What makes some films timeless?

[The Shape]

What do you guys think? There are tons of films that I see sticking around for generations to come, just as many old, classics are still popular today.

What gives these films staying power? And why does it seem that Hollywood is producing less and less of these quality films as time goes on?

 

[Under The Rose]

Because back in the day it was all about the story and not about the money now they are just churning any crap out to make profit.

 

[The Shape]

Because back in the day it was all about the story and not about the money now they are just churning any crap out to make profit.

Well, it was still about the money back then. But I do believe the storytelling was a lot greater than it is in most recent films.

Also, some classics have the power to be relatable even today, years or decades after their release. I think that's amazing.

 

[mister Lennon]

Because today there are a lack of creative ideas a a lot of special effects. Old movies just the oppossite, and they were a lot better . Better stories, beter actors, better directors, better movies. Today, too many remakes, too many sequels, etc. Also, the star power of nowadays are a joke compared to the star power of old days. I mean: bogart, grant, brando, newman, cooper, tracy, lancaster, douglas, peck, hepburn, taylor, monroe, gardner, stanwyck, davis, etc, etc.

 

[The Shape]

Because today there are a lack of creative ideas a a lot of special effects. Old movies just the oppossite, and they were a lot better . Better stories, beter actors, better directors, better movies. Today, too many remakes, too many sequels, etc. Also, the star power of nowadays are a joke compared to the star power of old days. I mean: bogart, grant, brando, newman, cooper, tracy, lancaster, douglas, peck, hepburn, taylor, monroe, gardner, stanwyck, davis, etc, etc.

That's true. Most "stars" today are nothing more than names. They don't have the chops that the stars did back in the day.

 

[primemover]

Because Todays Movies Suck And Older Movies Are Betterer!!@$# !$

 

[The Shape]

Because Todays Movies Suck And Older Movies Are Betterer!!@$# !$

I don't know what that was supposed to be, but I'll respond anyway.

Not all films today suck. Hollywood still produces some amazing films, and some I can see becoming classic. But the quality of most of the films being released today just sucks. And the majority of films released now seem to be remakes or sequels.

 

[Shuley]

You need a groundbreaking film which always helps.Great acting and a great script with a theme that is either original or never becomes dated.Pulp Fiction will never become dated.

 

[primemover]

I don't know what that was supposed to be, but I'll respond anyway.

Not all films today suck. Hollywood still produces some amazing films, and some I can see becoming classic. But the quality of most of the films being released today just sucks. And the majority of films released now seem to be remakes or sequels.

It was sarcasm, but it is a growing trend of people to think that the movies of a bygone era are overall better than what comes in current times.

There was a lot of crap back then too, but you only remember the gems and those few movies per year that stand out while the rest fade away into the land of forgotten movies. You are comparing those gems against the week to week releases of today, it's a very unfair comparison.

A better comparison is to compare those yesteryear gems to the best of the last decade. I am sure you'll see there have been some great movies in the last ten years that can compare to them.

 

[The Shape]

It was sarcasm, but it is a growing trend of people to think that the movies of a bygone era are overall better than what comes in current times.

There was a lot of crap back then too, but you only remember the gems and those few movies per year that stand out while the rest fade away into the land of forgotten movies. You are comparing those gems against the week to week releases of today, it's a very unfair comparison.

A better comparison is to compare those yesteryear gems to the best of the last decade. I am sure you'll see there have been some great movies in the last ten years that can compare to them.

You're right.

But I'm not so much talking about movies from long, long ago. I mean any films that you consider timeless, whether they be from the 40s or last year. There have been "gems" made from the 20's to recent years, in my eyes. But I do think that we are seeing less of the "gems" as time goes on.

Some of these "yesteryear gems", as you call them, just seem to stand out more because they've been around for so long.

 

[War Lord]

A film that is timeless doesn't try and be too contemporary.

 

[Carmine Falcone]

A film that is timeless doesn't try and be too contemporary.

Some contemporary films ARE timeless in their themes and acting. Take The Long Good Friday for instance, it is very contemporary in the way that it shows London 20 years ago and the music (synthesizers) But in it's themes (The tragedy of a man who sees his world collapse) it is timeless. And Bob Hoskins' performance will never lose it's power.

So you've got that with a lot of films. Themes that will last and last. The Godfather movies (family or business? - choiches), the Good, the Bad and the Ugly (betrayal, revenge), The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (Greed)

 

[War Lord]

Some contemporary films ARE timeless in their themes and acting. Take The Long Good Friday for instance, it is very contemporary in the way that it shows London 20 years ago and the music (synthesizers) But in it's themes (The tragic of a man who sees his world collapse) it is timeless. And Bob Hoskins' performance will never lose it's power.

There's a difference between a period film and a film that is contemporary. Period films might have settings in a certain period, but it deals with themes that are still relevant, but contemporary films has themes are very limited to a specific time.

For example, a period film that deals with civil rights will have a setting from the 1950's, but the theme might be about the measure of a man. A contemporary film about civil rights will have a theme about civil rights, which might not be as relevant 50 years later.

 

[Maxwinner]

Carmine, i just gots to say this: you got a great taste in movies

 

[Carmine Falcone]

There's a difference between a period film and a film that is contemporary. Period films might have settings in a certain period, but it deals with themes that are still relevant, but contemporary films has themes are very limited to a specific time.

For example, a period film that deals with civil rights will have a setting from the 1950's, but the theme might be about the measure of a man. A contemporary film about civil rights will have a theme about civil rights, which might not be as relevant 50 years later.

You are absolutely right. I misunderstood.

 

[Carmine Falcone]

Carmine, i just gots to say this: you got a great taste in movies

Thanks.

But Michael Caine is not overrated.

 

[Poetic Chaos]

Characters.

 

[War Lord]

You are absolutely right. I misunderstood.

I forgive you, my son.

 

[Carmine Falcone]

I forgive you, my son.

Thank you my Lord.

 

[Maxwinner]

Thanks.

But Michael Caine is not overrated.

Whateva

 

[The Shape]

Some contemporary films ARE timeless in their themes and acting. Take The Long Good Friday for instance, it is very contemporary in the way that it shows London 20 years ago and the music (synthesizers) But in it's themes (The tragedy of a man who sees his world collapse) it is timeless. And Bob Hoskins' performance will never lose it's power.

So you've got that with a lot of films. Themes that will last and last. The Godfather movies (family or business? - choiches), the Good, the Bad and the Ugly (betrayal, revenge), The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (Greed)

 

[mister Lennon]

Easily, the 20s, 30s, 40s and maybe 50s as the best ones decades about cinema. More masterpieces together, best actors ever, etc. 60s and 70s were pretty good. 80s were good and 90s decent.

Its a fact that in old times,there was more good movies and masterpieces than today or recent years. I think that , in general terms, all the creative things in all the levels were better than today.

 

[Poetic Chaos]

Themes are the smaller part of the big picture. All great movies need a great character to personify those themes and carry them the rest of the picture. That's what people latch onto throughout the film. The lead. Holly Golightly. Michael Corleone. Hell, Michael Myers. They made their movies what they are.

 

[The Shape]

Does anyone see any films produced this year becoming "timeless"? I can't think of any of the top of my head...

 

[primemover]

You're right.

But I'm not so much talking about movies from long, long ago. I mean any films that you consider timeless, whether they be from the 40s or last year. There have been "gems" made from the 20's to recent years, in my eyes. But I do think that we are seeing less of the "gems" as time goes on.

And I think that assumption is pure BS, I think we'd see the same ratio of 'gems' in today's time as we do from yesterdays, your perspective is what is out of whack here, and the fact that people don't see films as 'gems' or 'timeless' until some time goes by.

Look at films like The Shawshank Redemption or Office Space, neither of those films did anything at the box office nor made a big splash when they came out, but now are considered timeless classics.

But the biggest movie to go from 'meh' to classic in recent times is A Christmas Story, it just takes some time.