|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2024 8:59:31 GMT -5
I have seen people praise the 80s Transformer movie as if it was Lawrence of Arabia. I tried to watch it recently. It's a silly, bad cartoon. It's okay if you loved it when you were 9, but acknowledge that it is not a masterpiece. But see, this actually shows how relative it all is. You see a silly bad cartoon, but with my older eyes, I especially now appreciate just how good the actual animation was, the detailed rendering of the initial world in the opening scene alone is breathtaking and on such a higher level than a lot of modern animation. The coloring alone is so lost in this largely digital age. The soundtrack also especially holds up for those of us who appreciate 80's hard rock, those were some great artists/bands that contributed (a young Doug Aldrich in the band Lion playing that guitar opening at the start of the theme song still sends shivers, and Stan Bush singing "you've got the touch!" is a forever classic). It's just as valid it's a masterpiece for me as it's a bad cartoon for you. There are no truly objective arguments that suggest otherwise. |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Apr 2, 2024 9:12:43 GMT -5
I have seen people praise the 80s Transformer movie as if it was Lawrence of Arabia. I tried to watch it recently. It's a silly, bad cartoon. It's okay if you loved it when you were 9, but acknowledge that it is not a masterpiece. It's just as valid it's a masterpiece for me as it's a bad cartoon for you. There are no truly objective arguments that suggest otherwise. Obviously art is subjective. But there is still critical consensus. This is why Citizen Kane is considered, I don't know, better than Jaws: The Revenge, even though I'm sure there are people who consider the first to be rubbish and the second to be a masterpiece. But you can't always reduce everything to "it's subjective". |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2024 9:24:51 GMT -5
It's just as valid it's a masterpiece for me as it's a bad cartoon for you. There are no truly objective arguments that suggest otherwise. Obviously art is subjective. But there is still critical consensus. This is why Citizen Kane is considered, I don't know, better than Jaws: The Revenge, even though I'm sure there are people who consider the first to be rubbish and the second to be a masterpiece. But you can't always reduce everything to "it's subjective". Not to devolve too much into semantics, but critical consensus to me is just when a high volume of subjective opinions align. Don't get me wrong, that helps us make "suggested watching/reading/listening lists" which yield no end of jumping off points for debate, so I'm not dismissing critical consensus as rubbish. But at the end of the day, I truly believe it's still all subjective, mass opinion is not the basis for objective conclusions. On topic to this thread, we've ALL experienced something we enjoyed in the past and now is simply not as enjoyable. That's all that's meant by "didn't age well", it's all a relative journey. We all know creative works don't "age" in the literal sense. But much like discussing critical consensus, it gives us a vehicle to compare notes, but not make "final judgment" if you will. |
|
|
|
Post by tonebone on Apr 2, 2024 9:55:00 GMT -5
I just find it funny that this conversation exists at all... that someone would find that a comic book about 40 year old teenagers who put on colorful costumes and fight crime "didn't age well"... especially the one with green skin who turns into a green tiger or gorilla. Wait till you see the orange babe in the metal bikini who's hair is fire.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Apr 2, 2024 10:25:41 GMT -5
You know what doesn't hold up? M*A*S*H. It was my favorite TV show for every one of its 11 seasons and now I find it utterly unwatchable. At first I thought it was the laugh track or the obviously indoor "outdoor" sets but I finally had to admit its a combination of the writing and the acting. It feels as artificial and unnatural as a Busby Berkley musical minus the entertainment value. It makes me sad.
Cei-U!
I summon the tarnished classic!
|
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Apr 2, 2024 10:29:19 GMT -5
You know what doesn't hold up? M*A*S*H. It was my favorite TV show for every one of its 11 seasons and now I find it utterly unwatchable. At first I thought it was the laugh track or the obviously indoor "outdoor" sets but I finally had to admit its a combination of the writing and the acting. It feels as artificial and unnatural as a Busby Berkley musical minus the entertainment value. It makes me sad. Cei-U! I summon the tarnished classic! TV adaptations of movies (theatrical or TV movies) are rarely as good as the film. That's almost an unwritten rule. |
|
|
|
Post by majestic on Apr 2, 2024 11:15:14 GMT -5
What did not hold up?... my body.
|
|
|
|
Post by EdoBosnar on Apr 2, 2024 11:55:57 GMT -5
You know what doesn't hold up? M*A*S*H. It was my favorite TV show for every one of its 11 seasons and now I find it utterly unwatchable. At first I thought it was the laugh track or the obviously indoor "outdoor" sets but I finally had to admit its a combination of the writing and the acting. It feels as artificial and unnatural as a Busby Berkley musical minus the entertainment value. It makes me sad. Wow, I thought I was the only one; I pretty regularly watched and loved M*A*S*H during its last few seasons, and watched syndicated reruns of the earlier seasons in the early 1980s. Now I can't sit through even a few minutes of an episode. Another well-regarded sitcom that I used to love (well, the first five seasons anyway) that I simply can't even bear the thought of watching now is Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Apr 2, 2024 12:03:43 GMT -5
I have seen people praise the 80s Transformer movie as if it was Lawrence of Arabia. I tried to watch it recently. It's a silly, bad cartoon. It's okay if you loved it when you were 9, but acknowledge that it is not a masterpiece. But see, this actually shows how relative it all is. You see a silly bad cartoon, but with my older eyes, I especially now appreciate just how good the actual animation was, the detailed rendering of the initial world in the opening scene alone is breathtaking and on such a higher level than a lot of modern animation. The coloring alone is so lost in this largely digital age. The soundtrack also especially holds up for those of us who appreciate 80's hard rock, those were some great artists/bands that contributed (a young Doug Aldrich in the band Lion playing that guitar opening at the start of the theme song still sends shivers, and Stan Bush singing "you've got the touch!" is a forever classic). It's just as valid it's a masterpiece for me as it's a bad cartoon for you. There are no truly objective arguments that suggest otherwise. When I said bad, I meant the movie as a whole, not the technical aspects. For those, I am not sure if we should compare it to TV animation or animated movies of that decade. Compared to TV, yeah, it wasn't bad. Compared to theatrical releases? Not even in the ballpark. www.imdb.com/list/ls527093004/As for the music, I thought it sounded like a parody of 80s rock sound track. But we are just disagreeing about the production values, not the movie. It's a fun movie for kids. But compare to Akira or An American Tale or Grave of the Fireflies. It is not a valid masterpiece by any stretch. It does not have some of the best animation of the decade, it does not have the best action of any animated movie. These are things I have seen people say. I see this as something people loved when they were young and just can't see how mediocre it is. |
|
|
|
Post by james on Apr 2, 2024 12:14:03 GMT -5
As I reread my original post and read others ‘posts I saw some flaws in my thinking. Being a stepfather for the first time at 55 to a 15 year old I think everything annoys me. Even reading about a teenagers. I do like how this thread , and many threads in this forum branch out to start totally new discussions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2024 12:36:10 GMT -5
But see, this actually shows how relative it all is. You see a silly bad cartoon, but with my older eyes, I especially now appreciate just how good the actual animation was, the detailed rendering of the initial world in the opening scene alone is breathtaking and on such a higher level than a lot of modern animation. The coloring alone is so lost in this largely digital age. The soundtrack also especially holds up for those of us who appreciate 80's hard rock, those were some great artists/bands that contributed (a young Doug Aldrich in the band Lion playing that guitar opening at the start of the theme song still sends shivers, and Stan Bush singing "you've got the touch!" is a forever classic). It's just as valid it's a masterpiece for me as it's a bad cartoon for you. There are no truly objective arguments that suggest otherwise. When I said bad, I meant the movie as a whole, not the technical aspects. For those, I am not sure if we should compare it to TV animation or animated movies of that decade. Compared to TV, yeah, it wasn't bad. Compared to theatrical releases? Not even in the ballpark. www.imdb.com/list/ls527093004/As for the music, I thought it sounded like a parody of 80s rock sound track. But we are just disagreeing about the production values, not the movie. It's a fun movie for kids. But compare to Akira or An American Tale or Grave of the Fireflies. It is not a valid masterpiece by any stretch. It does not have some of the best animation of the decade, it does not have the best action of any animated movie. These are things I have seen people say. I see this as something people loved when they were young and just can't see how mediocre it is. We're not going to agree, that's fine. |
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Apr 2, 2024 12:45:42 GMT -5
Boy, I'm gonna have to disagree on MASH, with a caveat. I think it holds up quite well, for about the first 5-7 seasons, then it starts going south, for me. It never truly gets bad; but I have far fewer favorites as each season progresses and I have never really liked the finale, other than the performances. I really hated them going to the well of Hawkeye's mental breakdowns, again. I know that was probably Alda, as he liked playing that and similar psychological episodes; but, it was just overkill.
Not every episode is a winner; but, I liked them well enough to buy the DVD sets and I have watched the whole series, on several occasions and it still entertains.
Now, After MASH? That didn't even hold up then!
|
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Apr 2, 2024 14:16:48 GMT -5
You know what doesn't hold up? M*A*S*H. It was my favorite TV show for every one of its 11 seasons and now I find it utterly unwatchable. At first I thought it was the laugh track or the obviously indoor "outdoor" sets but I finally had to admit its a combination of the writing and the acting. It feels as artificial and unnatural as a Busby Berkley musical minus the entertainment value. It makes me sad. Wow, I thought I was the only one; I pretty regularly watched and loved M*A*S*H during its last few seasons, and watched syndicated reruns of the earlier seasons in the early 1980s. Now I can't sit through even a few minutes of an episode. Another well-regarded sitcom that I used to love (well, the first five seasons anyway) that I simply can't even bear the thought of watching now is Cheers. I mostly agree with this as well. I can still handle the first two or three seasons, even recognizing its warts. But it goes downhill super fast. I haven't tried to watch Cheers in eons. I find old-school TV that actually does hold up well to be the exception rather than the rule. |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Apr 2, 2024 14:52:13 GMT -5
Wow, I thought I was the only one; I pretty regularly watched and loved M*A*S*H during its last few seasons, and watched syndicated reruns of the earlier seasons in the early 1980s. Now I can't sit through even a few minutes of an episode. Another well-regarded sitcom that I used to love (well, the first five seasons anyway) that I simply can't even bear the thought of watching now is Cheers. I mostly agree with this as well. I can still handle the first two or three seasons, even recognizing its warts. But it goes downhill super fast. I haven't tried to watch Cheers in eons. I find old-school TV that actually does hold up well to be the exception rather than the rule.
I haven't tried watching any 70s shows but I have recently been watching some early 90s series and one I've noticed is that I can't binge-watch them the way many of us do with more recent series. These older shows, usually with no over-arching story arc that carries you on from one episode to the next weren't designed to be viewed this was, so one a night is the most I can do with them, and even that's pushing it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Apr 2, 2024 15:45:12 GMT -5
I mostly agree with this as well. I can still handle the first two or three seasons, even recognizing its warts. But it goes downhill super fast. I haven't tried to watch Cheers in eons. I find old-school TV that actually does hold up well to be the exception rather than the rule.
I haven't tried watching any 70s shows but I have recently been watching some early 90s series and one I've noticed is that I can't binge-watch them the way many of us do with more recent series. These older shows, usually with no over-arching story arc that carries you on from one episode to the next weren't designed to be viewed this was, so one a night is the most I can do with them, and even that's pushing it.
They are definitely not meant to be binged. I just find that most of them are kind of...meh. Some hold up well, Barney Miller and The Rockford Files I really enjoy. But mostly I wonder what we were thinking. |
|
