Aesthetics

it's several things OP
technology (types of cameras and common lighting equipment)
fashions in cinematography that arise from previous movies and are also influenced by technology (what's cheap to do)
For example, cameras getting smaller in the late 1960s allowed hand held "cinema verite" techniques to come to the fore in the 70s. This in turn forced a time in which both ambient noise and odd foley effects (to cover bad location shooting ambient noise) became prevalent.
Where this stands out to me is the difference between the early 80s Spielberg/Lucas stuff (Raiders) vs the late 80s Spielberg/Lucas stuff (Last Crusade). Late 80s looks like garbage and I can't believe the difference is mere budget

it feels 80s because it came from the 80s and all the other 80s films taught you what to expect. you can't subtract the fashion and the music because they are a big part of the flavour. the cars feel 80s because car models change with the times too and the 80s had some very distinctive cars. people still used landlines and cocaine was everywhere (so it shows up a lot in crime films).
there's also the fact that these movies were all shot on film and so look authentically dated. CGI was primitive so the way effects were handled was also different.
genres go through trends. science fiction is a way of commenting on the present, and all of those films share similar themes because they were inspired by the events of the 90s (like the rise of the internet). that's not even getting started on marketing trends where films are greenlit because of their similarity to another successful film.
as for GITS looking 90s, it's because it was produced using a composite of traditional cel animation and early CGI. it avoids the overly clean look that more modern anime has with the move to fully digital animation. GITS was also highly influencial and inspired a bunch of other stuff in the 90s, making its conventions '90s conventions'.

>After that, I can't make out a certain feel anymore.
its because you're inside it looking out. people in the 90s thought they were the end of history and so on. once the thing is over, behind you, you'll be able to grasp it.

Attached: hows-the-water-pic.jpg (291x173, 6K)

How long do you think will this era continue? It's now been going on for about 15 years and I can't see it ending soon.

>This is the 2000s atmosphere I am talking about.
The decade that killed all atmospshere and esthetics.

Attached: beta males.jpg (474x355, 20K)

This thread is reddit as hell

Explain yourself you memespouting retard.

Are you sure OP it's not just the soulful film look and the soulful retro car design before cars all became these round blobs?

Attached: terminator.jpg (1280x688, 356K)

>as for GITS looking 90s, it's because it was produced using a composite of traditional cel animation and early CGI. it avoids the overly clean look that more modern anime has with the move to fully digital animation. GITS was also highly influencial and inspired a bunch of other stuff in the 90s, making its conventions '90s conventions'.
Really, the movie had actual CGI? I didn't know that. I know that SAC had sometimes kinda obvious (apart from the opening).

Nah, frankly I don't like 80s cars, especially american ones. Look what they did to the Mustang for example.

its because you're inside it looking out. people in the 90s thought they were the end of history and so on. once the thing is over, behind you, you'll be able to grasp it.
No, I don't think so. I believe we are stuck in a sort of stagnant era or stage. This user kind of hits it right when he says:
>it's several things OP
technology (types of cameras and common lighting equipment)
fashions in cinematography that arise from previous movies and are also influenced by technology (what's cheap to do).
There hasn't been groundbreaking change in technology or fashion, behavior etc... from the 2000s onwards.

I think it's the lack of digital editing. Starting noticing when these shows came out that LA was being edited hard on the pavement to look perfect and not fucked up like real life kino

Attached: proxy.duckduckgo.com.jpg (474x379, 31K)

That post got butchered.

It's probably the washed out colors of contemporary cameras and the medium they were distributed in that make it "nostalgic" compared to crispy 4K HDR video we get today.

Same thing with hand drawn anime on cells compared to digitally colored anime of today. However, the technology is not to blame but it's usage.

>There hasn't been groundbreaking change in technology or fashion, behavior etc... from the 2000s onwards.
Guess why

Attached: culture leaders.jpg (1748x2481, 310K)

WRONG

>ralf
That's a german male name. Like Ralf Möller or Ralf Schumacher.

>There hasn't been groundbreaking change in technology or fashion, behavior etc... from the 2000s onwards.
Or maybe it just didn't seem that different to us because we lived it and the transition was gradual?

i see a clear line of differentiation in the way the world(and the web) is today in comparison to pre~2012. basically when the consolidation and centralization of net and world culture started to get noticeable. though as a process it started around 2008. even Yea Forums was different before that time.

Hard to say when this current moment will be over, or what the next epoch looks like. but its only been around 10 years at most i'd say.

>And I was thinking about this special kind of atmospheric aesthetic that is immanent to every decade and how and why.

It's things like set design, lighting, and camera lenses. The 70's was gritty, because they'd just film on location, and not change much. If I watch Close Encounters, Roy's house looked like houses in our neighborhood. Yes, I'm old, get over it. The 80's is when they started cleaning sets up, making things more sterile and stylized. There was still some "gritty" left, but it was way more set dressing, and the lighting got brighter.
90's, they just gave up and made sets perfect stylizations of locations, everything was brightly lit, and the new lenses were everywhere.
2000, is when the stopped dressing up sets, and just started throwing CGI everywhere.

And, being filmed on actual film had a lot to do with it, too. But it was just an overall stylistic shift away from real life to fantasy levels of environment and lighting, and advances in camera/lens tech.

Sure, that's the internet, but did it also influence the look and atmosphere of media? Because as others in this thread have also mentioned, it seems that it's not really possible to make a distinction to stuff made from like 2005 onwards.

Technology seems stagnant since like 2010. Reminder that it's been almost 50 years since a man last set foot on the moon.

Everything seems to have turned into a bleak, gray, mishmash of politics, shitty meme music, dishonest, late-stage capitalistic nightmare.

I just thought - when did digital start being the main thing? Was that around that time? I know that Robert Rodriguez was one of the first to only film in digital, then you have all the postprocessing and CGI everywhere, even if it looks like total shit.

>this special kind of atmospheric aesthetic

It’s called the 1980’s.

Attached: F56AED1C-8DBB-47D9-A1D6-C253BFA2C09C.jpg (2048x1536, 1.91M)

I know exactly what you're talking about

There is one thing I am wondering about: with all this nostalgia could it happen that people in the future won't really know what the past was like? Movies are obviously rarely realistic. But then new movies come out that take place in the past that will most likely have some more inaccuracies. And then you might try to ask people who lived in the past but they may have a selective memory.

Attached: stranger things logo.jpg (1383x736, 56K)

>Everything seems to have turned into a bleak, gray, mishmash of politics, shitty meme music, dishonest, late-stage capitalistic nightmare.
yeah, thats the shit i'm saying is only really like 10 years old at the most. Aesthetically in movies we're still trying to get out from nolan. Trailers for years were cut like the trailer from inception(with the loud horn) and his color scheme and 'realism' of dark knight. Explosions and destruction in movies stopped looking like independence day or die hard style, big fireballs, and basically just copy 9/11 footage now. not sure how we got out from under that one, or if it just goes on long enough that we collectively forget the inspiration event

Gotta be sure to talk different of what we see in media vs just epochs in general. sure in movies 2005 isn't much different from 2019, but in much of everything else things are different. The manager at dennys and the tow truck driver asking me to rate them 5 stars on some app would never have happened before 2012.

>with all this nostalgia could it happen that people in the future won't really know what the past was like?
That already happens, but not because of nostalgia.
Stranger Things is its own thing, 80s pop culture oozed long into 90s kids culture. The ST dudes are not much older than me, so they might have experienced the late 80s/early 90s a bit clearer than me, but it's the same crowd that likes Ready Player one. Basically people who could be my older siblings.

going to add one more thing and thats that, in each of those eras as well, the previous eras are changed. Asking someone now what the 80s were like gets you a different answer than asking someone in the 90s. My big example here is the red and blue neon color scheme ala or Drive. That's seen as an 80's thing NOW, but in the 90s no one would see that as an 80s thing, and while I have no proof, my personal feeling is that it actually was a much bigger thing in the 90s

just want to get across I think trying to remove the subjective experience from the view is futile and unhelpful.

>The manager at dennys and the tow truck driver asking me to rate them 5 stars on some app would never have happened before 2012.
True that, but I really wasn't talking about that, that is already talking about society. And I agree with you that at some point in the last 8-9 years, when everyone's grandma got their smartphone, everything changed.

forget the cars, we lost this aesthetic forever because cities moved to LED street lighting

>cities moved to LED street lighting
When was that? There are still enough regular street lamps around. I fully support them btw because they decrease light pollution.

It'll be apparent soon enough, once the nostalgia tide reaches the 2000's. Expect to see people usong mobile phones for everything, the nerd stereotype wears off, the internet is used for oractically everything, etc.
Camerawork made excessive use of higher framerates, even in non-action sequences (where a higher frame rate is intended to produce better slow motion), handy cams without estabilization, weird zooms/lens corrections (I am Sam is ridiculous in this), etc.
As for the aesthetics? 2000's gave us tighter shirts, non-ironed clothes, assymetrical zips (a zip on the shoulder? 2004-2005), wider belts, white pants. Hair? Rugged, wet "feel" (that actually require a ridiculous amount of time to gel up; think Stiefler from american pie), women with ponytails and pompadours (2008).
And the feel? That the world could have been pretty good had it not been for 9/11. You can see the themes of control and freedom everywhere. The 2000s were the beginning of an interconnected world.
The 2010's are pretty easy to identify: FEMINISM PANDERING.
In the words of Chuck Palahniuk: "every generation wants to be the last". We believe wearing things because they are retro is cool, because we dont believe we'll grow up enough to deride our fashion choices. We are wrong. The cyclical destruction of beauty is part of an economical conglomerate meant to subdue us into believing that our reality can be changed through consumption. That no one before has ever done anything quite as grand as we are doing.
Cinema has become a medium not to express ourselves, to tell a story, but to gloat about the world we, in and on ourselves, are.

>As for the aesthetics? 2000's gave us tighter shirts, non-ironed clothes, assymetrical zips (a zip on the shoulder? 2004-2005), wider belts, white pants. Hair? Rugged, wet "feel" (that actually require a ridiculous amount of time to gel up; think Stiefler from american pie), women with ponytails and pompadours (2008).
That was very early 2000s, basically as long as *NSYNC were relevant. Hell, scene lasted longer than what you described.

the film quality is a give away as well op. colors, lighting as well.

>OP discovers style

They've been switching out throughout the past decade. Less fuzzy yellowish light, more bright crisp white light now; kinda surreal.

This. I still remember a time before click-bait.

Yes and no. The success of the Dark Knight influenced everything, not just capeshit. There is a push towards realism, or at least, plausibility. BlockBusters are more complex than ever, both in terms of plot and especial effects. A complex plot is not indicative of quality (Star Trek into darkness comes to mind: what the fuck is that movie about?), but the ambition to which studios are willing a scriptwriter to have. People will spend hours upon hours commenting those movies on the internet, talking about the product, and other, newer products will imitate the successful ones in order to cash on it. The feedback between producer-consumer is more present than ever. You can talk to your favorite celebrities online, if you choose to follow their social media accounts™.
Which reminds me of the Horror genre (capitalized for emphasis, bitch). No other genre, not even science fiction, can become more dated than horror. There are horror movies told from a laptop, from a phone, from a fucking skype conference, and I believe there is a movie about people in facebook? Can't be sure about that, but there sure will be.

Now we are getting into a really identifiable place:
>Slow motion over some catastrophe
>Silent explosions
>Close-ups (bonus points for something mundane like splashing water in fron of a mirror, or looking at the sky covered in blood)
>All of this with some eerie piano version of a well-known song.
It's getting breddy old breddy soon

>No other genre, not even science fiction, can become more dated than horror.
What about comedy? If you are spoofing something everybody knows doesn't mean people 15-20 years later will even understand what you are going on about.
Whereas screens will certainly be around some time, so while that dumb skype horror movie will definitely be dated, at least some dumbass will be scared by it. Whereas not even 20 years later nobody even remembers "That's my Bush!".

Of course! But spoof comedy is a sub-genre, the same way that "technological horror" is. Some things age well, others do not. Think of Life of brian or The Exorcist and compare them to Scary Movie 1 or Phone Booth (not really horror, but you get my drift)

I'm not sure that pic makes sense

>Cinema has become a medium not to express ourselves, to tell a story, but to gloat about the world we, in and on ourselves, are.
MAINSTREAM cinema. That's important. the entry costs to make a movie are the lowest they've ever been. And if you're someone with a story to tell, or looking for someone's unique self expression, things have never been better.

If however, you're someone who feels hopelessly attached to the mainstream because you watch movies to have something to talk about with other people(aka an empty consumerist shell). Life sucks when you let your personality be replaces with a funko pop. just because you hate the funko pop doesn't make you different than the person who loves it. it still serves the same function of advertisement. That's what is happening in mainstream cinema today. The cinematic universe is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding cinematic universe. Money generating more money projected on a big screen for 120 minutes. The politics is only a color for a demographic that marketing execs says is on the rise.

>After that, I can't make out a certain feel anymore.
i think the 2010's aesthetic is mostly just filmmakers trying to get digital to look as much like film as possible.

Warning: GITS is in Japan, or Asia at least. The Asia's 90s isn't the 90s.

Nice floof you got there OP

Are you saying it's the Obama effect?

Exactly my point. I was, of course, referring to mainstream media, which understands cinema as a product by products for products, not as a medium of artistic expression. Which is not to say that all commercial movies are bad, nor to say that all artistic movies are good. There's crud everywhere.
Everyone carries a camera around, and literally the only reason why the layman is not interested in the cinematographical craft is because we have been used to certain standards in lighting, special effects, sound, etc. And then you look at Clerks and you see that a good movie can be very cheap.

yeah in the 90's we saw pink and black as being very 80's. Plus maybe yellow and some use of pastels.

Anyway, man, I feel this thread is gonna die sooner than later. Today you reminded me that this board can still hold cogent conversations.

it's like the city is being exhumed for an autopsy.

spenglercrashcourse.blogspot.com/2009/12/cities-and-peoples-the-soul-of-city.html

>There are horror movies told from a laptop, from a phone, from a skype conference, social media
Medium-specific narrative. Yeah, that's a major aspect of the shift. It's like the four gospels.

It is a very surreal change to city life.
Kinda like OP mentioned where we're jumping from one era of cinematic aesthetics to another but in real life.
Those fuzzy yellow lights were emblematic of urban living. The LED lights seem completely sterile and utilitarian by comparison.

Attached: light switching.png (1273x848, 997K)

There's also a weird aesthetic property to the fact the streets of Washington no longer look to be "paved with gold".

>With this the notion of money attains to full abstractness. It no longer merely serves for the understanding of economic intercourse, but subjects the exchange of goods to its own evolution. It values things, no longer as between each other, but with reference to itself. Its relation to the soil and to the man of the soil has so completely vanished, that in the economic thought of the leading cities the "money-markets" it is ignored. Money has now become a power, and, moreover, a power that is wholly intellectual and merely figured in the metal it uses, a power the reality of which resides in the waking-consciousness of the upper stratum of an economically active population, a power that makes those concerned with it just as dependent upon itself as the peasant was dependent upon the soil. [...] Money has become, for man as an economic animal, a form of the activity of waking-consciousness, having no longer any roots in Being. This is the basis of its monstrous power over every beginning Civilization, which is always an unconditional dictatorship of money, though taking different forms in different Cultures. But this is the reason, too, for the want of solidity, which eventually leads to its losing its power and its meaning, so that at the last, as in Diocletian's time, it disappears from the thought of the closing Civilization, and the primary values of the soil return anew to take its place.

Attached: Diocletian.jpg (248x338, 24K)

direct current doesn't equal D.C. but you get what I mean.

>2010.
The advent of cloud computing didn't really start until after that

I get this feeling about the 2000's watching the replacement players

is the jumpscare horror fad over? shit like paranormal activity. what if anything replaced that?

a24 basedhorror and blumhouse conjuring spinoffs

movies from the 80s have this great aesthetic to them because nothing has that perfected hollywood touch to it. how people look and live in newer movies is unrealistic to the point of being doll like. movies like terminator have things like wrinkled clothes, crooked pictures, people that still look real instead of plastic projections of what people want to be.

Attached: 7549_5.jpg (728x409, 38K)

Analogue film and editing produces a certain. Although I don't love them this is why Spielberg and Tarantino are still popular. They do things the old analogue way

It's going to b very hard to judge how dated comedy's get, because there have been almost no good ones in 20 years.

Design was more naturalistic in the 80s, from lighting to props to sets. What the RLM types call 'grit.'

Anybody know any 80s pornstars that resembles the chick on the right? I like that 80s look with big bushy curly dark hair. Thanks a lot.