comment #1

christian says ...

DELIVERANCE was one of the top ten hits of the year.

comment #2

mutinyco says ...

Deliverance had plenty of sex.

comment #3

Daniel G. says ...

Hollywood as Indiewood...interesting.

comment #4

Joe Leydon says ...

Around the time he did Spy Kids 3, I interviewed Sylvester Stallone. And we both agreed that the original Rocky was, by today's standards, a Sundance type of movie. As he said:

"It really was an indie film. Except indie films really weren't so prevalent back then. So when they agreed to do the film, they approached it more like it was, maybe, second-bill fare for drive-ins. I was told that: 'This is not A material, per se.' It was done with unknowns, under a budget of $1 million. And we had 28 days to make it. I never, ever thought it was going to be shown in a first-run theater.

"I've been told today by reigning studio executives that Rocky would today be considered high-concept. And I think, 'OK. The guy is wearing Converse sneakers, and he lives in a cold-water flat. And this guy is high concept.'"

We also talked about remakes. (I was too polite to mention Get Carter). He said this:

"I think there are times when material comes along that works only because of the actors you could cast at that time. For example, if you were going to cast The Godfather today -- well, good luck. Think about it. Who's your Brando? Who's the next Michael Corleone? Think about all the characters in that movie, right down to Luca Brazzi. You would be hard-pressed to cast that movie today, because the actors back then had a look that isn't in vogue today. They had a certain weight, a certain gravitas.

"That's why remakes, literal remakes, are so dangerous. Because perhaps the original film was designed -- and it worked -- because the world was on the same frequency at that time. Or there was a naivete that no longer exists. That's why it became a classic. Because you can't do it again."

comment #5

btwnproductions says ...

I've never really liked EASY RIDER. And if I read one more paean to the greatness of THE GRADUATE, I'll hurl. It's...fine.

comment #6

cobhome says ...

The Graduate is to my mind a perfect example of a film that had a very specific meaning to those who saw it at the time - and that meaning made it a great film then - it is hard for someone viewing it now - out of the context in which it was made - to fully understand why the film was so resonant with the mind set of - in particular - young people at that time. Stallone's quote certainly applies to both The Graduate and Easy Rider -

comment #7

renorambler says ...

The deal about "the same frequency" reminds me of an interview with Altman where he mentions the hit or miss aspect of capturing the interest of the public based on the times and the general mood of whatever period. Sometimes you get lucky and a film captures the moment and sometimes the film is good but out of sync with the times. Altman would have known that better than most.

comment #8

christian says ...

I taught a 60's film class, and presented the movies in cultural context. When I showed THE GRADUATE, the young students were literally out of their seats cheering at the end. It still works.

comment #9

Joe Leydon says ...

Renorambler: Good point. Sometimes, a movie is described as being "ahead of its time." Trouble is, that's a sure-fire way for a movie to flop at the box-office. Consider, for example, The President's Analyst, a movie MANY years ahead of its time.

comment #10

Joe Leydon says ...

Christian: Just curious. When you showed The Graduate to your students -- did any of them ask you why Benjmain didn't seem the least bit worried about possibly being drafted? I have to admit -- I didn't think about that when I saw the movie in first-run release, but...

comment #11

christian says ...

And which is in my top five of the 60's. I love that fucking thing.

comment #12

christian says ...

BTW, Joe, I also showed them THE PRESIDENT'S ANALYST.
Strangely, the draft question never came up, not even from me.
But some did think he was a self-absorbed jerk. Which a point could be made.

comment #13

Joe Leydon says ...

To me, it's funny that, when you look at movies of the '60s (and, yes, of the early '70s) with 20-20 hindsight, it's amazing how few even made indirect allusions to Vietnam. And, of course, as we all know: The only U.S. movie to deal with U.S. troops fighting in Vietnam during the actual U.S. involvment there was... The Green Berets (which, contrary to legend, actually was a box-office hit).

Speaking of the '60s -- I'm currently teaching a course on the "New Hollywood" era (roughly, 1967-1980) at University of Houston. I screened Rosemary's Baby three weeks ago (before Medium Cool and M*A*S*H) -- and I was pleasantly surprised to see my students were transfixed by Polanski's film. When it was over, I asked them: If this movie were made today, do you think the filmmakers would dare NOT show what the devil child looked like? And I have to say: All of them appreciated the subtlety of Polanski's film, but all of them them said no, it wouldn't happen that way today.

comment #14

soap-and-water says ...

i'd rate the graduate as the most visually sophisticated drama ever made, ahead of Kane simply because of its colour pallette.

have i got this wrong? i'm pretty confident.

comment #15

joncro says ...

What did they think of Medium Cool?

comment #16

Malone says ...

Which 2007 movies will we be talking about in 2027?

More than likely, NO COUNTRY (because the Coens will be elevated by then to near Hitchcock and Kubrick status) and THERE WILL BE BLOOD (because of DDL).

Certainly not ATONEMENT and JUNO.

It will be very interesting to see how time treats ZODIAC and HAIRSPRAY.

comment #17

Craptastic says ...

The films I always bring up when talking about getting "Oscar" respect if it were made today is: "Heaven Help Us" and "The Right Stuff".

"Heaven Help Us" is the Juno and Little Miss Sunshine of its time...only better.

It's the rare film from the 80's that involved teens and teenage sensabilities that didn't include a Simply Red soundtrack

I loved that film as a kid and still do today.

"The Right Stuff" is what all movies that involve modern day space travel is based on. Of course it was up against "Terms Of Endearment"...a sentimental fluff piece that had more in common with a soap opera than an actual artistic piece of film work.

Put any performance in "Terms.." up against a single line from "The Right Stuff":

"The hatch just blew!"

And "Stuff" will win anytime.

comment #18

Joe Leydon says ...

The impression I got: They were fascinated, but not moved, by Medium Cool.

comment #19

joncro says ...

Thanks Joe. I felt the same way about MC. You may like to hear about a film we made about Medium Cool - 'Look Out Haskell, It's Real'.

http://www.thestickingplace.com/film/look-out-haskell/

comment #20

Dan Revill says ...

My father, who isn't a cinephile by anyone's standards (he took some convincing to see NCFOM), had a rare reaction when I first watched The Graduate five or six years ago. He told me how much he loved that film. Remembered seeing it when he was a teenager. I thought that was cool, given that he was never one for seeing a bunch of movies.

I think it's a great film too. The point is, great movies remain great.

(For the record, he liked NCFOM, although he turned to me at the end and said, "I think I missed the ending.")

comment #21

Craptastic says ...

Off topic but is anyone else noticing that Conan was so much better without writers?

comment #22

MAGGA says ...

I would just like to make the point that The Godfather was almost impossible to cast in the seventies, that it had an unknown and a had-been in the leads and that the directgor had to fight the studio tooth and nail to avoid having a stereotypical star-driven cast at the time. Also, would anyone in the seveties green-light an epic with such a hateful LEAD character as Daniel Day Lewis? Oh, and I you cast Godfather today, DDL IS Don Vito Corleone.

comment #23

btwnproductions says ...

The underrated Heaven Help Us is set in 1965; a Simply Red soundtrack might have been a tad anachronistic.

comment #24

T. S. Idiot says ...

The Graduate touched a nerve among young people (I was 21) at the time of its release because it presented my generation as wondering what the purpose of our lives was. We didn't want to go into plastics or to graduate school. We didn't know what we wanted beyond not wanting to be like our parents. The experience of seeing it for the first time was unlike any other moviegoing experience I've ever had. It was the first and last film I sat through twice.

Because of the popularity of The Graduate among unwashed youth, there was a blacklash. Some claimed that it wasn't as antiestablishment as it seemed to be. Others objected to its lack of awareness of the America of 1967. In those days before the draft lottery, Benjamin would have been drafted, as I was, a few weeks after graduating. This weakness mattered not to me, just as the historical inaccuracies in Bonnie and Clyde are irrelevant.

comment #25

Rich S. says ...

Anne Bancroft was only 36 when The Graduate came out. And she was pretty damn good looking. Maybe not Gorilla at Large good looking, but still fine. And that was after they muted her beauty to make her seem older (Hoffman was 30, only 6 years younger).

It may sound trite, but the Graduate will always resonate as long as there are graduates. It was always one of my father's favorite movies, but I didn't understand why until I graduated college. Then I got it.

comment #26

Dave says ...

O'Hehir's thesis is 100% correct in that it's, like, 100% wrong.

This isn't 1996, folks. The "indies" no longer exist. They're all boutique production mills for the studios.

Arguing that no major studio would produce a Gandhi is like arguing that no major studio would produce a NCFOM, TWBB, or Juno. Except, you know, they all kinda did, either through their indie divisions, or relationships with the indies. (Of course, who here wants to argue that Miramax is still an independent? That'd be like saying Ellen Page is still a teenager because she plays them in the movies).

Whatever.

comment #27

DavidF says ...

Firstly, I'll agree with Craptastic about The Right Stuff which I think is amazingly under-appreciated. IF you sit down for a day or two with that flick and From the Earth to the Moon (and Apollo 13) you'll appreciate, firstly, how much the latter works follow what Tom Wolfe et al set up.

Secondly, you'll learn a hell of a lot about that time and of these "heroes" as real people. Thirdly, you'll be entertained. What more can you ask?

I think the Stallone quotes above are mucho interesting (And show, once again, that he's more clever than people give him credit for). Movies - all art - are ultimately of their time. We had "real" indie movies in the 90s and now we have an era of studio-indies. So wha?

Like "alternative music" the term has come to define a genre rather than something objective.

People always like to say "X would never get made if executives saw it today!" but studios are making Juno and Michael Clayton and Michael Moore movies. Coppola and Lucas are still self-financing, as is Stallone, basically. Woody Allen makes movies the same he used to also.

If Spike Jonze made Adaptation in 1976 everyone would be talking about how that would NEVER get made in this era - except it did.

The point? People who say "X would never be made today" are romantacizing the past just like some drunk guy, sitting in a parking lot, crying that there will never be another band as great as The Doors. There will, buddy. You just won't GET IT.

Lastly, you have to be of a certain age to FULLY get The Graduate but I certainly think you can watch it and appreciate it for what it is - a darned, good movie (if slightly dated).

comment #28

erniesouchak says ...

Regardless of whether you understand why "The Graduate" connected with a generation, you have to admit it's just a great comedy. As for casting "The Godfather" today, a great casting director could easily do it, but I'm sure every one of his/her choices would be a battle with the studio, just like it was then.

comment #29

corey3rd says ...

in the 21st Century, The Graduate would be medicated to the gills.

comment #30

christian says ...

Joncro, your doc looks great. Where can I see it? Was this on the DVD? BTW, I even titled my film course MEDIUM COOL. My class was, like Joe's, fascinated but somewhat perplexed. A few loved it.

comment #31

Dan Revill says ...

craptastic, I caught a segment of Conan the other night after work, and yeah, I was thinking the same thing...

comment #32

I,Claudius says ...

Deliverance made back more than ten times its budget.

comment #33

joemart says ...

Would "Deliverance" be made today? Yes. It is currently in early development stages of being remake at Warners. Studio Execs. give the marching orders to their producers on what they'll make (Warners - Big Tentpole / Fox - brand name remakes. When I worked at the studios the remake mantra was "remake bad movies with good ideas". Then I would find one and get shot down by the higher ups because, "Oh, that movie was terrible".

Cost is the real factor here. With so much money on the line movies today are made for the masses and need to take in money as quickly as they can. Gone are the days of "roadshow" attractions (hell "Fiddler On The Roof played one year in New York before expanding to local theaters!)

As production and marketing costs continue to soar, name recognition goes a long way in helping a movie open. So the remakes will keep on coming, and films with real vision will continue to fight the uphill battle.

comment #34

Edward says ...

This is the kind of thread that makes me come to this site. Good work, everyone.

comment #35

Gordie Lachance says ...

Most great films, most Oscar-nominated films, including Godfather, The Graduate, Deliverance and 90% of the other films mentioned in this thread were all based on best-selling novels. They would have been made in the 1920's, 60's or today.

The problem is you have a whole generation of screenwriters who worship Syd Field and Robert McGee yet only have a cursory awareness of Preston Sturges and Paddy Chayefsky.... and a fiction best-seller list full of serial killer 'novels'.

What Hollywood needs is a few more Scott Rudins.

comment #36

truefaith says ...

THE GRADUATE is THE CATCHER IN THE RYE of cinema. For example, Benjamin = Holden, Elaine = Phoebe, Benjamin's parents = D.B., plastics = phoniness, etc. Just as THE CATHCER IN THE RYE is considered a literary masterpiece, THE GRADUATE is a cinematic masterpiece in my book. It will be appreciated and loved for generations to come--just like THE CATCHER IN THE RYE.

comment #37

Jay T. says ...

The question is: would anyone really want to rent Deliverance: Unrated DVD Edition? lol...

comment #38

truefaith says ...

THE GRADUATE is THE CATCHER IN THE RYE of cinema. For example, Benjamin = Holden, Elaine = Phoebe, Benjamin's parents = D.B., plastics = phoniness, etc. Just as THE CATHCER IN THE RYE is considered a literary masterpiece, THE GRADUATE is a cinematic masterpiece in my book. It will be appreciated and loved for generations to come--just like THE CATCHER IN THE RYE.

comment #39

moviemaniac2002 says ...

Speaking of movies way ahead of their time.
Whilst in the middle of this overwhelming
pop culture nightmare we're living in (in which
political figures have been tossed into along with the celebs)take a look back at "A Face In The Crowd" with Andy Griffith.

This 50's movie, where Lonsome Rhodes(Griffith),a mean spirited, soul-dead hobo is
media re-packaged, reinvented and sold to the
gullible public as a beloved, avuncular,cornpone
celebrity...is like a Nostradamus warning for
future decades.
Specifically watch the scene where Griffith
carefully instructs a stuffy, pedantic politico
how to sell himself like toothpaste...in light of
what we have to endure today, it still gives me
chills.
Although, Budd Schulberg and Elia Kazan, as
visionary as they were, couldn't have conceived
the onslaught of someone like Paris Hilton...whose very nothingness and vapidity becomes the engine and object of her fame.

Getting back to the point, I'd love to see
some angry witty well-written movies about the
state of life today (where is our "Dr.Strangelove"? Where is our "Network"?)
And I'm not including that dreary array of
anti-Iraq films (Yeh, the war sucks, Bush is an
imbecile, tell me something I don't know...)

comment #40

MAGGA says ...

"The point? People who say "X would never be made today" are romantacizing the past just like some drunk guy, sitting in a parking lot, crying that there will never be another band as great as The Doors. There will, buddy. You just won't GET IT."

Amen. For someone born in 1980 like me, there have been new bands/artists of that caliber several times. Sonic Youth, Pixies, Public Enemy, Radiohead, Daft Punk, Apex Twin and onwards. What we have is more choice, and admittedly more commercialism, so some of the best bands and movies are drowned out in terms of attention. If Blood, No Country, Jesse James and Zodiac were bigger hits and did not have to compete with Juno for attention, we would not be having this conversation this year. Actually, we probably would. I remember finding a prominent Jaws review from the initial release that said that they finally had a film by someone who knew how to put a movie together. In 1975. Today we have The Coens, Fincher, Spielberg, Anderson, Jonze, great HBO TV-shows and an insanely brilliant club scene. When I am in my forties I will likely bemoan how whatever people enjoy at the time could never match this line-up.

comment #41

a1 says ...

'where is our "Dr.Strangelove"? Where is our "Network"?'

"Idiocracy". The movie is a prophecy.

"Election" should get a public airing every four years, as far as I'm concerned.

"Pretty Persuasion" has a lot of interesting things to say, and its dark, dark humor spares no one.

comment #42

Mario Borroto says ...

"More than likely, NO COUNTRY (because the Coens will be elevated by then to near Hitchcock and Kubrick status) and THERE WILL BE BLOOD (because of DDL)."

I think there is a bit of a disconnect in suggesting that the Coens will achieve Hitcock/Kubrick levels of prestige. They've been around for a long time and are very respected, but they are still nowhere near those two. I don't expect things to change that much in the next 20 years.

In the case of Paul Thomas Anderson I think you are going too far in the other direction. While he won't be achieving Kubrick-esque levels of renown either, you are seriously overlooking his potential as a director by omitting him as a reason There Will Be Blood will be remembered.

There Will Be Blood was masterfully directed, but regardless of how you feel it should be obvious that Anderson will only get better. By 2027 it is not far-fetched to suggest he will have cemented his status as an all-time great. It is likely that There Will Be Blood will be remembered by movie buffs as one of his "go-to" works.

comment #43

AJW says ...

I love this thread. This is why I come to the site. Added 3 movies to my Netflix queue. Hopefully there will be more of this after November.

comment #44

DarthCorleone says ...

Yeah, I concur: this was a great thread. Thanks, y'all.

comment #45

seduisant says ...

... and now I know what "Gorilla at Large" is.

comment #46

Rich S. says ...

Sadly, however, seduisant, you will probably never get to see Gorilla at Large in its original, glorious 3D.

comment #47

joncro says ...

Hi Christian (and everyone else),

No we couldn't get our doc onto the Medium Cool DVD, but it did screen at some festivals and on the BBC here in GB and I think the Sundance Channel in the US.

Contact us throught the Sticking Place site

http://www.thestickingplace.com/film/look-out-haskell/

and we can get a copy to you.

comment #48

joemart says ...

"The problem is you have a whole generation of screenwriters who worship Syd Field and Robert McGee yet only have a cursory awareness of Preston Sturges and Paddy Chayefsky.... and a fiction best-seller list full of serial killer 'novels'."

Gordie, you are so right.

I use to show Sturges' "Sullivan's Travels" to young studio execs. The movie was on VHS and always at the end of the tape. I'd put the tape, rewind it and the counter would read -90:00, I'd hit play, and leave the room. Eighty-five minutes later I'd return to a room full of antsy people. They weren't enjoying the movie because "there's only five minutes left and they don't know how it's going to end." To which I'd say "Exactly! Try bringing some of that unpredictability to your projects."

In my opinion, Field and McGee have taught aspiring writers to structually write the same film, giving an overall sameness to the dozens of scripts flooding into the studios each week.

I always believed William Goldman gave the best advice. If you want to write a screenplay, read a screenplay (lots of them) first.

comment #49

Malone says ...

THERE WILL BE BLOOD will always be remembered more for DDL than PTA. PTA's work up to now has been overwrought and undisciplined. MAGNOLIA was a mess, and the second half (seemed like two-thirds!!!??) of BOOGIE NIGHTS was very meandering.

And in 20 years, the Coens will probably have at least 10 more movies and I'll wager at least 3 of them get Best Picture noms. That'll be a resume that could easily pull up alongside Kubrick and Hitchcock.

comment #50

Gordie Lachance says ...

joncro-

I had mentioned in the other thread that the Medium Cool dvd is now out of print and unavailable from retailers.

Now that Paramount is licensing it's films (Days Of Heaven) to Criterion, perhaps you (or someone) should contact them about a new dvd.

comment #51

Mario Borroto says ...

"THERE WILL BE BLOOD will always be remembered more for DDL than PTA. PTA's work up to now has been overwrought and undisciplined. MAGNOLIA was a mess, and the second half (seemed like two-thirds!!!??) of BOOGIE NIGHTS was very meandering.

And in 20 years, the Coens will probably have at least 10 more movies and I'll wager at least 3 of them get Best Picture noms. That'll be a resume that could easily pull up alongside Kubrick and Hitchcock."

Day-Lewis's commanding performance is the most palpable aspect of the movie, but Anderson's natural talents shine through so brightly that audiences will be hard pressed to forget the auteur behind it all as they are watching it decades from now.

It is no surprise that I strongly disagree with your first paragraph and its dubious claims. However, your second paragraph shows that some people don't know their history very well. Best Picture nominations mean nothing in regards to how you will be remembered. Claiming that the Coens will be remembered alongside Kubrick and Hitchcock completely ignores the fact that the latter two moved cinema forward in leaps and bounds. The Coens have done no such thing that would land them in proximity to Hitchcock or Kubrick.

By the way, neither has PTA.