Yes, I've seen those movies. They're great, we all know this. That's why they're classics. That doesn't make them better than what we've got today. Don't know if you've noticed, the guy who made Pulp Fiction....he's still around making better movies all the time. I'm sorry if you're too preoccupied by all the shitty, generic blockbusters Hollywood puts out to notice that there's plenty of excellent movies coming out all the time. Use google if you need help to find them, I'm sure you can be helped. Doesn't mean you can't look fondly upon those older ones. I do. They've still all been outclassed many times over.
I dont watch block busters, I dont like superhero movies, I dont like spectacle movies. I watch a lot of movies from the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s and even today, but not whats popular, just real classic quality films. I have 1,600+ movies rated on imdb. I'm fairly certain I've seen a whole lot more than you have. Quentin has not made a movie nearly as good as pulp fiction since then. You can look at imdb ratings as see nothing that he has done has even approached Pulp fiction since then. You can filter to see only the opinions of top 1000 voters, people that have seen thousands of movies, and you'll get the same result.
It's obvious that you base your opinions on spectacle. Because film is a medium based on script and acting. There is absolutely no reason movies today would be any better except for technical advancements. You yourself were the one to bring up technical advancement as to why todays media is better than the past - so in other words you base your opinion off spectacle. I'm guessing new books are better than old ones too right? I mean books today have nicer, shinier covers. That's technical advancement right there. Shakespeare, who is that?