Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Movie Talk
Reload this Page >

Movies you think have aged well?

Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters

Movies you think have aged well?

Old 07-09-08, 06:25 PM
  #26  
Inane Thread Master, 2018 TOTY
 
OldBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Are any of us really anywhere?
Posts: 49,115
Received 864 Likes on 731 Posts
Originally Posted by project86
The Dark Knight
trolls need not apply.
Old 07-09-08, 06:38 PM
  #27  
DVD Talk Hero
 
GoldenJCJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Colorado
Posts: 26,941
Received 3,103 Likes on 2,009 Posts
Originally Posted by lawyer goodwill
Besides tech, I think the phrasing and cadences used by actors before The Method and naturalistic acting came around dates movies for some viewers. Dialogue and staging from Ford-Duke Westerns in the 40s are delivered differently than words in Unforgiven and Tombstone. This may not be the best example, and I realize they are many exceptions as well, but there is certainly a difference "in form" of how actors do things then vs. now.
Much of that comes from the actors who before movies had careers on stage. I agree with what you're saying, occasionally I get taken out of an older movie due to the actors "talking to the back row".


I think Die Hard is another movie that has aged well. It was made 20 years ago and aside from Willis, Bedelia, and Rickman looking so young, you'd think it wa made yesterday.
Old 07-09-08, 06:48 PM
  #28  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 11,288
Received 281 Likes on 206 Posts
Originally Posted by Decker
Thanks for including the names of the cast members. I couldn't remember who was in that film.
LOL! Smart ass


Has no one mentioned "Shrek" yet? Damn, that movie was dated before it hit the screen. As were it's tired sequels.
Old 07-09-08, 07:04 PM
  #29  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Nightmare Alley
Posts: 17,117
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Lord Love a Duck. The beach film satire is obviously dated, but it's skewering of evangelism and consumerism are spot on. Plus, that incestual sweater-purchasing scene has to be seen to be believed!

Last edited by NoirFan; 07-09-08 at 07:08 PM.
Old 07-10-08, 02:05 PM
  #30  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 918
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Decker
Alien has aged remarkably well. It was made for so little money and so long ago. it's remarkable that it still is so effective today. Compared to the many knock offs that have come since (like Species or Pitch Black), it just seems so much fresher and scarier. It's a testament to the immense talents involved in front and behind the cameras (many of whom were largely unkown back then) as well to the skill of the effects crew. Als it just shows that physical effects can age better than early computer generated effects.
Yes!
Old 07-10-08, 04:58 PM
  #31  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 6,290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Those Star Wars prequels didn't look good even when they came out - they were dated instantly. With those prequels, Lucas is more interested in quantity than quality. He didn't even fix his original trilogy well when adding new CGI effects. Ridley Scott knows how to use CGI - smoothly incorporating it into the Blade Runner Final Cut. Lucas may have developed the technology, but he doesn't know how to incorporate live actors with CGI.

Here are special effects sci-fi/fantasy films that have aged well:

Star Wars 4, 5, 6
Blade Runner
2001
Alien
Aliens
City of Lost Children
Time Bandits
Adventures of Baron Manchausen
Brazil
Legend
A Clockwork Orange



Other aged-well films:
I used to love Platoon more than Apocalypse Now, but I feel like Apocalypse Now has aged better.

Full-Metal Jacket gets better and better over the years.

Come Drink With Me (the martial-arts film that started it all) has done a complete circle. After all the different phases martial arts films went through (the 70s, the 90s, the Matrix/Croutching Tiger era) out the years, Come Drink With Me is pretty timeless.
Old 07-10-08, 08:13 PM
  #32  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Die Hard looks really old, but in terms of content/entertainment, it's not that dated. Why is it, that some 80's movies look old as dirt, but others look maybe 5 years old?
Old 07-10-08, 08:53 PM
  #33  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,017
Received 99 Likes on 79 Posts
Originally Posted by toddly6666
Full-Metal Jacket gets better and better over the years.

.
Interesting because I watched this just 2 or 3 days ago, and although the boot camp portion is still excellent the rest of the movie just is not that good.
Old 07-10-08, 11:50 PM
  #34  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Troy Stiffler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Under an I-10 Overpass
Posts: 25,731
Received 352 Likes on 256 Posts
Originally Posted by Yeti4623
Die Hard looks really old, but in terms of content/entertainment, it's not that dated. Why is it, that some 80's movies look old as dirt, but others look maybe 5 years old?
Because blue jeans, suits and a good orchestrated instrumental is timeless. Look at the way the 'said' film is handled. If you pay attention, those 'dated' movies are probably full of 80's pop culture. And if it's that packed with pop, it probably has that beaty-synthesized score going on in the background too. On a more subtle level, you can look at how 'crisp' or 'true' the image is. Some prints get treated poorly. And if the movie doesn't have a following, you can't expect studios to spend 'so and so' amount of dollars to get a pristine print.

2001 definately tops the list. The DVD looks amazing. The practical, physical special effects are stunning. And the movie ain't so bad either.

Blade Runner is another one with timeless effects. Even if they were a bit 'limited' by today's standards, they made everything look soooo good the first time around.

Akira is still an engaging, thrilling anime. The way the action and story is so well cut, orchestrated and energized makes it stand out with other modern action marvels.

That bein' said, I guess those movies are all futuristic sci-fic pics. That should say something about the genre.

You guys already mentioned a lot of others...

Kubrick's Movies
Apocalypse Now
Blood Simple
Die Hard Movies
Lethal Weapon Movies
Taxi Driver
Old 07-11-08, 02:09 AM
  #35  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: West Richland,WA
Posts: 1,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Robocop (1987) that film still kicks ass!!!

The Third Man
The Seven Samurai
The Rules Of Game
Ace In The Hole
The Sword Of Doom
Fanny And Alexnder
Shaft (1971) he is still one bad ass motherf@cker.
Superman The Movie (My All-Time Fav Movie)
Bringing Up Baby
Singin in the Rain
The Day The Earth Stood Still (1951)
Enter The Dragon
My Man Godfrey (1936)
Old 07-11-08, 05:57 AM
  #36  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Rypro 525's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: a frikin hellhole
Posts: 28,264
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Robocop (1987) that film still kicks ass!!!
It might, but the stop motion during certian scenes and espeically the end really date the movie and make it look corny
Old 07-11-08, 08:02 AM
  #37  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: So Cal
Posts: 7,071
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I disagree regarding the Phantom Menace. Part of the problem of why audiences tend to reject CGI is not the realism but the lack of creative vision behind it. CGI is a tool, but it's not supposed to be an end in and of itself. The only times that it's effective in the sense of purely being a tool is for the most mundane of features.

Take Return of the Jedi for instance. There are many times when physical models and location shooting really benefitted the film in terms of how rich the atmosphere of the movie is. However, some small effects, such as the rotoscoped characters and shadows on Jabba's barge really spoil some effects shots to the the point that I would rather have had them taken out. On the other hand, CGI would have greatly benefitted these scenes even though it is being used for purely mundane purposes.

Episode I was the only one of the Star Wars prequels where I really felt like they were using CGI as a tool to present a specific art direction. After watching Episodes II and III, and going back to watch Episode I, I was amazed at how astonishing the effects were. In comparison, Ep. II and III feel dull and muted. The CGI is definitely better in Ep. II and III, but I felt as if Lucas overdid it big time, using CGI in the most mundane ways that would not have benefitted - almost every background in Ep. III is CGI projected on a blue screen, and it really ruins the atmosphere of the movie. Furthermore, the art direction takes a real nosedive, presenting dull settings, ships, and flat battles.

You also have to consider when CGI is used, there are limitations due to physics. Physical models look better on film because they have more visual data. It has taken a while for computers to have the kind of storage capacity that can present the same amount of visual data as a physical model in a computer-generated image.
Old 07-11-08, 08:03 AM
  #38  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: So Cal
Posts: 7,071
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Brent L
The 2001: A Space Odyssey Blu-ray looks like it was just filmed yesterday.
Thats because of Stanley Kubrick's obsessive attention to detail. Kudos to him.
Old 07-11-08, 08:23 AM
  #39  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Arizona
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hellraiser
Phantasm
The Dark Crystal
The Labyrinth
Vampire Hunter D
Old 07-11-08, 09:37 AM
  #40  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 6,290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SUPERBOY,
that's nice of you to defend Phantom Menace, but these prequels don't have CGI realism and don't have any creative vision. All three movies are slopped together like a video game. I personally prefer old school special effects flaws (for example as you said in Jedi, such as the rotoscoped characters and shadows on Jabba's barge) which have charm, rather than his sterile, lifeless video game CGI used in his new ones....but either way I'm confused, because Lucas did use new special effects/CGI as a tool to fix the original trilogy, yet it didn't make a vast difference. If anything, his new effects hurt the movies as many fans will agree - such as Han Solo walking behind Jabba, or that CGId singer alien in Return of the Jedi - if you can't fix it perfectly, then you shouldn't fix it at all. As I mentioned before, Ridley Scott fixed the flaws with CGI perfectly in the Blade Runner Final Cut. On the other hand, Lucas fixed the flaws in the original trilogy sloppily. If one can notice the changes, than it's a bad job. Ridley Scott's team should be hired to fix the original Star Wars trilogy now...


Good ol' action movies like Die Hard and Robocop have aged well also, because contemporary action movies haven't been that good in ages, and it makes one appreciate the life, heart, and grit that 80s action movies had. A new movie can put all that new technology, CGI, Matrixy special effects, etc into their new films, but it doesn't help create a film to last. New action movies like Get Smart and Crystal Skull are just sort of too polished, too sterile, too cold, and just with actors doing the rounds - not really being deep into their roles. I feel like many new action movies are filled with actors being aware that they are acting and not totally being "in it." Those 80s action flicks such as Die Hard, Predator, Alien, Aliens, Robocop, Mad Max 2, Beverly Hills Cop, 48 Hours are just great action films, because everyone (from the actors to the filmmakers) put their heart into it, sort of like the same way as the Peter Jackson Lord of the Rings films. I'm not even that crazy about the Lord of the Rings films, but those movies are like the last action-type films i've seen where everyone (actors and filmmakers) are totally "in it."
Old 07-11-08, 09:41 AM
  #41  
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Shining.
Old 07-11-08, 12:10 PM
  #42  
Suspended; also need updated email
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 16,564
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes on 13 Posts
Every Bruce Lee movie is still better than martial arts movies made today

Production values may suck, supporting actors may suck, but Bruce's charisma and screen presence carries the films even today.

Diehard 20 years later is still one of the best action movies around
Old 07-11-08, 12:15 PM
  #43  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: MA
Posts: 17,000
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
M. It's hard to believe that movie is 75 years old.
Old 07-11-08, 01:58 PM
  #44  
DVD Talk Legend
 
d2cheer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 11,351
Received 245 Likes on 177 Posts
Originally Posted by KillerCannibal
The Thing. It will continue to gain the praise it so rightfully deserves as one of the best horror films ever made in the history of the known universe.
This is the first one I thought of as well.
Old 07-11-08, 02:24 PM
  #45  
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by d2cheer
This is the first one I thought of as well.
Yep, it's aged very well. So has Blade Runner, while E.T. I think has aged poorly. Funny how things turn out, eh?
Old 07-11-08, 02:53 PM
  #46  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 4,594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
i think Jurassic Park still holds up in the visual effects department.
Old 07-11-08, 05:02 PM
  #47  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: West Richland,WA
Posts: 1,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rypro 525
It might, but the stop motion during certian scenes and espeically the end really date the movie and make it look corny

Corny what ever.
Old 07-11-08, 07:13 PM
  #48  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: So Cal
Posts: 7,071
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by toddly6666
SUPERBOY,
that's nice of you to defend Phantom Menace, but these prequels don't have CGI realism and don't have any creative vision. All three movies are slopped together like a video game. I personally prefer old school special effects flaws (for example as you said in Jedi, such as the rotoscoped characters and shadows on Jabba's barge) which have charm, rather than his sterile, lifeless video game CGI used in his new ones....but either way I'm confused, because Lucas did use new special effects/CGI as a tool to fix the original trilogy, yet it didn't make a vast difference. If anything, his new effects hurt the movies as many fans will agree - such as Han Solo walking behind Jabba, or that CGId singer alien in Return of the Jedi - if you can't fix it perfectly, then you shouldn't fix it at all. As I mentioned before, Ridley Scott fixed the flaws with CGI perfectly in the Blade Runner Final Cut. On the other hand, Lucas fixed the flaws in the original trilogy sloppily. If one can notice the changes, than it's a bad job. Ridley Scott's team should be hired to fix the original Star Wars trilogy now...
Actually, Episode I had the most clear art direction. The battle droids, droid fighters, trade federation carrier ships and tanks were all inspired by african tribal artwork. I for one found that kind of art direction really well done. Ep. II and III had more of an allegorical art direction that was meant more to invoke the transition from the Old Republic to the Empire.

Good ol' action movies like Die Hard and Robocop have aged well also, because contemporary action movies haven't been that good in ages, and it makes one appreciate the life, heart, and grit that 80s action movies had. A new movie can put all that new technology, CGI, Matrixy special effects, etc into their new films, but it doesn't help create a film to last. New action movies like Get Smart and Crystal Skull are just sort of too polished, too sterile, too cold, and just with actors doing the rounds - not really being deep into their roles. I feel like many new action movies are filled with actors being aware that they are acting and not totally being "in it." Those 80s action flicks such as Die Hard, Predator, Alien, Aliens, Robocop, Mad Max 2, Beverly Hills Cop, 48 Hours are just great action films, because everyone (from the actors to the filmmakers) put their heart into it, sort of like the same way as the Peter Jackson Lord of the Rings films. I'm not even that crazy about the Lord of the Rings films, but those movies are like the last action-type films i've seen where everyone (actors and filmmakers) are totally "in it."
I agree. Like I said, modern movies tend to really overdo it when it comes to special effects. The overuse of CGI in unnecessary situations where it doesn't help either for budgetary or practical reasons really bring down movies now. However, you are excluding a fantastic film duo from your list: Kill Bill vol. 1 and 2. And those are movies you probably enjoyed because they had that same sort of "gritty" feel and were stylistic. So I don't think all modern action movies are horrible.
Old 07-14-08, 06:31 PM
  #49  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 918
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
In terms of CGI, there are four films that still amaze me, in that same way of how-the-hell-did-they-do-that, jaw-dropping wonderment. They are Jurassic Park, Terminator 2, The Mask and The Matrix. They were superb for the time and they do hold up today. Even though Transformers or The Matrix Reloaded might be technically far more advanced, they don't make my jaw drop (possibly because they're so good that you don't notice) in the way that these four do.
Old 07-14-08, 06:57 PM
  #50  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 3,381
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes on 20 Posts
Originally Posted by Decker
Thanks for including the names of the cast members. I couldn't remember who was in that film.

You'll welcome.

I did that so no one would mistake the Empire Strikes Back that starred Dom Deluise and Pauly Shore.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.