![]() |
I assume the poster is using classic as a measurement of time- just as this forum does.
|
Quote:
Classic is more than a measurement of time, as it refers to how well something endures it. |
This is a very interesting conversation.
'Better' is a completely relative term. If you mean better filmmaking, I'm not really sure what the answer is - early films like Vampyr and Nosferatu were made on new technology, which was kinda crappy equipment back then - but those films IMO are stunning and amazing. Films from the 40s and 50s might be campy, especially Ed Wood, but look at how clear those films look in terms of cinematography, then look at low-budget stuff from the 70s-90s, everything looks like crap (except the saturated colors of the Hammer Films, and Dario Argento I love those). Nowadays it seems any idiot willing to max out his credit cards can buy a digital camera and convince a few friends to make a crappy horror movie. |
Quote:
Ever heard of "Classic Rock?" It refers to a specific time period of rock music. The same concept is in play here- look at the index page of this forum and read the various subforum's descriptions. |
Quote:
|
Yah, I agree. And since the original poster hasn't returned, I can assume we weren't very helpful...
|
Quote:
|
I prefer the classics, but as stated some newer ones are better than older ones and vice versa.
|
I prefer most classics, there are some good modern ones but I find the classic people put more time an effort into them an there more original then most the stuff that comes out today an the two best movies ever in my opinion are the original Night Of The Living Dead & The Last man On Earth
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:48 AM. |