin movies before you see them. Look at the original trailers for your favorite older movies and consider whether you would have enjoyed them as much if you had seen all those spoilers.

  27. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    My grandfather would go to the cinema every week and watch a new movie, as did everyone else. Do you think these movies were good? They weren't so they were forgotten, but they did provide the money to fund actually good movies.

  28. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Nope. We have great work being done across the industry, but the writing has become dogshit. Mostly, it's because of DEI policies and corporate heads with an overinflated sense of ego to make demands of artists without consideration to the art.

    There's too much money involved now, so the ad men and accountants are listened to above the artists. The only thing to save movies/TV/video games/etc. is an industry wide crash so that genuine enthusiasm for the craft while also making a profit can rise again. It happened with the 40s/50s movie studio crash, and it will happen again.

    Because Hollywood never learns it's fricking lesson and they'll forget it again after the next crash.

  29. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    reflection of a better society

  30. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Back then, even the obvious propaganda media had to compete with genuine soul-made media.
    Now all media is bought and paid for before it even gets made and doesn't even have to disguise itself or compete with anything besides itself.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Thing is, the ones making the propaganda WERE the ones making the best actual films. Ford, Huston, Capra etc. They weren't just government stooges pumping out drivel

  31. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    design by committee

  32. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    People were generally more respectable. They actually played people rather than characters. Its like maybe you want to relate to most characters and see
    a little of yourself in them and was not a constant flooding of endorphins or something. The general tone of the show or movie could be magical but also subtle and not as intense.

  33. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Thoughts on pre-code vs post-code? Shit like scarface and white heat are kino but most of them are pretty cringe. Film is one of the only real time machines we have. We can really see how primitive things were over 100 years ago

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Night Nurse is great

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The Pre-code era was so brief, and honestly the early talkie period of the late 20s sucked ass. Only around 1930-1932 did Hollywood films become incredible. 20s was dominated by eurotrash. Anyway because 1934-1965 is such a vast mountain of great movies it handily beats 1927-1934

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Damn I said white heat but I was thinking of little caesar and public enemy

  34. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    If you're talking pre-80s, then it's by virtue of there being no model for the generic blockbuster yet. Films were actually creative and reflections of their creators. If you're talking 80s to 00s, then it's just because it took a few decades for the blockbuster to reach its final form: pandering, paint-by-numbers, lowest common denominator slop.

  35. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Every movie made now is either capeshit, social justice pandering oscarbait, low budget horror, or some artsy indie bullshit. Older movies were a lot more varied.

  36. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Is it just nostalgia?
    Nope. And don't trust a single homosexual who claims otherwise.

  37. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Better tech lead to complacency, cutting corners and a lack of technical knowledge. Keep in mind we've had stable CGI for thirty years and we still have movies that have CGI that looks like Reboot or Beast Wars which came out in the 90s.

  38. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Modern movies look like this.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      bro frick you for posting that frickin ape itt screw you

      Filmmaking was more pure, more creative, with greater focus on storytelling, dialogue and characters, and less obsession with trying to WOW you every five seconds. Special Effects looked real because they were real, and not CGI trash.

      i cant stand that square headed dyke, bette was 10 times better.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >bette was 10 times better
        lol frick no, she was both uglier and an inferior actress. Kate Hepburn's performance in The Lion in Winter shits all over anything Davis ever did

  39. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Why are older movies so much better than modern movies? Is it just nostalgia?
    one of my favorite movies growing up was the 1990 release of Total Recall. everything about that film made me love sci-fi movies from then on.
    then I came across "Johnny Mnemonic" and my child mind was further falling in love with Sci-Fi.
    I often talk about movie quality (not picture quality but actual quality of storyline and direction of story) and to me, it seems technology has went from being used to add onto the films as it did in the 90's, to becoming a crutch for storytelling in the 2010's and especial now in the 2020's.
    it seems most big named studios rely upon visual stimulation and engagement over storyline and it shows - a movie will look fricking amazing on mute, but become dog shit when audio is turned up.

    Now, the remake of Total Recall is ok if you take it for a reimagine. but to compare it against the 90's release, Total Recall 2012 kind of sucks

  40. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The peak of Hollywood was post-code up until the 90s. The 90s were too cheesy and then after that it devolved too much into cgi sloppa and hyperpolitical shit

  41. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    they cared more.

  42. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ITT: a bunch of people under 30 being maudlin like a bunch of people over 70 who wasted their youth.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *