Canyon Lake Agbu94 said:

---

SJEAg said:

---

The plane crash in Air Force One is my example of FX so bad it actually brings down the movie - just yikes.

---

This is the scene that I thought of immediately. I would not watch that movie ever again based off of that scene alone.

---

I just looked it up - holy cow, that is bad

2 questions.....

What movie is that?

And what did they have on that boat that make it explode like that from bullets?

No idea how i missed that one.

Bruce Almighty said:

---

I don't understand how old tech makes a movie outdated. That's what they were using at the time. I don't consider a movie from the 50s to the 80s outdated because they were using land lines.

---

Yep. I don't get it either. If we made a movie now of that time period, we would show people using that technology.

Bruce Almighty said:

---

I don't understand how old tech makes a movie outdated. That's what they were using at the time. I don't consider a movie from the 50s to the 80s outdated because they were using land lines.

---

Hear hear. The bad CGI usage is what dates these movies, not the "of-the-era" technology within the movie itself.

I don't believe any film is more laughably dated than The Net. It became dated probably 18 months after its release.

Definitely Not A Cop said:

---

---

Bro, we laughed at this in the theater. It was horrible even when it was brand new.

The lightning striking cattle scene in Lonesome Dove was laughably bad.

Rudyjax said:

---

Bruce Almighty said:

---

I don't understand how old tech makes a movie outdated. That's what they were using at the time. I don't consider a movie from the 50s to the 80s outdated because they were using land lines.

---

Yep. I don't get it either. If we made a movie now of that time period, we would show people using that technology.

---

I suppose I took the prompt more broadly than just "start of the art CGI then that sucks today." My example from the The Firm is that it dates the movie because a central feature of the plot is a device that was a standard and critical piece of office tech then that isn't used hardly at all anymore. It was more in the sense that if I showed that movie to a teenager now, I would have to explain what a fax machine is for them to understand the movie. To me, that's different than a deliberately made period piece about the wild west or ancient Rome or whatever.

The electric gremlin in Gremlins 2. Haha.

MW03 said:

---

Rudyjax said:

---

Bruce Almighty said:

---

I don't understand how old tech makes a movie outdated. That's what they were using at the time. I don't consider a movie from the 50s to the 80s outdated because they were using land lines.

---

Yep. I don't get it either. If we made a movie now of that time period, we would show people using that technology.

---

I suppose I took the prompt more broadly than just "start of the art CGI then that sucks today." My example from the The Firm is that it dates the movie because a central feature of the plot is a device that was a standard and critical piece of office tech then that isn't used hardly at all anymore. It was more in the sense that if I showed that movie to a teenager now, I would have to explain what a fax machine is for them to understand the movie. To me, that's different than a deliberately made period piece about the wild west or ancient Rome or whatever.

---

I think my teens would understand it.

I recently reread the book and I was more shocked about how excited he was for a $100k salary.

Complete Idiot said:

---

There is a move called 50 First Dates, surely that should be considered?

Unless I am missing the meaning of "most dated" ..... ??????

---

User name checks out

MW03 said:

---

Rudyjax said:

---

Bruce Almighty said:

---

I don't understand how old tech makes a movie outdated. That's what they were using at the time. I don't consider a movie from the 50s to the 80s outdated because they were using land lines.

---

Yep. I don't get it either. If we made a movie now of that time period, we would show people using that technology.

---

I suppose I took the prompt more broadly than just "start of the art CGI then that sucks today." My example from the The Firm is that it dates the movie because a central feature of the plot is a device that was a standard and critical piece of office tech then that isn't used hardly at all anymore. It was more in the sense that if I showed that movie to a teenager now, I would have to explain what a fax machine is for them to understand the movie. To me, that's different than a deliberately made period piece about the wild west or ancient Rome or whatever.

---

Yup, and it's also that specific time period. It's much easier to clearly detach from a movie in say the 50s with completely different technology than it is from something in the 90s that took wild stabs at what "future" tech would look like that was completely off base. A few films from that period did an incredible job stay technology agnostic enough that they hold up incredibly well (like The Matrix).

The rate of change in that time period was also incredible, in about 13 years we went from Jack Ryan on a DOS screen trying to print files being deleted from the other side of the office to the first iPhone. There's a 5 year bigger gap between that first iPhone and present day, but that technology seems much more aligned to how we currently do things.

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

Rudyjax said:

---

Some of these things are just how they were at that time.

IF we were to make a movie in that time period, we'd have flip phones.

---

I have to agree, generally. Except for this one time when a movie was made about Pearl Harbor, and we had F-14s.

---

If we made a movie like this today, It would be F-35s going after F-14s. Not quite as exciting.

Lawnmower Man

The hi-tech digital camera that is central to the plot of Mission Impossible 2 from 2000 stands out.




Now my sister, who is a huge musical theater nerd, will tell you that it's actually the end of Grease when ONJ and Travolta start dancing it up at the carnival. As a healthy man, it's hard not to just lust after Sandy in the black leather, but once you get past it, you can see her point. This is a carnival for kids graduating from high school (most of them looking 35+) and they get this little POS fun house with a "Danger" tunnel and a very slowly rocking platform? Jesus Christ, let's spend some money and make an effort, Rydell High. Clip is cued up to the terrible set scene.

AgTrip said:

---

Complete Idiot said:

---

There is a move called 50 First Dates, surely that should be considered?

Unless I am missing the meaning of "most dated" ..... ??????

---

User name checks out

---

That's what I wanted to hear!

When I created this account I was only going to make replies like that one above - a character I was going to play to fit the username.

But I quickly started making "normal" replies most of the time (could still be idiotic, but unintentionally) and I couldn't stay in character.

Duckhook said:

---

In the same tech vein, movies where everybody is using a flip phone are always a little funny looking.

---

You think that's bad? How about a party line -- as seen in 1959's "Pillow Talk."

Just so everyone can feel dated in this thread.

Definitely Not A Cop said:

---

Just so everyone can feel dated in this thread.

---

Here is my entry for this:

If Wonder Years was made today, it would be about a kid growing up during George W Bush's war in Iraq.

StinkyPinky said:

---

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

Rudyjax said:

---

2 questions.....

What movie is that?

And what did they have on that boat that make it explode like that from bullets?

---

The Final Countdown. Came out in 1980.

As for the explosion, presumably they hit the gas tank. But once you accept the premise of the U.S.S. Nimitz time traveling to 1941, I think that explosion can just go with the territory.

But ftr, I always loved this movie.

---

Loved this movie as a kid. Couldn't get enough of it.

---

The Naval Academy pulling out the Jolly Roger for Army-Navy this year had me almost rooting for them. I ****ing love that movie and those planes.

EclipseAg said:

---

Duckhook said:

---

In the same tech vein, movies where everybody is using a flip phone are always a little funny looking.

---

You think that's bad? How about a party line -- as seen in 1959's "Pillow Talk."

---

If this movie came out today set in 1959 and had partylines, would you consider it dated?

fig96 said:

---

MW03 said:

---

Rudyjax said:

---

Bruce Almighty said:

---

I don't understand how old tech makes a movie outdated. That's what they were using at the time. I don't consider a movie from the 50s to the 80s outdated because they were using land lines.

---

Yep. I don't get it either. If we made a movie now of that time period, we would show people using that technology.

---

I suppose I took the prompt more broadly than just "start of the art CGI then that sucks today." My example from the The Firm is that it dates the movie because a central feature of the plot is a device that was a standard and critical piece of office tech then that isn't used hardly at all anymore. It was more in the sense that if I showed that movie to a teenager now, I would have to explain what a fax machine is for them to understand the movie. To me, that's different than a deliberately made period piece about the wild west or ancient Rome or whatever.

---

Yup, and it's also that specific time period. It's much easier to clearly detach from a movie in say the 50s with completely different technology than it is from something in the 90s that took wild stabs at what "future" tech would look like that was completely off base. A few films from that period did an incredible job stay technology agnostic enough that they hold up incredibly well (like The Matrix).

The rate of change in that time period was also incredible, in about 13 years we went from Jack Ryan on a DOS screen trying to print files being deleted from the other side of the office to the first iPhone. There's a 5 year bigger gap between that first iPhone and present day, but that technology seems much more aligned to how we currently do things.

---

Is Blade Runner dated?

I enjoy the tech in the Star Wars Trilogy and the old episodes of Star Trek. If Star Trek is our future, then don't invest in touchscreen technology or even high def monitors. Apparently its all going in the direction of blinking lights, CRT Television screets, knobs, and some kind of microscope looking device to read data. The airpods are huge and somewhat painful looking, as well. Star Trek got the communicators frighteningly correct for a while during the flip phone phase.

As for Star Wars, I definitely prefer its brand of AI, ie. C3PO and R2D2, over the Terminator and Matrix. Unfortunately, we seem to be heading in the way of the latter two.

Bruce Almighty said:

---

fig96 said:

---

MW03 said:

---

Rudyjax said:

---

Bruce Almighty said:

---

I don't understand how old tech makes a movie outdated. That's what they were using at the time. I don't consider a movie from the 50s to the 80s outdated because they were using land lines.

---

Yep. I don't get it either. If we made a movie now of that time period, we would show people using that technology.

---

I suppose I took the prompt more broadly than just "start of the art CGI then that sucks today." My example from the The Firm is that it dates the movie because a central feature of the plot is a device that was a standard and critical piece of office tech then that isn't used hardly at all anymore. It was more in the sense that if I showed that movie to a teenager now, I would have to explain what a fax machine is for them to understand the movie. To me, that's different than a deliberately made period piece about the wild west or ancient Rome or whatever.

---

Yup, and it's also that specific time period. It's much easier to clearly detach from a movie in say the 50s with completely different technology than it is from something in the 90s that took wild stabs at what "future" tech would look like that was completely off base. A few films from that period did an incredible job stay technology agnostic enough that they hold up incredibly well (like The Matrix).

The rate of change in that time period was also incredible, in about 13 years we went from Jack Ryan on a DOS screen trying to print files being deleted from the other side of the office to the first iPhone. There's a 5 year bigger gap between that first iPhone and present day, but that technology seems much more aligned to how we currently do things.

---

Is Blade Runner dated?

---

To quote myself...

Quote:

---

A few films from that period did an incredible job stay technology agnostic enough that they hold up incredibly well (like The Matrix).

---

Like The Matrix, Blade Runner's tech is agnostic enough that you don't compare it to present day nor would I imagine are most people doing in depth analysis when it was supposed to take place. Back to the Future's version of 2015 is pretty silly when you think about it but I don't think most folks are overanalyzing that one either. Films that really revolved around the tech like others have covered are the ones you really notice.

Also not a film made in the time period I mentioned.

I think a movie like Alien (which I love) is more dated than some of the 90s techno thriller movies listed on this thread. Alien takes place well into the future but uses "future tech" that was designed in the 70s.