The Cinematic Differences of The Modern and Classic Film

[happyfilmluvguy]

There are many pieces to how a film was made, what it's style was like, and what was popular at the time it was made. The general opening of a classic film began with the STUDIO's introduction, then a PRESENTS and/or The title of the film, sometimes including the main actor and actresses names, and also sometimes the supporting at the bottom. At that point title cards were still being used, as they were in the silent era. It wasn't really until the early 50's that films began to run titles while showing moving images behind them. At least the vast majority of films, (example, Sunset Boulevard). There were plenty films in which moving footage was behind the text, (for example, Gone With The Wind) but really it wasn't common just yet.

Another part of the classic style of a film was the ending, which almost ends suddenly, with a big orchestral closing that didn't always blend into the mood of the film, (for instance, a sad story with a happy closing score). Acting was much more theatre like, with the movements of the body being somewhat over the top, giving it a more unrealistic feel, but later became much more real in terms of tone, grace, and attitude (for example, Now, Voyager with Bette Davis).

Romance was is many films, even when not completely necessary, but it made the actor and actress look good, and caused juicy stories for folks to read about, ("Was that kiss between Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall the real deal?") Stories however are not much different now as they were then, becausee the basics of story telling have always been there, and always will be, while many films did and still do use unconventional sub-plotlines, backstories, and things that aren't common is all movies.

Modern films are a entirely different story. Since the mid 1950's, modern film making began, with it's rugged tones, it's melodramatic acting, and it's keen styles. More realism means more suspense, and of course more popcorn in your mouth. Entering the 1960's and 1970's, some styles became popular, including the releasing of automatic "zooming". Before you had to manually zoom and focus into a subject or roll the camera on wheels closer to the subject. With the invention of automatic zooming, you were now capable of zooming into a subject without any need to re-focus. That's when you saw those reaction shots, where far away the camera would suddenly zoom into the subject's face. The 70's had random quick cuts to add to the suspense or surrealism.

The 1980's. MTV music videos have interested the many who watch them. The film makers however see something else. A new style. The one we have now. In the classic film, camera angles stayed on screen much longer before cutting to the next. The cinematographer would have the camera fly into the scene in a 5-10 second shot. Not anymore. Now shots were cutting quickly and your eyes had to follow it just as so. Probably not easy at first, but it is now the style that is used today. Quick shots means less patience. The quicker you get the audience to understand the scene, the more they will be satisfied and happy to go home.

Well, that's a little of what I know, while not all completely correct.

What differences do you see in the classic film vs. the modern?

 

[Sefton]

That's a good list. How about the soundtrack? Modern film soundtracks are much busier and louder now. Thanks to advances in sound recording and things like THX we have, on the plus side, much richer soundtracks. On the negative side the soundtracks are usually way too loud,sometimes it distracts from the film or is even so loud that it bleeds into the theater next door!

 

[LizzieMaine]

Quick and atmospheric cutting, odd angles, even mobile cameras were being used in the late silent era -- it was the introduction of sound that really locked the camera down and stultified directoral techniques. It took several years to shake this off, but it was still a long while before technique fully recovered.

The biggest innovation of the post-talkie era, to me, was the use of handheld cameras. That made shots more mobile than ever before -- and also brough a much looser style of direction.

 

[lindylady]

The lighting is definitely different. I don't know much about the techniques, but it seems that classic film lighting was more intimate, smoky, and changed with the mood of the setting. Modern film doesn't have that same effect. You have daylight, night, indoor light, and maybe a filtered lens to make the light darker in the grittier films.

 

[CharlieH.]

A few things that stand out in my memory are closeups on letters, signs, notes, etc. for the audience to read. You definitely don't see that at all anymore. Then there are transitions like wipes, fancy dissolves (eg. a picture in a newspaper turns into a scene), and irises, which had all sorts of shapes. Optical special effects and text-heavy trailers also come to mind.

And of course, scenes inside cars.

 

[Steve]

And let's not forget the height of cameras themselves. Film Noir was famous for it's low camera angles.

Structure of editing was interesting too. Enormous time was devoted to the credits, and often accompanied by an animation or a still frame that had to do with the film, i.e. Gunga Din or The Maltese Falcon.

Static endings were the rage also, coming back to a poignant image or location from earlier in the film to show "The End." The only modern film to have done this semi-recently was The Count of Monte Cristo, in which the prison wall etched with "GOD WILL GIVE ME JUSTICE" shows before the credits.