When We Were Kids

Compiled by Lukas Kendall

Wow! Ask a simple question and get lots of answers, that's what I love about this web site. Seriously! Yesterday I went off on a mini-rant about how lame-o most sci-fi films are today and asked if things really are worse today, or if I was just displaying a fondness for all the junk I used to watch. Here are many insightful responses:

From: Jim and Jenny Mitchell <jmitch@i1.net>

While as an adult it's impossible to judge my favorite childhood movies in the same manner as I did then, I don't think they were as bad. The simple answer is: special effects. I truly believe that the movies beloved to us (Star Wars, Planet of the Apes, Raiders, Poltergeist, etc.) were creatively driven by a STORY and characterization. From this rather crucial factor, special effects were derived to carry the story. Lucas had a space opera in mind, inspired by the movies and serials of his childhood. He needed some wizadry to bring the story to life, but had no real idea what the end result of these new toys would be. His confidence was in the story and the memorable characters, I believe. In Jaws, Spielberg had no idea how the mechanical shark would work, or if it would at all. The story didn't depend on it, and our glimpses of the shark were limited.

With contemporary "blockbusters", the opposite is the case; stories are derived from special effects. "OK- we've devised a cool, relatively inexpensive way to blow up the White House on film. Now lets build a story around that." Or "We've got the technology to make the most realistic Godzilla imaginable [hah!]- let's write a storyline for that." That makes for a rather surface-heavy film.

I think the same theory can apply to video games. I remember fondly my old Commodore 64 games, with their endless playability. The computer was not upgradable, so graphics were not the prime focus of programmers. Creative, playable games were required to hold people's interest. Now, with nearly daily advances in graphical capbalities, you see endless Doom incarnations that, while prettier, are the same games.

My fear is that the Star Wars prequels will be much the same- effects driven with secondary focus on story. Lucas has bragged incessantly about the number of effects in these movies. Please don't let us down, George!

From: Michael Lyons, MikeyL7076@aol.com

While I am not 12 (I am 17), I wanted to point out that you are not a cynical bastard. I still watch a lot of the things that you mentioned watching as a kid, when they are on the television. That when is the point. They aren't on much anymore. To tell you the truth, most cartoons and sci fi shows produced today (except Star Trek and Babylon 5) are shit, and their music is even worse. Those things you mentioned are also what got me interested in soundtracks (especially Star Trek), and the lack of them means a lack of film score lovers and a lack of appreciation of true greatness in film and television when it occasionally appears.

From: "Michael Moran" <mbm_grand@hotmail.com>

No! Kids' movies have not always been this bad! And lately they have been VERY bad. There are dozens of "kids' movies" that I loved when I was seven and still love today. My childhood saw the Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and Back to the Future series. We had Poltergeist to scare us, The Neverending Story to wonder at, and The Goonies to thrill us and make us laugh. Directors such as Spielberg, Lucas, Zemeckis, and Donner brought a new sophistication to movies aimed at a younger audience. Their films featured elements that are unthinkable in today's PG market (What was the last PG rated movie you saw that showed a man's still-beating heart being ripped out his chest before he is lowered into a pit of lava?). These movies will be remembered. Are the Three Ninjas, Mighty Ducks, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Power Rangers, and Free Willy sagas being remembered with the same joy and nostalgia? I can't see how, but what do I know in my old age? True, Disney has been expanding in leaps and bounds. The Little Mermaid, Aladdin, and The Lion King were all great, but virtually EVERY animated movie since has had the same plot structure: Introduction to mythic setting, hero's yearning for a better life, song to begin the adventure, wacky sidekick's song, villain's evil plan, shocking revelation, battle for victory, the kiss, fade to cheesy synth-pop version of love theme to be played over end credits, preferably sung by Peabo Bryson and/or Celine Dion. Kids deserve better than this, and I think they're getting tired of it (Note the box office returns on Hercules). Occasionally, something fresh and fun comes along. Three of the best recent kids' movies were Matilda (don't be scared by Mara Wilson on the box, it's twisted and hilarious), Mouse Hunt (fabulously designed and directed), and The Nightmare Before Christmas (God bless Tim Burton, Henry Selick and Danny Elfman!). Each has a much darker tone than the average Disney fare, and failed to bring in the same numbers at the box office. It seems that if kids today want something more edgy than Disney, they either sneak into the R rated movies or play the latest gut-splattering video game. This year seems to offer some hope. Mulan hardly looks like a generic Disney flick, everything I've seen from Prince of Egypt looks astounding, and while Small Soldiers looks somewhat reminiscent of Toy Story, it is brought to you by Joe Dante, the man who gave us Gremlins (Remember the cute little furry things that turned slimy, multiplied, and ended up maiming and killing old ladies?), so I am looking forward to it. Let's hope that today's kids get more of a choice from now on.

From: MegadethDC <MegadethDC@aol.com>

The majority of the movies aimed at families and kids especially the summer flicks have no heart in them. In late 70's and through the 80's movies some of the blockbuster movies had heart, directors and producers wanted to do movies right, and not to insult one's intelligence. Unfortuantley today's kids are growing up with bad movies which have no story, no nothing but cgi.

Movies like Raiders, Star Wars, Superman etc were great popcorn movies and most importantly had heart. The directors wanted to earn the dollars, film music composers wanted to create unforgettable movie scores, folks wanted to watch it over and over again. I grew up with these movies and I always watch them a few times a year.

Those movies had intelligence, story, decent f/x, great score and characters. Those factors combined are not present in today's family movies because studios have become greedy and know if they slap crap on the wall, kids will pay for it. Studios taking advantage of today's youth?

From: marco stefanini <mstefanini@sogei.it>

Yes Lukas! I agree with you, but wouldn't restrict the problem within the boundaries of that single movie - which I haven't seen yet -. Firstly, I don't think it's easy to produce a good movie based on a SCI-FI story. You did mention (I guess some of) the Star Trek and the Star Wars sagas, along with others GREAT movies like Logan's run Superman and so on. While I would add Damnation Alley, Alien, Blade Runner, CE3K and a few others to your list, can't help but point out that they are just exceptions that confirm the rule: SCI-FI movies often suck even though may provide some sort of entertainment to the audience (i.e. ID4). Secondly, why do productors invest so much money on remakes? Maybe for a lack of new ideas? They just force the audience to compare the new movies to the originals. I'm quite sure that if Devlin had called the new Godzilla as "Iguanilla" - pun intended! - so bad word-of-mouth wouldn't have spread that way. So I wonder why productors make promises they don't want - or can't - keep? Such productors should rely STRICTLY on the original plots and characters. I'm horrified at what they have done to Batman and Robin recently. And now I've found out that Tim Burton is filming a new Superman! Whyyyyy?? Tim is the director of choice for a DARK movie, like the first Batman which I do love, but in my opinion the first Superman movie was simply awesome, well acted and - last but not least - magicaly scored by Johnny. On the other hand, I can't wait for Cameron's "Spider Man". If only James let the score to Jerrald! I guess you got the picture: ORIGINAL soundtrack needed!!

From: irmo@iquest.net

1. "Were kids movies always this bad?"

I don't think so. For starters, the main characters had more to define them than their relation to the situation. Indiana's introductory scenes did more than say, "This is an archaeologist (sp?) who's also a professor." They introduced you to his personality, which was more than just a collection of stupid affectations. You pretty much know the guy well enough after the first 15 minutes to take an interest in whatever he was going to do for the rest of the film. Same with Threepio and Artoo, Bones, good heavens - Chris Reeve in Superman: The Movie! Even Kevin Flynn was...kooky?

Add to that plots that seemed more motivated by the writers' fascinations with their subjects, rather than with needs to unveil big scenes. Plots were interesting enough that their 15 year old special effects don't make them any less engaging films today.

2. "Seriously... the sci-fi/adventure I watched when I was 12 was Star Trek, Star Wars, Robotech, Twilight Zone, Superman, the Apes movies, Indiana Jones... Do 12-year-olds still watch these things and like them?"

I would guess that they do. Most of the staff at my movie theater are 17-20, and so were only zygotes when Star Wars first hit screens, some only age 3 when Jedi came out . . . yet that trilogy is virtually sacred to many of them - BEFORE the Special Editions came out. They must be seeing this stuff! And liking it.

3. "Or am I just being a cynical bastard, ..."

It's easy to self-evaluate so when one hears one's own good taste express itself as seeming nay-saying, but I fear your opinions of these films will withstand a greater test of time than will the films themselves. Two years after it hit screens, how many people do you know who now "hate" Independance Day? I know quite a surprising number who do. I don't mean that it necessarily deserves this, but how many people hate 2010?

4. "...who is just getting warm fuzzies for the junky cinema of his youth, ..."

I'm afraid the fuzzies may be in play here, but the test of this lies with how you now view such former youth hits as Popeye, Clash of the Titans and Flash Gordon (no less delightful tho it be all cheese). This will help you judge the weight of the fuzzies. The answer lies deep within yourself, I'm afraid. But your cited movies are, by no means, "junky".

5. "...while dissing the equivalent output for today's kids?"

No. It is not equivalent, this output. Think. THINK! What was the last, really stunning genre-ish movie you saw that you know will stay in your pantheon even after it is playing repeatedly on WTBS? The Crow? Aliens? I mean, two years after Home Alone, did it really still seem as good as Ghostbusters? There are no future classics now. ID4 isn't. Lost World, even Jurassic Park won't be. Honestly, think back to the summer of '82! E.T., Poltergeist, Star Trek 2, Tron, Bladerunner, The Thing, The Road Warrior ... I'm barely into July of that year, I think ...Megaforce - Sorry! But even Firefox still seems pretty good. The LAME movies from that era were the ones that were "only okay". How can we compare things today with that?

It is a truly sad state of things.

From: LogieD <LogieD@aol.com>

When you mention your reaction to the then and now of movies you will find that as you get older, you will even have more reactions. As you get older you also get more selection. Lets see, today I will watch, Flash Gordon with Buster Crabbe, First Men in the Moon with Lionel Jefferies, Star Wars with all those young stars, and I should be able to finish off with Star Trek - First Contact or TMP. Also get some great music with them all. LogieD

From: John Maher <maherj@federal.unisys.com>

Well, Lukas, I do think you are getting warm and fuzzies for the films of your youth. You mention some pretty popular films, but I could fill a book with what I didn't like about most of them. However, almost all the films you mention had marvelous scores, something "Godzilla", did not. There simply was nothing in the music, to take you aways with the film. Although, the worst thing about "Godzilla", was that it wasn't "Godzilla". With that said, I still had a better time watching it, then say, "Jurassic Park", which I found horribly dull. I think it is true that we all hold the films we saw as children, as special. I was seeing films like "It's A Mad...World", "How The West Was Won", "The Miracle Worker" and "The Sound of Music", along with the original batch of "Godzilla" films, the William Castle films, etc. when I was a kid, and the movie experience (with few exceptions), just isn't the same anymore.

From: John Sloan <jsloan@lucent.com>

Regarding the 27 May FSD, I agree the most of what passes for childrens' fare these days is crap. Like most things in life, it surely obeys Sturgeon's Law: 90% of everything is crap. But I think 90% of childrens' TV and film has always been crap. We just remember the 10% from our childhood that was decent. This is what nostalgia is all about. And I suspect that we're remembering much of it though the lenses of childhood; if we saw it today (with the possible exception of some of the things Lukas mentions in the article) it might not age so well. Or maybe we can't see it in an objective light now, having the experience contaminated with our memories of seeing it for the first time. Not everything can be the WIZARD OF OZ, enchanting anew every time we see it.

So maybe we should be concentrating on the 10% that isn't crap. I'd like to nominate a couple of films that were intended for children but accessible to adults as well. Everyone remembers BABE, and I think it will still be as delightful to kids twenty years from now. I also recommend a Japanese animated film, KIKI'S DELIVERY SERVICE, which rumor has it will soon be released by Miramax/Disney with new dubbing, although there is a completely servicable English language edition already floating about, with voice acting that is much superior to the typical anime dubbing.

I'm sure there are others. Why waste our time on the other 90%?

I'll chime in with my further thoughts at a later time. For now, send yours: MailBag@filmscoremonthly.com