Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Why has the quality of mainstream film and music taken a nosedive since the 70's?

Options
12357

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    Arghus
    Registered Users Posts: 14,377 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    I think you need to watch more films and have more humility about your level of knowledge.


  • Options
    #123
    sk8erboii
    Site Banned Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭sk8erboii


    Arghus wrote: »
    I think you need to watch more films and have more humility about your level of knowledge.

    Lol. Thats funny man. Ive spent most of my childhood with a filmmaking family, and have watched thousands of film.


    Its telling that you’re defending The dark knight trilogy, a series that everyone who works in film agree is a mess


  • Options
    #124
    Arghus
    Registered Users Posts: 14,377 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    sk8erboii wrote: »
    Lol. Thats funny man. Ive spent most of my childhood with a filmmaking family, and have watched thousands of film.


    Its telling that you’re defending The dark knight trilogy, a series that everyone who works in film agree is a mess

    Bro, you sound like a young fella who has just read Sight and Sound for the first time.


  • Options
    #125
    sk8erboii
    Site Banned Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭sk8erboii


    Arghus wrote: »
    Bro, you sound like a young fella who has just read Sight and Sound for the first time.


    Why? Cause i share an opinion with most of filmmakers?


  • Options
    #126
    Arghus
    Registered Users Posts: 14,377 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    sk8erboii wrote: »
    Why? Cause i share an opinion with most of filmmakers?

    Whatever you say.

    Look, obviously, you have strong opinions - doesn't mean they are right, in fact they're not, but they are strong - so I presume you are a young budding cinephile. Two places I recommend you should start if you really want to actually gain some worthwhile knowledge would be -

    https://www.amazon.com/New-Biographical-Dictionary-Film-Completely/dp/0307271749.

    Get a copy of this. Brilliant book, every home should have one. You'll learn loads about the history of cinema.

    Also, check out -

    https://www.theyshootpictures.com/ - Really fascinating resource that aims to list the 1000 most acclaimed films of all time. I recommend their sub-section on 21st century cinema.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    sk8erboii
    Site Banned Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭sk8erboii


    Arghus wrote: »
    Whatever you say.

    Look, obviously, you have strong opinions - doesn't mean they are right, in fact they're not, but they are strong - so I presume you are a young budding cinephile. Two places I recommend you should start if you really want to actually gain some worthwhile knowledge would be -

    https://www.amazon.com/New-Biographical-Dictionary-Film-Completely/dp/0307271749.

    Get a copy of this. Brilliant book, every home should have one. You'll learn loads about the history of cinema.

    Also, check out -

    https://www.theyshootpictures.com/ - Really fascinating resource that aims to list the 1000 most acclaimed films of all time. I recommend their sub-section on 21st century cinema.

    So you think the batman trilogy is a classic?


  • Options
    #128
    Arghus
    Registered Users Posts: 14,377 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    sk8erboii wrote: »
    So you think the batman trilogy is a classic?

    No. And I never said I did.


  • Options
    #129
    sk8erboii
    Site Banned Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭sk8erboii


    Arghus wrote: »
    No. And I never said I did.

    Right. And thats the only 'opinion' ive ever given in this thread.

    So what exactly are you arguing for?


  • Options
    #130
    Arghus
    Registered Users Posts: 14,377 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    sk8erboii wrote: »
    Right. And thats the only 'opinion' ive ever given in this thread.

    So what exactly are you arguing for?

    It's all there in my posts.


  • Options
    #131
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    sk8erboii wrote: »
    Lol. Thats funny man. Ive spent most of my childhood with a filmmaking family, and have watched thousands of film.


    Its telling that you’re defending The dark knight trilogy, a series that everyone who works in film agree is a mess

    Who are these people. And nobody would say it’s a great movie just better than most superhero movies.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    batgoat
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,423 ✭✭✭batgoat


    sk8erboii wrote: »
    Lol. Thats funny man. Ive spent most of my childhood with a filmmaking family, and have watched thousands of film.


    Its telling that you’re defending The dark knight trilogy, a series that everyone who works in film agree is a mess

    Your arguments from authority actually shows how weak you are at making an argument. It's a style of debate that will get you nowhere.


  • Options
    #133
    xckjoo
    Registered Users Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭xckjoo


    Arghus wrote: »
    I think you need to watch more films and have more humility about your level of knowledge.

    Its a parody account no? Reads like one anyway


  • Options
    #134
    The Rape of Lucretia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,440 ✭✭✭The Rape of Lucretia


    Arghus wrote: »
    Bro, you sound like a young fella who has just read Sight and Sound for the first time.

    I dont think thats fair Arghus. The poster knows people in the film industry, and even spent some of their childhood with them, so I think you are going to just have to accept that they are right and you are wrong. You probably havent even met a person working in film.


  • Options
    #135
    Gimme A Pound
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,482 ✭✭✭Gimme A Pound


    xckjoo wrote: »
    Its a parody account no? Reads like one anyway
    As is the below:
    The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »
    I dont think thats fair Arghus. The poster knows people in the film industry, and even spent some of their childhood with them, so I think you are going to just have to accept that they are right and you are wrong. You probably havent even met a person working in film.
    Be. More. Subtle.


  • Options
    #136
    lawred2
    Registered Users Posts: 24,298 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    sxt wrote: »
    Compare the top rated albums of 1979,joy division,pink floyd, the clash ,talking heads ,michael jackson ,ac/dc ,fleetwood mac etc) All made by main stream musicianshttps://rateyourmusic.com/charts/top/album/1979

    Who are mainstream today? ed sheeran ,adele? Taylor swift? kathy perry. none of these artists have made an album that will be listened to in 50 years time



    Take the oscar winning movies of the 70s vs today. Every single one of those movies is a bonified cinematic classic!

    1979 - "The Deer Hunter"
    1978 - "Annie Hall"
    1977 - "Rocky"
    1976 - "One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest"
    1975 - "The Godfather Part II"
    1974 - "The Sting"
    1973 - "The Godfather"
    1972 - "The French Connection"
    1971 - "Patton"
    1970 - "Midnight Cowboy"

    So many average movies winning oscars these days like argo,slumdog millionaire, chicago ,kings speech etc


    it seems to be the late 1990s was where the steepest nosedive took place, in films anyway, thats when dreadful movies like titanic and shakespear in love started winning oscars

    That correlates with the start of the Internet? Did the Internet kill creavity in the mainstream?

    old man doesn't like new stuff


  • Options
    #137
    DublinWriter
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭DublinWriter


    "in Italy, for thirty years under the Borgias, they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love, they had five hundred years of democracy and peace – and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock"
    Orson Welles, The Third Man.

    The 50's, 60's and 70's were very turbulent decades to live in, economically and politically.

    In 1956 Elvis had his first hit with 'Heartbreak Hotel'. Twenty years later and the Sex Pistols released 'Never Mind the Bollocks'. In between, you've had the Beatles, Cream and Hendrix.

    Queue the 80's and it's all about consumerism. It's the era of Stock-Aiken-Waterman and in that regard, it's been that way ever since what with Boy Bands and X-Factor.


  • Options
    #138
    The Tetrarch
    Registered Users Posts: 2,092 ✭✭✭The Tetrarch


    Films went to hell with CGI.
    Music went to hell with boy bands, girl bands, and marketing.

    Back in the day when they wanted to improve a cowboy film it was "bring on the empty horses".
    Now they bring on a CGI army of tens of thousands.


  • Options
    #139
    Irish Guitarist
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,736 ✭✭✭Irish Guitarist


    There's a difference between mainstream and top of the charts. Pink Floyd only ever had one number one single, in Britain at least. If some teenager who listens to Katy Perry now had been around in the seventies they wouldn't have been listening to Pink Floyd. They would have been listening to something like this.



    There's always been shite music but now it's easier to make because of computer software so there's more of it. Stock, Aitken and Waterman took over the charts in the late eighties. Every single song they produced had that weird vocal effect. I'm not exactly sure what they did to achieve this effect but it's very distinctive and sounds like shit. Now it's even easier to use Autotune on someones voice and stitch a song together with Pro Tools.

    There's still plenty of bands around that play their own instruments. Whether you like them or not is down to personal taste.


  • Options
    #140
    Church on Tuesday
    Registered Users Posts: 3,858 ✭✭✭Church on Tuesday


    Woke Hogan wrote: »
    Star Wars came out in 1977 and the generations who grew up watching it never graduated to serious films for adults.

    A man born in the late 40s would have watched Tarzan films in the cinema when they were kids and mature, thematically more sophisticated films like Annie Hall by the late 70s.

    A person born in the late 60s would have watched Star Wars in the late 70s and... another Star Wars films twenty years later in the cinema.

    Now we’re at the stage that people in their mid thirties have only watched films for children in the cinema. Superhero films and cartoons for babies.[/QUOTE]

    The anti-craic right here.


  • Options
    #141
    Gimme A Pound
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,482 ✭✭✭Gimme A Pound


    Irish Guitarist wrote: »
    There's a difference between mainstream and top of the charts. Pink Floyd only ever had one number one single, in Britain at least. If some teenager who listens to Katy Perry now had been around in the seventies they wouldn't have been listening to Pink Floyd. They would have been listening to something like this.



    There's always been shite music but now it's easier to make because of computer software so there's more of it. Stock, Aitken and Waterman took over the charts in the late eighties. Every single song they produced had that weird vocal effect. I'm not exactly sure what they did to achieve this effect but it's very distinctive and sounds like shit. Now it's even easier to use Autotune on someones voice and stitch a song together with Pro Tools.

    There's still plenty of bands around that play their own instruments. Whether you like them or not is down to personal taste.
    Talking about the mainstream though. While there was always crap mainstream music, it's unquestionably at its worst now.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    xckjoo
    Registered Users Posts: 3,357 ✭✭✭xckjoo


    Leandro Clever Sunbonnet wrote: »
    Talking about the mainstream though. While there was always crap mainstream music, it's unquestionably at its worst now.


    I'd sooner listen to Taylor Swift than the Osmond Family....


  • Options
    #143
    Irish Guitarist
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,736 ✭✭✭Irish Guitarist


    Leandro Clever Sunbonnet wrote: »
    Talking about the mainstream though. While there was always crap mainstream music, it's unquestionably at its worst now.

    The likes of Foo Fighters have plenty of mainstream success. Whether you like them or not they're no less musically talented than a lot of seventies bands.

    It's disingenuous to lump "Joy Division, Pink Floyd, The Clash, Talking Heads, Michael Jackson, AC/DC and Fleetwood Mac" together as if they all had the same level of mainstream success and compare them to "Ed Sheeran, Adele, Taylor Swift and Katy Perry".


  • Options
    #144
    Yermande
    Closed Accounts Posts: 115 ✭✭Yermande


    batgoat wrote: »
    Your arguments from authority actually shows how weak you are at making an argument. It's a style of debate that will get you nowhere.

    Funnily enough, he pulled me up on one of my posts yesterday, even linking me to a diagram of fallacious arguments. Fast-forward 24 hours and he's appealing to authority and delivering personal attacks.


  • Options
    #145
    Arghus
    Registered Users Posts: 14,377 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    xckjoo wrote: »
    Its a parody account no? Reads like one anyway

    Probably, but if it isn't there's no harm giving good honest advice.


  • Options
    #146
    Gimme A Pound
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,482 ✭✭✭Gimme A Pound


    Irish Guitarist wrote: »
    The likes of Foo Fighters have plenty of mainstream success. Whether you like them or not they're no less musically talented than a lot of seventies bands.

    It's disingenuous to lump "Joy Division, Pink Floyd, The Clash, Talking Heads, Michael Jackson, AC/DC and Fleetwood Mac" together as if they all had the same level of mainstream success and compare them to "Ed Sheeran, Adele, Taylor Swift and Katy Perry".
    Foo fighters and who else? I think it's disingenuous to say mainstream music is the same as ever.

    Yeah I prefer Katy Perry and Taylor Swift to The Osmonds (still think they're sh1t though) - we can all name random examples but overall of course pop music is worse now.


  • Options
    #147
    Irish Guitarist
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,736 ✭✭✭Irish Guitarist


    Leandro Clever Sunbonnet wrote: »
    Foo fighters and who else? I think it's disingenuous to say mainstream music is the same as ever.

    Radiohead for a start. That's what a young person now of a similar mindset to a Pink Floyd fan from thirty years ago would probably be listening to.
    Yeah I prefer Katy Perry and Taylor Swift to The Osmonds (still think they're sh1t though) - we can all name random examples but overall of course pop music is worse now.

    As I said there's more crap music being made because it's easier to make it. If I were to compare like to like I'd compare Katy Perry to someone like Madonna. In which case that would be an example of pop music going downhill.

    I certainly wouldn't claim that AC/DC have been replaced by Ed Sheeran or that Joy Division were the seventies equivalent to Adele.


  • Options
    #148
    timthumbni
    Registered Users Posts: 4,845 ✭✭✭timthumbni


    Ghostbusters (2016). The one with the girlies is a modern classic that will stand the test of time.

    That wee media studies student on here can shove his gaspar noe up his arse in a subway compared to it.

    And those cameos. Bliss..


  • Options
    #149
    duckofdeath
    Registered Users Posts: 88 ✭✭duckofdeath


    Grumpy old men hates new stuff. Some things never change! :)


  • Options
    #150
    BailMeOut
    Registered Users Posts: 2,979 ✭✭✭BailMeOut


    There is no such thing nor will there ever be 'main stream' again due to the wast amount of entertainment available to to us all now. I will not ague with OP that the 70's was great for movies and one could argue that the 90's was another excellent decade however we are now in the era of unprecedented and excellent TV quality.

    Yes there is a lot of garbage out there however if you look there is incredible amount of great music, movie and TV available.

    PS: I cannot stand Pink Floyd.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Irish Guitarist wrote: »
    Radiohead for a start. That's what a young person now of a similar mindset to a Pink Floyd fan from thirty years ago would probably be listening to.

    What now? Radiohead formed in 1985.


Advertisement