Hatebox Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 (edited) It's impossible to say whether movies are any better or worse today because you're not the same person watching them now as you were back then. I'm sure I'd have devoured the MCU as a 12 year old. I do suspect that if you made a list of the top 100 grossing films of the 80s and 90s I'd find them superior to the 2000s and this decade so far, though. Edited July 9, 2015 by Hatebox 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avatree Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 Plus, we didn't have Twitter or Facebook back in the day t see and hear everyone's opinion which travels faster.. I'm thinking that if The EMPIRE STRIKES BACK were never made back in the day and made now, in the present, the "Luke, I am your Father" would've been spoiled in no time.. YOU QUOTED IT WRONG OMG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krissykins Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 Yeh the late 90's films are my favourites. After school, renting a VHS from Blockbuster or Global Video, looking at all the films in the shop. Waiting for films to come out on video because I was too young to see them. 18 is 18 in the UK, can't take anyone younger. I remember I pre ordered the Titanic VHS and got a poster with it hahah. I still have the poster in my parents house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolioD1 Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 it would have been spoiled in the trailer like terminator geneyesize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TServo2049 Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 (edited) Also, much as ID4 gets lumped in with the "too many sequels, mindless CGI spectacle and destruction" thing, people seem to forget that it was original, it had at least two-dimensional characters, they had actual moments between the destruction, and nearly all the effects set pieces were practical, they were just composited digitally. ID4 is an enigma: Did it start the trends we bemoan today, or was it the end of the previous era? Or both? Really, it didn't all happen at once. Edited July 9, 2015 by TServo2049 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avatree Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 I bet if Titanic was released now the internet would spoil the ending. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyGossamer Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 I bet if Titanic was released now the internet would spoil the ending. Huh? It was spoiled then even before the internet. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatebox Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 (edited) Also, much as ID4 gets lumped in with the "too many sequels, mindless CGI spectacle and destruction" thing, people seem to forget that it was original, it had at least two-dimensional characters, they had actual moments between the destruction, and nearly all the effects set pieces were practical, they were just composited digitally. ID4 is an enigma: Did it start the trends we bemoan today, or was it the end of the previous era? Or both? Really, it didn't all happen at once. You're right, trends take a while. But it's hard not to see it as some kind of precursor to the 'annihilate everything!' ethos that's pervaded almost every big movie today (the 'Size Does Matter' mantra would come back to bite Emmerich in the ass with Godzilla, funnily enough). To ID4's credit, some of the imagery was amazing, though. The White House explosion still looks great, and the sense of scale was unprecedented. Edited July 9, 2015 by Hatebox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfirebird2008 Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 Also, much as ID4 gets lumped in with the "too many sequels, mindless CGI spectacle and destruction" thing, people seem to forget that it was original, it had at least two-dimensional characters, they had actual moments between the destruction, and nearly all the effects set pieces were practical, they were just composited digitally. ID4 is an enigma: Did it start the trends we bemoan today, or was it the end of the previous era? Or both? Really, it didn't all happen at once. It was the start of an entire genre: destruction porn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TalismanRing Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 (edited) It was the start of an entire genre: destruction porn. I guess Earthquake, The Poseidon Adventure and The Towering Inferno don't count Edited July 9, 2015 by TalismanRing 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TServo2049 Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 But regardless, ID4 did it better than most of the stuff that came after. I'm more annoyed by people who lump it in with the "CGI problem." Everything they blew up in that movie was a model, they deliberately chose to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJohn Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 they all are. the people who act like the first one is some modern classic are literally the most embarrassing people on the planet. The first one is a good fun action movie. Don't see what is the problem of thinking that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Marston Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 The first Taken is Commando with Liam Neeson. That's what makes it awesome. No negotiating. Just killing one bad guy after another 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfirebird2008 Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 I guess Earthquake, The Poseidon Adventure and The Towering Inferno don't count Those were more one-off destruction movies. ID4 came along right when CGI was becoming a huge deal and it made things easier for Hollywood to pump out plenty of destruction movies...enough to actually call it a genre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avatree Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 The first Taken is Commando with Liam Neeson. That's what makes it awesome. No negotiating. Just killing one bad guy after another commando is actually watchable though, that's the difference. Taken is trash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Marston Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 Tom Cruise was huge in the 90s. I believe A Few Good Men, The Firm, Mission Impossible and Jerry Maguire adjust to 300m or near it. Though Days of Thunder flopped so it shows no actor is perfect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolioD1 Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 it's a badly put together action movie. nothing about it is well done. if you like taken you hate movies. just admit you like it for that one scene of liam neeson giving that speech on the phone. it's ok. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandias Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 if you like taken 2 or 3 you hate movies. fixt 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walt Disney Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 it's a badly put together action movie. nothing about it is well done. if you like taken you hate movies. just admit you like it for that one scene of liam neeson giving that speech on the phone. it's ok. No. I know what I like, and I like movies. But not all movies. But, I do like Taken. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJohn Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 (edited) it's a badly put together action movie. nothing about it is well done. if you like taken you hate movies. just admit you like it for that one scene of liam neeson giving that speech on the phone. it's ok. No, you are the one who hates movies here Edited July 9, 2015 by CJohn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
