As much as I hate to admit it, yes. That’s 30 years ago now.
Think of it like this… If Back to the Future came out today, they would be going back to 1995.
🤯
Movies from 1955 were old in 1985, so movies from 1995 are old now.
NO SHUT UP THE 90S WERE TEN YEARS AGO
“TELL ME! WHO’S PRESIDENT IN 2025 - DONALD TRUMP??!?!”
😭😭😭😭😭😭
Yeah anything produced in the late 1900 I would consider old. Like me…
Depends how old you are.
Oh yeah. For movies, new only lasts like 5-10 years, then it’s old.
Thirty years. I may have seen it while I was young, but that doesn’t make us both not old.
i am over 30 and I consider a movie from 1995 old.
they were still cutting cropped vhs in 1995.
If you watched it when it was new, you are now old. Therefore by the transitive property, the movie is also old.
With how many movies are constantly being churned out, I consider even 5-10 year old movies to be “old.” The same way a meme older than a week on the internet is old.
Absolutely. It’s from the time when families used to share a single phone! That they glued to the wall!!
Meanwhile in 2025, I’m deciding if I need to wall mount my bidet remote for “anti theft” purposes
1995 was 30 years ago.
In 1995, 30 year old movies would have been made in 1965, and in the 90s we would have absolutely considered movies made in the 60s to be “old”.
So, I’d say yes, movies made in 1995 could be considered old.If Back to the Future came out today, they would be going back to 1995.
And you just know that Hollywood is waiting for that one guy to die so that they can reboot this. Instead of just making an original nostalgia-driven time traveling movie.
The plot of Austin Powers revolves around thawing a man who has been frozen for 30 years, from 1967 to 1997. Only 2 years to go before we reach 30 years from that movie’s release.
I thing you got your math wrong. See, it’s 2025 and … Oh NO
Haha 2025?! It’s 2015, i just checked me calendar and … Oh NO
Yesterday I re-watched Copycat. Part of the suspense fell on the main character not having a cell phone and the would-be killer cutting the land line.
It felt… weird.
And yes, it was old 😢
Colin Farrell in Phone Booth perfectly captured that early 2000’s feeling of where we were, technologically.
1998’s You’ve Got Mail does, too.
Red Hot Chili Peppers is now considered “classic rock”
Oofh. Oh yeah, that one hurts.
Time is a bitch. I disapprove of the whole concept.
Time is relative. A 5 year old piece of software is ancient. A 100 year old stone church is very recent. If you find a stone axe that isn’t at least 10 000 years old, you can toss it back where you found it.
In before Muzak version of Blood Sugar Sex Magik. :)
30 years is pretty old for a movie.
Yeah, 30 years is, but he said 1995… Wait, no no no no no no no
It’s only old if you’ve seen it before. The movie could be 100+ years old, but if you’ve never seen it before, it’s still totally new to you.
I have been working through my “must watch” list with my teenage daughter recently. While all the movies are absolutely new to her, that hasn’t stopped the occasional snickering about how “old” some of the stuff is. (And honestly, I can’t disagree. I had a few “ah fuck I’m old” moments rewatching Predator and Blade Runner recently.)
So, in spirit, I 100% agree with you. In reality, nobody can quite escape how old some movies actually feel.
I wanted to watch the OG Nosferatu before the new one, my wife could not stop laughing.
“No! This serious horror movie!”
(snort)
[OT: watch “Shadow of the Vampire” after watching the OG Nosferatu.]
I watched the Third Man next which was fascinating. Lots of similar shadow use.
Did you know that Charlie Chaplain actually made a movie with audio? Watch how something that’s actually so old somehow becomes new to you…
Sorry, I couldn’t quite get the feeling you described. It’s partially because I have seen that before and partially because it still looks old and the sound quality was reminiscent of a cylinder phonograph.
Good try though. ;)
Hah, interesting that you’ve seen that before, cool cool 👍
As crappy as the audio is, honestly it’s still pretty good for when it was made.
I actually like the audio. (I’ll leverage faux tape recording effects and plate reverb on occasion with music I write.)
And honestly, it was kinda refreshing to watch Charlie Chaplain again.
‘old’ and ‘unknown to me’ aren’t the same thing and never were. When someone says they’re into ‘old movies’, they never mean that they like rewatching movies from the 2020s.
Then please define exactly what NOS means?
New Old Stock. Yes, NOS is a thing, literally old stuff still in the original box, unopened, never used.
Shit, you got any idea how much money Biff got for his OG unopened box set copy of Back To The Future?
https://youtube.com/watch?v=dsIcCtylbUw
Just because a thing was made ages ago doesn’t necessarily mean it’s ever even been used/viewed/played or whatever.
And Biff wasn’t stupid, he learned from the very movie he played in.
That’s just not what “old” or “new” mean for media. You could maybe make that argument if the movie was made a long time ago but only released now, but that’s a very rare case. The public has already consumed the media, if it was somewhat popular you might be aware of what people thought about it before you even watch it for the first time, and if it was influential it might even interact with younger movies, possibly leading to you thinking that certain elements of it are overdone or old hat when this might actually have been one of the first works to have used these elements.
On top of that, the general societal context is not that of today, but of when the movie was made - few works are so timeless that this doesn’t matter at all.
Try watching Pink Flamingos
If you’ve anything like the audience of the time it came out, you’ll almost certainly turn it off within about 10 to 15 minutes.
But it’ll likely be new to you.
Highly not recommended…
I have a 1969 truck. If you haven’t driven it before, is it new?
yes, it’s now a cybertruck
New to me, yes.
Also, don’t ask what the actual first vehicle I ever drove was, but it wasn’t much newer than that.
I don’t think this is what Einstein had in mind when he spoke of relativity.
In 1995 most would probably consider Star Wars an old movie. I think most would consider Jurassic Park to be an old movie now.
I think it depends on the movie
If, after 30 years it still has a lot of cultural relevance, I’d think of it as a “classic” movie.
If it doesn’t, if it hasn’t aged well and/or faded into obscurity, I think it’s fair to think of it as an old movie.
Probably around '95, I would have been watching Star Wars for the first time. It didn’t feel like an old movie to me then and it still doesn’t to this day. Other movies from that same era haven’t aged quite as well and felt “old” to me.
Looking at some of the top movies from '95, some of them are just as enjoyable or relevant today as they were when they released, others feel dated and not relevant to me today.
It’s going to depend on your personal tastes and experiences of course. I can also sprinkle in a lot of platitudes like “you’re only as old as you feel” and “one man’s trash is another man’s treasure”
I think there’s also room for some overlap. There’s classic movies that also feel dated. I think some movies can be both old and classics. You’d be pretty hard-pressed to find someone who wouldn’t agree that, for example, Casablanca, isn’t old, but I think that just about everyone agrees that it’s also a classic. Where the line is is pretty murky.
