Why get bent out of shape just because someone contributes only once to a topic? Some folks just have more things to do with their time than spend hours and hours yapping on the same theme. I mean, you've read the thread, got a good cross-section of opinions, formed your own opinion, and tossed it out there for what it's worth. This isn't a life line. It's a message board
This is my first comment -- and the ONLY one on this topic, guaranteed. So I'll shift gears now.
It's not that many of us think there are no classics in the films made, say, from 1960 on -- it's just that they are few and far between. The films of the 1930s and 1940s were, much more frequently, were better in quite a few aspects. They were tighter, more crisp -- you had to pay attention to every second because they managed to pack a lot into 90 minutes. And they did it without relying on a glut of gee whiz special effects, without straying into scenes that didn't matter to the plot, and without the freedom -- no, license -- that the film makers of today have. They were so strictly censored that it forced them to write a superior script that employed subtle innuendo and, more importantly, your imagination, to literally create a masterpiece.
Yes, some contemporary flicks are "classic" in their context, but the old ones are great for all time. Seriously -- I'll take one Casablanca to all three Star Wars any day.
You call that a classic?
in General Discussions
Posted
Why get bent out of shape just because someone contributes only once to a topic? Some folks just have more things to do with their time than spend hours and hours yapping on the same theme. I mean, you've read the thread, got a good cross-section of opinions, formed your own opinion, and tossed it out there for what it's worth. This isn't a life line. It's a message board
This is my first comment -- and the ONLY one on this topic, guaranteed. So I'll shift gears now.
It's not that many of us think there are no classics in the films made, say, from 1960 on -- it's just that they are few and far between. The films of the 1930s and 1940s were, much more frequently, were better in quite a few aspects. They were tighter, more crisp -- you had to pay attention to every second because they managed to pack a lot into 90 minutes. And they did it without relying on a glut of gee whiz special effects, without straying into scenes that didn't matter to the plot, and without the freedom -- no, license -- that the film makers of today have. They were so strictly censored that it forced them to write a superior script that employed subtle innuendo and, more importantly, your imagination, to literally create a masterpiece.
Yes, some contemporary flicks are "classic" in their context, but the old ones are great for all time. Seriously -- I'll take one Casablanca to all three Star Wars any day.