Watching a Film makes you Rate a Previous One Lower?

[ShogunRua]

To a large extent, one's perception of a movie is a function of the previous movies one has seen. When I watch an action film, I'm subconsciously comparing it to hundreds of pictures I've already seen in the genre.

As a kid, one of my first action films was Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (1990). I thought it was exciting, well-paced, cool, and had wicked awesome characters and great choreography. As an adult, I realized it's utter shit in all those regards, and embarrassing when compared to a mass-produced Hong Kong kung fu made on a shoestring budget.

But while that's common for films I saw as a youthful blank slate to disappoint upon an adult rewatch, I experienced something more unusual last night.

I watched Jawbreaker (1999) at sixteen, by which point I had seen at least 1,000 films, including dozens set in high school. My tastes back then aren't that different from today. I thought it was an average movie with a few nice touches. Nothing special. I scored it a 53, T5.

Then, last night I finally got around to watching Heathers (1989). While far from perfect, I soon realized that Jawbreaker is nothing more than a lousy, fourth-rate rip-off of the earlier flick.

My perception of Jawbreaker completely changed...by watching a different movie!

Focus- Anyone ever had this type of experience?

[Stewball]

You're saying that as some of us continue to grow and mature, our awareness and taste become more sophisticated. But only some...as Franklin said, some people die at 25 but aren't buried until they're 75. Yes, people do grow, but industries and art forms do as well. We can chalk some of the increase in quality to the quality of technology, but a lot of it is just simple improvement in technique, like in acting, especially from the 30s & 40s to now--with a few ahead-of-their-time exceptions of course.

For me, all science fiction went into the trash can after 2001, for both content and fx. OK, bad example, most of it was crap to begin with. Hmm, same with comedy. I never thought the Marx brothers, Jerry Lewis, or Abbot & Costello were funny (Who's on First an amazing one trick pony exception). Comedy wasn't really born until TV finally came up with All in the Family. It's hard to see why "I Love Lucy" was ever popular. It's obvious why TV comedy has returned to the laugh track. The use of music in films deteriorating in recent years, along with straight up comedy, is where film has gone down instead of up--but that's not just my opinion, it's an absolute, especially the music. I dunno, maybe I've just always been sophisticated, waiting for the quality to come up to my level. What else could it be?

[CMonster]

Not exactly like you described it, but I finally got around to watching Boogie Nights. It ended up in my T9. I feel like if I had seen Boogie Nights before I saw any other PTA film, I probably would have put it in my top tier of films, but just knowing PTA can do better (imo) and having a bit of an idea about his style (so it won't blow me away) affected my watching of it.

I also am very willing to change scores a lot. If I see a film that makes me think of another, it's not uncommon for me to go back and give it more or less points based on how well it has aged in my mind. Its rarely a drastic change, but a change nonetheless.

[dardan]

My respect for Woody Allen and to a lesser extent Monthy Python dropped after seeing Duck Soup, but that's mostly due to obtaining knowledge. In regards to changing tastes towards more sophistication, I recently was appalled by Spielberg's The Terminal. The notes with which Spielberg tries to manipulate the audience were so false and cheap that I lowered the score several tiers.

On a relative scale my opinion of every film (or more specifically 2001 and Persona) was lowered by The Face of Another, which I now consider to be the best film ever made.

[Pickpocket]

Comedy wasn't really born until TV finally came up with All in the Family. It's hard to see why "I Love Lucy" was ever popular. It's obvious why TV comedy has returned to the laugh track.

I don't think they ever abandoned the laugh track. It typically is inserted to cover up deficiencies in the work. I like the youtube videos where they edit out the laugh track and you can see just how terrible the show really is. See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BFSZ8XzWOM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKS3MGriZcs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_sxuyB_uVI

What I've noticed is that they don't have the laugh track they have shifted to this thing where the character will stare into the camera as if to say "isn't this a whacky situation!"

Examples:







The Office was the worst perpetrator of this trend but at least that made sense as they established that a documentary crew was following them around so breaking the fourth wall could be expected. These other shows these characters will stare into the camera in the middle of the scene because the writing cannot live without them letting you know exactly how to feel at that moment. You see this in really poor journalism too or the "comedy" news shows like Colbert or Stewart where someone will say something that disagrees with the accepted narrative and the host will not provide a rebuttal but rather a horrified or shocked expression. Basically the physical embodiment of "I can't even." I've also noticed it with late night hosts, particularly Conan, who's face is so bizarre looking that he can contort it to any weird shape and people will laugh. It's a crutch just like the laugh track, but I think some still think it has merit where I think it has none.

[Velvet Crowe]

Well, for me I find myself thinking this way for a lot of games. For example, I used to think God of War was amazing until I started playing more action games like Shinobi and God Hand. After that, I ended up looking back at the games and came to the realization that they are pretty mechanically shallow compared to what the genre has to offer.

In some cases, it can be a cross media thing. For example, I couldn't get into HBO's Vikings because I found the depiction of vikings was really lacking compared to what I read in Vinland Saga.

As far as films go, I can't think of anything in particular that I watched that dropped my ratings of other movies but I do find myself looking back on some films and decreasing their score. A good example of this is District 9. At first I thought it was a fantastic movie back when I saw it in theaters, but after a few years and looking back at it, I thought the movie was just average action movie schlock whose social commentary is toddler level at best. I tend to find that my opinions of things tend to be a lot more positive upon a first viewing but can be a bit more negative after thinking about it for a day or two.

[ShogunRua]

Comedy wasn't really born until TV finally came up with All in the Family. It's hard to see why "I Love Lucy" was ever popular. It's obvious why TV comedy has returned to the laugh track.

I don't think they ever abandoned the laugh track. It typically is inserted to cover up deficiencies in the work. I like the youtube videos where they edit out the laugh track and you can see just how terrible the show really is. See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BFSZ8XzWOM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKS3MGriZcs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_sxuyB_uVI

While it's true that these shows leave a pause specifically for a laugh track, and would thus have a different tempo without them, those videos still do a fine job underscoring how basic and weak most sitcom writing is.

What I've noticed is that they don't have the laugh track they have shifted to this thing where the character will stare into the camera as if to say "isn't this a whacky situation!"

Bizarre facial expressions are fine, but mugging directly at the camera in a two-camera sitcom is a terrible crutch, as you noted. I can forgive its occasional use in talk shows, but not when it's abused and relied upon to the degree one sees with a Jonathan Leibowitz or Conan O'Brien.

[Stewball]

I don't think they ever abandoned the laugh track. It typically is inserted to cover up deficiencies in the work. I like the youtube videos where they edit out the laugh track and you can see just how terrible the show really is. See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BFSZ8XzWOM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKS3MGriZcs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_sxuyB_uVI

Exactly, the laugh track is a huge crutch, but what I was talking about was laugh track vs. live studio audiences. I think All in the Family was the first to use it, and it worked because the writing was great and the humor was actually funny. To this day I can't not grin at the opening song, "Those Were the Days".

BTW, I thought that Raymond segment was/is funny, and some shows, like that one, were pretty good at the laugh trak. But the best test is whether I laugh, or at least grin, or not. I know from experience in theaters that I'm often not in sync with the rest of the audience when it comes to humor. The laugh track is mostly to make some people feel good about themselves when they laugh at stupid shit; you know, like Obama voters. (Awwwwwww, there I go getting political again. Cue the laugh trak. )

What I've noticed is that they don't have the laugh track they have shifted to this thing where the character will stare into the camera as if to say "isn't this a whacky situation!"

I agree there too, but I think it's worth mentioning that asides to the camera can work, but usually in dramas. The best example I've seen recently is Kevin Spacey in House of Cards. They do impart things the viewer would probably not otherwise know, and it jacks up the cynicism and satire to a level unattainable without it. Truth is the core of all the best humor, not slipping on a banana peel, even if it's the first time you've seen it.

[Daigoro]

Yeah it happens to me, and not just with movies but with anime, games etc. too.

Well, for me I find myself thinking this way for a lot of games. For example, I used to think God of War was amazing until I started playing more action games like Shinobi and God Hand. After that, I ended up looking back at the games and came to the realization that they are pretty mechanically shallow compared to what the genre has to offer.

In some cases, it can be a cross media thing. For example, I couldn't get into HBO's Vikings because I found the depiction of vikings was really lacking compared to what I read in Vinland Saga.

As far as films go, I can't think of anything in particular that I watched that dropped my ratings of other movies but I do find myself looking back on some films and decreasing their score. A good example of this is District 9. At first I thought it was a fantastic movie back when I saw it in theaters, but after a few years and looking back at it, I thought the movie was just average action movie schlock whose social commentary is toddler level at best. I tend to find that my opinions of things tend to be a lot more positive upon a first viewing but can be a bit more negative after thinking about it for a day or two.

God of War mostly relied on its edgyness to sell. Anyway I felt the same way about a lot of games which were huge parts of my chldhood, mostly 3D platformers, since I eventually played 2D platformers that somehow offered deeper gameplay mechanics and generally more exciting gameplay that I look back on the games from my childhood and think "meh".

[Velvet Crowe]

Well I don't think it was just the edginess, the whole Greek mythos part was a big selling point{and admittedly, that aspect of the game is pretty cool} and the gameplay was pretty simplistic and immediately satisfying so I can easily see the appeal. That said, I don't mind the series and it's honestly not that bad compared to other action schlock I've played{Arkham games, Remember Me, etc}.

I think a lot of 3D platformers still hold up very well today. Not too many games have the fluidity of games like Mario 64 or Jak & Daxter in terms of control and movement, more than most 2D games I can think of. Some other games like Banjo and DK64 have aged a bit and aren't nearly as tight in terms of platforming/control, but I still think they're fun and inventive games that are easily replayable.