Pic related is playing in select theaters nationwide on 8/13

File: 1412346052942_wps_12_No_Merchandising_Editoria.jpg (101KB, 634x725px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 634x725px

>>86242741
faye dunaway was a qt back in the day.
this film is so damn important to the whole new hollywood movement, it's amazing. sorry about your thread, OP.
https://youtu.be/UTeOhlva3k0

>>86243484
She was the last great female star imo. We've had lots of great actresses since then (Julianne Moore is probably my personal favorite) but I don't think anyone more recent has that level of...magnetism, I guess? A certain type of charisma that vanished as the Hollywood paradigm shifted. Male actors have suffered from it as well, we've had heroes, guys who could take a punch and not give up, guys who you root for, but nobody with the vulnerability of Montgomery Clift or the danger of Brando. Idk, I feel like they used to make movies about larger than life, almost superhuman individuals that the audience would fall in love with, and over the last half century "serious filmmaking" shifted to a more realistic reflection of the world. Which is all well and good but I wish the old style would make a resurgence from time to time. La La Land was an attempt at that but I think it suffered from the fact that Emma Stone and Goose are not actually on the level of the people they were imitating. Nobody is.

Thanks for replying

>>86244026
(samefagging) I guess I miss when movies endeavored to represent the best, the bravest, the noblest, the cleverest, the prettiest, the pinnacles of human potential. I think that sort of (necessarily moralistic) way of looking at the world was curbstomped by postmodernism starting in the late '60s. As much great stuff as we got out of the New Hollywood era and the ensuing fallout I wish the victory hadn't been as total. And perhaps in the social constructionist wasteland we currently inhabit there's room for the old style to make a bit of a comeback.

I guess you could see Faye Dunaway as a sort of transitional figure, being a star very much in the vein of the old ones yet playing a big role in the new style of cinema (this movie, Chinatown, etc.)

>>86243484
excuse my samefaggotry, but I liked that video a lot anon, is it from a full documentary or something?

File: anna-karina-vogue-01.jpg (1MB, 2373x2998px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2373x2998px

>>86244414
>As much great stuff as we got out of the New Hollywood era and the ensuing fallout I wish the victory hadn't been as total.
well, it's not like it lasted long. around the time the 80s started, films were focusing on unstoppable action heroes and stars. now, it's all super-heroes. the flawed protagonist and realistic settings are mostly absent in mainstream cinema.
i wouldn't mind going back to new hollywood.

File: michaelciminojpg-03-jul-2016-ts600.jpg (45KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 600x400px

>>86244975
comments say it's from The Cutting Edge: The Magic of Movie Editing

>>86242741
>>Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway star in director Arthur Penn’s groundbreaking and Academy Award®-winning film. Celebrate the 50th anniversary of this iconic film with a special screening and enjoy exclusive commentary from TCM Host Ben Mankiewicz.

What is the "exclusive commentary" and does it happen before, after, or during?

This thread certainly isn't a shill made by Turner execs, no way.

File: MV5BYmI4MjhjZjQtYTEyYS00NzM1LTg4ZmEtMzZiM2E4M2EzZmYyXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjAwODA4Mw@@._V1_.jpg (173KB, 594x344px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 594x344px

>>86242741
Watch Natural Born Killers instead, it's the same movie except not boring.

>>86245340
>exclusive commentary from TCM Host Ben Mankiewicz
I've been to a few of these and all of them have just been him introducing the film with some trivia thrown in.

It's basically the beginning of every other introduction you can see on their channel.

>>86245020
the proliferation of highly commercialized spectacle blockbusters is a separate phenomenon imo, starting with star wars and evolving along its own course. And I think they have their place, we got a lot of great movies out of that movement. Mostly in the 80s and 90s, but whatever. In terms of "serious films" if you want to call them that, I see the current crop as being primarily influenced by New Hollywood, to the exclusion of what came before. (aside from those who are so singular (Coen Brothers, Wes Anderson) that they seem to be their own thing entirely.) and I think that's a shame.

>>86245057
thanks

>>86245340
just some guy talking about the movie for like 5 minutes before and after. Nothing that interesting but you're not paying extra for it or anything.

>>86245403
I just want people to know about classic movies they can see on a big screen even if they live in bumfuck nowhere. I don't go to every TCM screening but I'm always bummed at how few people are there when I do. Godfather was the only one that got a good showing in my town so far because normies adore that movie

I watched it just last year, it was really enjoyable. Gene Wilder was hilarious.

>>86246769
>no new posters
>someone besides me samefagging
thanks bud

>>86245456
Natural Born Killers is a rip off of Wild at Heart. Watch the original instead.

>>86248654
Watch Badlands instead, better than all of these.

>>86242741

whys ned beatty missing fingers

File: NEJCF2teqgE9MN_1_b.jpg (66KB, 600x316px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 600x316px

op is finally not a fucking faggot redditor

i wish i started my cut sooner

>>86245403
>oh no! This thread isn't about capeshit REEEEEEEEEEEE

>>86242741
>you have no excuse for not seeing it

How about I have absolutely zero desire to support the glorification of white trash piece of shit criminals, or lining the pockets of Jews exploiting their memory?

Fuck off, OP.

>>86242741
>old movies are good because they are old
Kill yourself.

>>86250610
I find your view overly moralistic, especially 50 years removed from the social climate it was originally released in. You sound a lot like the critics that didn't like it in '67. Well, maybe not the Jews part.

Art can certainly influence culture, but I think it mostly just reflects it, and anything that provokes strong responses from people is worth seeing to help understand them and potentially yourself. Except for snuff/porn/gross-out stuff of course, that's basically cheating.

>>86250645
The historical aspect is part of it--these movies are sort of windows into the collective psyche of another time--and you may not share my interest, which is fine. Still, I find that classic movies are usually regarded as classic because they are good. You should try watching more of them.

Get the audiobook of Peter Beinart's "Easy Riders Raging Bulls"

The only real lesson of this thread

>>86251460
This is an old movie. This is not a classic movie.

File: 1490060068251.jpg (30KB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 720x480px

>>86243484
>this film is so damn important to the whole new hollywood movement

PASS. I'm not seeing this degenerate movie and screw movie theatres if they keep playing such garbage, saged

>>86244026
Nice, anon, that's why I come here.

>>86251498
Fair enough I guess

>>86251472
They made a documentary of that book, it's really good.

>>86251472
>>86252110
I will check it out, probably the documentary version. Wiki says a bunch of the filmmakers covered said it was bullshit but they would I guess if it painted them in a bad light

>>86251460
>your view overly moralistic

Criminal shitbags should be forgotten, not celebrated, you degenerate scum.

>>86252832
Do you have evidence that art "glorifying" crime/violence has ever caused an uptick in either of those things in real life? Because I'm not aware of any.

It influences people who are insane or already criminally-inclined, sure (e.g. drug dealers and Scarface) but normal, productive people don't change their minds about being normal and productive because they saw a movie, friend. Don't mean to proselytize but I feel like you're missing out on a lot looking at the world this way.

>>86253376
>ever caused an uptick in either of those things

I never stated it did, you dumb fuck.

My position is that shitbag criminals shouldn't be rewarded by being memorialized in film, or any other fucking media. They should be forgotten, or mocked.

There were countless citizens alive during that time period that deserve recognition for serving their communities and fellow man, and yet you would have us honor pieces of human filth criminals.

KYS already.

File: 1497474319219.png (227KB, 635x661px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 635x661px

>tfw I have to work from 15:30-22:00 that night
cant catch a good film
cant get a gf
my heart hurts

>>86242741
I'm a Tremorsfag. I might see Dunkirk at least.

>>86253804
They're not being rewarded. The film was made after their death.

>>86253804
But all those people were boring as fuck, anon

>>86253943
They should be forgotten and as unknown as any common nigger that robbed any given quickie-mart.

>>86253968
If it's killing you find so fascinating, then perhaps you'd find a story about the men that hunted down criminal scum and killed them worthy of your attention, instead of white trash criminal fucks making life harder for the average citizen.

>>86253804
Wow man, I'm a bit of a moralfag myself but you're just next level. I'm kind of impressed.

I don't:
a) see having your meaningless and unproductive (yet interesting for a variety of basic human reasons) criminal career and violent death (that is, ultimate failure) depicted in a movie as being a reward;
or b) understand the problem in the first place, with "rewarding" such behavior in this way, if it doesn't cause any real-world increase in antisocial behavior.

Like the other guy said, normal is boring. Almost every story is predicated on a character or the circumstances deviating from the norm in some way, that's when it becomes a story. Your buddy doesn't tell you about that time when everything was super normal and somebody was a productive member of society. Do you object to every story about crime or just ones where the characters are based on real people? It's a thing that happens, yet is not a part of the daily lives of the vast majority in the west, so people find it interesting. Harmless.

>>86253871
Both days? That sucks dude