What makes it a 'Classic'?

[fantayzya]

In the past few weeks we've stumbled on some great old movies now released on DVD. They may have been out for awhile, but we just found 'em lol.

Added to our collection:

The Pink Panther
Fiddler on the Roof
Treasure Island
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
Escape From Sobibor
All About Eve
The Ghost and Mrs. Muir
The Thirty Nine Steps
Santa Fe Trail
The Day the Earth Stood Still

We have several other oldies as well Musicals, Westerns, Dramas etc.

What makes a classic? What does a newer movie have to have to someday be called a classic? Do Raiders or Star Wars have what it takes? How bout others? What newer movies would you nominate for a Future Classics award?

[roodad]

That is a tough one. I think that I consider some movies "classic" just because I enjoyed them when I was much younger and they are evocative of my youth. A Man and a Woman falls into that category for me.
And some movies are "classic" just because I see the DVD at a great price. Guys and Dolls falls into that category for me. :oops:
What makes a classic really varies for me from movie to movie. The dramatic lighting and pace of The Third Man does it for me. So does the sweet earnestness of Jimmy Stewart in Harvey. The sick, twisted message of Birth of a Nation makes that a classic for me - sort of the fascination of the abomination, ala Conrad.
Among more recent movies, I think Schindler's List is already a classic. I think the Indy movies are classics, as a whole, but that the second one doesn't warrant that status on its own merit. I think the first three Star Wars movies also warrant classic status, but not the rest, to date.
I think the LOTR series will be considered a classic. Although a light weight among this company, I think Raising Arizona will be considered a classic, as will Fargo.

[sandar]

hi fantayzya,

Now this is a challenge. I agree with roodad that the elements vary from one "classic" to another. For example, I'd say that "To Kill A Mockingbird" and "Fargo" may both be classics, but for very different reasons.

The given wisdom is that a classic holds up over time, that its art captures the interest of people born many years after its creation. If you accept that as one criterion, how do you predict? Will people be happily immersing themselves in the 2078 holographic viewing experience of "Star Wars" 75 years from now?

My snobby answer is that a movie has to have some moral weight to really live on in my head. For sure I agree with roodad on "Schindler's List." Yet I also appreciate good escapism, and take joy in watching something purely fun that was created with great care and attention to detail. So who knows? Might say that "Raiders" makes the list, too.

Very interesting question, Lori. Wish I had a more satisfying response for you.

Sandi

[fantayzya]

I think it's staying power. And yes, I think it's an individual decision as much as anything. That's not to say that there aren't films that the majority of people would call 'classic'

If a comedy makes me giggle, EVERY time I watch it, no matter how many times I watch it. No matter how brainless it might be to someone else, it's classic to me.

If I tear up every time, if I am on the edge of my seat every time, if it makes me think, or whatever, despite knowing how it all turns out, Heck if I want to watch it again, despite having seen it 50--1000 times, that's a classic to me.