New posts

Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="miguk, post: 88850, member: 1510"] CGI was used in the 70s (wireframe in the [I]Star Wars[/I] trench run demo and the opening credits of [I]Superman[/I]), but it was still very primitive. Modern CGI was barely used until the 90s. (Honestly, not enough people watched [I]Willow[/I] for it to catch on until [I]T2[/I].) There were artistic differences (such as the "90s cool" look of [I]The Matrix[/I], [I]X-Men[/I], etc), but the tech was basically the same. The only big change has been digital cameras, and the effect of them is replicated in remasters of 90s/00s films. (Ironically, early digital films like [I]28 Days Later[/I] and [I]Attack of the Clones[/I] look more dated than these remasters.) The rule used by historians is that it's not "history" if it happened less than 20 years ago; it's just current events which will eventually be history. That said, artistic movements don't fit into perfect numerical barriers; just look at how literary scholars can't decide if the post-modern era (1945 to ????) ended yet or not. For music, it's a result of music technology stagnating. We've had 2 big changes in music tech since the early 00s: improved voice synthesizer software (such as Vocaloid) and AI. Neither of these have made big waves in mainstream music, as both are opposed by a lot of singer/songwriters and even by most of their fans. And pretty much all "new" genres that have emerged are just variants of older genres (synthwave, vaporwave, etc). So we essentially aren't getting "new" music because we haven't advanced the technology to the point that artists can/will/want to make anything "new." (Note: This is not some rant against Vocaloid or anything mentioned above; I'm just explaining why it hasn't changed mainstream music worldwide.) Good question. There's a movie called [I]The House of the Devil[/I] (2009) that I would recommend watching. It is extremely meticulous in making itself look like an early 80s film, down to the pacing being slowed down to the time's standard. So without context, you would assume it was an 80s film. But realistically, it is not. A really good imitation is not the real thing. The time period it was made in also matters because we're talking about old, not old cosplay. Ya, so many kids these days claim [I]Fritz the Cat[/I] is their favorite Disney film. You are right that the culture is different. That's especially true if you watch comedies or tech thrillers. But the technology used to make the films isn't too different, especially when compared to previous decades. The high quality 35MM film that became the Hollywood standard by then transfers very well to digital form, and color correction and lighting were much better than in decades past. (Only night shots stand out as looking different, as extreme low light shots were not yet possible.) [I]Starship Troopers[/I] was a future sci-fi movie. [I]Forrest Gump[/I] was a period piece. They wouldn't be much different if filmed today. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Online statistics

Members online: 146

Guests online: 3,669

Total visitors: 3,815

Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads: 13,086

Messages: 318,408

Members: 873,611

Latest member: Monique55

Reply to thread

Online statistics

Forum statistics

Advertisers