MovieChat Forums > The Conversation (1974) Discussion > Paper-thin content and ideas

Paper-thin content and ideas

posted 9 years ago by Roonil_Wazlib_97
2 replies | jump to latest

I thought the film was simply paper-thin in terms of content and ideas:

- We see the way a surveillance expert works. This can be conveyed in 5 minutes. Instead there are endless scenes that consist of nothing but seeing him work on the same tape.

- We see that this man has a moral conflict about whether he's complicit in what might result from his surveillance. That's fine but when this conflict is static (he's simply in a conflicted state - there are no developments to that conflict) it can't fill up a 2 hours running time.

- We see the irony of the protagonist making a living out of spying on others but being extremely anxious and angered when it comes to someone having access to his personal life and home. It’s a potent idea. But it fully came across in the first scene that brought it up: his phone call with the landlady about the key. Yet the movie keeps making the same point again and again and again.

- We have a twist at the end which is a basic thriller surprise element. But the movie is very unconcerned with having the thrills and rythms of a thriller. So what did the twist add to the film? Nothing that I can think of. The victims turned out to be the perpetrators. So? What did the viewer gain?

What else is there that made this movie appeal to so many viewers and critics? Sure it would have made a fine 20-30 mins film but as it is, there’s simply not enough meat there as far as I'm concerned and it's pretty dull as a result. A 4/10 for me.

[–] dyahrmarkt 9 years ago

1) It's fascinating to watch people do things. '70s films were full of those kinds of films (see "The French Connection", et al).

2) What makes the film interesting is watching how it detroys him. Surely there is a development there. He goes from being cold and objective to deeply and totally immersed by guilt and paranoia. His slide towards the bottom *is* the film.

3) The same points may be made again and again to reinforce the fact that Harry isn't as good at his job as he thinks he is. In fact, he's quite incompetent, "best bugger on the west coast" or not.

4) Again, you're missing the point. The movie isn't terribly concerned with the plot so much as Harry's slide towards oblivion. The twist serves as a very important catalyst to bring out Harry's deepest fear - that he is truly, utterly being watched by one who *knows* - his Catholic upbringing made tangible reality.

**It's too bad you didn't get anything out of this movie. It's one of the great films of the 1970s.
Please nest your IMDB page, and respond to the correct person -

[–] Roonil_Wazlib_97 9 years ago

2) I guess this is a case of different viewers having different viewing experiences. It felt static to me. It’s all based on the same tape, the same suspicion from the beginning. Nothing new comes into play (until the twist). I didn't feel he was that cold and objective at the start. He starts feeling bad as soon as he starts working on the tape. Yes his guilt increases with time, but wasn't it present from the start? The mention of his past New York job, his obsession with the current tape, his confession, his dream, his trip to the hotel room... all the same point: he's feeling guilty. We get it!

4)

The twist serves as a very important catalyst to bring out Harry's deepest fear - that he is truly, utterly being watched by one who *knows* - his Catholic upbringing made tangible reality.

That's an interesting point. But it would have been the same without the twist reversing the roles of the victims/killers. He'd be watched by the people who would have killed the couple.

That said, I feel a bit different about the twist now after discussing it on another board and thinking about it. I think it speaks to the idea that the truth is often not what it seems even after precise observation and details. Which is an intrinsic failure of surveillance. It shows how dangerous it is to act on conclusions from surveillance, circumstantial evidence, etc.