this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2025
387 points (97.8% liked)
People Twitter
8553 readers
2576 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I feel like movies haven't changed much at all since around mid 90s. Like as long as current day fashion doesn't appear in the movie, then i don't see how a person would even be able to tell if a movie came out today vs. twenty years ago.
Like the other comment says, the CGI doesn't hold up that well. Luckily, the LotR trilogy doesn't rely on it that much. I still hope they have the original unedited footage stored somewhere and we get a new version with modern CGI capabilities. That'd be amazing to see. It holds up mostly fine though, so it isn't a huge issue.
Found George Lucas.
Lol. Hopefully not that far. They should try to capture the intent of the original, just with much faster technology and better tools.
And then the better tools just scrape most of it, because it's considered then-a-days as "boring" and "not catchy". I recently ran some old songs through Suno. Sure, the tracks are catchy, but they scraped most of the buildup, intentionally overlapping sounds and noise and after listening to some originally different tracks, they kind of had the same beat and vibes in the newly generated tracks. Hope that gets better instead of worse.
Better tools, as in rendering technology and hardware, not as in like AI or something that would modify it. If they do it they need to keep the original format and only re-render the CGI components.
Cellphones changed shape.
90s movies did not have 'MillenialSpeak' / 'Marvel-isms'. They had cheesy one-liners. Which were better.
Club scenes are no longer filled with Goths, they're filled with Jocks and Popular Girls.
Scores are generally much less unique and interesting these days.
More frantic pacing, contemplation is not allowed, outside of arthouse films.
I REALLY hate the new fight montages where they jumpcut every punch like in Matrix 4. They never let it settle enough for you to get your berings, feels like it's just a rabid weasel with a gopro starapped to it.
Art is conveying what you intend to convey, through constraints, bound by limitations.
The cleverness, the beauty... is not in disregarding those limitations, those handicaps.
It is in accepting them, and finding a way to do the job anyway.
There's actually quite a lot that's changed in cinema since then. Since digital cameras and effects are incredibly common these days, we light everything very flatly so that it's easier to change in post without reshoots. It makes lighting abysmally bad. (See wicked where the actress in vibrant green makeup looks a little grey the entire movie).
Pacing is also much faster, there's more emphasis on not confusing audiences rather than letting things have mystery. Dialogue is more quippy rather than grounded.
Oh! And since there's no more mid-budget movies, there's a whole lot less comedies running around. Everything is either high budget, wall-to-wall action or grounded indie films with very little in-between.
Give us back mid-budget original films or Patrick H Willems will start kidnapping Hollywood execs one by one!
Im one bus away from Hollywood. I have some 6" zip ties and a chipped kitchen knife. LETS GO
The pacing got much faster over time. Comparing LotR with a new MCU film, you clearly notice the shift. (Admittedly, LotR was a little slower than the average movie at the time)
I feel like if you're comparing it to modern movies, the MCU isn't really fare. Compare it to Dune maybe. I'd guess the new Dune is still paced faster with more action, but I'm not really sure. They're probably not that dissimilar. Probably the biggest difference is Dune (part 2 in particular) has a constant building of tension, with no release until the end. LotR builds and releases tension in cycles.
Arguably Dune should be even slower than LotR, as almost all the action in the Dune books is at best mentioned, but it isn't focused on. Meanwhile the new Dune movies, especially the second, added a ton of fighting that wasn't in the books and doesn't really fit the story of the books. The LotR books are slow, but it does give quite a bit of detail on fights and battles.
That's not a valid comparison, lotr was waaaay slower and longer than movies of its time. If you want to compare against a modern mcu movie then you have to compare to a similar type of movie, like for example even years before lotr look at men in black from 1997
Easy: the effects got worse /hj
Effects have gotten better, but they've made everything else worse. Costume? Add it in post. Proper lighting? Add it in post. The entire set? Add it in post.
Add second screen syndrome and every new movie and TV show is perfect to have on in the background while you scroll through Facebook
Some have, some haven't. I feel like physical explosions often work better for instance.
I don't disagree. Practical effects are are almost always preferable to CGI, especially with things like explosions and fluid movement. I'm just saying that special effects themselves have largely improved, to the detriment of the medium as a whole
I think I get your point better now, CGI has improved and is now being used for everything because it's "good enough" but this has lead to a reduction in quality because no one bothers to do anything properly any more?
That's actually quite an interesting topic. Some good things in the comments, too.
i recently rewatched the first jurassic park and wow is it so incredibly different from new movies. i don't dislike it though.