movies/tv Movies that have not aged well?

[TheAnimationFanatic 3,606]

What are some movies that you liked when they came out, but have not held up very well? The movies don't necessarily have to be bad, just ones that haven't stood the test of time? For me it would be Shrek.

Edited August 16, 2015 by Theanimationfanatic

[Pastel 7,630]

There's a difference:

 

A movie that hasn't aged well would be 2001: A Space Odyssey. Maybe it was amazing when it came out, but now it's so boring. I hated it the first time I watched it, because there are now better movies/video games taking place in space.

 

A movie I used to like, but don't anymore would be Edward Scissorhands. It used to be my favorite movie when I was a kid, but I rewatched it years later and I was kinda disappointed.

[TheAnimationFanatic 3,606]

The former. For example, the Richard Donner Superman movie, which are dated, but are still well acted and are better depictions of Superman.

[Mesme Rize 15,692]

A movie that hasn't aged well would be 2001: A Space Odyssey. Maybe it was amazing when it came out, but now it's so boring. I hated it the first time I watched it, because there are now better movies/video games taking place in space.

 

Sorry, but in eyes, 2001: A Space Odyssey is one of the greatest movie masterpieces in Cinema history. The movie wasn't made to be eye pleasing, thought the Special effects where revolutionary for the time.

 

This movie tries to reach you on an intellectual level, that many movies failed to do and it's still a movie that is shown in many film classes, for it's uniqueness.

 

 

Anyway, i think a movie that hasn't aged well was the towering inferno. In 1974, it was one of the first disaster films that people saw and was also awarded with several oscars. Since then though, not only have we grown bored off disaster movies, but it also showed some very silly logic problems.

 

For example, there’s a scene once the fire is raging in which Robert Wagner and a bedfellow are trapped with a fire billowing nearby. Wagner puts a towel over his head as he attempts to run through a burning room, but here’s where things get a little silly; not more than two seconds into his run, he ends up running into a chair, and suddenly ends up bursting into flames immediately. Wagner gets to run around for a while, giving us a disturbingly protracted death (which is pretty cool and still looks good today) culminating in him tripping over a bit of glass and falling to his demise, but the stupidity of the character and the bizarre direction – where’s the suspense in some idiot clumsily running straight into a fiery chair when he’s just started his run?

 

Don't get me wrong, it's not necessarily a bad movie. Just not as good as it was praised to be.

[honk friend 1,987]

The Neverending Story

 

The special effects of 1980's fantasy films are charming, and I'd certainly love watch Labyrinth or The Dark Crystal again, my issue with this movie in particular is it's a prime example of how dated they are. The Neverending Story is my favorite book, but the movie doesn't do it any justice at all. What I've read was an epic fantasy novel, but what I've watched is the first half of the book condensed in to a really underwhelming childrens' adventure film. I can understand the path the directors tried to take, but the author is completely right, the directors simply did not understand the book. If it came out a few years later I'd have called it a cheap attempt to cash in on Jim Henson's success.

 

I would honestly be satisfied with a Peter Jackson adaption of the book, even if LotR and TNS are in two totally different leagues entirely.

[GuyNamedEarl 1,332]

I sort of liked Star War: The New Trilogy and thought it looked ok, but looking back on it now, it looks like absolute shit.

[Mesme Rize 15,692]

The Neverending Story

 

The special effects of 1980's fantasy films are charming, and I'd certainly love watch Labyrinth or The Dark Crystal again, my issue with this movie in particular is it's a prime example of how dated they are. The Neverending Story is my favorite book, but the movie doesn't do it any justice at all. What I've read was an epic fantasy novel, but what I've watched is the first half of the book condensed in to a really underwhelming childrens' adventure film. I can understand the path the directors tried to take, but the author is completely right, the directors simply did not understand the book. If it came out a few years later I'd have called it a cheap attempt to cash in on Jim Henson's success.

 

I would honestly be satisfied with a Peter Jackson adaption of the book, even if LotR and TNS are in two totally different leagues entirely.

 

That's not necessarily a problem of the film being from the mid 80s. It has more to do with the fact, that it's a book adaptation. Many people criticize the harry potter movies for that and the last one came out 5 years ago.

 

I remember the 4th movie skipping the first 150 sites in the first 5 minutes.