Day 52 - Dated

I don't care if things have aged badly. They're not being made presently so the present is a strange parameter to fixate on. The main thing is it wouldn't happen now, so let's focus on the positive - the present. It's rare there are many positives in the present but at least in progressive values we have some (although we haven't quite nailed our approach just yet, but that is a whole different debate).

Are we so averse to praising the present that instead we choose to focus on being negative about the past? Fair enough to criticise something new for being a bit backwards, but to be honest even then, depending on the specifics, I'd most likely find it interesting that a director has chosen a controversial route rather than an easy one. Art is there to challenge, not to repeat the dominant societal mantra of its time. 

Bored before it has even happened by the post-movie "that, this and this part was a bit dated" retort, at this stage I've already spend too long anticipating and dreading the comment, so when it inevitably happens, I'm overly irritated. Yes it is dated!! Because it is from 1985 and that being ages ago means there will obviously be cultural differences!!! It happens almost every time!!!

Then yet again, I'm correctly seen as being a dickhead. Great.

Conversely, I don't mind the opposite - if a film from, let's go with 1985 again, is surprisingly ahead of its time, I find this more interesting as it shows that the director has used their own moral compass instead of the general accepted values of their contemporaries.

But I also don't want to be associated with the opposite. The vocal "free speech" crowd, although I agree with free speech, are not a bunch I want to align with. Frustratingly, any argument seems to naturally align you with some sort of extreme these days. These days. These days you can't watch a film from 1985 without ending up on GB News criticising the trans community. These days.