Paul Farquhar
Legend
The weird thing is that TV has gone in the opposite direction, with a single mystery being dragged out over ten hours or more, when Columbo would have had it wrapped up in less than 2.
Lack of creativeWell, as someone who watches Doctor Who, I feel that the older episodes moved both slower...and faster.
The pacing in someways was more deliberate and slow with the events of what happen in an hour of today's doctor who, transpiring over the course of 2 - 4 hours of an arc in the older series.
On the otherhand, things still seemingly move faster in some ways as well, as scenes sometimes are actually rather short, and with three acts in an episode, each act may be ten minutes instead of 20 in today's modern who.
I have one kid that LOVES the modern Who and doesn't really care for the Older Who...and one the LOVES the Older Who...and also enjoys the Modern Who.
Watch your language, please.because old Ridley try to explain and expand it too much,especiall those religious shits
Just rewatched Alien with my 16-year-old, and it just comes across as a crappy low-budget sci-fi movie with bad lighting, weird cinematography choices, bad sound, bad haircuts, and a man in a monster suit.Prometheus wasn't great but I actually kind of liked Covenant. I don't remember Aliens, not having watched it in 20-odd years, and I've never seen Alien 3. I did watch the original Alien more recently, and it just felt agonizingly slow and kind of boring actually.
What was with 70s sci-fi movies being so bloody tedious? Think like 2001: A Space Odyssey, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, and Star Trek: The Motion Picture. Are they better if you're high or something?
The original Star Wars is probably one of the few 70s sci-fi films I know of that isn't painfully slow and boring.
You should watch the original Doctor Who version first, then you would appreciate the FX, sets and lighting more.Just rewatched Alien with my 16-year-old, and it just comes across as a crappy low-budget sci-fi movie with bad lighting, weird cinematography choices, bad sound, bad haircuts, and a man in a monster suit.
I will watch Aliens next and then maybe watch Alien 3 for the first time ever while waiting for Romulus to hit Disney Plus.
I disagree. I consider Alien, in general, to be truly a great movie, but specifically the cinematography and lighting are superb.Just rewatched Alien with my 16-year-old, and it just comes across as a crappy low-budget sci-fi movie with bad lighting, weird cinematography choices, bad sound, bad haircuts, and a man in a monster suit.
I disagree. I consider Alien, in general, to be truly a great movie, but specifically the cinematography and lighting are superb.
Well, as someone who watches Doctor Who, I feel that the older episodes moved both slower...and faster.
The pacing in someways was more deliberate and slow with the events of what happen in an hour of today's doctor who, transpiring over the course of 2 - 4 hours of an arc in the older series.
On the otherhand, things still seemingly move faster in some ways as well, as scenes sometimes are actually rather short, and with three acts in an episode, each act may be ten minutes instead of 20 in today's modern who.
I have one kid that LOVES the modern Who and doesn't really care for the Older Who...and one the LOVES the Older Who...and also enjoys the Modern Who.
Maybe! I have not watched any Doctor Who episodes.You should watch the original Doctor Who version first, then you would appreciate the FX, sets and lighting more.
I disagree. I consider Alien, in general, to be truly a great movie, but specifically the cinematography and lighting are superb.
Yeah I rewatched it pretty recently too and I don't know how one can say the cinematography and lighting are bad. It holds up great and it is the best film in the franchise IMO. It is an amazing movie