3 ms·

I think the problem is that any film made before those that the viewer was first introduced to the film format with (or is used to watching) is going to seem ol

by Flenser 14y ago

I think the problem is that any film made before those that the viewer was first introduced to the film format with (or is used to watching) is going to seem old and be judged as less appealing. This mostly unconscious judgement made in a a few seconds based primarily on the 'look' of the film (b/w vs color, film stock, lenses etc.) and secondarily on it's pacing and editing style. There may be older films that have good cinematography but the viewer is still going to judge it as 'old' before they get to appreciate that.

antiterra 14y ago
Plenty of films do seem dated in a negative way to me, and I can get that someone expects carefully mastered soundtracks with impressive thumpy sound. But I think there are some films were well made that stand the test of time. The LA Times ran an article[1] arguing lack of interest in old movies stems largely from new films having a social function that is similar to fashion. I'm inclined to agree. Therefore, while 48+fps might become the fashion, I doubt it's required to retain interest in new movies as referenced in the great-grandparent post. I certainly wasn't around when The Seventh Seal was filmed, yet I find it astonishingly beautiful and impressive (which makes the parody film De Düva even better.) Of course, I can't talk about it the way one talks about the weather or of theater run films-- "Did you see Argo yet? I want to check it out, the trailer looked cool." http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/14/entertainment/la-ca-film-novelty-20120715 http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/14/entertainment/la-ca-...