-
The Seventeen Year Itch
May 15, 2013 | 6 comments
-
Questions
May 1, 2013 | 50 comments
-
Stifling Our Children
April 15, 2013 | 39 comments
-
Thoughts on Gay Marriage
March 27, 2013 | 96 comments
-
Baseball Saints and Sinners
March 13, 2013 | 13 comments
Another Perspective
All About Hollywood
We all have old favorite movies. Will any made today ever be called that?
The other day, a friend of mine asked if I had seen a recent broadcast of All About Eve on TV. We laughed as we recalled how many times we’d seen the flick and how we admired the tremendous performances in it. And although I did not see the movie last week, All About Eve remains one of my favorites.
How flawed but noble was Bette Davis’ Margo Channing; how treacherous the cloying villainy of Anne Baxter’s Eve; and most deliciously, how perfidious the unctuous urbanity of George Sanders’ Addison DeWitt? Yet for all her wheeling and double-dealing, in the end Eve ends up as the unwilling mistress of DeWitt. Although to some of us more shallow female moviegoers, this mightn’t have been so terrible a fate.
Yes, Margo achieves a modicum of revenge and gets her man alright, but, in an almost prophetic scene, Eve survives to continue her grasping, conniving ways, even to the point of cloning herself at the end of the film; letting us in on the fact that there are countless Eves waiting in the proverbial wings. And so this has indeed come to pass; just think of the apparent allure of the same kind of ruthless ambition in the latest episode of Survivor.
Those great performances seem even greater in hindsight for the fact that the dark proclivities to cheating, lying, doubletalk and deceit are now desirable, while the traits we esteemed in the good guys are nearly absent on the modern silver screen. Today, the Eve Harringtons are the winners; much to be admired.
As several others joined in our cinematic reverie, someone brought up Animal House. Now, I’m no fan of this lewd, sophomoric frat house flick, but in a way, even this throwaway comedy would serve as high art today. As is the case with many old movies, the themes which were once the subject of parody, are now themselves a part of everyday life.
When John Belushi’s Bluto cracks his line about the Germans bombing Pearl Harbor, it was a great joke, but would scarcely resonate with today’s fraternity brothers who most likely wouldn’t get it. A survey taken a few years ago found that most college students didn’t know much about history. According to the survey, 63 percent did not know during which war the Battle of the Bulge was fought. But the one thing in common between the fictional Delta House of the 1960’s and today’s collegians is that the behavior of those pledged to “the worst house on campus” is now de rigueur for too many Americans under the age of forty.
As our discussion on other old movies we loved continued, we got to talking about the possibility of anything like them being made today. They say life imitates art, and if anyone considers the dreck coming out of Hollywood art, this is sadly a reality. Similarly, if one considers the reverse true, both our lives and our art are in dire cultural peril. But could any of the old classics survive the cutting room floor were they under consideration to be made today?
How about The Caine Mutiny? In it, Captain Queeg is taken down partly through the cowardly machinations of Lt. Keefer, yet in the end, all agree that his years of brave service to his country must command respect. Compare that to the Obama Administration’s depiction of veterans as possible terrorists and Hollywood’s stock portrayals of American servicemen since the Vietnam War.
Gone with the Wind? The romantic entanglements aside, the notion that Margaret Mitchell could possibly wax nostalgic over the Old South is unfortunately as anachronistic as the film itself is considered by far too many today. And this is the point; Hollywood can no longer overlook any aspect of American history that does not accord itself with modern mores. Consequently, this and other factors naturally limit its range and appeal.
Cinematic fare is so torpid today that whole genres of movies have been relegated to the Tinseltown trash heap. Want to catch a shoot-em-up Western where there’s a snowball’s chance in hell of coming across a white good-guy? Where have you gone, Randolph Scott? Religious blockbusters like The Ten Commandments or Ben Hur? Much too controversial. Yearning for a musical filled to the brim with graceful dancing and songs replete with witty lyrics fit for the whole family? Sorry, Hollywood has not kept folks with that kind of talent on its roster for decades.
No, you won’t find a good Eve Harrington to sink your teeth into today on the silver screen anymore. If you do, she’s likely the heroine, dishing out well-deserved revenge on some Rhett Butler who has unwisely toyed with her feminist affections. It’s enough to make you want to paraphrase Margaret Mitchell:
There once was a land of heroes and heroines called Hollywood. Here in this pretty world, civility took its last bow. Here was the last ever to be seen of wise men and their devoted families, of faith and of patriotism. Look for it only on TCM, for it is no more than a dream remembered, a civilization gone with the wind.…
Letter to the Editor View all comments (64) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Lisa Fabrizio
More Articles From Another Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/04/22/all-about-hollywood
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
jd| 4.22.10 @ 6:30AM
Sadly, I think the heyday of Hollywood was in the 40's. The movies back then had such witty dialogue that I cannot imagine classy movies like that being produced in the Hollywood of today. Yes, Hollywood now is a pathetic haven of mediocrity at best, even though the likes of Clooney and Damon think they are in the same league as Hollywood greats. Dream on.
Stuart Koehl| 4.22.10 @ 8:08AM
In cinema (if I may be so pretentious) as in everything else, "Sturgeon's Revelation" applies: in all times and places, in every area of endeavor, 90% of everything is crap.
The past looks good in comparison with the present, because crap sinks, while the cream rises. We think literature was better in the 18th and 19th centuries, because only a handful of works--that 10% of quality--has survived the test of time and is read today. The same is true of antiquity: we only know those plays, poems and epistles that were worth preserving (at a time when such preservation meant painstakingly copying a manuscript by hand) and which, through accident or divine intervention managed to avoid destruction. We know Homer, Euripides, Sophocles and Aristophanes--but the hundreds of hack poets and playwrights have vanished.
In cinema, we look back nostalgically at the studio system of the 30s and 40s, and remember only the handful of classics, the Oscar winners or contenders, the cult favorites and the sleepers. We forget that Hollywood used to crank out B movies the way it now cranks out cheap sitcoms and reality shows. And like the cheap sitcoms and reality shows, the majority of B movies were crap--painful to watch today, with their stilted writing, formulaic plots and poor production values, unless rediscovered as camp.
The problem with comparing cinema today with that of sixty or seventy years ago is we are still swimming in the middle of a pool in which the crap and the cream are all mixed in together. Time has not yet had a chance to filter them. Get back to me in forty years, and then we can talk about the "modern classics", the films that defined a generation. But right now, we're just too close to make that call.
Becky| 4.22.10 @ 8:23AM
I kind of had the same thought. This article reminded me of my art teacher saying that most art is junk, that the Beatles had a lot of songs and only a few are really good.
Steve Cross| 4.22.10 @ 12:00PM
Terrific observation. I have a friend who always lives in the past, convinced that not much literary or cinematic quality has been produced since the '50s. Your "10%" analysis is spot-on.
Jeff Perren | 4.22.10 @ 3:45PM
"The past looks good in comparison with the present, because crap sinks, while the cream rises. "
A common and initially plausible retort. But it doesn't stand up to close examination. I've seen over 5,000 pre-1965 films. Even the ordinary ones are generally more entertaining than all but one or two of the best from the past 45 years, and the closer to now you get the worse the score.
There is a difference between the culture of 50 years ago and that of today, and the one today is inferior in every respect but technology.
TCM fan| 4.29.10 @ 7:44PM
"Sturgeon's Revelation" applies: in all times and places, in every area of endeavor, 90% of everything is crap.
Wrong. That should be "at least 90%", and in this day and age we are batting close to 1000.
R. Hoffman| 4.22.10 @ 8:25AM
Yesterday I watched The Ox-Bow Incident on TCM, a film-noir western with an overwhelmingly powerful moral message, brilliantly directed and played. Henry Fonda is handsome, troubled and repelled by the brutes who lynch three innocent men. I've seen it five or six times over the last several decades, and it is still moving and powerful. I'm sure the Hollywooders think this old and grand flick is pure yesterday. And they're right.
Noir Guy| 4.22.10 @ 8:51AM
Movies today are such garbage. I've never seen a Nicole Kidman film, too many magazine covers of her and Tom Cruise looking constipated in the 1990's. No one makes movies for the audience anymore, they make them for other directors, so they can indulge in that circular (incestuous?) love fest called The Academy Awards.
Angie| 4.22.10 @ 9:12AM
Since around the year 2000 I began watching fewer new films and more old ones. Now that’s practically all I watch. I have not only watched the big names in their big films (like High Noon with my favorite actor Gary Cooper), I have also watched their lesser known films as well as the actors and actresses largely forgotten today.
I would also like to say there is a huge difference in golden age B pictures and today’s lot. B pictures from the 30s and 40s were often made by talented people behind and in front of the cameras who just hadn’t quite been able to crack the A list. More films were made then each year than now as tv wasn’t around and many more people got their entertainment from films so it was far more competitive. Many B pictures were about an hour long and would have been shown before the main A list film. Going to the movies was really an event as you would see a cartoon, a news reel, a programmer (the shorter B picture), and then the main A list film.
An example of a good B flick is the Torchy Blane series of films starring Glenda Farrell from the late 30s and early 40s. Farrell played Torchy, the star reporter on a big city paper. Her character served as the inspiration for Lois Lane and she would be very recognizable to any modern woman today. She’s smart, career oriented, but also retains her femininity in a masculine world as she juggles the demands of her job with her personal life that involves getting her police detective boyfriend to marry her. These are fun detective stories carried out with charm and humor.
Not all the films from the golden era (A or B caliber) are hits but there are far more that I like than dislike and that’s more than I can say about modern films. There were so many more genres of films produced and actors/actresses then to fit everyone’s taste so I think there’s something there for everyone.
As for me, I’ll take Gary Cooper as Marshal Will Kane saving his town from a gang of thugs any day over the anti-American drivel modern Hollywood keeps churning out.
Joseph Harriss| 4.22.10 @ 10:49AM
Angie, you are obviously a person of some considerable taste in movies. High Noon is, for me, the best film ever made, bar none. It perfectly respects the unities of time and space, the moral complexity is complex indeed, and there is not a wasted or superfluous word or scene. Just to remind myself what great cinema can be, I view it at least once a year. And I recall that one attraction of Paris used to be that, on any given day of the year, you could see High Noon at one of the many movie houses.
Derek Leaberry| 4.22.10 @ 1:39PM
Mrs. Ramirez- "Kane, if you were smart, you would go."
Kane- "I can't."
Mrs. Ramirez- "I know."
Would a scene so spare, yet intelligent and soul-searching, ever be filmed today? Of course not.
Stuart Koehl| 4.22.10 @ 1:47PM
High Noon is a good example of how a great work of art can be interpreted in a manner entirely contrary to the intent of its author, for the film was intended as a critique of the McCarthy period, with Gary Cooper as one of the stalwart Hollywood Ten, Lloyd Bridges as the cravens who testified before HUAC, the townspeople as the mindless American populace, and the gang coming in on the noon train as McCarthy and his ilk.
Of course, nine out of ten Americans, if forced to turn it into an allegory, would say that Coop represents the United States, the townspeople our feckless "better dead than red" allies, Bridges the craven intellectual apologists, and the bad guys as the communists. But what do they know?
whbeff| 4.28.10 @ 10:44AM
My answer to your question would be, "More than you."
Derek Leaberry| 4.22.10 @ 9:19AM
Although there is much truth to what Mr. Koehl writes, the cultural collapse in which we are living is more pronounced than it was fifty years ago and it is reflected in film. Yes, Hollywood used to churn out some mediocre films. Ever see the hundred or so one-reelers John Wayne starred in in the 1930s? Rather lousy. Yet when paired with director John Ford, Wayne played in excellent movies like "The Searchers", "Stagecoach", "The Quiet Man", and "Fort Apache". Would any films like these be filmed today? Highly improbable. A great part of the reason for this is the juvenilization of your average American. In films, they seek special effects and fantasy. To actually watch a film that required the viewer to think is beyond the comprehension of your average American.
Stuart Koehl| 4.22.10 @ 1:51PM
Actually, I would say we are living in a golden age of some film genres. I would submit that some war movies of the recent past are among the best ever made, certainly better than most of the propaganda churned out during World War II. I would not include "Saving Private Ryan" among these (excepting the first twenty minutes or so, which are incomparable in capturing as much of the violence and chaos of war as is possible on film), but would include "We Were Soldiers Once", "Blackhawk Down", "The Great Raid" and "Pain Locker". A few of the modern Westerns are as good as anything Ford ever made, while both of Ron Maxwell's Civil War films--"Gettysburg" and "God and Generals" were grossly underrated and much better than critics would ever admit.
Bill| 4.22.10 @ 9:23AM
Louis B. Mayer, Sam Goldwyn, where are you guys now that we really need you?
"If you want to send a message, call Western Union."
Sara| 4.22.10 @ 9:49AM
Oh how I love those old movies. And you can actually watch them with children in the room.
You all have listed some of my favorites already, and to that list I'd add almost anything with the younger Greer Garson, Stage Door, Philadelphia Story, any Thin Man—well there's just not enough space.
But I will say from this year's crop, I like The Blind Side, which does celebrate the goodness of a white and (gasp) conservative southern family who take in a homeless black teenage boy. It was well done (with the single exception of the one unnecessary word of dialogue added to achieve the obligatory PG rating). And it has the added appeal of being based on a true story, something liberals would love to refute and cannot.
Michael| 4.22.10 @ 10:09AM
I hope for the day when we can have "ala carte" cable tv, that way I can have basic cable, plus Weather Channel, History Channel, and most of all Turner Classic Movies, for when I can watch movies worth watching. Today's movies? Few and far between.
Citizen Jerry| 4.22.10 @ 11:29AM
I stopped attending movie theaters years ago, as most of what they purvey is garbage. I'm reminded of what the Waldorf and Statler characters said in the Muppet Show: "I've seen detergents that left a better film than that."
I'm thankful for DVD, as Bogie and the Duke will never die.
Seek| 4.22.10 @ 11:53AM
I'm sorry to differ with the manufactured consensus, but most old Hollywood movies were basically crap by today's standards -- poorly conceived, lit, directed and acted (with that machine-gun cadence dialogue). There were some fine films back then, but overall the scene wasn't that good. Most of the Old Hollywood couldn't come within shouting distance of the best filmmakers of today like Scorsese, Hallstrom, Coen Brothers, Eastwood, Soderburgh, Woody Allen, Ang Lee, Anthony Minghella, David Fincher, etc., plus Disney/Pixar, Dreamworks and other animation studios.
Tell Lisa Fabrizio to get the sentimental stardust out of her eyes.
Sara| 4.22.10 @ 5:56PM
They did churn out some mediocre films in the early days. But many movies from that era are great. If you love films, you would really enjoy The Maltese Falcon, for instance. Or The African Queen (early 50s). The Coen brothers must like the old ones. It's almost a shame to watch Oh, Brother if you haven't seen Sullivan's Travels.
Tyler S.| 4.22.10 @ 12:34PM
There are a few movies from that era which do withstand the test of time to speak to future generations, true, but what tends to get forgotten is that, like today, between these precious gems is a whole lot of crap. There's never been an era where only good movies are made, and I just don't think the past was any better than the present.
Indeed, the present has a leg up simply in terms of volume. So many movies are produced today all over the world, that there almost cannot help but be more amazing films today, even if you believe (as I do not) that the overall quality has gone down.
Of course, there is the issue of finding these gems in an ever larger mountain of crap, but it can be done. Indeed, I feel that the need to hunt for masterpieces adds to the experience, rather than detracts.
It is true that all taste is subjective, and it may well by that the author is looking for something I am not in films which has, in fact, faded over time, but this movie lover definitely feels that the present has produced more wonderful films than the past
Petronius| 4.22.10 @ 12:52PM
The top movie quotes of all time:
1 "Frankly Scarlet, I don't give a damn."
2 "Here's looking at you kid."
3 " His god, Is God"
4 "Who stole the strawberries?"
5. "Fill your hand you son-of-a bitch!"
Of course there's little on offer except one joke comedies and autodidactic cinesewage. As if bad writing weren't the only thing keeping film goers spending their entertainment dollars elsewhere, there are only a handful of film makers who think of what they do as a craft. The project/syndicate method of today which places concept before plot alienates conventional movie goers. Computer generated animation masks the actor, (if he is there at all) smothering performance. And at the very end, none of it is believable. I did enjoy Saving Private Ryan. How long ago was that?
Christopher Holland| 4.24.10 @ 12:13AM
What about the line in Casablanca where the police chief says 'round up the usual suspects'. Brilliant. Ot Marlon Brando in 'A Streetcar called Desire' yelling out 'Stella - Stella', or saying 'I coulda been a contender, I coulda been someone' in On the Waterfront' or asking 'are you an assassin?' in Apocalypse Now. And I always liked the colonel in Apocalypse Now saying 'I love the smell of napalm early in the morning' and Michael Douglas in Wall Street saying 'greed works, greed is good'.
brutus6| 4.28.10 @ 3:49PM
A favorite movie quote from Aliens, a film that surely would have us reaching for Webster's Unabridged while reading a James Bowman withering review. I still like the quote, no matter how shallow the plot: "Go back?!?! Hey, maybe you aren't up on current events but we just got our a$$es kicked, pal!"
Jim Wilson | 4.22.10 @ 12:54PM
I agree with several of the other comments that one reason old movies seem better is because the famous ones we've all seen deserve their fame. There were plenty of awful movies done back when, just watch 'Manos the Hands of Fate' if you don't believe me. Then there were goofy stupid movies that were still fun like 'Dr. Cyclops' or 'Black Shield of Falworth,' both of which I got off of AMC back when and now have copied to the computer.
Movies today are mostly garbage, certainly. And there are undeniably more stupidly preachy movies. There are plenty of good ones, however, and sometimes the preachy ones are enjoyable too, like the Bourne movies.
The thing is there's a difference between favorite movies and best movies--my favorite movies I watch all the time; the ones I consider the best are ones I rarely watch because the emotional effect isn't something I want to deal with every day. Sappy sentimental movies leave me totally unmoved, but I had tears in my eyes for at least half of 'We Were Soldiers.' I've seen no other movie that simultaneously celebrates the virtues of soldiers and the glory of war, pulls no punches on the brutality and horror of war, and grinds your face in the suffering on the home front during the war. I know of no other movie that does the same, and I reckon I've seen every war movie ever made before 1990.
While it's true that most directors and most movies treat the audience as dumb kids, there are exceptions. And abandoning the movie theatre to them is hardly the best way to improve the situation. If you want them to make movies you like, take a chance now and again and see a movie that you might hate instead. Sometimes there's a pleasant surprise, sometimes there's pessimism confirmed. Either way you're a winner, 'cause who doesn't like to be proved right?
Stuart Koehl| 4.22.10 @ 4:41PM
From which we can add a sixth great movie quote (courtesy of the immortal Tony Curtis):
"Yondah lies da castle of my faddah".
Right up there with these, from Spartacus:
"I yam a singah of sawngs, an' I taught da classics to da children of my mastah".
Not to mention,
"Spahtacus, I luv ya like a bruddah."
scott| 4.22.10 @ 1:51PM
Memory is a funny thing, it makes the golden ages golden. As was said before we tend to forget the oldies-but-badies and combine the good ones into one category called 'oldies-but-goodies' forgetting that they were made over a long period of time.
Eventually we'll all remember the Star Wars saga and Lord of the Rings and be blissfully ignorant of WaterWorld.
Stuart Koehl| 4.22.10 @ 1:54PM
"Movies today are mostly garbage, certainly. "
Movies from any era are mostly garbage.
Books from any era are mostly garbage.
Plays from any era are mostly garbage.
Paintings from any era are mostly garbage.
Sculpture from any era is mostly garbage.
Music from any era is mostly garbage.
TS| 4.22.10 @ 2:40PM
Going to the movies today is different from going to the movies 20 years ago and is certainly quite different from going to the movies back in the classic era, due to the changes in theaters and audience behavior as well as the movies themselves. I find going to movies now to be less enjoyable now as opposed to the past, regardless of what I'm seeing. That makes it harder for me to imagine which movies today might hold up over time.
Previous comments that there have always been a vast quantity of lousy movies are quite right. For example, "The Sin of Madelon Claudet" from 1931 is awful as anything I've ever seen and as bad as anything out there today. Don't take my word on this. The producer, Irving Thalberg, openly acknowledged it was crap and said it necessary to produce such crap (the movie was a box office success) if he were to be allowed to make some good movies. Thalberg's dilemma is just as true today.
What seems to have become very rare are non-blockbuster, lower budget movies that rely just on plot and acting to be entertaining, assume an adult audience and do not require a big success at the box office. I suppose "The Hurt Locker" may qualify but I can't think of too many other recent movies that do. Back in 1950, when All About Eve was made, such movies were not at all unusual.
gearjammer| 4.22.10 @ 2:40PM
Seek, your cavalcade of great directors is the ultimate over the hill gang. This crowd does not get much of my time or money. Woody Allen was kinda funny, once upon a time. And, he's kinda funny now trying to still be the love interest to young chicks. Hey, maybe he can do a movie as Larry King paying the big bucks to his sister in law for some action. Hey, such irony and truth is beyond Woody. And Clint. What was the big fuss anyhow ? I'd kick in but any day of the week, including in his prime. Scorsese ? Really ? That Rolling Stones documentary ? At least Otto Preminger never tried to make one about Buddy Holly and the Crickets. It would have been just as ridiculous. I only watched 20 collective minutes of Gangs of New York but am convinced everyone involved in that horror show was doing the really serious, heavy duty drugs. Sorta how I think of the Obama administration and its' fanatical circle of friends and allies. If, I were to touch upon movies of the past vs. today and compare, I'd simply say the movies of the past were more authentic. We live in a phony age. A fraud universe has been declared the world of truth, reality, and the true nature of life. The most revolting and truly ugly people are placed atop the mountain and called great-our " elites". At this moment a huge effort is being made to restore poor Michael Jackson to some kind of mythical , heroic status by people with great wealth and power. Then comes something called the Tea Party. If anything, it is a quest for something " authentic". And, those of the lie, the giants of the artificial universe of liberalism paint them as evil. So keep modern Hollywood.Though I admit that now and then a few good movies break through.
The Big E| 4.22.10 @ 3:32PM
While I love old movies as much as anyone (my favorites are Casablanca, To Kill a Mockingbird, and North by Northwest), I disagree with the author about modern movies. There are very, very good movies being made today, movies which will be considered classics in 40 years on a par with any from the "golden age." The difference is, you generally have to seek them out.
Other than the Lord of The Rings trilogy, the good ones are not so spectacular, or lavish, or thoroughly hyped as the crap (such as Avatar, for example. Terrible, TERRIBLE movie).
But there are great ones. Just to name a couple:
Signs - an unusual mixture of science fiction and faith, but a fabulous movie -- well acted, well directed, with just enough modern special effects to make it believable, and good characters you can root for and believe in. The characters in this movie accept who they are, are remorseful when they've done wrong, struggle to forgive when they know they should, and in the end . . . oops, I don't want to spoil it, but the ending is EXACTLY what it should be.
Up -- a cartoon, yes, but the values expressed in that cartoon are those so many who comment on the site would like to instill in their kids.
Gattaca -- personally, I think this is best science fiction movie nobody's heard of. It is DEEP. It seriously questions the blind reliance on science in our society, while also exploring the question of what truly makes any particular individual exceptional.
Jocon307| 4.24.10 @ 4:49AM
"Gattaca -- personally, I think this is best science fiction movie nobody's heard of. "
I have wanted to see this movie for a long time.
Thanks to your recommendation I'll have hubby put it on the queue.
I hope it's available in Blue Ray!
Robert Hobart| 4.28.10 @ 7:32PM
Gattaca is an atrociously imbecilic film. Its assumptions about future society make no sense and the film manages to be sluggish, pretentious, and silly all at the same time.
GhaleonQ| 4.22.10 @ 3:51PM
Someone actually desires the return of shlocky "religious blockbusters?" Even this theological conservative finds them problematic. Give me A Serious Man any day.
And, yeah, the rest of the world may put out far greater stuff than they used to produce (and, in the case of animation, have completely dominated American feature-length mediocrity like Pixar's as well as our short film makers) and Hollywood may release less wholesome stuff (though, really, the amount of "bad people" in the industry is probably about equal). Does that mean we should accept the return of the cornball? No. Start watching non-American movies or get better taste, posthaste.
Bill| 4.22.10 @ 4:00PM
Lisa,
These articles pining for the good ol' days get a little old especially when they revolve around art forms. As previously mentioned by other commentators there are plenty of good and even more bad movies in all eras. I would suggest that you either willfully ignore good cinema or are just oblivious to it.
To wit:
A shoot'em up western that features a white good guy (not even sure why you bring race into it) -Unforgiven and on a more urban note Gran Torino both directed and starring Clint Eastwood.
Albeit not a blockbuster but a very warming religious movie is "Millions" an English film that was widely distributed in the US about a young boy who loses his mother and is followed around by a guardian saint, and does good things for others.
I thought The Hurt Locker portrayed American soldiers in very real and favorable light. Black Hawk Down showed American soldiers in a very fine light.
How about Juno? Not necessarily for all ages but a film about a teen girl that makes the decision to give her baby up for adoption as opposed to having an abortion.
Others:
Shawshank Redemption
Schindler's List
A Beautiful Mind
Million Dollar Baby
For heaven's sake just this year The Blindside if that's not a wonderful family movie I don't know what is.
In short Lisa, you just aren't looking very hard.
P.S. I guarantee you that almost any Will Farrell comedy will be as quoted as Animal House over time.
Stuart Koehl| 4.22.10 @ 4:43PM
"I always thought of him as a muscular trapeze artist".
Gr0w1er| 4.22.10 @ 4:51PM
One's tastes in movies is like art: it's all highly subjective and always open to interpretation. Happy
viewing!
bernardo| 4.22.10 @ 6:32PM
Quality in genres comes and goes. Rock music had its day in the fifteen or so years after 1955. Impressionist painting had its in the last third of the 19th Century. American movies peaked in the years between around 1930 and around 1965. That does not mean everything that has come after that has been bad, or that moviemakers of that period did not produce some really bad junk. It just means that we are in a period of decline which might end someday.
Nick| 4.22.10 @ 7:40PM
Mr. Koehl,
I agree with your premise ("the cream rises"), but the question is, "How much MORE cream was there in the past?"
I don't believe your 90/10 ratio applies to the '40s and '50s. I would give the '30s some slack, as film-makers were re-learning their craft, after the advent of "talkies."
By 1939, in one year, they had found the sweet spot:
"Gone with the Wind", "The Wizard of Oz", "Stagecoach", "Jesse James", "Drums Along the Mohawk", "Beau Geste", "Dodge City", "The Little Princess", "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington", "Of Mice of Men", "Gulliver's Travels", "Only Angels Have Wings", "Young Mr. Lincoln", "The Hunchback of Norte Dame", "Goodbye, Mr. Chips", "Ninotchka", "Love Affair", "The Roaring Twenties", and "The Three Musketeers", to name but a few. (Ha-ha)
There were many more. There were three Andy Hardys, two Sherlock Holmes', a Thin Man, and a Hopalong Cassidy that year. Google it and see the list of movies that year, it is amazing.
The '60s and '70s weren't as prolific, but still had many 3 and 4 star movies to see every year.
By the '80s, the corporatization of Hollywood was complete. Instead of churning out many films, studios had middle managers who had to "green-light" movies.
I think the old system was better.
Today, there are three types of movies I see advertised on TV, since I rarely go to the theater.
-Chick Flicks, i.e. "Date Movies",
-Satanic Flicks, what we used to call "Horror/Slasher movies", and
-The Blockbuster, i.e. "Big budget, special effects movies."
In twenty years, all movies will probably by computer generated anyway. No actors. No sets to build. No cameramen. No voice-over people either.
Just I.T. geeks and "test audiences."
How depressing.
Nick| 4.22.10 @ 7:58PM
That should be: "[...] all movies will probably BE computer generated [...]"
Stuart Koehl| 4.23.10 @ 10:54AM
When that happens, there will be no use for actors, and we will no longer have to listen to drivel from the likes of Sean Penn and Matt Damon.
Every cloud has a silver lining.
Nick| 4.23.10 @ 12:40PM
Mr. Koehl,
I hadn't thought of it that way!
You may be right.
Well, we can dream, can't we?
Stuart Koehl| 4.23.10 @ 10:56AM
If there seem to be fewer good movies, that might be because there are fewer movies overall. If 90% of everything is crap, and 100 films are released in a year, then 90 films will be crap, and 10 will be good.
On the other hand, if only fifty films are released in a year, then 45 will be crap, and only 5 will be good.
But the ratio holds.
ejp| 4.22.10 @ 9:39PM
My viewing habits consist entirely of movies made no later than 1979 with a very few exceptions beyond that date, and the same is true for TV programs. There is nothing from the last two decades that I would ever call classic in the way Old Hollywood used to do it.
Rudy| 4.22.10 @ 10:37PM
The passage of time makes the bad seem better, and the malign benign.
THESE are the "good old days", with apologies to Carly Simon.
Derek Leaberry| 4.23.10 @ 10:34AM
Sadly, Miss Fabrizio seems to have imbibed the left-wing indoctrination of hatred of all things southern, especially the Old South. What I find disturbing about younger "conservatives", if indeed they are truly conservatives, is that they seem to have accepted all the egalitarian and history-hating notions that the lefties have thrust down their throats. Just another reason to home school my six children.
Kenneth E. MacAlister Jr.| 4.23.10 @ 2:25PM
I, for one tend to avoid movies made after the early '60s. When Hollywood became Hollyweird in the late '60s in came gratuitous profanity, violence, political preaching & sex for the sake of sex in 90% of its product. For all the special effects & better panoramic pictures in today's movies, the things listed above, for me, make them unwatchable. Hollywood directors & actors up until the late '60s had too much respect for their audience to bombard them with the leftist bilge today's "stars" & directors do. Actors like John Wayne, Steve McQueen, Bette Davis, Edward G. Robinson, & Maureen O'Hara & directors like John Ford & Alfred Hitchcock who continued working into the '70s continued to offer a class product because they respected their audience. What has replaced them are not worthy of the following these people had. Even Paul Newman, who was a great actor, lost me as more & more left wing preaching & profanity filled his movies as his career progressed. Hollyweird has long forgotten what its job description entails: entertainment, not gutter language, gratuitous violence & sex, & leftwing political preaching. I'll continue to stick with the Hollywood of old thank you.
fjdsk| 7.1.10 @ 1:21AM
beijing massage shanghai girl
;lkjhg | 10.27.10 @ 10:55AM
hjt gjyu tyht