|
|
Post by beljah on Jun 21, 2012 20:24:01 GMT -5
Please. The 90s were the worst. Any decade that would allow Garth Brooks to rise to Superstar status needs to justify itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by BJ on Jun 21, 2012 20:28:52 GMT -5
i was born in '69. the '70s were the worst decade i lived through, with the sole exception of every other decade i've lived through. Ha, that's what I always think about when people trash (or praise) a particular decade. Looking at the list, I was a bit surprised at how much I like all those episodes. I can even remember what happens in all those movies, which isn't always the case. |
|
|
|
Post by caucasoididiot on Jun 22, 2012 17:17:45 GMT -5
The '70s doesn't seem to have been as fruitful a decade for experiments, but perhaps that's because it was sandwiched between the '60s and its surfeit of cheap films to support drive-in turnover and the '80s with the similar direct-to-video boom. That's one of the many likable things about the KTMA years: all the '70s TV material. Maybe I'll dig out Cosmic Princess . . . in keeping with Mrs. Torgo's observation that the 60s didn't really start until the middle of the decade (i think it may have actually been when the beatles started taking LSD and went scruffy), i couldn't help but notice that the late 70s are really different from the early-mid 70s. notice how different the hair and fashions are between "it lives by night"/"a touch of satan" and "angel's revenge," for instance. the whole feathered hair/stache thing feels really 80s to me, but the early 70s was all about drab, flat hair and sideburns. A lot of pop culture does seem to go more in five year cycles when you really look at it. '57 looks a lot different from '52, as does '37 from '32. Seems like a zero year always sort of demands a new look, and odds are something will come along by mid-decade to shove things in a different direction (presidential assassination, oil shock, what-have-you). Thus, our culture tends to divide itself pretty clearly along fashion and pop culture lines, so we don't mistake a 1968 collar for one in 1971, or a style of film making defined 1964 as cutting edge must, of necessity, be left by the side of the road by 1974. It's really pretty crucial to the way we define ourselves. Japan, on the other hand (and in no way am I any kind of expert on Japan, these are just personal observations) has a much, much, much longer history as a nation an culture than America does, and a big part of their cultural identity is tradition and preservation of history. Thus, once a style of film or fashion emerges, it not only has big ties to a past, it tends to be preserved and reworked until it's woven into the national psyche. Once a story has been thoroughly pulped and sucked dry, it's left to wither quietly until a new generation finds it and seeks to define its own current situation through this story, one that's been accepted and worked into the cultural mind as "part of Japan". I'm sort of "yes and no" on that, Mrs. PT. What you describe is certainly one aspect of Japan's cultural trend, but they are also very big into high turnover fashion. Especially once you allow for actual production dates rather than Sandy Frank release dates (as someone already noted) you can definitely follow the changing hair and clothing styles and often see a lot of it mirroring Western culture at the time, though certainly with a lot of their own rapidly embraced and as quickly discarded ephemera thrown in. The "Stomp Tokyo" movie review site notes some of these and how they show up in kaijuu films, like Gamera's weird gymnastic bit in G. vs Guiron being a reference to the '64 Tokyo Olympics. Just as an aside, while Japanese fashion does thus pick up on some of the West's zero year shifts, their own system uses reign years. They do use the AD/CE system and it seems to be becoming more common over time, but 2012 is often listed as Heisei 24 there (24th Year of the Heisei Imperial Era). This makes Japanese nostalgia a little different too, like in the recent Always or 20th Century Boys films which recall "Shouwa" times. This usually seems to call up things from about the '50s to '70s, but as the Shouwa Emperor reigned from 1926 to 1989, that's a little arbitrary. And Ijon goes into analytical overload again . . . |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2012 2:45:25 GMT -5
The mst3k 70s are sort of the quiet interlude between the other eras. It is quite right that it is an empty decade. Sort of a glum brooding decade with a heavyness on the heart in them all. Probably best encapsulated by Ted Nelson peeling back the layers from inside himself for Steve to return in the mellow sunflower fields.
|
|
|
|
Post by Treadwell on Jun 24, 2012 9:51:57 GMT -5
Whenever I watch a seventies movies, whether it's good or bad, I just can't get past how unatractive the men were. The oiliness, the horrible clothes and hair, both facial and on the head, just drives me crazy and takes away from the movie. The women, too. Many an otherwise lovely 70s lady is marred to unattractiveness for me by Farrah hair, lip gloss and unblended rouge. "Look, I have prominent cheekbones!" No, you have warpaint on. (80s big hair was not an improvement, however) |
|
|
|
Post by TheNewMads on Jun 24, 2012 11:06:58 GMT -5
i dunno, the 70s movies are among my favorites a lot of times. the later ones, as in the 80s and 90s movies, have that shot-on-video look a lot of times that leaves me a bit underwhelmed. at least the 70s experiments look like actual movies, if cheap, crappy ones.
|
|
|
|
Post by floatinginspace82 on Jun 27, 2012 20:09:28 GMT -5
I'm re-watching most of the seasons I have and seeing Mitchell again brought me through many emotional cycles, it went from hey this is kinda funny to waah? to slightly disturbing to OMG the horror the horror the weeping for many an hour but ya.... other than that the wakachika wakachika pulls me in every time cant help it . SFI was kooky and laserblast left me scratching my head and me being like wth did I just watch .
|
|
