4 ms·

Much of the praise for Kane is because it used groundbreaking cinematography, which have influenced many later films. But to appreciate that, you have to know t

by olavk 12y ago

Much of the praise for Kane is because it used groundbreaking cinematography, which have influenced many later films. But to appreciate that, you have to know that Kane was the first movie to use these techniques. The movie (like many historically groundbreaking movies) will be underwhelming when seen without this knowledge. A popular classic like Cassablanca have endured due to strength of story and acting, something which ages much better than "groundbreaking at the time".

manachar 12y ago
Interestingly, I use Casablanca as my go to example of a classic that younger audiences find boring, predictable and cliché. By the time most viewers today see Casablanca they'll have already seen most of the scenes ripped-offed, parodied, homaged, or referenced. For the first time viewer it won't feel like the original and instead will feel like an old black and white copy with a strange style of overacting.
- krylon 12y ago
  For me, it was quite the opposite - when I saw Casablanca for the first time, I remembered all the scenes from it being parodied or quoted, and I thought, "so that is where those came from". The same happened to me watching The Wizard of Oz. Suddenly I remembered all those scenes from the Simpsons which I did not get before and was like, "now I get it". There is an episode of Star Trek DS9 where a character almost literally quotes the speech at the end of The Third Man (given, incidentally, by Orson Welles). Had I not seen The Third Man, I would have thought it was just a stupid monologue, but knowing where it came from changed the tone and gravity of that scene completely.
- ableal 12y ago
  Borges has a story for that ;-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Menard,_Author_of_the_Quixote http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Menard,_Author_of_the_Qu... - where a book now being rewritten identically word for word is, of course, a completely different book ...

by olavk 12y ago

manachar 12y ago

Interestingly, I use Casablanca as my go to example of a classic that younger audiences find boring, predictable and cliché. By the time most viewers today see Casablanca they'll have already seen most of the scenes ripped-offed, parodied, homaged, or referenced. For the first time viewer it won't feel like the original and instead will feel like an old black and white copy with a strange style of overacting.

krylon 12y ago
For me, it was quite the opposite - when I saw Casablanca for the first time, I remembered all the scenes from it being parodied or quoted, and I thought, "so that is where those came from". The same happened to me watching The Wizard of Oz. Suddenly I remembered all those scenes from the Simpsons which I did not get before and was like, "now I get it". There is an episode of Star Trek DS9 where a character almost literally quotes the speech at the end of The Third Man (given, incidentally, by Orson Welles). Had I not seen The Third Man, I would have thought it was just a stupid monologue, but knowing where it came from changed the tone and gravity of that scene completely.
ableal 12y ago
Borges has a story for that ;-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Menard,_Author_of_the_Quixote http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Menard,_Author_of_the_Qu... - where a book now being rewritten identically word for word is, of course, a completely different book ...