Who Agrees With Me That

[thegroggman]

yeah but movies in the 70s eerbnt about money

LOL...what?!? There has never been a movie produced by a movie studio, no matter how good, that hasnt been about money. The bottomline is always how much money they can make off a property. As for teenie-bopper films, I think there was actually a sharp drop off in the 70s due to content restrictions being dropped. Directors for awhile would place anything into their films, so the innocent teenie bopper films of the late 50s and 60s dissapeared. But they made their return in the 80s during the Regean Administration...and havent left since. The only teen film I can think of from the time was Animal House...and that unlike current teen films, was funny.

[Ad]

thegroggman lol u must have quoted me before I got to edit

DAMM U!!!

[Runik]

i agree with ya most of today's movies suck with a few execptions

but uh
indiana Jones

that movie was made in the early 80's

[DarkBlizzard]

There's a ton of awesome movies these days. Watch MTV on June 5th. Thats when the MTV Video Music Adwards are. Wouldnt wanna miss those would ya... But if your lazy human ass's dont get out of ur damn bed from sleeping for 16 hours because u stayed up until 5 am the night before ( as will most likely happen to me) then u can just catch the VMA's the next day on MTV.

[Ad]

no what I am saying is this

70s would u pay an actor to 4 million to do lethal weapon 4????

no they wouldn't Mel Gibson has admitted he is sick of doing this shit becasue he is board he has admitted that hes only doing it for the money.

also 70s had better actors im not saying that today we havent got good actors but 70s had more.

we are full of actors that are exremly overrated

70s had the best actors
marlon Brando
Robert Denero
Al Pachino

I can go on this is jsut a few example I know there still going today but name some good ones that are brought up in the 90s decade that are as good as these guys???

Nichle Kidman for example wtf??? how did she win?? worst performance ever in days of thunder I have ever seen actully.

[3RA1N1AC]

o man, the 70s... they sure didn't make any disposable, exploitative adolescent crap back then...

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/6302316405/

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/6303102700/

http://video.barnesandnoble.com/search/pro...ean=43396062023

[Ad]

lol just had a read of all that I didn't say the 70s had no crap I said that 60s had less crap and more classic movies.

these days its 4 million
teen
and special effects

thats what ruined Phatom Menece never live up to the original star wars

all those special effects ruined it and it seemed to appeal for a much much younger audience

U have a look at the 20 top movies of all time see what movie is there today

Titanic maybe the latest

and yes someone mention Quetson Tarintinos stuff yes I love it that is the decent 90s stuff of today.

I guess Im just getting too old already now I need Help!!!

[thegroggman]

Well the reason Lucas has done what he did with the current Star Wars films is because he wanted to appeal to a younger audience...and apparently it worked, cuz when I went and saw Phantom Menace and AOTC both were packed with screaming 13 year olds. Id kinda say he sold out...but hes out to make tons of doe just like anyone else. Besides when you make a classic like the Star Wars series...its hard to strike oil twice.

As for the actors in the 70s being superior to todays...I think I would agree...although a lot of those actors are still acting...Actually my favorite actors would have to be from the 50s/60s...Jimmy Stewart, Peter O. Toole, Audrey Hepburn, and my favorite actor ever...Steve McQueen. But there are also good actors who have debuted in relatively recent years...Tom Hanks comes to mind...

Edit: Whoops left out the part about the money that actors are paid. I agree that actors are paid too much...kind of gives them the wrong motivation...but actors back in the day were also payed alot, just the economy was different. When a blockbuster cost 20 million tops, paying your lead $500,000 was a lot of money.

[Bait Master]

Originally posted by thegroggman@4 June 2003 - 06:21

Im...shocked! Really there isnt a single 70s film that you like? Godfather? Star Wars? The French Connection? Attack on Precint 13? Alien? The Shining? Animal House? Young Frankenstein? Annie Hall? Blazing Saddles? Monty Python and the Holy Grail? Chinatown? One Flew Over the Cookus Nest?  Taxi Driver? Clockwork Orange? Apocalypse Now?  The Deer Hunter? Dog Day Afternoon? Jaws? Manhattan? Dirty Harry? Rocky? The Exorcist? Patton? Close Encounters of the Third Kind? Netowork? .

Out of that list i can pick 2 that i like. The Shining and Monty Python. Even then i couldn't stand to watch either 1 more than once every few months.

See the problems i have with those 70's movies is: Picture quality (that erks me the most), the cloths(disco is dead, friggen hippies ), special effects (if there's one thing i hate more than total computerized graphics it's old crappy graphics/special effects.)

See the wierd thing is that i like allmost every time i have seen a movie in the past 5-10 years i have liked. Even the crappy ones everyone else hates.

[darktiger]

What do/did you people like about Gangs of New York?

I saw it at a moviefestival in Holland, and I thought it was the biggest piece of crap I had ever seen.

(btw I'm going to see Lizzie next Sunday (just out in Holland in theaters))