Coppola made some classicsDefinitely agree. I & II are incredible every time.
Apocalypse now is still awesome.
The conversation is very underrated.
Coppola made some classicsDefinitely agree. I & II are incredible every time.
I love butch Cassidy and the sundance kid.The Sting
Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid
On The Waterfront
12 Angry Men
Same for Apocolypse Now.Definitely agree. I & II are incredible every time.
Wouldn't call this classic. I'm thinking like 60s or earlier.Forrest
Fucking
Gump
I dunno, did you see Rumblefish?Same for Apocolypse Now.
Must be the director.
Reported to @LeighWouldn't call this classic. I'm thinking like 60s or earlier.
Debbie does Dallas?Can anyone remember the title of this classic movie where this woman bangs a confused young gay man and she says this classic line about when he thinks back on this moment "please be kind"? Honestly that stuff is pretty ahead of its time. That was a movie from the fifties if I remember correctly.
Found itDebbie does Dallas?
Dialogue almost always ages poorly if it's on point for the time. If it's more theatrically written, it can hold up more over time, but can seem sort of wooden. The best writers manage a synthesis of both so their work feels authentic for the time, but decodable in cross-temporal ir cultural contexts.
To me, there are more films from the 40s and 50s that manage to navigate this line because morality plays were more common. In the 60s and 70s you start to get more slice of life work that's more insular and then from the 80s, a lot of work was about spectacle mixed with thin ideas propelling them. In the 90s and early 2000s we got a bunch of sort of pastiches of old ideas, shots and lines because our culture became so self referential. In the 2010s there's a hodgepodge of stuff, with TV competing neck and neck with film for rewatchability and narrativizing the human condition. Sadly this has led to more recycling of old ideas, but also truly unique experiments when they break through.
All that said, when plumbing the archives of old films, it's worth it to follow screenwriters more than directors even though it's usually done the other way around. Auteurs who do both are best, but if it's a team effort the writers can lead you down more reliable paths of quality. The writers sometimes bomb or are doing hack work, but often you can curate a good selection because the studio system was very restrictive about what got passed on to the decent directors.
William Faulkner, for example, wrote The Big Sleep, which is a masterpiece. William Goldman wrote Butch and Sundance, All the President's Men and The Princess Bride. Of course, a director can either butcher or punch up a screenplay so ideally when the good writers link with decent directors (and a smart producer) you obviously get the best results.
The best movies are not really well known.We're talking about 70 years of movies.
This list could be 400 pages.
Man i really loved all the presidents men. I thought the movie was one of those rare times it lived up to the book. Redford is an amazing actorDialogue almost always ages poorly if it's on point for the time. If it's more theatrically written, it can hold up more over time, but can seem sort of wooden. The best writers manage a synthesis of both so their work feels authentic for the time, but decodable in cross-temporal ir cultural contexts.
To me, there are more films from the 40s and 50s that manage to navigate this line because morality plays were more common. In the 60s and 70s you start to get more slice of life work that's more insular and then from the 80s, a lot of work was about spectacle mixed with thin ideas propelling them. In the 90s and early 2000s we got a bunch of sort of pastiches of old ideas, shots and lines because our culture became so self referential. In the 2010s there's a hodgepodge of stuff, with TV competing neck and neck with film for rewatchability and narrativizing the human condition. Sadly this has led to more recycling of old ideas, but also truly unique experiments when they break through.
All that said, when plumbing the archives of old films, it's worth it to follow screenwriters more than directors even though it's usually done the other way around. Auteurs who do both are best, but if it's a team effort the writers can lead you down more reliable paths of quality. The writers sometimes bomb or are doing hack work, but often you can curate a good selection because the studio system was very restrictive about what got passed on to the decent directors.
William Faulkner, for example, wrote The Big Sleep, which is a masterpiece. William Goldman wrote Butch and Sundance, All the President's Men and The Princess Bride. Of course, a director can either butcher or punch up a screenplay so ideally when the good writers link with decent directors (and a smart producer) you obviously get the best results.
Can anyone remember the title of this classic movie where this woman bangs a confused young gay man and she says this classic line about when he thinks back on this moment "please be kind"? Honestly that stuff is pretty ahead of its time. That was a movie from the fifties if I remember correctly.
It was killing me that I forgot the title.
Coppola is also a good screenwriter.Same for Apocolypse Now.
Must be the director.
That's one Coppola movie I did not see yet. I do enjoy his and Kubrick's work immensely.I dunno, did you see Rumblefish?
Correction:Coppola is also a good screenwriter.
He also knows how to get a good screenwriter on board.
Fun fact :
John Milius wrote the screenplay for apocalypse.
He also directed and wrote Conan the barbarian with Arnie!
Last but not least: he also produced the very first UFCs!!
That's because they aren't classics.T
The best movies are not really well known.
People can be prejudice against old movies because they are based on opinions of family favorites like Ben Hur, Casblanca and Gone with the Wind. They movies that had unpleasant themes that are more relatable with real and modern life that current generations may enjoy are almost never mentioned in the top lists of classic movies.
Classic can mean being a favorite but also it can mean to describe a vintage genre yes? What are we talking about here? I assumed he wanted to know if any vintage movies worth watching.That's because they aren't classics.
Listen here you trashy Korean Martha Stewert, this thread encompasses It's a Wonderful Life and Miracle on 34th street, and that's IT!Classic can mean being a favorite but also it can mean to describe a vintage genre yes? What are we talking about here? I assumed he wanted to know if any vintage movies worth watching.