The definition of Classic is "judged over a period of time to be of the highest quality and outstanding of its kind."

But as you say it's very subjective.

For example, It's a Wonderful Life was critically panned when it first came out, but now is considered a classic.
So who knows. What is critically panned today may become a classic decades from now.
So I wouldn't take critics opinions into consideration here.

I think at least these are the criteria I would apply to Classic.
1. 20 Years old or older.
2. Considered to be something with high watch-ability (But that too is subjective).
3. Often copied. (Such as Alien, how many similar films are based on the same basic premise of that film).
4. Often mentioned in Pop Culture.

So for recent films, let's take the Back to the Future trilogy. I would only apply Classic to the first film.
For the Star Wars films, probably the first trilogy.
For Star Trek, I'd include Star Trek II and Star Trek IV as Classics.
For the Road Warrior films, probably Mad Max and The Road Warrior.
For the Alien Franchise, probably just Alien and Aliens.

I think you can see a trend.

For really old films, I'd probably apply Classic to such films as King Kong, The Wizard of Oz, Gone with the Wind, From Here to Eternity, The Bridge on the River Kwai, War of the Worlds, When Worlds Collide, Planet of the Apes (1968) and many others.

I may also take into consideration Oscar winners and those nominated too.

As far as Plan 9 from Outer Space, personally I don't think it's a classic.
You asked what it does not mean, well think of just about any films made for the SyFy channel and you get the idea of bad films that I don't think anyone would ever consider to be classic. So films that are just badly acted, badly directed, cheap effects and bad script I would not consider to be Classic. But some may.

But in the end, that leaves many, many films that are neither bad or worthy of the label Classic. Doesn't mean that they aren't good or even worthy of the label Classic by some people.

But in the end, it's a very subjective Genre/Label.

I'm another who doesn't think it really belongs. If I do assign something as a classic I keep it local.

Quoting CubbyUps:

Quote:
The definition of Classic is "judged over a period of time to be of the highest quality and outstanding of its kind."

That's one definiton. It's not like there is one definitive definition. Merriam-Webster also lists "historically memorable". But even if we go by your definition, a critical flop doesn't mean that it can't have been judged quite differently over time.

And just to make it clear, my question was not if Classic is a viable genre. That's a whole different question. I just wanted to know if you agree that a critical failure disqualifies a movie as a classic.

Sorry CubbyUps, that wasn't meant to be directed especially to you. I realized that you agreed with me. I was curious about opinion from others.

I've removed "Classic" from every one of my local profiles.  If I was going to ascribe some definition to it as a genre, I would apply it only to "classic Hollywood" - so films pre-1968.  (Wikipedia)

That would be considerably too broad, but trying to say that one film or another is a "classic" is too subjective, IMO, to get any consensus on.  Classic has snuck into my local must recently for How to Stuff a Wild Bikini and Beach Blanket Bingo, which I guess could be loosely considered "cult classics" but are in no way actual classics.



In other genre related stuff ...

I've removed "Family" from my local as I find that it has been applied to everything from G rated cartoons made primarily for kids (or the "whole family") to serious adult dramas that happen to be about families, rendering it moot as a genre, and "Children's" since my personal definition of that one would apply to films for ONLY small children (such as toddler DVDs) rather than stuff like Disney films.

Another thing that really gets me is seeing a lot of documentaries marked "Special Interest."  If a documentary about astronomy is "Special Interest" because it means you have a special interest in astronomy, then every film is "Special Interest" because it could be said to appeal to those people who have a special interest in whatever the film is particularly about.  I very much think that genre should only be used for things that aren't covered by any other genre - such as exercise DVDs, instructional videos, or purely experimental stuff like Stan Brakhage's films.

Yeah, not sure why Classic was included in the first place.

And BTW, not to remind people how old they are, but under CubbyUp's criteria, something like Groundhog Day could be labeled as a classic. 

Quoting mreeder50:

Quote:
I personally use Classic on several movies.

And submitted?

IDK, seems like a better fit as a custom genre.

Of course some people refer to "instant classic" which further muddies things. I suspect the reason the category exists is that some video stores have used the category in their rental/sales. Personally if I'm cloning a profile as a starting point for creating a new submission, I won't take it out before submitting, but I won't add it as a category either.