|
Post by pacinoyes on Jan 18, 2020 13:33:52 GMT
You often hear these terms particularly around award season so, just curious if you think you're guilty of it or if it's a myth for you at least - that isn't really a thing? Heck if you are guilty of either is that even a bad thing?
You most often see this I notice for actors - our GOAT poll for males had only one peak actor in terms of age, active in our top 12 (Phoenix) and I'd argue even that was high (DiCaprio was 27th) myself.
Of course you see it with movies too - Kramer vs. Kramer/Marriage Story etc.
So what are your thoughts - does this exist with you, or is it an overblown "topic" in general?
|
|
|
Post by finniussnrub on Jan 19, 2020 1:37:36 GMT
I'd say recency bias most frequently comes into play in a single given year, not for me personally, but there can be a habit of kind of moving on to the next "exciting prospect". Classic bias I'd more comes up in general, one in not accepting that any new films can be on the level of classic, but also just the tendency to treat anything old with an assumed reverence. For example, when Mad Max: Fury Road first came out I saw a hesitation in some to declare it the best Mad Max, even though I'd say it pretty obviously was, though in a few years time this has become basically the accepted view. I'd say that took the time based on classic bias, where Road Warrior had to be better simply because it was older and a "classic".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 1:46:16 GMT
Sort of think it's a thing but in very specific ways. Recency bias seems to come from people who haven't actually seen the older stuff being borrowed from (or that the new thing is similar to), not so much that they're actually biased towards newer films for being newer. Classic bias exists in those steeped in an imaginary "golden age" of whatever, and you do see it with the older crowd, certain film critics, etc. But there're also lots of people who generally prefer newer films, and those who generally prefer older/"classic" films, who don't come off as biased at all. It's not something I think about much either way, we all have some level of bias with art.
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Jan 19, 2020 2:59:11 GMT
Vertigo is a flat-out bad movie.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Jan 19, 2020 3:05:26 GMT
Vertigo is a flat-out bad movie. LOL, I always knew we'd finally agree on at least one controversial stance.
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Jan 19, 2020 3:24:28 GMT
Vertigo is a flat-out bad movie. LOL, I always knew we'd finally agree on at least one controversial stance. I'll get into fist fights over this, and I love Hitchcock.
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Jan 19, 2020 3:48:44 GMT
Recency bias is a much larger phenomenon. Outside of a few big classics like Star Wars, Indiana Jones, or the big Disney movies most the public forgets a movie after 5-10 years no matter how much they liked it at the time and their favorite movie list will be almost all things from the past few years.
The claim of "classic bias" you hear from new school/"poptimist" critics sometimes is kind of a fallacy. They're lumping everything "old" (more than 10 or 20 years old) in together as one category. If someone's top lists are predominantly things that are older that makes sense because a much greater breadth of things are "old" than brand new. That's not indicative of bias. You see classic bias sometimes with old Hollywood fanboys and girls and in music with the "classic rock real music" guys, but that's a much smaller phenemenon than the masses of people who dismiss anything as "old" that came out more than 10 or 20 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Jan 19, 2020 4:19:40 GMT
I've seen many more "recent" movies than "old" movies, so in that sense any favorites list of mine will likely skew recent.
That said, the older movies tend to be the more accepted classics (as they stand the test of time to be more accessible). My 10/10 breakdown is like so:
1940s: 7 (187 watched) 1950s: 11 (277 watched) 1960s: 15 (313 watched) 1970s: 21 (256 watched) 1980s: 23 (333 watched) 1990s: 24 (406 watched) 2000s: 26 (863 watched) 2010s: 24 (731 watched)
So the last two decades have accounted for nearly half of all I have seen (I have an insignificant number of views from the 30s and 20s), but they don't have any more choices than other decades. Huh.
Well, it's that old cream of the crop argument: I've seen the same amount of cream in every decade, but the crap is harder to come by after a few decades of obscurity.
|
|