Greatest decade in film?

The 1920's and (early) 1930's were a matter of style over substance. The combined lack and newness of sound lead to distinctly visual aesthetics, best exemplified in German Expressionism. Everything had to be conveyed (and understood) without dialog and only sparingly used intertitles, which largely carried over into early sound films like M.

The 1940's and 1950's were largely defined by the yoke of the Film Production Code. Prievously outrageous content had to be parsed down into subtext, if allowed to remain at all. Subversive intonations and implications abounded, and the slick Hollywood Studio machine was strong enough to push out incredibly polished, high-quality films of concentrated entertainment. Combined with one another, the productions were generally better than they were interesting.

With the weakening, and then ultimate abandonment, of the Production Code and desperate to compete with television, the films of the 1960s and 1970s were generally the opposite of the previous too decades. Young, energetic talent emerged in contrast to the old guard of Hollywood. The productions, although often more cheaply made and experimental, were generally more interesting than they were well made.

The 1980s and 1990s, in my mind, brought together the aesthetics of the preceding four decades into a sort of compromise. Films were being produced with large budgets and huge wells of talent, but still were given some (although often not much) room to "find themselves." The productions were not quite as good as the 40s/50s and not quite as interesting as the 60s/70s, but equal parts of both.

Although not yet complete, the 2000s and 2010s seem to be coninuing the trends set in the last two decades of the twentieth century. Studio films are increasingly concentrated on a small number of highly profitable films, which means that blockbusters have the most money and high-end talent thrown at them as the studios can manage (or afford). In turn, this results in a superior quality blockbuster. At the same time, however, increasingly segmented viewing demographics (through the democratization of information, the rise of the internet and the general segmentation of interests from a singular mainstream) has lead to numerous projects tailored toward these viably profitable demographics. So while the overall films are still as good as they are interesting (in the sense of the 80s and 90s), they are more staunchly divided into one or the other.

The 1920's and (early) 1930's were a matter of style over substance. The combined lack and newness of sound lead to distinctly visual aesthetics, best exemplified in German Expressionism. Everything had to be conveyed (and understood) without dialog and only sparingly used intertitles, which largely carried over into early sound films like M.

The 1940's and 1950's were largely defined by the yoke of the Film Production Code. Prievously outrageous content had to be parsed down into subtext, if allowed to remain at all. Subversive intonations and implications abounded, and the slick Hollywood Studio machine was strong enough to push out incredibly polished, high-quality films of concentrated entertainment. Combined with one another, the productions were generally better than they were interesting.

With the weakening, and then ultimate abandonment, of the Production Code and desperate to compete with television, the films of the 1960s and 1970s were generally the opposite of the previous too decades. Young, energetic talent emerged in contrast to the old guard of Hollywood. The productions, although often more cheaply made and experimental, were generally more interesting than they were well made.

The 1980s and 1990s, in my mind, brought together the aesthetics of the preceding four decades into a sort of compromise. Films were being produced with large budgets and huge wells of talent, but still were given some (although often not much) room to "find themselves." The productions were not quite as good as the 40s/50s and not quite as interesting as the 60s/70s, but equal parts of both.

Although not yet complete, the 2000s and 2010s seem to be coninuing the trends set in the last two decades of the twentieth century. Studio films are increasingly concentrated on a small number of highly profitable films, which means that blockbusters have the most money and high-end talent thrown at them as the studios can manage (or afford). In turn, this results in a superior quality blockbuster. At the same time, however, increasingly segmented viewing demographics (through the democratization of information, the rise of the internet and the general segmentation of interests from a singular mainstream) has lead to numerous projects tailored toward these viably profitable demographics. So while the overall films are still as good as they are interesting (in the sense of the 80s and 90s), they are more staunchly divided into one or the other.