Dawn of the Dead (1978) - OUT OF PRINT

[Richard--W]

Originally Posted by DenOfEarth

I consider Night and Dawn and Day classics! Jaws is a classic, Exorcist is a classic, Elm Street is a classic, Predator is a classic, King Kong is a classic, Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a classic, Frankenstein is a classic, Bride of Frankenstein is a classic, The Haunting 1964, The Fly 1986 is a classic, John Carpenter's The Thing is a classic etc. those are classics to me.

The Fly 1986 and John Carpenter's The Thing (1982) are NOT classics.
Excellent films, but NOT classics.

NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD (1968) and DAWN OF THE DEAD (1978) are
classics and take their place with the other films you mentioned. They are

also important films for reasons.

[Mister_Kidd]

The Thing is definitely a classic.

[DR Herbert West]

Originally Posted by Richard--W

The Fly 1986 and John Carpenter's The Thing (1982) are NOT classics.
Excellent films, but NOT classics.

They are to me.

[postmodel]

My 2 cents, calling something a "classic" in the sense that it is one of the greatest films ever made, or greatest with a cultural impact, is more of an opinion. It just so happens that a lot of films are deemed classic by the masses, so to speak, thus making it appear as fact. Art is subjective after all.

Carpenter's The Thing and Cronenberg's The Fly are classics, to me and to many. Beyond being fantastic films, so many people can see imagery from them and might be able to name where they originate from without even being familiar with the films themselves. Saying Brundlefly might turn some heads, but showing them Brundlefly might get the "oh yeah! I've seen that before!" reaction. Even if they just mean seeing the image before and not the film itself.

Anyway...thanks for listening to my TED talk. Night is a classic in the classic definition of the term...Dawn is as well but more regarded within the world of horror and Day I feel is more of a classic within the world of horror enthusiasts, but when you name drop either 3 films people will always know what you are referring to.

But yeah...opinions are as opinions do...or something.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by monwobbbo

Perhaps but it tends to be a consensus based on those opinions. DOTD tends to be considered a horror classic. Does rank up there with films considered to be " all time classics"? Maybe not but of course those films may not be highly regarded by horror fans ( hence opinion)

Originally Posted by kwisatzhaderach

It's long been held up as a classic horror film, for over 30 years. What criticism of it do you have that might potentially revoke its classic status?

I never said how I feel one way or another.
Just that when people say a film is “a classic” that is subjective, thusly an opinion.

[Caseyscott]

Originally Posted by rickah88

I never said how I feel one way or another.
Just that when people say a film is “a classic” that is subjective, thusly an opinion.

A film or work of art achieves classic status as the result of cumulative favorable subjective judgments. It is an objective assessment of subjective frequency.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by Caseyscott

A film or work of art achieves classic status as the result of cumulative favorable subjective judgments. It is an objective assessment of subjective frequency.

Lol. No it’s not. May seem that way to you, but it’s not.
It’s just a group of opinions. There is no set of approved standards /testing in place to label a film a “classic”.
An argument can be made either direction.
All art is subjective. Always has been always will be. As is whatever label one wishes to place on said art.

[Caseyscott]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Lol. No it’s not. May seem that way to you, but it’s not.
It’s just a group of opinions. There is no set of approved standards /testing in place to label a film a “classic”.
An argument can be made either direction.
All art is subjective. Always has been always will be. As is whatever label one wishes to place on said art.

No that’s literally the definition of classic. If the “group of opinions” is sufficiently favorable it can objectively be labeled as “classic.” Think of it like this, if 8 out 10 people surveyed think red is the best color, you can make an objective analysis that red is the most popular color of that survey pool. The descriptor “classic” is meant to signify the same analytics with a different set of parameters. Art is subjective but subjective responses are not.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by Caseyscott

No that’s literally the definition of classic. If the “group of opinions” is sufficiently favorable it can objectively be labeled as “classic.” Think of it like this, if 8 out 10 people surveyed think red is the best color, you can make an objective analysis that red is the most popular color of that survey pool. The descriptor “classic” is meant to signify the same analytics with a different set of parameters. Art is subjective but subjective responses are not.

Show me where it’s been recognized by an approved set of standards that a “group of opinions” makes something objective?
It’s not. Never will be.
Classic = opinion. Not fact.
It can have 8 billion people that think a piece of art is classic and one that doesn’t. That’s called opinion.

[rocknblues81]

Originally Posted by Richard--W

The Fly 1986 and John Carpenter's The Thing (1982) are NOT classics.
Excellent films, but NOT classics.

[Caseyscott]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Show me where it’s been recognized by an approved set of standards that a “group of opinions” makes something objective?
It’s not. Never will be.
Classic = opinion. Not fact.
It can have 8 billion people that think a piece of art is classic and one that doesn’t. That’s called opinion.

It’s not “thinking the art is classic” that determines that qualification. If 8 billion people like it then the objective analysis of the subjective assessment is that it is popular. Popular is good comparison word as it functions the same. Popular is not the opinion, it’s the result of the analysis of opinions. Classic is not the opinion, the opinion is “good or bad” (to be a bit reductionist), “classic” is the assessment of those quantified opinions.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by Caseyscott

It’s not “thinking the art is classic” that determines that qualification. If 8 billion people like it then the objective analysis of the subjective assessment is that it is popular. Popular is good comparison word as it functions the same. Popular is not the opinion, it’s the result of the analysis of opinions. Classic is not the opinion, the opinion is “good or bad” (to be a bit reductionist), “classic” is the assessment of those quantified opinions.

Show me the governing body of labeling, in this instance, a film, a classic. Show me all the scientific standards that were put in place to arrive at this definitive conclusion.
I will wait.

[drush9999]

Originally Posted by Richard--W

The Fly 1986 and John Carpenter's The Thing (1982) are NOT classics.
Excellent films, but NOT classics.

[Caseyscott]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Show me the governing body of labeling, in this instance, a film, a classic. Show me all the scientific standards that were put in place to arrive at this definitive conclusion.
I will wait.

I don’t have that data, my interjection into this conversation was to clarify that “classic” by definition isn’t subjective. If Dawn of the Dead meets the criteria established then it qualifies. The precision of the assessment is of course determined by the metrics, but it cannot be subjective. One doesn’t think a film is “classic” on it’s subjective merits, they think a film is good or bad, and the cumulative subjective response determines its status as classic or not.

If I personally do not enjoy reading Great Expectations, that opinion has no bearing on whether or not the book is a classic.

[happydood]

I read a lot of posts at blu-ray.com in the voice of Cliff Clavin from Cheers in my head.

[Thebunk]

Imagine trying to score hot take points and state Carpenter’s The Thing is not a classic. Unreal.

[DukeTogo84]

Originally Posted by Richard--W

The Fly 1986 and John Carpenter's The Thing (1982) are NOT classics.
Excellent films, but NOT classics.

The Thing is without a shadow of a doubt a classic. Easily top 10 horror films of all time, if not top 5.

[Richard--W]

Originally Posted by DukeTogo84

The Thing is without a shadow of a doubt a classic. Easily top 10 horror films of all time, if not top 5.

I realize I'm in the minority, but I'm sticking to my guns. I've been a dedicated
Carpenter fan since ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13 opened in 1976, and I know he's
made better films than THE THING. It's excellent, but all Carpenter films are.
Whenever a new Carpenter film opened I'd see it many, many times in a theater.
I've really missed his work on the big screen.

Likewise I'm sticking to my guns on Romero's DAWN OF THE DEAD. It's not just
one of the great horror films, in the top 10 if not the top 5, it's a great film for any
genre. It's also one of the great independent films, made with non-professional
actors, that surpasses anything Hollywood was capable of at the time. It has
the intellect to underpin the horror, and the horror is in its intellect.

I'm excited about the 4K box coming out in region B. Although Romero's original
version is the only version I really want, they're all worthwhile.

[SeanJoyce]

Originally Posted by Richard--W

I know he's
made better films than THE THING.

Even if that were true, is that seriously the root of your argument as to why The Thing isn't a classic?

[stvn1974]

People who don't recognize that The Thing is a classic shouldn't be allowed to watch movies.