Posted
7:41 PM
by Gene
While looking for DVD-review sites and finding too many of their authors can't stand older movies and overrate new ones, I discovered another of those famous Wikipedia articles that is longer than many of its biographies of presidents;
a "[l]ist of films considered the worst." Even those who don't read carefully will note, except for the B-pictures of the 1950s that inspire most of today's masterworks, ALL BUT
ONE of the items listed are from
the VALENTI Era and beyond. Which raises a question: if
MOVIES ARE!!!!! BETTER THAN EVER!!!!!, why are most of the skunks of recent vintage?
P. S. The ad-blurbists will point to this possible defense:
Rotten Tomatoes only has comprehensive coverage for recent movies....Meaning yesterday's turkeys may be overlooked. And surely there were many bad pictures in the golden age -- how could there not be with "studios" like
Republic and
Monogram? But these days it's almost a competition to see who can make the worst possible picture, and there are too many winners.