Hacker News Reader

I suspect this is just a matter of style. Current style somewhat favours fast-paced action and pacing. But one can easily find counter-examples.

There are contemporary productions that are absolutely plodding -- the recent miniseries The English [1] is full of over-long shots of oblique plaintive faces looking out over the prairies. I was twiddling my thumbs at times. Admittedly, it is a contemporary Western, which is prone to that style, and it's a deliberate effect. The same kind of tension-building as in Alien, really. It's not to everyone's taste.

And there are older films that feel very fast-paced and, well, modern -- I recently watched an old Japanese yakuza film, Battles Without Honour and Humanity [2], released in 1973 now 50 years ago, and it opens with a scene cut every 20 seconds or so, just action, action, action and it never lets up. Felt like watching something released a few years ago.

Tastes come and go, but no style ever fully goes away.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_English_(TV_series)

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_Without_Honor_and_Huma...

> I ended up staring at my phone for the 2nd half of the movie

I think this says more about you than about the film.

I think this is a commentary on what modern technology has done to us. I loved the original star wars trilogy as a kid, but revisiting them now... Man do they drag on.

I hate that so much of our media has become this constant mess of distraction with constant flashy lights and a million cuts, but I think a lot of it has to do with competing with our pocket pacifiers for our attention. If you dare slow down for a moment to let your audience feel the weight of what's happening, half of them will be on there phones in seconds.

What's funny is, it's exactly those fast-cut-30-minute-final-action-scene-CG-shit-flying-everywhere movies that I find improved by being able to tune out and look at one's phone, in home viewing. Most of the Marvel movies are better at home where you can check out for multi-minute stretches to scroll the Interwebs, for instance.

Good movies become worse if you're distracted by your phone during them, and are also usually much more sedate.

Question of taste of course! I for one immensely enjoy the slow pace and tense rhythm of it all.

The "for its time" is 100% subjective, and some young (18-20) people I know (very well I must say: children and nephews, etc) also enjoyed it very much. Asked to watch the sequel on our next "cinema night". Also all were flabbergasted at seeing an "empowered woman character" from "literally like 50 years ago". Came as a little bit of a shock for them. :o)

And ... I would kindly argue the opposite: today's productions are a blur of action, cgi vomit, sometimes almost non-sensical kaleidoscope of seemingly unrelated scenes and topics. I believe they reflect "their time": <tongueincheek>I want it all, I want it now and delivered to my door please. I will let Alexa answer the doorbell for me</tongueincheek>.

> Also all were flabbergasted at seeing an "empowered woman character" from "literally like 50 years ago". Came as a little bit of a shock for them. :o)

The interesting thing there is that the story and dialog was written for a male character and then swapped to a woman for commercial reach reasons. They'd didn't really change the dialog when they did that change though.

Had it Ripley been originally written as a woman I'm not sure her character would have been as empowered and I'm also not sure the movie would be the masterpiece that it is.

That sounds like an awesome trick to write tough female chracters without having your tainted brain trick you into sterotypes. Just random all genders up after writing.

well I personally don't give a flying flamingo about man/woman in the lead role of that film. It's just great. What I found telling is the reaction of young people today after realising "waitaminute, this isn't 100% like twitter and tiktok tell us it was... Maybe I need to do a little bit of research and <del>listen to the old man<del> (nah!)"

:-)

I re-watched Star Wars for the first time in a while (I watched it surely more than 100 times as a kid, but hadn't in a long time).

Leia is a straight-up badass the entire movie. She's the only competent one in the main 3 (Obi Wan's a contender if you expand it to 4, but he dies, spoiler alert). The other two are bumbling idiots until the very end, and don't go through half as rough a time as she does.

Then we open Empire and she's perfectly cool under fire while being the #1 person in charge of commanding a fighting retreat against an overwhelming, mechanized force, and has to be dragged away to finally leave her post as the structure is collapsing around her.

The whole thing is played like it's ordinary, no awkward asides to make sure we understand that this is a WOMAN being STRONG. 1977 and 1980 release dates.

Like... holy shit.

> The whole thing is played like it's ordinary, no awkward asides to make sure we understand that this is a WOMAN being STRONG. 1977 and 1980 release dates.

This is a big problem I have with modern movies; they're unable or unwilling to simply show, they need to show and tell. It doesn't matter the theme, even wholly unpolitical themes are far too often explicitly laid out, multiple times, with blunt dialogue exposition to the audience who are presumed to only be half-watching the movie.

A modern movie can't just have a bank robber kill another bank robber. They need the killer to say "hehehe, this way I get a larger cut of the profit!" Does that really need to be said? Why can't a movie just show it but not have the character explain his motivations outloud to an empty room? Because modern movies are made to spoonfeed disinterested dimwits with short attention spans. Movies are catering to people who aren't even paying attention, because in test audiences there are always a few people who keep muttering questions "what's going on? what did they just say? why is this happening?" And the worst part is, these sort of people are still confused even when the movie explicitly explains everything to them.

Plenty are still made well... they're just not usually blockbusters that get a ton of advertising.

This is a big problem I have with modern movies; they're unable or unwilling to simply show, they need to show and tell. It doesn't matter the theme, even wholly unpolitical themes are far too often explicitly laid out, multiple times, with blunt dialogue exposition to the audience who are presumed to only be half-watching the movie.

The smart writing (and smart audiences) have all moved to TV. The Sopranos, Mad Men, Breaking Bad, True Detective, Better Call Saul. These are the shows that respect their audience's intelligence.

The movie business has turned into Disneyland with guns.

It seems you missed a lot of recent awful shows. What the GP describes is very present in TV.

> Movies are catering to people who aren't even paying attention, because in test audiences there are always a few people who keep muttering questions "what's going on? what did they just say? why is this happening?" And the worst part is, these sort of people are still confused even when the movie explicitly explains everything to them.

I've got a few relatives I simply can't watch movies with because it's like this the whole movie. It's like they can't remember anything that happened over 2-5 minutes ago. "Who's that character?" "Where are they?" "Now who's that?" "Is that the cousin or the uncle?" "What are they doing now?" "I don't understand." OF COURSE you don't understand! You've been on Instagram the whole movie! They come out of a standard brain-off romcom and they don't really know what it was about, except that the ending was sweet and romantic and they liked it. Put something like Inception or Tenet in front of them, and they're going to just sit there totally befuddled.

Also, often times that’s the whole point of the movie that we don’t know yet who is that character! Like, can’t you accept that as an unknown and work the story from there?!

As I heard it, they wrote the script without concern for the gender of the actors, and they picked actors for the parts based on auditions. Although commercial reach reasons would also fit.

SPOILER ALERT: At the end of the day, it still fits the meme:

"Alien is a movie where nobody listens to the smart woman, and then they all die except for the smart woman and her cat."

If her character was really empowered, maybe they'd listen to her?

/SPOILER ALERT

I'm in the same age bracket as you, and I love the pacing of Alien and original Star Trek. I don't mind long panning cuts or ponderous establishing shots; it's like sustaining a note in music. Come to think of it, I also like downtempo electronic music, for example. In both media, taking their time to me equals feeling something deeply. And sometimes, giving space to think.

This can sometimes require more effort to pay attention so you actually do have thoughts on the material in those moments (and other times it comes easily), but that is its own reward afterward in a Type II fun sort of way, and it's generally the works that prompted you to have your own thought commentary that stick with you.

I'm not always in the mood for entertainment that requires me to do a little work for it, but slipping into this is a habit you can train (e.g. by visiting art galleries, and maybe watch some YouTube videos interpreting paintings beforehand to teach yourself a method - Nerdwriter1 is very modern and accessible), and it's ultimately very rewarding imho.

This is to say, I don't think it's the age of the piece. It's more likely taste (maybe you just didn't like it that much and/or it didn't have that much to offer you personally, which is fine, it's just a movie), mood, consumption habits, etc.

Modern tastes have less tolerance for slower pacing.

I grew up watching movies with slower paces (born 1980), but some of those I also have issues watching unless I'm in the right frame of mind. I think in part it's just we've gotten used to information overload, and thus expect the faster pacing.

That said... What I really like about the original is that it has that classic look and feel of 70's sci-fi. The white paneling and bright lights on the space ships, the grainy film, red and orange stripes on things, etc.

I really think it’s just the right frame of mind. I can easily forget why I opened some app on my phone, but yet I thoroughly enjoyed Alien, as well as 12 angry men. But these are not movies you just pop in and half-ass over, they require real concentration — people just often unwilling to commit their attention to one thing, not incapable.

I'm a bit of a film buff and I agree with you on the slow pace of older films being a problem. I'm not opposed to a slow film (Skinamarink has a glacial pace and is amazing), but I many films from the 70's will simply waste my time. When a character hears a noise and is about to go outside, I don't need to watch him put on his shoes. I especially don't need to watch him do up his laces. Before anyone argues realism, the screenwriter could write the scene where the character was already wearing his shoes. I've spent far too much of my life watching people in shag haircuts tying their shoes.

The further you go back in time, the worse it becomes. Watching films from the fifties, there's a recurring theme of

  1) Protagonist decides he needs to speak to the president
  2) Protagonist grabs his coat and goes outside
  3) Protagonist drives to the airport
  4) Protagonist boards a plane
  5) Stock footage of an airplane taking off
  6) Stock footage of an airplane in flight
  7) Stock footage of an airplane landing
  8) Protagonist disembarks
  9) Protagonist hails a taxi
  10) Protagonist enters taxi
  11) Protagonist asks driver to take them to the President

Today, steps two through eleven would be replaced with an establishing shot of the white house. Some better directors managed to squeeze a bit of character development into one of these scenes, but most of them were just a perfunctory explanation of how travel works. It's just padding out the film like a student who procrastinated on a term paper.

Slow pans and long takes are important tools for a good director to heighten the mood and shouldn't be stricken from the cinematic vocabulary. The unfortunate truth is that most directors are merely average and when the mood is boredom, the last thing we should be doing is encouraging them to amplify it.

Breathless.

It only had step 11.

Slow pacing can be considered an essential part of the story. It certainly aids with building tension and fits in with a space mining crew that would be sat around with nothing to do for long periods of time.

Maybe part of the problem is that due to its success, a lot of the designs and themes have been copied elsewhere, so it's less captivating. Back in the day, there was nothing like those Giger sets, so people were quite happy to see a slow descent into an alien spaceship.

Good call-out on Jaws. I, for one, also thought Alien to be a bit sluggish in just telling the story - and I was a teen when I saw it! In other words, I was used to movies of the time. It was a typical horror movie device at the time - go slow to build suspense. No. What builds suspense is Ripley racing to the escape pod with, presumably, the alien hot on her trail. What doesn't build suspense is jump scares brought on by a cat. I found that annoying - even at the time of release 44 years ago.

Jaws, OTOH, FANTASTIC movie! I saw that in a HUGE screen theater that had a balcony. The scene where the head suddenly appeared in the hull sent popcorn raining down in the main auditorium! One of my most memorable movie experiences! That reminds me, I saw a lot of great movies in that theater!

It's because Alien is a suspenseful horror movie, not an action movie. Aliens might be a better fit for you if you need it punched up.

I think it's a deeper phenomenon than taste. I find a lot of modern films (the latest Star Wars trilogy for example) nauseatingly fast-paced. I literally get vertigo and motion sickness from the rapidity and relentlessness of the cuts. Lots of people seem to devour these films, however... Then on the bus ride home I peek over someone's shoulder and see why:

They're swiping Tiktok videos even faster than that!

It's incredibly disturbing to me. I'm reminded of drug addicts clawing at the drywall of their dilapidated apartments, fiending for their next fix. We've used all of this wonderful semiconductor technology to turn millions of people into digital junkies. And our culture is deteriorating right along with it!

Your comment reminds me of the classic example: Taken 3 where they used 15 cuts in 6 seconds[1] to show Liam Neeson jumping over a fence. You can barely hold people's attention for 400 milliseconds.

1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCKhktcbfQM

I was born in 1987 and don't think it is too slow at all.

Just don't pull your phone out while watching a movie and take some time experiencing the slowness. It might feel boring or torturous at first, but give it some time and you will begin to see the value in focus.

Sure the average audience of today has no attention span and needs constant flashy-action, but that doesn't mean you have to be a part of that.

Interesting. I'd put this more down to taste but you might be right.

I tend to prefer films like this and I think there are plenty of "modern" examples. I do find some older films too slow paced, but I think its only when it's coupled with weaker writing and atmosphere building. In Alien I find the pacing works for the content and I assume it was a conscious decision, and that's why I think it holds up. But I'm not an expert on this stuff so I could be quite wrong here.

I don't think you are wrong there. There is always a lot of subjectivity with things like this. Many people would never ever consider picking up a phone while watching any movie, while for others even absolutely exciting movies like Escape from NY feel boring. It's about taste, not about the film being old, and I'm sure it was exactly the same when it was released.

I agree with you (born 1977). Saw Alien sometime in 80s

Alien would be a solo but forgotten masterpiece like Man Hunter until James Cameron made Aliens.

“Mother” is kept mysterious in Alien, relying too much on 1970s zeitgeist of technology. I kept expecting a Dream Scene which were all the rage in 1960s/70s.

Good contrast with Jaws, I would also add Blues Brothers from the same period. Excitement possible even in those days.

Probably best to keep away from my favourite 70s sci-fi then: Tarkovsky’s Stalker. There’s real beauty / bravery in multi-minute lingering shots, but when a single zoom-out-and-in shot is long enough for a rain shower to start up and finish before the shot concludes, while the characters sit looking morose and not saying anything, then it’s probably not for you.

I was also thinking Tarkovsky’s Stalker while reading the parent comment - a great accompaniment to a nap on a lazy afternoon. Nice atmosphere, but did anything happen in that movie?

Alien was actually good though.

I hope you put your phone down for the meal scene with Kane. Lol imagine glancing at it and thinking, oh boring they're just eating... time to check Twitter, and looking away.

> Too many long panning cuts, too much staring at a wall, too much space between dialog, too little action.

What do you think of 2001 A Space Odyssey?

> What do you think of 2001 A Space Odyssey?

Exactly. If "modern tastes" can't appreciate this film, I feel that's more a sign of an ADHD epidemic.

> too slow for a general audience in the 2020s

I think that says a lot about the latest generations and the boom in children hyperactivity disorders.

That's what I see with my son too (I'm 44, he's now 14). I tried to watch some of the older movies (not alien just yet), and it's all just too slow-paced/boring for him. These movies have a huge and slow buildup, and by that time they already lost the younger generations.

Todays movies and series really go fast into the action, and grab you from start to finish.

I was hoping by the time he gets a little older, he can appreciate the slower pace a bit more, but your comment gives me less hope ;).

Anyway, the 'classics' such as Godfather and Casablanca are also too boring for me :D.

> Too many long panning cuts, too much staring at a wall, too much space between dialog, too little action.

You might as well have described Breaking Bad or Better Call Saul, modern universally lauded productions.

That long buildup with that immense tension throughout is exactly why that film is so good - you may have just not been in a correct mood for the movie.

I definitely do not like the choices made for the director's cut. I don't know if it's actually any longer than the theatrical cut, but it feels like a lot more emphasis was placed on wandering around with occasional cuts to the cat. It was annoying.

I do actually think the theatrical cut is still pretty entertaining. That said, I did like Aliens better.

Have you tried watching at 1.25x in these circumstances? I find it helps when exercising or otherwise stressed.

insert steve carell god please no meme

I was thinking Tommy Lee Jones looking over his newspaper.

Yeah, I should definitely be more like him.

1.25x is too much imo, but 1.1x to 1.2x really helps when you're feeling "a faster tempo".

I watched it, maybe for the first time all the way through, a couple years ago when it was in theaters as a Fathom Event. It might be a bit slow in some places, but it's not slow like Star Trek 1. I saw that one in a theater recently as well and yawnfest.

I didn't like Star Trek TMP when it was released in theaters because it was slow, but have come to appreciate it over the years. There are some really beautiful shots, and the story has some depth that the later more action-y movies are just missing. Not my favorite by any stretch, but certainly watchable in the right mood.

And without it, we wouldn't have gotten Wrath of Khan.

Like much other media of its era & older, it's paced too slowly.

Any example of fast paced current era movie that you like?

Not the OP but I could not watch the recent Elvis biopic by Baz Luhrman because it was the most frenetic, ADHD fast-cut movie I have ever seen. It was beautiful looking but felt like it was made for a generation of people that couldn't stand still.

Not the OP, but as an older guy, I'll throw in "Everything Everywhere All At Once". Very fast paced with incredible concepts being thrown in seemingly at random. When you reach the infamous rock scene, it feels like it's the first time in the movie you've had time to draw a breath. Also very confusing emotionally as you'll be laughing one minute and snivelling the next.

You must despise 2001 then.