Jurassic Park 1
Blade runner 1
2001: a Space Odyssey
The Matrix 1
They all hold up so well and in particular their vfx. In the Matrix it’s probably more the plot than the vfx, even though it had merit coining that frozen up bullet time shot aesthetic. But in general every time I watch these I can’t help but marvel at how well put together they are and then I remember when they were released and then I compare them to the mediocre releases decades after that and yeah. I’m in awe.
2001: A Space Odyssey.
Kubrick gave them fucking iPads. In 1968.
I still can’t believe The Matrix is from '99. The themes and the effects hold up incredibly well, it feels far more modern.
I strongly disagree, Matrix was very much a product of its time, if it had released a decade before or a decade after it would not have had the same impact.
In the 80s as a general rule people didn’t know of the internet nor were they very computer savvy.
In the late 00s cellphones started to be ubiquitous and people were using broadband almost exclusively.
So there was only a small period of time when people were familiar with the idea of telephone lines carrying data, which is a core concept of the movie (exiting the Matrix through your cellphone or laptop is a lot less cool and less prone to plot hooks).
Not to mention that the 90s were extremely gothic and grimdark about the future. I don’t think a movie that the base premise is in the future humans are enslaved to machines and hooked to a large simulation to keep them from realizing they’re slaves would work in any time period besides the 90s.
There was also that short sliver of the late 90s through early 2000s where the slick black trenchcoat and sunglasses look was considered unironically cool.
The Matrix, Blade, Underworld, and Equilibrium all being in this era. Any movie where characters dress like this to be cool and it isn’t treated with at least a wink to the audience probably either came from this time or is a sequel to something from this time.
That look become uncool 2-seconds after the Columbine shooting.
I’d think so too, but Columbine shooting was 1999. Movies still used it unironically for another few years. In media I think it mostly went away because it got parodied to death.
It’s for sure a product of its time, but it really doesn’t feel like a 1999 movie. Around that time we had
- Sixth sense
- American beauty
- Eyes wide shut
- Being John Malkovich
- Fight Club
Matrix has such a stark level of visual and thematic modernity compared to those. Maybe Fight Club comes near, but the other movies look like they’re from a different decade.
Matrix is a “work sucks” movie the same way that “American Beauty”, “Fight Club”, and “Office Space” was. It is a very 1999 movie.
Agreed with all that, but still, don’t forget how mind blowing it was in 1999. One of the only movies I ever saw twice in the theaters, two nights in a row even.
Even the trailers were wild. First time we saw one in the theater my gf and I looked at each other like, “What the fuck was that all about?!”
The Matrix was to science fiction in 1999 about what Star Wars was in 1977, so far ahead of the game it was like nothing before it.
It was from the era when choreography mattered. You could roll through an entire fight scene and see what every punch was supposed to be doing. You had some situational awareness where everyone was.
Now we keep getting that stupid crap where they’re changing the scene every punch, with so many scenes per second that you can’t follow through, actually just like the fight scenes and matrix 4.
You’re not gonna believe this but there were movies that are even older.
Surely not?
Metropolis might be the ultimate “ahead of its time” movie. It’s nearly 100 years old and still looks mind-blowing.
When I heard about megalopolis I thought Coppola was remaking this movie
Holy crap yes, I watched it a few years back and couldn’t belive not only how good it looked but how good it was in general.
Day After Tomorrow was about two days before its time
Actually, I believe you’ll find, if you refer to the title, that it is a movie about two days after its time
¿Por qué no los dos? (a phrase that itself is both of the 2010s and also timeless)
Citizen Kane.
Yes it is circle jerked hard by film lovers… For good reason.
This is what I might consider the first movie shot in what would be recognized as a modern movie format.
It is told non sequentially, the composition of shots is absolutely incredible.
It’s a movie shot in 1941 that looks nothing like the other movies of the time. Literally decades ahead of its time. It looks like it could have been shot a few months ago as a period piece.
There’s good reason for it being one of the most acclaimed movies of all time.
It’s hard to overstate how important the film is to cinema. It pretty much established what the modern movie is.
That said, based strictly off of entertainment value. IMO it is just absolutely terrible.
That’s interesting. I’m not a film guy at all, and it certainly never occurred to me that it pioneered some of the key stuff in modern movies (although that totally makes sense). But I remember enjoying it! The pacing felt quite good, there were some mysteries and character drama. Not a top movie for me personally, but pretty watchable for a B&W movie.
While filming Citizen Kane, director and star Orson Welles likened making a movie to playing with a toy train set, and that playful inventive spirit shines all throughout the movie.
Clue is an interesting study. It’s a movie set in the 50’s, made in the 80’s, and it bombed in theaters in the 80’s, but the television cut became popular in the 90’s and 00’s. It definitely is a product of the 80’s, I don’t think they would have made it in 1995, but that’s when it landed.
One of my favorites
“Mystery Men” seems to have a lot of themes on super hero fatigue in it that feels like it would be a better commentary in 2019 than 1999.
“No Country for Old Men” feels like a movie from a previous era.
Brazil - Made in 1985, feels like post 9/11.
Napoleon Dynamite, but that’s intentional.
Napoleon Dynamite hits just right if you grew up at a certain time in a rural area. That movie is like watching my own childhood.
That movie is like watching my own childhood.
Hopefully without the intellectual impairments all the main characters have?
The first “War of the world’s” movie from 1953.
It’s based on a genius, but quite challenging science fiction novel.
I am sure the people in 1953 liked the movie.
When you watch it today, after you have already seen Spielberg’s version from 2005, then it feels like they were way ahead of their time in 1953 (and you would never believe anyway that the book was written even back in 1898).
You should hear what happened to the radio broadcast of the book.
What happened?
It was read like a news broadcast and many people were unaware it was a fictional reading. The story was re-written for this radio broadcast to sound like a news report and caused mass hysteria.
But the truth is, that’s the fictional story. It’s all hyperbole and a bunch of newspapers at the time ran with it, to have some fun and sell some papers. There was never any mass hysteria as reported. No one killed themselves thinking aliens were invading, the broadcast was only listened to by 2% of the US, and everyone was aware it was fake. It was a regular type of thing on this radio program.
TIL. I remember my history book one year in grade school mentioning that show and the hysteria it caused.
People thought the world was actually ending
One of the many little details I love about that movie is Pacific Tech, the university where scientists studied the alien hardware. I noticed they used that as the name of the college in Real Genius. Apparently it’s has been in many movies and tv shows.
Josie and the Pussycats was lampooning our current celebrity obsessed, “influencer” obsessed, consumer lifestyle 20 years ago. Yes, there was certainly celebrity worship back then. But the way the movie portrayed it and the consumer greed that seeks to profit from it feels even more relevant today.
Bladerunner and the sequel
I just rewatched both Bladerunner movies with my son and, the first movie, while aesthetically it still looks beautiful and has some great individual scenes, the action and the dialogue get kind of non-sensical at times, it’s become the weaker of the two movies for me. 2049 feels just a lot more coherent and looks brilliant, it’s just an overall better movie that surpasses the original.
Blade Runner was very much a product of its time (though Syd Mead’s visuals were outstanding).
There was something floating in the late seventies / early eighties zeitgeist that would become the cyberpunk genre, and it sort of condensed in several spots simultaneously.
William Gibson had just published Burning Chrome, and was finishing writing Neuromancer (which would be published in '84 and be considered a foundation of the genre).
Ridley Scott and Syd Mead independently adapted a (very different from the film) book by Philip K. Dick into a film that looked and felt like it was set in Gibson’s Sprawl.
In Japan, Kasuhiro Otomo had just begun publishing Akira.
Frank Miller was probably in the process of writing and conceptualising Rōnin, which DC would start publishing in '83.
Bruce Bethke had come up with the term cyberpunk in 1980, but that short story wouldn’t be published until '83.
Over the next few years many other authors would create other works clearly set in the same genre, though at this point they probably had some influence from Gibson and Blade Runner and each other.
Mike Pondsmith was drinking it all up and coming up with a role playing game with that title, to be published in '88.
And, all over the eighties and nineties, the genre exploded, and was everywhere.
Brick. By Rian Johnson with Joseph-Gordon Levitt and Lukas Haas was very deliberately a throwback to good ol’ hard boiled detective noir.
I thought it worked quite well. It has an excellent on-foot chase sequence, if nothing else.
Love when he takes off his shoes
One of my favourite movies.
