best decade for cinema?

[meatball]

Garfield made me laugh twice (I think). Besides, the situation of Jennifer Love Hewitt continuing to play wholesome characters who run around in little tops keep hope alive for those twelve year old boys who are restricted from PG-13 movies.

With broadband, who needs JLH and PG-13 movies?

Back in my day we had to wait all day to download porn.  Kids these days, with your broadband and your DSL, you don't cherish the porn like we did, son!

So, what you're saying is that this is the best decade for pornography?

[Gamblour.]

Gamblor, it's mindblowing to me that you can criticize 90s films for being cheap and then praise Million Dollar Baby.

God dammit, where is Ono? He knows what's up.

JB, sorry you feel that way. When I saw MDB, I was in the middle of writing this stupid screenplay for class at the time, and watching the movie, I thought to myself, "Why in the fuck am I writing the stupid shit in my screenplay when people like Eastwood are making films that are this important? I'm writing a waste of time."

Anyhow, I don't feel like arguing for MDB. Except for I'll say, 90s movies rehash old movies, while MDB is that old movie.

[meatball]

Gamblor, it's mindblowing to me that you can criticize 90s films for being cheap and then praise Million Dollar Baby.

God dammit, where is Ono? He knows what's up

Anyhow, I don't feel like arguing for MDB. Except for I'll say, 90s movies rehash old movies, while MDB is that old movie.

What's up is your hero worship.

[Gamblour.]

Dude, what the fuck are you talking about? MDB is the first movie I've seen with Eastwood starring in it. Other than that, I've seen and loved Mystic River. Please, start using size 1 so I can be spared of actually having to read what you say.

[Jeremy Blackman]

90s movies rehash old movies, while MDB is that old movie.

I kind of get what you're saying, but I think it just wants to be a big, classic, important movie. I think it crumbles under its own weight. And I don't think I saw a more derivative movie in 2004. I still haven't heard one substantial defense of MDB, and that includes the debate we had months ago.

Maybe this would be a better discussion if you named the older films that you're comparing 90s films to.

I think you might be taking a few dominant 90s figures (Tarantino and other openly derivative filmmakers) and unfairly naming them representatives of the decade. I think the 90s films that I love are not the ones that you're knocking down like so many straw men.

You could say that as the history of film piles up, the mainstream naturally becomes more derivative. But those are all more reasons for outsiders to innovate and struggle against the mainstream. Isn't that what the 90s was all about? Wiping out the 80s? The alternative was mainstreamed and so the new alternative is instantly more radical. Didn't the same thing happen with music?

[socketlevel]

90s movies rehash old movies, while MDB is that old movie.

I kind of get what you're saying, but I think it just wants to be a big, classic, important movie. I think it crumbles under its own weight. And I don't think I saw a more derivative movie in 2004. I still haven't heard one substantial defense of MDB, and that includes the debate we had months ago.

Maybe this would be a better discussion if you named the older films that you're comparing 90s films to.

I think you might be taking a few dominant 90s figures (Tarantino and other openly derivative filmmakers) and unfairly naming them representatives of the decade. I think the 90s films that I love are not the ones that you're knocking down like so many straw men.

You could say that as the history of film piles up, the mainstream naturally becomes more derivative. But those are all more reasons for outsiders to innovate and struggle against the mainstream. Isn't that what the 90s was all about? Wiping out the 80s? The alternative was mainstreamed and so the new alternative is instantly more radical. Didn't the same thing happen with music?

it happened with music for a year and a half then it became shit all over again.  

nineties did wipe out the 80s for cinema, but any other decade could have hands down.  it didn't take too much of an effort.  i agree that the 90s is over rated.  it was good, but shit look at the 50s to 70s.  solid gold.

-sl-

[meatball]

I don't think the 90s is overrated at all. I've only heard complaints about the 90s.

[socketlevel]

I don't think the 90s is overrated at all. I've only heard complaints about the 90s.

just from this site?  or you mean in general?

-sl-

[meatball]

I don't think the 90s is overrated at all. I've only heard complaints about the 90s.

just from this site?  or you mean in general?

-sl-

Just in general. Everybody complains about blockbusters.

[Gamblour.]

Maybe this would be a better discussion if you named the older films that you're comparing 90s films to.

I think you might be taking a few dominant 90s figures (Tarantino and other openly derivative filmmakers) and unfairly naming them representatives of the decade. I think the 90s films that I love are not the ones that you're knocking down like so many straw men.

When I think of great past films, here's what I think of:
Strangelove, 2001, 8 1/2, Psycho, Godfather, Taxi Driver, Rear Window, Citizen Kane, The Third Man....this is just a who's who...these are movies that are well known for being great to a lot of people.

JB, I'll admit, I am hanging guys like Tarantino out to dry, but you have to admit, without further hindsight, Pulp Fiction will be the movie remembered for the 90s. And maybe Shawshank because Ted Turner plays it so much.

[modage]

pulp is remembered for the 90's just as much as taxi for the 70's.  the only difference is that we were there for pulp so it seems nostalgiac and 'trapped in its era'.  but we can still romanticize and  seperate any films that came out prior to our (being alive or being old enough to notice) but i dont think they're more timeless.

[soixante]

It is interesting to note that the passage of time can turn a poorly-received movie into a classic.  When Taxi Driver first came out, many critics took a dump on it, and it landed on few top 10 lists for 1976, but by the end of the 70's it was considered one of the best films of the decade.  Now it's considered a classic.  Even Raging Bull received mixed reviews upon its first release in 1980.  By 1989, it was called the Best Film of the Decade by numerous critics.  When The Godfather came out, it got great reviews, but no one thought it was going to become one of the most highly regarded films of all time.

Thus, a lot of films from the 90's have yet to attain status as classics, because not enough time has passed.  

For me, Unforgiven was something I enjoyed upon first viewing in 1992, but I didn't think it was a classic, or even a semi-great movie.  It is only after a few more viewings, after 10 or so years, that its greatness became evident.

William Goldman said the 90's were the worst decade for film, but I think he didn't get out enough to see more independent films.  There was a rich vein of great films in the 90's, and it will probably take another 10 years for everyone to realize how many great films were made.

Even in the 70's, a lot of folks kept saying, "They don't make movies like they did in the good old days."  Now the 70's are the "good old days."

[socketlevel]

so then it's none of the movies we mention from the 90s, it's the other ones.  that's an interesting thought.

i always thought "the minus man" was never appreciated.  i loved that film.  not to mention that it has the best trailer ever.

-sl-

[socketlevel]

sorry, i thought you said something else.  i thought you ment all the gems were undiscovered when they came out, so those would be the remembered ones in the future.

but i see your point now, and for what it's worth i think you're bang on.

but it's still an interesting thought that maybe the classics of now are not being seen till the next generation of filmmakers let them out of the bag.

-sl-