I agree. I'm just pointing out that, technically, the acting and writing is not anywhere close to what you find in modern films and shows. Newer movies can be condemned for poor writing and performances even when it's objectively better than what you find in old "classic" films.https://twitter.com/baseballcrank/status/1138901902446465025 …
-
Show this thread
-
There was nobody in Hollywood in 1940 or 1950 that came close to the raw acting talent of someone like Meryl Streep or Daniel Day Lewis or one of our great actors today. The "greats" of that era were turning in performances that would be considered hammy and contrived today.
518 replies 10 retweets 109 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @MattWalshBlog
Also, crucially, audiences have become more sophisticated, and expect more mastery and nuance.
1 reply 0 retweets 14 likes -
Replying to @primalpoly @MattWalshBlog
Have you... err... watched a movie in the last 10 years or so?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @StateBanjo @MattWalshBlog
I'm not talking about superhero movies. I'm talking about movies for grown ups.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @primalpoly @MattWalshBlog
You're still wrong. It's easier to see the lack of sophistication of a culture or time that's not your own, but overall, modern movies are pretty dull and heavy-handed. If anything, endlessly rehashing earlier works has made audiences less sophisticated.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Thinking you're smarter and more sophisticated than those who came before is the most timelessly basic opinion.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
You must be new to my feed. I'm very traditionalist about most art forms.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.