[demonrail666]

King Kong (1933) - The idea of a film being like a rollercoaster ride probably started here.

Casablanca (1942) - In many ways the first cult film ever made.

The Big Heat (1953) - Managed to free the American gangster film from the clutches of German Expressionism (ironic really, seeing as how its director was one of those most associated with it.)

The Hustler (1961) - The first major American film to really pick up on the European New Wave.

Jaws (1975) - Introduced the concept of the holiday blockbuster.

Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975) - Prior to this films became cults because of their audience. RHPS was probably the first time that a film was made deliberately in order to develop a cult following.

Star Wars (1977) - Merchandise, merchandise and more merchandise.

Betty Blue (1986) - A film that sold itself around the concept of being an arthouse movie, rather than actually being one. Without Betty Blue there would be no Amelie, or virtually any film starring Juliet Binoche or Julie Delpy.

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by acousticrock87

I wonder, what's the difference between being "ahead of their time" and "revolutionary"? A first step must always be made, but it might be made at the right time. In that case it isn't really ahead of the time, but just in time.

It doesn't much matter, but I was just thinking about it.

I think you're right. Revolutionary is a far more realistic concept than something being ahead of its time, and that was kind of the basis that I used to draw up the list above.

[atari 2600]

Before Rocky Horror, 2001 and The Harder They Come provided the basis of The Midnight Cult Movie...but yeah, RH Picture Show was the first to elicit audience participation to the degee it did. Next will come the posts about shit John Waters dabbling in pressing people's buttons, I know.

[purplebumblebee]

Jules et Jim (1962) directed by Francois Truffaut

[MellySingsDoom]

One of two more:

Peeping Tom (1960) - This film destroyed Michael Powell's career, but it's mix of warped sexuality, lustmord and intimations of child abuse totally blew away the staid English horror format. Notable that this came out in the same year as "Psycho".

The War Game (1965) - A docu-drama so hard hitting that the UK Government (via the BBC) had it suppresed for years. Seeing the state go insane with violence would have caused a huge uproar in a country where deference was still pretty much the order of the day.

[me.]

Akira - 1988.

I'd never seen anything like this before, can't believe there's going to be a live action film of this,.... i mean why?..

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by atari 2600

Before Rocky Horror, 2001 and The Harder They Come provided the basis of The Midnight Cult Movie...but yehr, RH Picture Show was the first to elicit audience participation to the degee it did. Next will come the posts about shit John Waters dabbling in pressing people's buttons, I know.

Yeah, but 2001 and (especially) The Harder They Come were picked up and sold as cults by distributors. I can't think of an example of any film prior to RHPS that was made with the sole intention of having a cult audience. Maybe John Carpenter's Dark Star (1974), maybe.

I think it's fair to say that a film like John Water's Pink Flamingos probably did bring something to the table, but its hard to really determine what. Certainly his 'shock value' aesthetic borrowed heavily from the American Underground film of the 1960s and the exploitation cinema of the time. Thinking about it, it's hard to think of John Waters as any more than some kind of synthesis of Warhol, Jack Smith and H. G. Lewis. I do like John Waters, but its hard for me to think of him as really revolutionising anything, or being ahead of his time. The only thing I might say is that he made producing films like Couch, Flaming Creatures and Blood Feast economically viable in a way that they'd never really been before.

One that I would add though is Deep Throat (1972), which managed (albeit briefly) to make hardcore pornography acceptable to a wider 'respectable' audience than had ever been the case before.

[atari 2600]

Definitely Akira. Good one, .me. I'm adding that to my list.

I suppose you're right about Deep Throat, demonrail, but should we now include some Roger Corman or perhaps even Porky's?

Oh, and Kubrick definitely didn't intend for 2001 to be a midnight movie, it just turned out that way because stoned hippies were the only audience that took to it initially. Everyone else was going, "wtf?" whereas they were going, "right on!"

Originally Posted by Tokolosh

I expected to see a lot more films in this thread.
Two that spring to mind for me are:

2001: A Space Odyssey (Thanks to Arthur C. Clark's visions of the future for the most part) and Andrei Tarkovsky's Stalker (1979).

Oh, and Eraserhead.

Was adding these while you were posting about them yourself.

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by atari 2600

I suppose you're right about Deep Throat, demonrail, but should we now include some Roger Corman or perhaps even Porky's?

I think that unless we're just going to fill this thread with films that TCM would deem 'worthy', we have to at least acknowledge that films such as Porky's might have been revolutionary in their own way. Not necessarily in the development of film as an art form, but maybe as an industry. Personally I don't think it is, but that has nothing to do with its artistic merit, or lack of.

[Cantankerous]

i don't think a clockwork orange is ahead of it's time at all.

2001 a space oddyssey, yes.

[atsonicpark]

Yeah, a clockwork orange seems very much a product of its time... like the abdominisers and private investigators looking for a cheap coffee...

[demonrail666]

If anything I'd say that 2001 was among the last of a type of philosophically inclined epic sci-fi movie, rather than one that looked to its future, which was represented far more by Star Wars, Blade Runner, Mad Max and The Matrix, and the countless copy-cats that followed them. The only film I can think of that is really anticipated by 2001 is Tarkovsky's Solaris.

[NWRA]

Originally Posted by MellySingsDoom

One of two more:

Peeping Tom (1960) - This film destroyed Michael Powell's career, but it's mix of warped sexuality, lustmord and intimations of child abuse totally blew away the staid English horror format. Notable that this came out in the same year as "Psycho".

I was just about to add this! When I saw Psycho listed, it had been on the tip of my tongue...

These two are tenuous (as I'm no expert) but:

Black Christmas. It was before Halloween which would probably make it the first 'slasher'. Halloween copied aspects of it (notably the wobbly 'seeing through the eyes of the killer'-shot), and then loads of films copied Halloween.

Cathy Come Home: It’s a film pretending to be a documentary, very realistic, of the kind which is popular now. It's drama-as-socialist-propaganda, and without it there wouldn't have been nearly as many soul-detroying British films.

[Cantankerous]

Originally Posted by demonrail666

If anything I'd say that 2001 was among the last of a type of philosophically inclined epic sci-fi movie, rather than one that looked to its future, which was represented far more by Star Wars, Blade Runner, Mad Max and The Matrix, and the countless copy-cats that followed them. The only film I can think of that is really anticipated by 2001 is Tarkovsky's Solaris.

but like think about it.

we hadn't even been to the moon when that movie came out.

[demonrail666]

[quote=NWRA

Cathy Come Home: It’s a film pretending to be a documentary, very realistic, of the kind which is popular now. It's drama-as-socialist-propaganda, and without it there wouldn't have been nearly as many soul-detroying British films.[/quote]

Trivia note: It was also instrumental in the founding of the Shelter charity.

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by Cantankerous

but like think about it.

we hadn't even been to the moon when that movie came out.

Fair enough, but you could say that about all sci-fi made before it. You could argue that man's landing on the moon effectively demystified outer space in a way that made a film such as 2001 largely redundant within a year. I don't actually believe it did, but certainly after the moon landing sci-fi changed dramatically.

It's an interesting question: whether 2001 marked the beginning of a new era, or the end of an older one.

[Cantankerous]

Originally Posted by demonrail666

Fair enough, but you could say that about all sci-fi made before it. It's the very fact (arguably) that man's landing on the moon effectively demystified outer space in a way that made a film such as 2001 largely redundant within a year. I don't actually believe it did, but certainly after the moon landing, sci-fi changed dramatically.

but the moon landing was faked.


everyone knows that.

[NWRA]

To me, films like A Clockwork Orange and 2001 are retro-futurist, typical 60s/70s visions of what this time now would be like and, because they (obviously) aren’t accurate, are inevitably dated. They gave themselves a sell-by-date (unless you choose to see them as set in a parallel-universe rather than a literal date in the future; I do with 1983).

I want my Sex Robot.

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by Cantankerous

but the moon landing was faked.


everyone knows that.

Good point.

And speaking of that:

 

[o o o]

Originally Posted by atari 2600

Night of the Hunter (1955)

Ah yes, very good movie, and it really does not feel as if it was done in 1955.

Originally Posted by Tokolosh

Andrei Tarkovsky's Stalker (1979).

I love it, but somehow I personally do not tend to think of it as "ahead of its time" as I cannot really think of a similar movie or of movies that have been influenced by it (I'm sure there are some, though). In any case, an exceptional movie.

Also, there is the fact that the movie predates Chernobyl... I remember reading some article making a parallel between the two: "The Zone" in Stalker and the zone around Chernobyl, both devastated and deserted, with forbidden access.