8mm Forum: Should new criteria be used to signify what is deemed a "Classic"?

This is topic Should new criteria be used to signify what is deemed a "Classic"? in forum General Yak at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=002110

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on March 24, 2012, 12:53 PM:

I had recently acquired a super 8 feature print of "Nothing Sacred".

Now, this film is stated to be a "screwball comedy", a designation which is used to determine a certain wacky style of humor, different from "dark humor" for instance.

Being a fond lover of comedy, I chose to buy this, as this film is literally given the top rating in every film ratings book; 4 out of 4 or 5 out of 5. With that kind of rating, I felt that I couldn't go wrong.

Well, I felt I was let down.

Now don't get me wrong, the film wasn't a total loss. It had a few good comedic moments as far as I was concerned, but when I think of screwball, I'm thinking of Marx Brothers (which one could easily give the description of "Manic"), or perhaps Laurel and Hardy, which isn't really manic but certainly up there with the Marx Brothers ...

But this film, while a decent storyline, was NOT screwy, to be sure. For comparision, a comedy which has been called "screwball" and certainly earns the title is the 1971 comedy, "What's Up Doc?" starring Barbera Streisand and Ryan O Neal., All film listing books says that it is a "homage" to the screwball comedies of the 30's, but doesn't rise to the same level. I highly dis-agree, as "What's Up Doc" is over-flowing with excellent comedic dialogue and extremely well paced and timed gags.

I think that perhaps, the 30's are placed at such a lofty level by film historians that most things produced during this period are considered classic or the highpoint of a genre, without really taking into account the overall quality of the picture.

Now, granted ... film sensibilities are different today than they were in the thirties, but I have always considered myself a "connesiuer" (yeah, I know I mis-spelled that), appreciating all humor, except for "potty humor" (except in rare occasions where it is done masterfully, such as Mel Brooks), so I appreciate well written comedy.

Perhaps the Marx Brothers do so well because they're humor has aged quite well, incredibly well, as has Laurel and Hardy, both teams having a universal appeal. It is the overall writing of the material. This is also true of "What's Up Doc" which has aged very well and stands up to Mel Brooks (in a different comedic vein, however), as one of the top comedies of the 70's and even up to this day.

What do you folks feel? Should a classic be rated more on how well it ages, or upon other criteria? Your thoughts ...

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on March 24, 2012, 01:57 PM:

The Marxes and L&H would not at all be considered to belong in the "screwball" genre, so to compare NOTHING SACRED with their output gets you off to the wrong start straight off.

There are no set characteristics of the genre, rather an overall feel to the films. Some are more blatantly funny than others. There's been much written on the screwball genre by commentators far more learned than me. Search around.

Anyway, NOTHING SACRED is right in there with the best of them.

Posted by Hugh Thompson Scott (Member # 2922) on March 24, 2012, 03:42 PM:

My interpretation of the word "classic" is something that is held
in high regard,one look at Paul Fosters list and you could be forgiven for thinking that the worst crap put on celluloid qualifies
as a classic,take a look,just about every title is a classic.Bit like
Derann's over worked little term"stunning print"

Posted by Michael O'Regan (Member # 938) on March 24, 2012, 03:48 PM:

The word "classic" will be defined as different things to different people.

If one is dicsusssing cinema history then the era 1929 - 1945 or so (depending on who you ask) is known as the Classical Era- therefore any film from this era could have the term "classic" attached to it.
Outside of that it becomes a question of personal taste.

So, there are no "criteria" to change.

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2