Nostalgia can cover movies in such a varied and interesting
way. Certain films will forever be doused in the notion that they are great one
way or another, and can fall apart when subjected to an objective viewing.
Whatever way you look at it, even the worst film ever made can mean something
to someone if they saw it at the right age (except ‘The Last Airbender’ because
that is just depressing).
There are many categories of nostalgic movies that don’t
hold up today, sometimes through no fault of their own. Even the best film of a
certain age can suffer from the film industry moving on without it. Effects
wise this can be devastating for a film that at one stage may have looked
ground-breaking but now looks dated. Even though I’ve never really liked the
film, I saw ‘Armageddon’ the other day, and there’s now no denying that
compared to today’s blockbusters it is just a complete mess. Honestly, looking
back you have to wonder why we were ever surprised by Michael bay’s descent
into loud and obnoxious movies as ‘Armageddon’ was full of his usual tropes
such as rapid fire editing, multiple explosions, cringe worthy stereotypes and
needless slow motion and it was the highest film of the year, so don’t be
surprised that since then he’s tried to achieve success by multiplying all of
those. But at the time it was undoubtedly a cinematic experience, so we forget
the parts that don’t work as well. But today, looking back objectively, it
doesn’t hold up. Then of course you have to take into account the fact that it
came out five years after ‘Jurassic Park’ and the only part of that movie that
doesn’t hold up is the 1990s computer.
This habit of forgetting certain scenes in certain films has
happened on multiple occasions, most of all to ones I enjoyed growing up. ‘Temple
of Doom’ contained multiple scenes that I had forgotten and sort of highlighted
why the film is considered the lesser of the three Indie films (and there are
only THREE). Until I saw it again recently I remembered ripping out hearts and
death defying swinging from hundred feet high bridges. But now I notice the kid
centred scenes and the decidedly slower pacing in between action. It’s
certainly not a bad movie, but it hasn’t aged as well as the others and
retrospectively can’t compete with ‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’ or ‘The Last
Crusade’.
Another film that really suffers from this is the sequel to one
I mentioned earlier, ‘The Lost World’. Most of what I remember involves that
scene walking through the grass, but then watching it again you realise that
you forgot about that frantic chase sequence, the convoluted nature of the plot
and once again more child oriented scenes. Many kid favoured things struggle to
hold up without the help of nostalgia, it’s only in the last twenty years that
filmmakers have made a real effort to try and ensure that kid’s films can
appeal to every age group on every level. Children’s films from years ago just
cannot be taken seriously any more. You look at older ones like ‘Highlander’ and
‘The Wizard’ both of which I enjoyed as a child are now really out of their
league when you look at the work that Pixar is doing.
But some of those films can suffer when they create a genre
that instantly goes beyond what they accomplished. Sometimes a film is leaves a
huge impact on its area of cinema and then is parodied so many times and
relived on multiple occasions, in the end the film on its own remains just a
good film, but not quite a cultural touchstone that it may have unwittingly
become. In short certain films struggle to cope today because they can’t handle
the weight of their own success and can’t live up to their own reputation. For
me ‘Animal House’ springs to mind with this, it’s still a good comedy but so
many people have copied it and so many clichés have become clichés because of
that film then you start to see the beats of the film and realise it may not be
the ultimate experience. In the meta world of comedy today you half expect ‘Animal
House’ to be aware of the clichés it revels in, but at the time they were new
and unknown jokes so how can you really blame it for not holding up?
This brings you back to the essential part of the nostalgia
issue, if a film leaves such an impression on you it can therefore inspire a
thousand imitators that may even do a better job than the original. Is the
first one still good just because it was the first to do so, does that make it
right to ignore flaws that, if they were in a film today, may be criticised.
Look at the campiness of the original ‘Superman’ film. Many credit it with bringing
the concept of superheroes on the big screen to life, but look at how many we
have now and consider how they hold up against the likes of Marvel. You could
do this with every superhero revitalisation through cinema history, the
campiness of ‘Superman’, the gothic nature of Burton’s Batman, the stylised fun
of Raimi’s Spiderman, in twenty years will the MCU become a nostalgic
experience rather than cutting edge modern blockbusters.
That brings me on to the most dangerous part of this
argument, to one specific blockbuster in general. Coming from someone who loves
this film more than anything, it pains me to consider a question like this, but
if I could look at the first ‘Star Wars’ film in an objective light, how good
would it actually be? In the sequels we delved far deeper into character
complexity, but the first one is quite basic and archetypal. But then again
there is a reason that it became the highest grossing film of all time and won
six Oscars, so does it deserve to be held above an objective viewing. Do
certain films earn the right to separate themselves from rational criticism of
film and exist on a pedestal of emotion in which your own personal connection
with it will always overrule genuine criticism?
It’s definitely not a bad thing that nostalgia can keep a
film alive and keep it fresh in the minds of millions. It means that whatever
it looks like now, the film must have had something to draw you in and make you
remember it originally and identify with it at the time. The only difference is
that people tend not to remember the negative aspects of a film, when you gets some
distance from it the majority fades from memory in favour of what makes it
great for you and however bad a film is on reviewing, it should always be
commendable for building a perfect perception within you.
No comments:
Post a Comment