Enjoying Older Films

First of all, quit stopping the films after only a few minutes. Force yourself to watch them from beginning to end.

Buy one for your collection. Purchase a ticket to a reperotory theater.

But yeah. Finish watching one. That's the first step.

If you're having issues with the pacing of certain older films, check out these fast-paced screwball comedies:

The Awful Truth (Leo McCarey, 1937)
Bachelor Mother (Garson Kanin, 1939)
Bringing Up Baby (Howard Hawks, 1938)
The Devil And Miss Jones (Sam Wood, 1941)
His Girl Friday (Howard Hawks, 1940)
It Happened One Night (Frank Capra, 1934)
It's A Wonderful World (W.S. Van Dyke, 1939)
The Lady Eve (Preston Sturges, 1941)
Libeled Lady (Jack Conway, 1936)
One, Two, Three (Billy Wilder, 1961)
The Philadelphia Story (George Cukor, 1940)
The Seven Year Itch (Billy Wilder, 1955)
Some Like It Hot (Billy Wilder, 1959)
Sullivan's Travels (Preston Sturges, 1941)
The Thin Man (W.S. Van Dyke, 1934)

Another point of consideration: Turn off the lights, the cellphones, laptop, and actually devote your entire attention to the film. This seems to have become a lost practice as well.

....

I recommend watching the film like you were a person of that time period. With films from different eras, you have the advantage of looking back as a historian and becoming an actor. It's somewhat of a leap to watch a film from the eyes of a Great Depression American, but not that much. If you don't, do some research on those days' emotions. Feel what it's like to be of the Lost Generation. What were your grandfather's emotions as he went off to war? What did it feel like to feel like a god during the 1920s?

If you do that, you'll have a better chance of appreciating these films as well as objectively understanding why they were great in the first place. And yes, you'll have to turn off everything and watch the film it was meant to be seen: in a dark room with little distractions. You know, like a theater.

I'm curious as to how you define "the more modern language of cinema." Then maybe we could point out some earlier films matching that definition that might interest you.

I think you're erroneously crediting the era. I'd wager a list of contemporary films you'd have trouble getting through could be compiled if you thought about it.

Way back when, when I sort of felt this way (though I never felt it to the degree you describe), these were a couple of the older films that really perked my attention up, grabbed me and would not let go:

Casablanca
North by Northwest (and any other Hitchcock, really)

ETA: Another thing that really helped me was taking a film history class, and learning about all of it from the ground up. Really helps you appreciate what was being done rather than simply looking at older films vs. what we have today.

Start with your favorite genre.

Adventures of Robin Hood. That shit could've come out last week, and still worked on a modern audience. Thats how perfect it is. And probably the litmus test I'd choose as to whether there's some other issue going on why an older film might not work.

I'm with Doug. Pick your favourite genre and start with the classics from there. You'll start seeing the influences of your favourite movies, you'll notice little homages and shared textual themes, you'll start to see where certain subgenres came from and how they split off from the original and you'll see the language develop.

This is an interesting question. I just screened Bigger than Life for a few friends a couple weeks ago, and some folks complained about the seemingly tacked-on "happy" ending. I don't really think the ending is all that happy, but at the same time, coming from the 50's, that ending makes a certain amount of sense. After so much devastation, the film needs some kind of release at the end, even if it's a wolf in sheep's clothing type of ending.

I think the trick is to read up on the history of film and history in general. If you're used to modern movies it's because you grew up with them. It does take a certain imagination to enjoy movies from the past. I'm not saying you have to pretend like you're living in the era, but I try to view older movies both as someone looking back while imaging what audiences must have thought of them at the time.

For example, the Thin Man has so much boozing in it! It's crazy how much they drink. Yes, that's the characters, but it's also the time period (post-prohibition) and I'm sure audiences back then got just as much a kick out of it as audiences now, just in different ways.

I try to imagine how audiences viewed Citizen Kane. Did they connect it immediately with Hearst? Someone else? Does it matter? I didn't grow up with Hearst. I know of his life, but I bet that made a difference. And no, it doesn't really matter because the movie is still incredible on its own.

It's difficult to imagine audiences being thrilled at the end of Birth of a Nation. But then you realize they'd never seen anything like it, and that makes it easier.

Context is key. And I agree with Doug also, investigate a genre that you like and go from there. It should help. I started with mystery/film noir/Hitchcock and went from there. Also, screwball comedies are timeless. Watch His Girl Friday and revel in the dialogue, editing and performances. Can't go wrong with that.

ETA: Film is history, even if it isn't accurate. It has truth and lies all wrapped up in one (which, lets face it, makes it all the more realistic). That's the imporance of watching older movies. It's the only thing we have close to time traveling.

Well, I think that classic films do have a language of their own. They're written differently, and the pacing of their stories differ quite a bit from what more modern tastes expect. In this respect, experiencing older films is like experiencing older books, where you can't really handle older ways of speaking until something from back then really speaks to you. When that epiphany happens, all of that stuff that you wrote off becomes a little more clear, and you can begin to see what all the fuss was.

So, if you want to pick up a greater ability to appreciate classic films, it's mainly a matter of finding the one that really speaks to you, and only you can really know what that film is when you see it. However, it might be helpful to think about the films (or other forms of art) that do mean something to you, and the emotions that they speak to, and seeking out classic films that might be along similar lines. So, keep experimenting, and it might be helpful to throw out some of your modern favorites so that your friends here and elsewhere can have a better idea of what to recommend.

...

I literally don't know where to start here. You're not just talking about the Lumiere Brothers and Tod Browning's Dracula, right? I can SORTA see someone making those comments about those films.

So maybe start with Buster Keaton and work your way forward...

Another potential obstacle could be the acting style of the older films for the most part. The acting seemed to be a little more theatrical than today's films tend to be. What really sets apart the newer films to the older films besides film grammar could be the method acting movement becoming standard. Just a guess.

I'm young too (still in my teens) and I understand where he is coming from, but watching the whole movie is certainly something that needs to happen. I haven't seen a lot of the classics, but I have a big list of them that I've been trying to get through and the advice of really turning everything off and immersing yourself into the film is great advice. Also, the advice of trying to put yourself in the mindset of the era is great because it really helps you appreciate the characters and the revolutionary aspects of some of these films that we take for granted today.

Some of the classics that I've watched that I would recommend to help get into others:

North by Northwest: Just an incredibly fun movie that felt to me like a James Bond flick before there were James Bond flicks. Also, the crop duster scene is as enjoyable an action scene as a lot of what is thrown on the screen today.

The Apartment: So delightful, the characters are so great, the acting is superb, and the story itself is just a perfect balance between comedy and drama. I loved this film so much and giving it a shot is really a reat way to get into the romantic comedies of the time.

The Maltese Falcon: Noir at its finest. This movie was a little boring to me at first but I was completely wrapped up in the mystery and the story and by the time it was done I realized this was the beginning of every other noir film I love. Plus, Bogart is just aces.

I know I can't enjoy a 1930s musical unless my hair is slicked back with pomade and I'm wearing my casual sleeve garters.

You'll look back at this thread one day and shake your head. That's okay. In the meantime, watch more classic films (particularly foreign ones) and realize how wrong you are.

EDIT: Films WERE different in the 50's. They were also different in the 80's. And in 2002. I'm saying that the strict cut-off you sense from pre-60's films is a result of you not having seen many pre-60's films. Film language has evolved much more fluidly over the past century than you think.

And I only watch early talkies when I'm severely congested.

It Happened One Night
The Big Heat
Double Indemnity
The Lady Vanishes
Umberto D
Rome Open City
Battleship Potemkin

All awesome. Get on it.

Here's a rare shot of my film watching group as we prepare to view a pre-code "naughty":

At Disney World, no less!

Try King Kong. Have you seen King Kong? The acting is going to throw you, but just sit tight until the monsters and men in blackface show up.

Battleship Potemkin is so not going to turn this kid around.

How about Psycho? Ya like Psycho? It's the prequel to the 80s Psycho movies.

In all seriousness, either older acting styles or older editing styles are disconnecting you, but I'm not sure which it is. Give Rope a whirl.

There's a lot of really good advice in this thread. Picking a genre you enjoy is a good one. Watching a movie until the end is the very best one, though. These films may not grab you immediately but if you exercise a bit of patience, I think you'll find that by the end, the characters will have you firmly engrossed in the film.

There are fantastic suggestions here, as well. And if pacing seems to be your problem, Barry has made a great list of comedies, but beware, even some of those faster-paced screwball comedies require a slow pace in the beginning to set up all of the pieces of the plot, but once the plot is in motion it's near perfection.

If you stick through Some Like it Hot and everything that Joe E. Brown says doesn't make you laugh then there is something very wrong with you.

Because I don't think one need be acquainted with vintage stylistic choices to appreciate the films on it, I'm going to repost my list for posterity:

The Apartment (don't know how anyone could possibly not enjoy this movie)
Citizen Kane (there's a reason it's often considered the best of all time)
Rashomon (as good as any movie, ever)
12 Angry Men (epitome of timeless)
Rear Window/Vertigo/Strangers on a Train/Psycho
Paths of Glory
Some Like It Hot
Metropolis (silent, but so good it hurts)
Bridge on The River Kwai
400 Blows
The Bicycle Thief
Sunset Boulevard

Double Indemnity is the one that hooked me on older films (I'm 26).

I'll second all the Hitchcock recommendations cause he seems like a good gateway in general. Hell, if you're feeling really bold/determined just get that Masterpiece Collection box set and watch 'em all in chronological order.

Also, if you're going to watch PSYCHO, you might as well watch PEEPING TOM too, and if you're going to watch PEEPING TOM, you might as well watch THE RED SHOES and BLACK NARCISSUS too.

Lastly, if you want to be blown away by a silent comedy, check out Keaton's SHERLOCK JR. I know a lot of people would say THE GENERAL but I think SHERLOCK is more accessible to the modern-minded.

lawls


Everybody stop posting big lists! They mean nothing to this kid and will only scare him off! I'm telling you, King Kong is the litnus test here. Or like Phil said, Psycho. But be warned, kid, there's a lot of people sitting around talking about taxidermy in it.
I'm curious what you think of M Knight's movies.

And I can guarantee that The Apartment, Some Like It Hot and His Girl Friday will only bore the shit out of him. Especially The Apartment.

This seems like a too-obvious selection, but it brings up a point...

Surely, TheMantis has seen older films which he does enjoy, no?

We hear certain titles being brought up again and again, but it's because they are great stories, which transcend their respective eras.

I would find it hard to believe that TheMantis doesn't know and enjoy some of these already.

So, if that's the case, TheMantis, would you mind sharing some of those older films which you do enjoy?

Doug is wise.

Actually, Doug reminded me: Fritz Lang's M. The serial killer genre hasn't evolved much since. That is to say, this is still fucking great, creepy, well-executed stuff.

If you have to force yourself to watch it, maybe it's not for you.

Hahaha. I was going to post that as a joke. Followed by D.W. Griffith's Intolerance.

Yeah, you might just have to accept that you're a bad person.

Muhfucka need to watch some Sunrise: A Song Of Two Humans, STAT. Getchoo some Murnau, nigga.

How could The Apartment bore anybody? I loved that and Some Like It Hot when I was 10!

Also, my list kicks ass.

The Red Shoes might be a good gateway drug for you. It's very much of its time, but the cinematography has a very modern flair to it. It really feels like it was shot yesterday. It's also a phenomenal film, so that's the main reason you should watch it.

I had a weird hang up about B&W films as a (very) young kid, but all it took was one film (Young Frankenstein) to turn me around. I'm 26, so the ADD watching can still very much apply to me, but I guess I lucked out by spending a childhood being raised by my grandparents: no cable, no internet until I was 14, just books and their video collection--needless to say, it was hard to find a film made after 1970. So by the time I was in junior high I was already steeped in the classics. But that's just me.

I don't really think "putting yourself in the mindset of the era it's from" is the right way to explain on how to "get into" older films. You just have to let the story hook you. I don't know the first thing about the mindset of someone in 1932, but Duck Soup slays me everytime I watch it. I know it seems a task, trying to watch an older film with the same eyes as a modern one, and it's true: the further back you go, the more rudimentary the productions seem. But maybe try this to help get you started: all the filmmaking language we take for granted today, all the pans, dollys, cranes, zooms, whathaveyous, think of how hard and arduous doing shots like that took to accomplish before our systems of hydraulics and electronics. Back then, if you wanted to do a shot like that, you had to have a damn good reason to. So watch those films with that hanging out in the back of your mind; when suddenly, from out of nowhere, the camera comes to life and it trucks into a closeup of an actor's face, consider what it means, what it's conveying, for the character and for the story. You'll find yourself more appreciative in how films tell stories, both in older films and newer ones. That's how I go about it, anyway.

Agree 100%.

Is it fair enough to suggest some Kurosawa films?

Seven Samurai, Yojimbo and Throne of Blood are my favorites. A lot of times, they look like modern films shot in black and white because they were so damned head of their time in terms of cinematography.

And if you find Seven Samurai or Yojimbo boring, then it's time to give up on movies.

I'm kidding, of course.

But no, seriously.

I'm not sure about "putting yourself in the period" of a classic film is the best way to watch it - are we talking about a method audience?

What worked for me when I was trying to get my girlfriend into older stuff was watching something about the film first. We watched a documentary on The Great Dictator and after that she was eager to watch the film and really enjoyed it. She was bugging me about Citizen Kane - "But why does everyone think it's so great?" - so we watched one of the documentaries in the special features.

Sometimes context helps a lot.

Sometimes I wonder if kids in high school today have trouble getting into 80's movies. I still think the best of them still get the job done (especially Star Wars trilogy) but I can also appreciate that there might be a disconnect with some people who were born in the 90's.

Have some of the younger Chewers on here had trouble getting into Raiders of the Lost Ark, Poltergeist, and ET?

I have a friend who has great taste in contemporary films, yet refuses to watch anything pre-1980. I try to explain that many of the best films (especially independent) nowadays are heavily indebted to '60s and '70s films, but he's completely uninterested. Talking to him about it is like talking to someone with a mental disorder. At least the original poster is making a go at it.

His Girl Friday boring? Fuck yourself. Don't you also think that Let Sleeping Corpses Lie is boring? Doug's got fuckin' ADD.

I don't think we really disagree, really. I enjoy thinking about how people would have reacted to the film in the time period and that helps me engage with older movies, but I don't think it's essential. I just like history (particularly, 20th Century American history) so to connect the history with film interests me. It's the art form of the century, after all.

But the history of film making and how it develops is more important. And what you write about the importance of big shots is 100% on the money.

Andre yesterday talking about the push-in on Leia in Empire Strikes Back. That was just 1980, and I feel like if the movie were made today by another director (or Lucas, god forbid) that shot would be totally different, excessive, or even worse, not exist. And that's just thirty years ago.

The shot like the epic pull-in on John Wayne in stage coach makes you sit up and pay attention. These days, every character could get a push-in like that and it could mean nothing.

The language of cinema has become something like a tower of babel. These shots mean something and when someone knows how to use them to communicate in the art form, that's more important then just having the shots for the sake of having them. It's why so many modern movies are over edited and directed.

Best. I Have No Taste Thread. Ever.

That being said, finding your local rep or revival house and checking out their slate is a great way to experience these movies for the first time. In some cases, it's the only way. Not only do you see the films as they were meant to be seen, thus taking part in an experience that thousands of people across decades have had, which I, in my pretentiousness, find to be incredibly moving, but you're also forced to sit and watch the movie. You can't walk out if you don't like it, and if you fall asleep, you're kind of an asshole. For me, I have the added bonus of Catholic guilt, which makes me go "well, you paid for the fucking thing, you should stay and watch it."