No, I wasn't. And I couldn't understand what the crap you had written earlier. Practice some sentence structure.
I understood it perfectly. Movie years are different to people years. Just like people years are different than dog years. 20 year old human still relatively young. 20 year old movie or TV show considered old.
Says the guy with Nosferatu in his avatar. : P I imagine it also has something to do with how old the person making the comment is. A movie made before you were born might seem old, but if you were around to see it in theatres, it might not seem so ancient.
I only liked the first three. The rest that followed were crap, and Jason X was really the last straw for me. Freddy Vs Jason was ok. While I'm on classic horror movies that got ugly sequels... The Howling (First was awesome. The sequels got worse with each one.) Halloween (The original was good. Sequels sucked. Rob Zombie's remake of the 1st was ok.) Nightmare On Elm Street (Shoulda left it at one.) American Werewolf In London (The Paris sequel was godaweful..) Saw (The first two were awesome. The rest were weak.)
I have nothing against old movies. I LOVE old movies. I prefer watching old movies to new ones really. New movies are full of recycled material and overused CGI. When I try and think of a movie to watch for a movie night, I think to myself usually; "Hmm, what movie from back in the day have I not watched yet that I've always been meaning to get around to." Seldomly does a new release take priority to me. If I were ever to become a film maker, I would deliberately put in cardboard sets, toy model space ships, and monsters in rubber suits.
Exactly, saying a movie is old doesn't mean I think it's bad. Old /=/ Bad. Doesn't mean it's not old though...
I'm always amazed at how people can have such completely differing opinions on films. But as they say, variety is the spice of life. I liked Halloween 3 because it was so different -- more of a thriller than the other Michael Meyers hack & slashfests. But it spooked the crap out of me when I saw it in my teens, made me a little paranoid about wearing masks, and to this day I cannot hear the tune of "London Bridge is Falling Down" without my flesh crawling. The other Halloween sequels all run together in my mind now -- it's been so long since I've seen them that I couldn't tell you what made them suck, although I do recall falling asleep watching H20 if that tells you how entertaining it was to me. And I haven't seen the Rob Zombie remake yet, so no comment on that. The same kinda goes for the Nightmare on Elm Street series. I really enjoyed the first but don't remember much about the sequels -- my tastes weren't as discerning back then, although it seems like I recall at least two of them having rather ridiculous plots. However, I loved the 7th film better known as Wes Craven's New Nightmare. I honestly think it's among Craven's best films to date -- the whole movie within a movie was executed brilliantly, so by the end it's a total mindjob trying to figure out which is "reality" and which is the movie. I also liked the TV series, and enjoyed Freddy vs Jason too. Most of it is intelligible even if it's a rather closed-minded opinion, but the "look before you leap" comment makes no sense to me in relation to the rest of GW Freak's post, and he contradicts himself as well. If 20 years in entertainment "isn't OLD", why do you say there's no "real way to deny" that Burton's 1st Batman film is "old"? Either it's old to you or it isn't. Make up your mind. But it will still be 10-20 years from now before I call any film from the 80's "old". If a car needs at least 25 years to be considered "classic", then a movie released less than 20 years ago isn't "old" yet either except to some young whippersnapper punk kid. Again, this is merely opinion, and we'll have to agree to disagree. But still I would think most adults don't think of 80's movies as "old", and certainly not one from '89. They just don't fit the standard definition of an "old movie". Take a poll on any movie fan forum and I think you'd find the general consensus to be that "old" applies more to films at least 20-30 years older than anything made in the 80's. Do you see Turner Classic Movies showing much of anything from the 80's? Late 70's is about as "old" as they get. I would think their staff and film buffs in general would scoff at the idea of a movie from 1989 being considered "old" to anyone except kids and teens.
Right on. And if I didn't appreciate things from back in the day, I wouldn't be on a website that is meant for fans of a toyline that's been around for 25 years.
I kind of liked Friday the 13th 2, but if it wasn't for Mark's (The wheelchair kid) slightly hilarious death I would have hated it.
Batman came out in 1989, this is 2009. Now the film was released in the late spring/early summer so it's not EXACTLY 20 years old, it is a few months short. It is an older film. At this point in the public consciousness films from the 80's are OLD and films from the 70's and back are ANCIENT. I am sorry this makes you feel old and therefore do not want to deal with the fact lots of people see it this way, but that's just the way it is. Here's your AARP card.
There was a sequel to ID4 that was written but will smith refused it saying that the story ended when the first one ended. And my list includes the xXx franchise, Underworld, and Daredevil?Elektra (though DD DC is redeeming to a point)
