Hypothetical Film Question: What Would Bad Movies Today Be Considered If Released in the 30s?

[The Panda]

The scenario is this, some guy invents a time machine and decides to take a movie like Jack and Jill, The Last Airbender, or Movie 43 back to the 30s, how would this movie be recieved?

 

Would it be regarded as a classic for being so ahead of its time in technology and be considered as something never seen before?

 

Or would it still be reveled and considered trash?

[Plain Old Tele]

Insofar as people could understand them, they'd still be considered trash, IMO.

[Kvikk Lunsj]

They would be consider shit. 

[The Panda]

Insofar as people could understand them, they'd still be considered trash, IMO.

 

I'm thinking from a technical standpoint, if you showed a person who had been used to black and white movies their whole life Transformers 2 (a piece of shit movie) they'd most likely be amazed at the visuals they saw, whether or not the story was great.

 

It's kind of like how the first motion pictures were literally things like a moving train and they were considered classics.  So in a generation that probably hasn't even had the idea of CGI might lend them to think a movie like Transformers 2 was fantastic if they saw it.

[Plain Old Tele]

I'm thinking from a technical standpoint, if you showed a person who had been used to black and white movies their whole life Transformers 2 (a piece of shit movie) they'd most likely be amazed at the visuals they saw, whether or not the story was great.

 

It's kind of like how the first motion pictures were literally things like a moving train and they were considered classics.  So in a generation that probably hasn't even had the idea of CGI might lend them to think a movie like Transformers 2 was fantastic if they saw it.

 

Except, by and large, if you read reviews of old movies, while they may praise the special effects or visuals, they usually focus on the story and content. So I expect the same would be true this time around. They'd be unable to process the rapid cutting of a Bay movie, and it would seem just like jumbled nonsense (abeit loud and with pretty colors). In addition, they would have zero attachment to the Autobots and even Shia, Megan, and the other humans (since societal and cultural norms were completely different back then).

[baumer]

People would love Transformers 2 in the 30's just as much as they do now.

They would also hate Citizen Kane back in the 1930's, and they did (in the 40's), and they would still have to wait 40 years before enough critics made other critics feel stupid for not seeing brilliance of it.  So basically, people's taste hasn't changed.  It's just people are sheep.

Edited January 1, 2014 by Christmas baumer

[Fancyarcher]

People would love Transformers 2 in the 30's just as much as they do now.

They would also hate Citizen Kane back in the 1930's, and they did (in the 40's), and they would still have to wait 40 years before enough critics made other critics feel stupid for not seeing brilliance of it.  So basically, people's taste hasn't changed.  It's just people are sheep.

 

Uh huh!

 

You keep telling yourself that.

Edited January 2, 2014 by Fancyarcher

[Plain Old Tele]

People would love Transformers 2 in the 30's just as much as they do now.

They would also hate Citizen Kane back in the 1930's, and they did (in the 40's), and they would still have to wait 40 years before enough critics made other critics feel stupid for not seeing brilliance of it.  So basically, people's taste hasn't changed.  It's just people are sheep.

 

They didn't hate KANE in the 40s, the movie was basically sabotaged (and literally removed from release) by Hearst. It's not like it had a typical run in theaters.

 

Bay's editing would be incomprehensible to a 40s-era audience. Back then, a straight cut from scene to scene to indicate the passage of time was unheard of; you used a dissolve. (LAWRENCE OF ARABIA's cut from Lawrence and the match to the sunrise was considered shocking and stunning at the time, and that was 1962.) A movie like THE WILD BUNCH was considered insanely "cutty" during its action scenes... in the late 1960s. And yet it's positively sedate compared to most action films today.

[baumer]

Kane was ignored when it first came out.  It was ignored at the box office and by the academy.  Only after brainwashing everyone was it revered.  

[Plain Old Tele]

Kane was ignored when it first came out.  It was ignored at the box office and by the academy.  Only after brainwashing everyone was it revered.  

 

[Jessie]

Star wars comes to mind...

[baumer]

[Plain Old Tele]

LOL

[Jessie]

People would love Transformers 2 in the 30's just as much as they do now.They would also hate Citizen Kane back in the 1930's, and they did (in the 40's), and they would still have to wait 40 years before enough critics made other critics feel stupid for not seeing brilliance of it.  So basically, people's taste hasn't changed.  It's just people are sheep.

This. I find it hilarious how people think Transformers 2 was hated by the GA. It had very good legs for a supposedly hated film, better than TDKR lol

[baumer]

Do you still love me Tele?  

[Fancyarcher]

This. I find it hilarious how people think Transformers 2 was hated by the GA. It had very good legs for a supposedly hated film, better than TDKR lol

 

It had a fairly big second weekend drop.

Edited January 2, 2014 by Fancyarcher

[baumer]

It had a fairly big second weekend drop.

 

Puerto Rico abandoned it in the second weekend.

[Plain Old Tele]

Do you still love me Tele?  

 

Always.

[Fancyarcher]

Puerto Rico abandoned it in the second weekend.

 

[vc2002]

It wouldl be considered as a proof that either time travel is possible, or there are aliens in other planets who also love making movies.

Edited January 2, 2014 by vc2002