To me a classic has to have some "age on it so to speak" but there are movies that in my opinion are instant classics. The First Nightmare on Elm street was an instant classic. To me a classic makes you remember, it becomes part of the publics vocabulary, its one of things where 1 year after it came out you could go to any girl in highschool and go "one, two Freddies comming for you" and watch her squirm.

I think of the classics as movies that either started or redefined a trend in the genre.

In literature a classic is just a book 20 years old or older

Yeah, but I don't like calling something a classic just cuz its old.  Alot of old stuff sucks -- even books.  Did you ever read Silas Marner -- if not, don't.

I agree with Pumpboy that just being old doesn't make something a classic.  I think for something to be a classic a it has to be widely appreciated or at least appreciated among people well-schooled in the particulars of the genre in question, and it has to pass the test of time.  It helps if it has "transcendental" elements too, but that might be expecting a bit too much for everything that's described as a classic.

yea but whether or not something is good, well done or before for its time doesn't really make it a classic. I think people assume classic= good, amazing, awesome, but I think its just old. And yes you are right pumpboy some classics suck

classics can be good, amazing, awesome, boring, dull, insignificant, or whatever, but they are all old

So Molly's saying we should use a word like definitive or seminal  to describe the greats, not classic, cuz classic just means old, like antique.  Good point Molly.