yanceycravat

How does one make it to 23 having never heard of Chaplin?

137 posts in this topic

On 9/26/2018 at 1:46 AM, speedracer5 said:

I like this Millennial cut off date being 1985 instead of 1982 (as is usually cited). As someone born in ‘84, can I consider myself Gen X now? I’m tired of being lumped in with all the generalizations attributed to the Millennials. I have a very long attention span and can watch the slowest paced films, if they’re interesting. There’s nothing wrong with superhero movies. People greenlighting the sequels, remakes, etc. are most likely older generations—not millennials. 

People born before the Internet existed are not "Millennials".  People who pity those who mythologically lived before the Internet existed ARE.

And there's something we've been seeing in Millennial humor, namely that all the great films they do know about, or at least have been told about by "Oldsters"--Citizen Kane, 90's Oscar winners, documentaries that played actual theaters in the 70's and 80's--need to be comically "taken down a peg", as they've clearly got overblown reputations put on them by other people.  Old ones, obviously.  There's the "Documentary Now!" comedy on cable, that parodies specific-reputation documentaries without ever really having seen them outside of reputation, there's at least a dozen "What's so great about Forrest Gump/Shawshank Redemption?" video bloggers on YouTube that don't quite understand the point of them, but think they were unjust to get Oscars instead of better movies, and if you tell a Millennial to "Watch more classic movies", he WILL immediately think you're referring to Citizen Kane...Ten bucks if he doesn't.  Unless you tell him to see a foreign film, and then he thinks he has to go watch Death playing chess and talking like the Swedish Chef.

There's something more at play here than just "attention span" or "preferring color to B&W"--It's the key to the whole Millennial mindset, which is the same reason there's been more of an angry upturn in parodies of Great History:  Millennials do not like to be told that something from before their time is worth their attention, because what they've been fed for breakfast, lunch and dinner throughout their entire formative school years is historical revision that everyone in America for most of the 19th and 20th century acted like racist chauvinist baby-murderers, and that the burden of civilization is now completely on them to Fix Everything Right Again from scratch.  Their generation has been told that nothing good came before them, and now people who did come before them are telling them that something did...Yeah, right--They would, they were in on it.  Fortunately, the Millennial is armed with his magic weapon:  TECHNOLOGY!  That mysterious thing that people over 30 will hopefully "puzzle" over, scratch their heads, and slink away in baffled awe at the merest mention of "Online social media" like jungle natives seeing the explorer Make Magic Fire with his lighter.  When cornered, the Millennial will immediately concoct fantasies that anyone his age is the only generation alive that's ever heard of the Internet, Uber or smartphones, and where else would you look for classic films but YouTube?  And what classic films are there besides the one our video/DVD generation discovered?...Are you saying there's a more classic film than Princess Bride?  If a movie doesn't have color, or sound, or has old-school effects or soundstage backgrounds, it was clearly an earlier generation's fault for lacking Technology, and still pretending to be an actual movie, because people back then were more gullible and believed stupid things.

There're some great videos on YouTube's "React Channel" (the same one that has "Old People React to Fortnite"), where high-school students react to classic films--Watch the reaction always turn out to be the same:  1) Sniggering at its Oldness, 2) Baffled disorientation ("What...are they...?), 3) Bemusement, 4) Creative Individuality ahead of their peers for liking it ("I have got to rent this, even though it's old, but I'm, like into this stuff!"), and then 5) Instant Expert, lest any old person suspect they were a clueless teen before the lesson--"This is one of the great classic Oscar-winning films!"  Oh, thank you for telling us that, good thing you knew and we didn't.  ;)

("Everything I know is from Glee!"  "I know this song because Family Guy parodied it!")  :D

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/25/2018 at 1:22 PM, LawrenceA said:

It's easy to forget when discussing classic movie sources that YouTube has literally hundreds if not thousands of classic films, and at no cost beyond the internet connection. There are several ways to watch them on your TV, too, so one doesn't have to rely on your desktop/laptop/phone or tablet for viewing, although that doesn't seem to be an issue for younger people, which is who we are targeting with this discussion.

So...you actually FOUND one that wasn't glaucoma'ed, chipmunk sped-up, 2X zoomed into the characters' noses, and/or pushed into a postage-stamp corner, in accordance with YouTube "Fan edit" copyright loopholes?

On 9/23/2018 at 12:28 PM, TomJH said:

I recall once talking to the head of personnel of a small company. He was, at a guess, around 30.

At one point in our conversation I made reference to Captain Bligh.

"Who?" he asked.

"You know," I said, "Captain Bligh. Mutiny on the Bounty."

"Sorry," he replied, "Before my time."

Well, you could have imitated Charles Laughton saying "Mis-tah CRIS-chunn!", he would at least know that reference from Bugs Bunny cartoons...  ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, EricJ said:

People born before the Internet existed are not "Millennials".  People who pity those who mythologically lived before the Internet existed ARE.

And there's something we've been seeing in Millennial humor, namely that all the great films they do know about, or at least have been told about by "Oldsters"--Citizen Kane, 90's Oscar winners, documentaries that played actual theaters in the 70's and 80's--need to be comically "taken down a peg", as they've clearly got overblown reputations put on them by other people.  Old ones, obviously.  There's the "Documentary Now!" comedy on cable, that parodies specific-reputation documentaries without ever really having seen them outside of reputation, there's at least a dozen "What's so great about Forrest Gump/Shawshank Redemption?" video bloggers on YouTube that don't quite understand the point of them, but think they were unjust to get Oscars instead of better movies, and if you tell a Millennial to "Watch more classic movies", he WILL immediately think you're referring to Citizen Kane...Ten bucks if he doesn't.  Unless you tell him to see a foreign film, and then he thinks he has to go watch Death playing chess and talking like the Swedish Chef.

There's something more at play here than just "attention span" or "preferring color to B&W"--It's the key to the whole Millennial mindset, which is the same reason there's been more of an angry upturn in parodies of Great History:  Millennials do not like to be told that something from before their time is worth their attention, because what they've been fed for breakfast, lunch and dinner throughout their entire formative school years is historical revision that everyone in America for most of the 19th and 20th century acted like racist chauvinist baby-murderers, and that the burden of civilization is now completely on them to Fix Everything Right Again from scratch.  Their generation has been told that nothing good came before them, and now people who did come before them are telling them that something did...Yeah, right--They would, they were in on it.  Fortunately, the Millennial is armed with his magic weapon:  TECHNOLOGY!  That mysterious thing that people over 30 will hopefully "puzzle" over, scratch their heads, and slink away in baffled awe at the merest mention of "Online social media" like jungle natives seeing the explorer Make Magic Fire with his lighter.  When cornered, the Millennial will immediately concoct fantasies that anyone his age is the only generation alive that's ever heard of the Internet, Uber or smartphones, and where else would you look for classic films but YouTube?  And what classic films are there besides the one our video/DVD generation discovered?...Are you saying there's a more classic film than Princess Bride?  If a movie doesn't have color, or sound, or has old-school effects or soundstage backgrounds, it was clearly an earlier generation's fault for lacking Technology, and still pretending to be an actual movie, because people back then were more gullible and believed stupid things.

There're some great videos on YouTube's "React Channel" (the same one that has "Old People React to Fortnite"), where high-school students react to classic films--Watch the reaction always turn out to be the same:  1) Sniggering at its Oldness, 2) Baffled disorientation ("What...are they...?), 3) Bemusement, 4) Creative Individuality ahead of their peers for liking it ("I have got to rent this, even though it's old, but I'm, like into this stuff!"), and then 5) Instant Expert, lest any old person suspect they were a clueless teen before the lesson--"This is one of the great classic Oscar-winning films!"  Oh, thank you for telling us that, good thing you knew and we didn't. 

By definition of the year of my birth I am a millennial, or depending on what you read, perhaps at the very beginning of the generation after that. Despite that, I don't feel at all like what is defined here, maybe because I always found history interesting or because I was raised around adults or because I never believed the slander against previous generations and actually respect them immensely.  Maybe I'm the exception. One never knows.

That being said and getting back to movies, the subject at hand, its hard not to notice the attempts to take films down a few pegs that you mentioned. Forrest Gump is a very good film, and Shawshank Redemption is a brilliant one. While neither is my favorite film of 1994 (that honor would be a dead heat between Quiz Show and the remake of The Browning Version), I don't begrudge them any attention or Oscars they were up for or received. But Forrest does receive a large amount of unnecessary flack, usually having to deal with the Robin Wright character. But even that film gets off easy compared to the frosty receptions of a few Oscar winners of the classic era (especially Cavalcade, Gigi, Gentleman's Agreement, The Greatest Show on Earth, Cimarron, and Around the World in 80 Days). Again its unwarranted. What such films were aiming at were either deep and serious topics, portrayed sensitively or at being pure entertainment. And what is so harmful about that that all that vitreol is unleashed. If anything, current films are, on the whole, much hollower. 

You are also right about songs too, by the way, even pop songs, rather than movie musical music can apply. Case in point, a few months ago, I heard a very popular early 90s song on the radio, Duran Duran's 1992 hit "Ordinary World" Loved the song, have listened to it a lot since then. But looking at that song 's comment section on YouTube, so many of the comments were yelling "Everything Sucks!" Which as it turned out to be was a web TV series that only lasted about 10 episodes earlier this year before being cancelled. That show used the song in one episode, I guess, but it seems so shallow to cut a great song down to size and associate it with a blip of a series and not to even know it was there beforehand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, EricJ said:

Well, you could have imitated Charles Laughton saying "Mis-tah CRIS-chunn!", he would at least know that reference from Bugs Bunny cartoons...  ?

I would think even that but a faint possibility here Eric, and especially considering that the guy Tom mentioned was approx 30 y/o and thus not of the Boomer or even Gen-X generations. As I would think one would have to be of those generations to have watched a lot of old W-B cartoons and in which and from which many of us of those generations would often get our first taste of the parodies of the previous generations' cultural touchstones such as Bugs doing his Laughton/Capt Bligh impression.

(...this would be similar to how that one teenager in that video you posted above kept saying he "saw that [parodied] on Family Guy")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/24/2018 at 3:49 PM, CaveGirl said:

I agree, we need no more talk of Amish or Mennonite lack of viewing habits of movies or tv programs.

What about the Hutterites in 49th Parallel?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, CinemaInternational said:

By definition of the year of my birth I am a millennial, or depending on what you read, perhaps at the very beginning of the generation after that. Despite that, I don't feel at all like what is defined here, maybe because I always found history interesting or because I was raised around adults or because I never believed the slander against previous generations and actually respect them immensely.  Maybe I'm the exception. One never knows.

Still, the one thing about "Old films" they do know--from babysitter movie-night on DVD--is that all the great "Old films" they did enjoy came from the 80's:  Ghostbusters, Back to the Future, The Goonies (which our generation hated).  Check out the one kid in the clip who saw Seven Brides for Seven Brothers:  "This is old, it's got to be from the 80's--It's from before the 80's??  That's old."

1982 is the "cutoff date", all right, not for "Millennial birthdays" (that's 1995, hence the name, and anyone born then is approaching the Big 24), but for "The first year when any good movies were made...Except for the Star Wars ones."  There's a reason for that too:  The 80's were probably the last great perfect-storm for feel-good commercial movies--Star Wars and Rocky had gotten us out of our 70's Golden Age Ford-Carter Malaise in 1977, and it wasn't really until 1980, and the "Forget the icky news and be happy for your president!" Reagan years that entertainment turned into a major shopping-mall industry and movies finally started outdoing TV.  Tickets were still $5, so it was easier to repeat-view your favorite, since VCR's were too expensive to own for another six years.  But, also it was the last decade of on-set physical soundstages and effects, which made a movie seem more "real", before CGI took over in the early 90's, made producers overconfident, and audiences cynical about lazy producers.

Clip time again--Watch a batch of college kids now try to identify movies from posters.  Obviously, they're better at identifying classic 70's Horror than classic 70's Comedy, but that's not to say they A+ the quiz:

Note that every movie that they haven't seen that looks "good" HAS to be put in cultural-historical reference with the 80's, when it was okay to watch them--If Mel Brooks did a comedy, it must have been "Spaceballs", and if a Little League team played baseball, it must have been "The Sandlot".

The problem with getting them more exposure to at least the 60's-70's classics, never mind the B&W, is that that's exactly what the studios believe, too:  Following Warner's "Nobody buys catalog disk anymore! :(" persecution-complex, other studios have dystrophied their "classic" catalogs to just a few iconic five or six that the audience can already quote dialogue from memory--Paramount just makes their money selling Ferris Bueller and Grease--and refuse to release anything else for disk or Fathom screening.   Well, mean...why else would anyone go to see it if they couldn't? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one culprit is true lack of interest in history, or popular culture. 

When I was in high school in the early 70's, there was a nostalgic resurgence in classic film: Chaplin, Keaton, WC Fields, Mae West, etc. The nostalgia was later fueled by references in popular films, like Woody Allen's. As a kid who loved history plus a Mom who liked classic film, I started watching whatever SHE watched and grew to love "old" movies on my own. In my early 20's the video boom opened up an entire world of movies equalizing "classic" and "current", although few current films were as enjoyable.

There has been a rekindling of the interest in classic film, and I credit TCM a lot for providing such a high quality outlet for it. This generation is no different than any other and my millennial sat through many a long b&w movie with us and actually preferred silents! It became her "schtick" in high school to wear Chaplin shirts, set her apart from other kids.

So I think if kids aren't exposed to "old" movies, they don't know where (or even why) to see them. Most "historical" themes are fun because of your own personal discovery. They're just waiting for you, like little time capsules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/26/2018 at 12:28 AM, sewhite2000 said:

Ha ha ha, I'll never forget Shatner pointing at Jon Lovitz, wearing Spock ears, and asking him, "You. Have you ever kissed a girl?", and he hangs his head in shame.

I'd really love to see that sketch again. Can't find it on Youtube last time I looked.
 

Another sketch from SNL I will always remember but can't find anywhere, is when Tony Perkins hosted and he played the part of a hotel management school advisor, and it was set in the office from the "Psycho" movie. As I recall it might have even had some of the stuffed birds in the background, but I could be hallucinating in that memory. It was one of the best sketches of all time and Perkins was hilarious. Good actors can do comedy or drama and he proved it!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/24/2018 at 12:11 AM, NickAndNora34 said:

I personally love history; it's one of my favorite subjects. I am fascinated by the WW2 era and enjoy learning more about it. I have a lot of community theatre friends who are still in high school and hate history. I get it, it's not enjoyable for everyone. 

I think the preservation of historical documents/pieces is extremely important. It helps show us just how far we've come, but also reminds us there should be an appreciation for the trails our predecessors blazed, as well as a strong resolve to not repeat the same mistakes that have occurred in the past. 

As for film: I was thinking the other day about how CGI/special effects are getting used so liberally now, and how I strongly believe that some of the last "authentic" films were released in the 1980s. I'm not saying that there are no movies from the 90s/present day that don't tell real stories, but it seems like the vast majority of films today are "comedies" (I use that word lightly), horror movies, and action/superhero movies. To be fair, I believe that supply and demand play an important role in this. The majority of the public enjoys things with special effects. I don't think I know anyone under the age of 24 who would be all that interested in seeing something like "The King's Speech" or "The Artist." 

I think a lot of younger people simply haven't been exposed to older films, so they simply have no appreciation for them. I've been slowly getting some of my friends to watch some of my personal favorite older movies, and it seems to be a success thus far. I think if a lot of younger people watched a couple older movies, they would enjoy them and realize just how fascinating the film industry is. 

*My brother is only 16 and he knows who Charlie Chaplin is, so I'm sorry, but that 23 year old has no excuse. 

On 9/24/2018 at 1:42 AM, CinemaInternational said:

As it so happens, I am 23 years old. I don't recall how old I was when I first heard of Chaplin, but it was long before I actually saw him on screen  when I was 16 (The Great Dictator). I long knew who he was. Is it surprising that some do not know who he is? No, but given how much Modern Times in particular means to me, it is deeply depressing.

I think the issue with not as many people my age being familiar with famous stars of the past is because of this giant bubble of pop culture. Aside from TCM itself and FilmStruck on the internet, there aren't many direct ways to see classic films anymore. Libraries may or may not have classic films. Streaming services outside of FilmStruck aren't any help, aside from some public domain ones on Amazon Prime, its very rare to find one before the 1980s... and even the ones from the 1980s and 1990s are few and far between. HBO and similar premium channels rarely have films from before 1990. Websites are not much help because they always push the newest films (and even upcoming ones) first. So, for someone young to get interested in classic films, they either must receive TCM or they must learn to dig deeper than the surface level. And the surface level is unfortunately very flashy and attention-grabbing, because it seems as though everybody in my age bracket wants to stay current and up-to-date.

Staying up-to-date is not very important to me. I generally see many of the praised films of current years a few months after they are released on DVD, or some others if they are of interest, but my heart remains with films that were released years ago. This can mean anything from the turn of the century through the 1990s, but especially classics. The classic era films were glorious, and never again will we see stars the equal of say Clark Gable and Spencer Tracy or Bette Davis and Ginger Rogers. They were some of the greatest ever to hit the silver screen. And filmmaking was an art back then. I miss those days.

This thread was really interesting to read through so I guess I'll add my two cents.

I'm also 23. When I was in high school, I dressed up as Charlie Chaplin for Halloween and wore my costume at school for the entire day - bowler hat and cane and all. The vast majority of students who reacted to my costume called me "Hitler." I got a much better (and correct) response from some of my teachers. The funny thing is that I've always preferred Keaton to Chaplin. I wanted to dress as Keaton instead but axed the idea after I realized that nobody would recognize my costume. Seems like I flopped anyway.

I started watching classics in high school after I signed up for a film class that I thought would be pretty easy to pass. It ended up being really writing intensive and was basically centered around TCM's schedule. We had to watch certain films on the channel (I think it was probably at least one every single night, usually around primetime) and write up reviews about them. I was completely overwhelmed because I didn't have the time back then to devote to watching so many films because I was also trying to juggle AP classes and playing sports. I did horrifically in the class. However, something ended up changing in me. I don't know if it was the history loving part of me that responded so much to these films but I did realize something important about this experience - it was the first time I was ever made to watch classics in school.

I remember being forced to read books such as ANIMAL FARM, FAHRENHEIT 451, OTHELLO, and TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD even before I reached high school. What is the difference between reading a book first published in 1945 (using ANIMAL FARM as an example) and watching a film like THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES from 1946? These are both forms of popular culture from the past that can be easily analyzed and consumed in a classroom setting. Both books and films were created from the desire of an individual or a group of people with a clear point of view that can be criticized and dissected. These are both forms of historical documents that each have something to say and think about, yet the latter is not taken nearly as seriously as the former. Why is classic literature like TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD or 1984 still famous and talked about? One could argue that the themes in these books seem timeless and relevant even in the modern era, and that's why they're still brought up in schools today (I've noticed that's a way to get younger crowds interested in old material). Then why are excellent and relevant films such as THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES or A FACE IN THE CROWD not studied in schools? I really think modern education has played a big part in younger generations not caring about the history of film and the older I grow, the more obvious this becomes to me.

Since this has been mentioned with some of the stories in this thread, I want to add that my parents/family members were never into classics so I feel like I'm more of an unusual case. In fact, I've been the one introducing them to new films and genres. I have always been interested in history (and I ended up studying it and film) so classics are just another form of historical study for me.

I complained about this in another thread not that long ago but issues with having access to classics through streaming sites is an issue...actually, probably the biggest reason why younger people don't seek out classics through their own will. When I first started watching them, I was able to see a bunch of 20s Keaton films back to back on Netflix through their streaming service. I remember watching Valentino's THE SHEIK, M, and some Marx Brothers movies too. This is totally unheard of today. Every time I check their "Classics" section, more and more oldies are wiped to make way for Netflix's definition of the genre which apparently includes titles like THE BREAKFAST CLUB. I would jump to making the statement that it should be Netflix's responsibility to maintain a healthy selection of all films from all sorts of years but that's obviously asking for too much. I believe that Netflix and Amazon Prime are probably the two most important tools for getting more younger people into older films, yet Netflix seems to be failing at this faster than I can even describe. I mention Amazon as well because they seem to have a greater variety of films so the average person might find it easier to slowly segue into watching older things. Filmstruck/Warner Archive/Kanopy/TCM on Demand are too specific and clearly for bigger film devotees. I think the average 20 year old would be totally overwhelmed and uninterested with streaming services like those.

I use my local public library to get DVDs and they've been a great resource for me (but many of my friends have not walked into a library or even read a book, unless it was for school, in years). YouTube is a decent tool but a lot of the prints (and films!) on there are of poor quality and, again, I don't think the average person is going to get up one day and decide that they're going to dive headfirst into classic film. People need to be exposed to this type of media/history as young as possible. This way, their interest can blossom and they can start to dig and really go out of their way to find and appreciate these great films.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Judex said:

This thread was really interesting to read through so I guess I'll add my two cents.

I'm also 23. When I was in high school, I dressed up as Charlie Chaplin for Halloween and wore my costume at school for the entire day - bowler hat and cane and all. The vast majority of students who reacted to my costume called me "Hitler." I got a much better (and correct) response from some of my teachers. The funny thing is that I've always preferred Keaton to Chaplin. I wanted to dress as Keaton instead but axed the idea after I realized that nobody would recognize my costume. Seems like I flopped anyway.

I started watching classics in high school after I signed up for a film class that I thought would be pretty easy to pass. It ended up being really writing intensive and was basically centered around TCM's schedule. We had to watch certain films on the channel (I think it was probably at least one every single night, usually around primetime) and write up reviews about them. I was completely overwhelmed because I didn't have the time back then to devote to watching so many films because I was also trying to juggle AP classes and playing sports. I did horrifically in the class. However, something ended up changing in me. I don't know if it was the history loving part of me that responded so much to these films but I did realize something important about this experience - it was the first time I was ever made to watch classics in school.

I remember being forced to read books such as ANIMAL FARM, FAHRENHEIT 451, OTHELLO, and TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD even before I reached high school. What is the difference between reading a book first published in 1945 (using ANIMAL FARM as an example) and watching a film like THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES from 1946? These are both forms of popular culture from the past that can be easily analyzed and consumed in a classroom setting. Both books and films were created from the desire of an individual or a group of people with a clear point of view that can be criticized and dissected. These are both forms of historical documents that each have something to say and think about, yet the latter is not taken nearly as seriously as the former. Why is classic literature like TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD or 1984 still famous and talked about? One could argue that the themes in these books seem timeless and relevant even in the modern era, and that's why they're still brought up in schools today (I've noticed that's a way to get younger crowds interested in old material). Then why are excellent and relevant films such as THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES or A FACE IN THE CROWD not studied in schools? I really think modern education has played a big part in younger generations not caring about the history of film and the older I grow, the more obvious this becomes to me.

Since this has been mentioned with some of the stories in this thread, I want to add that my parents/family members were never into classics so I feel like I'm more of an unusual case. In fact, I've been the one introducing them to new films and genres. I have always been interested in history (and I ended up studying it and film) so classics are just another form of historical study for me.

I complained about this in another thread not that long ago but issues with having access to classics through streaming sites is an issue...actually, probably the biggest reason why younger people don't seek out classics through their own will. When I first started watching them, I was able to see a bunch of 20s Keaton films back to back on Netflix through their streaming service. I remember watching Valentino's THE SHEIK, M, and some Marx Brothers movies too. This is totally unheard of today. Every time I check their "Classics" section, more and more oldies are wiped to make way for Netflix's definition of the genre which apparently includes titles like THE BREAKFAST CLUB. I would jump to making the statement that it should be Netflix's responsibility to maintain a healthy selection of all films from all sorts of years but that's obviously asking for too much. I believe that Netflix and Amazon Prime are probably the two most important tools for getting more younger people into older films, yet Netflix seems to be failing at this faster than I can even describe. I mention Amazon as well because they seem to have a greater variety of films so the average person might find it easier to slowly segue into watching older things. Filmstruck/Warner Archive/Kanopy/TCM on Demand are too specific and clearly for bigger film devotees. I think the average 20 year old would be totally overwhelmed and uninterested with streaming services like those.

I use my local public library to get DVDs and they've been a great resource for me (but many of my friends have not walked into a library or even read a book, unless it was for school, in years). YouTube is a decent tool but a lot of the prints (and films!) on there are of poor quality and, again, I don't think the average person is going to get up one day and decide that they're going to dive headfirst into classic film. People need to be exposed to this type of media/history as young as possible. This way, their interest can blossom and they can start to dig and really go out of their way to find and appreciate these great films.

1sat things 1st, you wrote a lengthy & excellent story friend  BIG-TIME! & I know exactly what you mean non almost all accounts here too!  If I may ask Judex, did not yet see how many posts you have td? & if col, how old are you, I ask because of your cinematic knowledge & such

 

&* as for "THE LITTLE TRAMP!" *CHARLES (Spencer) CHAPLIN-(l889-l977_) you hit the bullseye once again. I went through exact same thing as a teenager around '79 at age 14-15 & first falling in love with THE M.O.V.I.E.S OOIPS, I just saw your were just 23. Wish I was again, turning 54 on Nov 8th.  But as a kid around 1979/80 I used to watch old flix on a crappy tv & more over I always watched tv's Mike Douglas-(l925-2006) & sometimes even Merv Griffin-(l92502007) & mostly it was Mike that put the GOLDEN AGE ERA cinema hook into me. Also around time I started collecting movie books-0(now 135-150 to date) & like a ton of cinephiles his idol since childhood was *"THE GRERAT: SPENCER TRACY"=-(l900-=l967) even once had his ccameraman film inside the off putting "FOREST LAWN" in GLENDALE-(not to be mixed up w/other in HOLLYWOOD HILLS/BURBANK, where more modern stars chose. But when his camera guy got close to the lg *TRACY GARDEN, Mike said "Now this is the one I waited for most of all" & I have the chills unquote

Another of that glorious era rarely mentioned nowadays is *COOP & W.C. Fields???  Hell, most haven't hardly already heard of the wonderful John Candy now either?

 

THANX & KEEP IN TOUCH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎9‎/‎29‎/‎2018 at 4:25 PM, CaveGirl said:

I'd really love to see that sketch again. Can't find it on Youtube last time I looked.
 

Another sketch from SNL I will always remember but can't find anywhere, is when Tony Perkins hosted and he played the part of a hotel management school advisor, and it was set in the office from the "Psycho" movie. As I recall it might have even had some of the stuffed birds in the background, but I could be hallucinating in that memory. It was one of the best sketches of all time and Perkins was hilarious. Good actors can do comedy or drama and he proved it!

CaveGirl, it's still o but difficult to find. Mostly the clips are on those superbly done 1970's, 80's, 90's & more tv specials by *Hanks! It was by far at it's pinnacle during it's fi5rst 5yrs (l975-80) John Belushi-(l949-82) was volcanic, huh! &  I always somewhat liked his 1980 Blues Brothers over Animal House mysewlkf. YOU CAN EASIULY FIND ALL OF THEM ON YOUTUBE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us