4 ms·

Sure. But the reason it doesn’t apply “equally” is not because citizen Kane is a classic, but because ant man 3 is mainstream blockbuster trash. People who fram

Sure. But the reason it doesn’t apply “equally” is not because citizen Kane is a classic, but because ant man 3 is mainstream blockbuster trash. People who frame marvel as the height of films today are just so… intellectually lazy. I’ve shown quite a few people citizen Kane and, aside from a musing discomfort at the parallels of post modern trump like media manipulation (FRAUD), it really doesn’t resonate with people nearly as much as, say, Parasite, despite them probably being culturally closer to Kane. Tl;dr if you’re going to show someone a “life changing film” pick something new that is similarly ambitious. Classics require too much effort to enjoy. It often doesn’t work.

allturtles 3y ago
Well I think citizen kane is powerful and parasite is terrible. So what have we proved? Taste is indisputable, I guess.
- jncfhnb 3y ago
  If taste is indisputable then appealing to classics as a must watch cohort makes even less sense
  - allturtles 3y ago
    I was responding to your tl;dr not the GPs point. I think people who love Citizen Kane should encourage other people to try it, and people who love Parasite should encourage other people to try it, and we shouldn't make broad pre-judgements like "because you are younger than X years you won't like this movie that's more than Y years old." Obviously if we know someone else's particular taste we might be able to guess that they will strongly like or dislike a particular movie (e.g. my mom dislikes any violence, she would hate Parasite).
    - jncfhnb 3y ago
      Sure, great. That’s yet another argument for not putting “classics” on a pedestal as the “best” movies.
      - coldtea 3y ago
        Well, classics and "the best movies" is pretty much synonymous: the classics are what are considered the best movies.
- coldtea 3y ago
  Well, I, for one, dispute personal taste. Taste needs to be cultivated. Even if two people with cultivated tastes don't agree on everything (or anything), their opinions on say movies or music are worth more than some guy's who just "likes what he likes" and never really got into exploring that space any deeper.
pests 3y ago
Not everyone watchs a film for intellectual pursuits, some just want to enjoy a story or relax and unwind.
- jncfhnb 3y ago
  That’s great. And if that’s what you want I think “the classics” are generally not a good choice for the vast majority of people.
- coldtea 3y ago
  Well, then they're wrong, and should change their ways, similar to someone who just eats fast food because "that's what they like, they don't want to be challenged by food". I prefer to be a little more provocative than going with the conventional wisdom and just saying: "well, more power to them". They need to put in the work to get that increased power :)
  - pests 3y ago
    Not everyone is trying to improve themselves or learn something. Nothing about watching a dumb movie to escape the world and relax for two hours is unhealthy; probably improves mental well being. How is that related to unhealthy food? Again, not everyone wants power. You might want to try being more proactive in your compassion.
  - lupire 3y ago
    If my whole worldview was upended 50 times or more each year by classic great films, my ego psyche and would lay crumbled on the floor. You should show more respect for the people you depend upon to maintain your sense or intellectual and moral superiority. Where would you be without them?
    - Barrin92 3y ago
      I always find these attacks on perceived elitism extremely inverted. Someone who recognizes the importance of challenging classics implicitly recognizes that this holds value for anyone. On the other hand "don't be an elitist, the mailman doesn't need to read the Iliad" is not as humanistic of a position as many people think it is. The pseudo-egalitarian idea that there is no difference in value when it comes to what people consume depends on the nasty, unspoken idea that the masses are just too stupid to want to do anything seriously challenging.
yterdy 3y ago
The MCU was the height of films because it managed to wrangle more than half-a-century of comic book lore (much of it previously deemed unfilmable) into a coherent and compelling multi-film epic that was both entertaining and (lightly) philosphical and political. Through Endgame, it was an unprecedented undertaking involving the hard work of tens (hundreds?) of thousands of talented artists and technicians across the globe, marshalling untold resources over the span of a decade. And they actually pulled it off, producing a series of critical and commercial blockbusters that form (more or less) a single, sprawling narrative. It's unlikely we'll ever see anything like it again in our lifetimes. The day when the project would lose its luster was always coming - as anyone who knows the history of Hollywood westerns and action flicks and blaxploitation could tell you - and you may gloat now that it's arrived. However, for a shining moment, literally billions of people had something special to share, and no amount of elitist posturing can take away from it. (Citizen Kane's cool, too, of course. Gave us that clap meme and a baller Simpson's episode.)
- coldtea 3y ago
  >The MCU was the height of films because it managed to wrangle more than half-a-century of comic book lore (much of it previously deemed unfilmable) into a coherent and compelling multi-film epic that was both entertaining and (lightly) philosphical and political. That's more of a parlor trick than art. "See how much simplistic comic book storytelling randomness I can fit in 30+ movies, and even live room for 70% of it be explosions and fight scenes". >it was an unprecedented undertaking involving the hard work of tens (hundreds?) of thousands of talented artists and technicians across the globe "Talented" is begging the question. IMNSHO, not only is the writing, acting, and directing mediocre by-the-numbers blockbuster crap, but even what they supposedly do best (the special effects and fights and such) are shodilly made. There are movies made from comics that are worth a damn cinematically (Logan, Sin City, Watchmen, Constantine) but 99% of MCU is not in that set.
  - labster 3y ago
    I think Black Panther came closest to being good, as a non-colonial/post-colonial vision of Africa. But the last hour is just the same as every other MCU movie, eminently skippable. Neil Gaiman does decently well in the adaptations that involve him, I must say.
coldtea 3y ago
The question was "doesn't that [quality, to be able to stay with you and change you] apply to every film?" And my answer is: not exactly, it applies best to movies that are not "mainstream blockbuster trash". I'm pretty sure we can find some people for which some of the 200 movies in the Avengers franchize resonated with them and changed their life. Especially since billions saw them (and unprobable events will tend to happen as the sample size grows). After all, Hallmark movies also resonate with many people. And in the right conditions, say our dog just died, they can make even the more cynical of us cry. But generally, better movies have that quality more. This is what makes the better in the first place: touching on some essential aspect of humanity in a non-trite way. Doesn't have to be classics as in "old movies favored by critics", just generally movies made with more vision, integrity, and core message than "look 2 hours of explosions and fancy effects mixed with reshased cookie cutter dialog", or "look at these two cute young people fall in love, have a falling out, and getting back again") will tend to resonate with people more deeply and in more nuanced ways.
grujicd 3y ago
I never liked Citizen Kane that much. Direction, cinematography, camera angles were inovative for that time and I can understand why it's important from historical perspective. But the story leaves me cold. On the other hand, 12 Angry Men or Casablanca are masterpieces in my eyes.
- lupire 3y ago
  12 Angry Men was an accidental master class in failure to apply Bayesian reasoning.
- Cthulhu_ 3y ago
  That's the other thing to keep in mind, seeing things in perspective for the time; these movies were literally groundbreaking, like Wizard of Oz' transition to color film (compare with e.g. Avatar which popularised 3D film), Jurassic Park's use of CGI blended with models and live actors, the unfortunately one-off Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Toy Story's full CGI film that revolutionised animated filmmaking (arguably for the worst since it eventually came at the cost of "traditional" western cartoons). It feels like it's getting harder to do something new.

allturtles 3y ago

Well I think citizen kane is powerful and parasite is terrible. So what have we proved? Taste is indisputable, I guess.

jncfhnb 3y ago
If taste is indisputable then appealing to classics as a must watch cohort makes even less sense
- allturtles 3y ago
  I was responding to your tl;dr not the GPs point. I think people who love Citizen Kane should encourage other people to try it, and people who love Parasite should encourage other people to try it, and we shouldn't make broad pre-judgements like "because you are younger than X years you won't like this movie that's more than Y years old." Obviously if we know someone else's particular taste we might be able to guess that they will strongly like or dislike a particular movie (e.g. my mom dislikes any violence, she would hate Parasite).
  - jncfhnb 3y ago
    Sure, great. That’s yet another argument for not putting “classics” on a pedestal as the “best” movies.
    - coldtea 3y ago
      Well, classics and "the best movies" is pretty much synonymous: the classics are what are considered the best movies.
coldtea 3y ago
Well, I, for one, dispute personal taste. Taste needs to be cultivated. Even if two people with cultivated tastes don't agree on everything (or anything), their opinions on say movies or music are worth more than some guy's who just "likes what he likes" and never really got into exploring that space any deeper.

pests 3y ago

Not everyone watchs a film for intellectual pursuits, some just want to enjoy a story or relax and unwind.

jncfhnb 3y ago
That’s great. And if that’s what you want I think “the classics” are generally not a good choice for the vast majority of people.
coldtea 3y ago
Well, then they're wrong, and should change their ways, similar to someone who just eats fast food because "that's what they like, they don't want to be challenged by food". I prefer to be a little more provocative than going with the conventional wisdom and just saying: "well, more power to them". They need to put in the work to get that increased power :)
- pests 3y ago
  Not everyone is trying to improve themselves or learn something. Nothing about watching a dumb movie to escape the world and relax for two hours is unhealthy; probably improves mental well being. How is that related to unhealthy food? Again, not everyone wants power. You might want to try being more proactive in your compassion.
- lupire 3y ago
  If my whole worldview was upended 50 times or more each year by classic great films, my ego psyche and would lay crumbled on the floor. You should show more respect for the people you depend upon to maintain your sense or intellectual and moral superiority. Where would you be without them?
  - Barrin92 3y ago
    I always find these attacks on perceived elitism extremely inverted. Someone who recognizes the importance of challenging classics implicitly recognizes that this holds value for anyone. On the other hand "don't be an elitist, the mailman doesn't need to read the Iliad" is not as humanistic of a position as many people think it is. The pseudo-egalitarian idea that there is no difference in value when it comes to what people consume depends on the nasty, unspoken idea that the masses are just too stupid to want to do anything seriously challenging.

yterdy 3y ago

The MCU was the height of films because it managed to wrangle more than half-a-century of comic book lore (much of it previously deemed unfilmable) into a coherent and compelling multi-film epic that was both entertaining and (lightly) philosphical and political. Through Endgame, it was an unprecedented undertaking involving the hard work of tens (hundreds?) of thousands of talented artists and technicians across the globe, marshalling untold resources over the span of a decade. And they actually pulled it off, producing a series of critical and commercial blockbusters that form (more or less) a single, sprawling narrative. It's unlikely we'll ever see anything like it again in our lifetimes. The day when the project would lose its luster was always coming - as anyone who knows the history of Hollywood westerns and action flicks and blaxploitation could tell you - and you may gloat now that it's arrived. However, for a shining moment, literally billions of people had something special to share, and no amount of elitist posturing can take away from it. (Citizen Kane's cool, too, of course. Gave us that clap meme and a baller Simpson's episode.)

coldtea 3y ago
>The MCU was the height of films because it managed to wrangle more than half-a-century of comic book lore (much of it previously deemed unfilmable) into a coherent and compelling multi-film epic that was both entertaining and (lightly) philosphical and political. That's more of a parlor trick than art. "See how much simplistic comic book storytelling randomness I can fit in 30+ movies, and even live room for 70% of it be explosions and fight scenes". >it was an unprecedented undertaking involving the hard work of tens (hundreds?) of thousands of talented artists and technicians across the globe "Talented" is begging the question. IMNSHO, not only is the writing, acting, and directing mediocre by-the-numbers blockbuster crap, but even what they supposedly do best (the special effects and fights and such) are shodilly made. There are movies made from comics that are worth a damn cinematically (Logan, Sin City, Watchmen, Constantine) but 99% of MCU is not in that set.
- labster 3y ago
  I think Black Panther came closest to being good, as a non-colonial/post-colonial vision of Africa. But the last hour is just the same as every other MCU movie, eminently skippable. Neil Gaiman does decently well in the adaptations that involve him, I must say.

coldtea 3y ago

The question was "doesn't that [quality, to be able to stay with you and change you] apply to every film?" And my answer is: not exactly, it applies best to movies that are not "mainstream blockbuster trash". I'm pretty sure we can find some people for which some of the 200 movies in the Avengers franchize resonated with them and changed their life. Especially since billions saw them (and unprobable events will tend to happen as the sample size grows). After all, Hallmark movies also resonate with many people. And in the right conditions, say our dog just died, they can make even the more cynical of us cry. But generally, better movies have that quality more. This is what makes the better in the first place: touching on some essential aspect of humanity in a non-trite way. Doesn't have to be classics as in "old movies favored by critics", just generally movies made with more vision, integrity, and core message than "look 2 hours of explosions and fancy effects mixed with reshased cookie cutter dialog", or "look at these two cute young people fall in love, have a falling out, and getting back again") will tend to resonate with people more deeply and in more nuanced ways.

grujicd 3y ago

I never liked Citizen Kane that much. Direction, cinematography, camera angles were inovative for that time and I can understand why it's important from historical perspective. But the story leaves me cold. On the other hand, 12 Angry Men or Casablanca are masterpieces in my eyes.

lupire 3y ago
12 Angry Men was an accidental master class in failure to apply Bayesian reasoning.
Cthulhu_ 3y ago
That's the other thing to keep in mind, seeing things in perspective for the time; these movies were literally groundbreaking, like Wizard of Oz' transition to color film (compare with e.g. Avatar which popularised 3D film), Jurassic Park's use of CGI blended with models and live actors, the unfortunately one-off Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Toy Story's full CGI film that revolutionised animated filmmaking (arguably for the worst since it eventually came at the cost of "traditional" western cartoons). It feels like it's getting harder to do something new.