3 ms·
Isn't it in the nature of innovations that they become old hat a century later?
by nemoniac 5y ago
Isn't it in the nature of innovations that they become old hat a century later?
- AlbertCory 5y agoMost of them. Anyhow, there are works of art that still speak to us, e.g. Tolstoy, Shakespeare, and then there are some that were important at the time.
- France_is_bacon 5y agoYes. The Beatles were absolutely groundbreaking in the extreme, but now, they are a yawn, because everyone uses what they did. The same thing with French New Wave cinema. Their techniques are everywhere and are not "groundbreaking" anymore. For example, they did a lot of jump cuts and long tracking shots (like what happened in Goodfellas when Henry and Karen Hill walked through the kitchen scene. Goodfella shot is better, but that was 40 years after the French New Wave did it for the first time. Quenton Tarantino's Pulp fiction also borrowed heavily from French New Wave. So, when you go back and look at the French New Wave cinema, like Breathless or The 400 Blows, they don't look like anything new, and actually are kind of boring compared to today's movies, because sure, now they are standard and a lot better technically than the 1950s, but back then, the techniques were brand new, nobody had seem them before, so they were amazing back then.