Old movies vs.

New movies
Old movies are better:

1) The Acting
Films today have great actors like Jeff Bridges, Leonardo DiCaprio, Natalie
Portman, Colin Firth, and Paul Giamatti. I love those guys, they rule. The truth
is, however, acting back in the day was much better in my opinion. Why you
ask? Well, for me the answer is simple: lack of technology. In the golden age of
film, there was no CGI, there were no crazy special effects, and there wasn’t any
3D. All these things in today’s films can easily distract the viewer from poor
acting. Look at actor Sam Worthington and the string of movies he’s been in for
example. The fantastic CGI effects in Avatar and Clash of the Titans easily
distracted the viewers from Sam Worthington’s sub-par acting. Film before
these technological advances was very simple, you had a great story (I will get
to this later) and you had great actors. If the actors sucked, your movie was
destined for failure. For this reason, movies back then really only had good
acting in them.

2) The Historical Aspect

I must say that I really enjoy learning about history, more specifically American
History. One thing that I found so interesting about older movies is how they
perfectly capture the time period they were filmed in. Prior to the introduction of
film and photography, it was basically impossible for us to have a detailed idea
of what living in a specific time period was like. Well, if I want to get an idea of
what living in the 1940’s was like, all I have to do is watch It’s A Wonderful
Life which was made by someone who lived in the 1940’s about people who
lived inthe 1940’s. These older movies are time capsules. They take me on a
trip to an earlier time period which I otherwise never would have understood as
clearly.

3) Thrills Without the Computer Special Effects

Some feel that special effects were actually far more difficult back in the day
than they are now. That, in spite of SFX now requiring machinery that costs
millions of dollars, the olden days required genuine creativity because of
technical limitations. Think of The Incredible Mr. Limpet, the Don Knotts
classic that seamlessly merged live-action with animation, something the
unreleased remake made almost 30 years later still couldn’t achieve. Or,
consider The Sea Hawk (1940), which took a scene as grandiose as the naval
warfare in the Spanish Armada and achieved it using clever lighting, set design
and conjunction with shots of the sea and studio productions. Cameras being
operated by multimillion dollar drones may capture more detail, but they don’t
bring about that same sense of wonder that comes when you really have to ask
yourself, “how did they do this?”

4) Art Imitating Life

One of the most famous films of Steve McQueen’s career was The Great
Escape, set during the Second World War and focusing on Allied soldiers trying
to escape imprisonment. One of the more famous scenes involves McQueen’s
character fleeing from a number of Germans on a motorcycle. Ironically,
McQueen was pulled over by German police during the production and jailed
for speeding!

5) True Family Films

There was a time when family movies were genuinely made with the intention
that both young and old could sit together and watch them without any awkward
moments. Think of Little Women, which shows its young ladies and their
mother persevere and hold down the fort while their father serves with Union
troops. It’s a warm, gripping story without one moment that couldn’t be watched
with your granddaughter. which often isn’t the case with entertainment today.

New movies are better:

1) Autonomous Drones
There are autonomous drones out there on the market already, but today’s
“autonomous” offerings are just sensational beginnings to what fully
autonomous drones are going to be able to do. We’re talking about sentient
drones with built-in knowledge and algorithms on everything from filmmaking
techniques (shot sizes, viewing angles, and screen position) to corrective
obstacle avoidance and open source technology for developing the drone
cinematographers of the future.

2) 4k+ 3D Technology
As you can see in our comprehensive coverage of this year’s NAB convention,
virtual reality (or VR as we like to say in the biz) may be the brightest star in the
future-tech galaxy. One shining example would be Lucid VR’s LucidCam,
which is touted as the “first and only 4K 3D VR live production camera” — you
can read more here. Not to be outdone is Google-supported Yi Technology’s Yi
Halo (pictured above) 16-point 4k 3D action camera. This is as impressive as it
is expensive (more here).

3)Technicolor changed storytelling

"The color must never dominate the narrative," Parker told the Times:"We have
tried to get a sort of satin gloss on the scenes and have consistently avoided
striving for prismatic effects... We realize that color is violent and for that reason
we restrained it." Today, we're accustomed to seeing color choices set the tone
for a scene, a film—even an entire body of work. A supercut of Stanley
Kubrick's use of supersaturated reds to ratchet up tension recently made the
rounds on the Internet. (It contains some graphic footage from films like The
Shining.)
There's some irony in the fact that colorizing film—ostensibly to make it look
more like the real world—may have cemented the medium's dreamy, escapist
quality. The three-color process, in particular, created films punctuated by colors
so electric they were surreal. That continued through the era in which Gene
Kelly, Judy Garland, Betty Grable, and others became superstars—an era that is
still referred to as Hollywood's golden age. "Technicolor had developed this
very vibrant, saturated palette," Layton told me. "When these films started
getting more colorful, that's what audiences reacted to. They loved this artificial,
fantasy, over-the-top palette. And that's the way color shifted. It's idealized."

4) Remake of an old movie

Often part of a series, a "remake" of an actually decent old movie, or derivative
of another series--the movie can't be appreciated on its own but must be
understood in terms of some external reference or context.

5)The use of sequel

This may just be a pet peeve involving semantics, but the use of the word “too”
in sequel titles over the past 30 years has been really irritating. The logical
reason for having a title ending in the word – as opposed to the explanation that
it’s simply different from using the homophonic number, as “2,” “II” or “Two”
– is to indicate that the new movie is not so much a continuation of the original
as a fresh start with a similar protagonist or premise. “Too” in this case means
“also,” as in another. Sure, it can also mean “more,” but it makes greater sense if
Think Like a Man Too is about new characters who must think like men rather
than the same guys who must further think like men. But it isn’t. I’m not sure of
any kind of literary precedent to the “too” sequel prior to Hollywood’s apparent
first use in 1984. There isn’t an easy way to filter through the history of books
for examples. But it is something that occurs, and just recently there was a work
of erotic fiction called “Checking Her Cherry, Too,” which must be commended
for getting the usage correct. According to the official description on Amazon,
“It’s not necessary to have read the first ‘Checking Her Cherry’ to enjoy this
story, but after reading it, you’ll certainly want to! This sequel features different
characters, but shares the same title theme.”

Source:
http://twoguysonemovie.com/oldies-but-goodies-why-young-people-should-
watch-old-movies/
https://www.factinate.com/things/42-wild-facts-old-hollywood-movies/
https://movietime.guru/4-reasons-classic-family-movies-are-better-than-movies-
today-2b1286f2a18c
https://www.premiumbeat.com/blog/7-innovations-changing-film-industry/
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/02/technicolor-at-
100/385039/
https://filmschoolrejects.com/the-confused-history-of-sequels-that-use-too-
instead-of-2-bac3dbb40fb2/