MovieChat Forums > Taxi Driver (1976) Discussion > The 70's

The 70's

posted 6 years ago by LetThemEatCake (2717)
9 replies | jump to latest

I hear this over and over and over again, mostly by loser fanboys that see in DeNiro, Fincher, Nolan, the man of their dreams and who, predictably, haven't seen anything done prior to 1970. Charlatans like that worm looking director that recently got accused of sexual assault also promote this lie. Now the 70's is the decade that established the modern style of filmmaking, it did away with the classical style, and all films since are in the language of the 70's, but that's not saying much given the execrable quality of modern day filmmaking.

What the 70's gave us was basically ugly grainy photography, explicit violence, jump cuts and annoying closeups of irrelevant actions as a way to give an "artsy" mood, that's it. At the end of the day, this is NOT the best style to effectively tell a story or to create art, the classical style, from silent films to late 1960's, is. They got it right. How do I know? Because when you spend a year looking at those old films like I have, the post 70's films become unwatchable, since the style is so jarring, you are reminded there's a camera with EVERY SINGLE SHOT. It's awful.

So educate yourselves and stop lusting for Fincher or Nolan's cock.

[–] LemmyLugosi (411) 6 years ago

Are you talkin' ta me?

[–] LetThemEatCake (2717) 6 years ago

Another dubious achievement of the 70's was to basically strip films away off women. Never again did we see the likes of the characters played by Garbo, Crawford, Davis, Elizabeth Taylor and many other legends. Films became 100% male, female characters were relegated to supporting players as the girl with very few lines. In fact, I can't think of a single female starring role from the 70's onwards, maybe Faye Dunaway in Mommie Dearest?

Neo moronic feminists need to do their homework because male driven cinema is a recent phenomenon, prior to the 70's there was true equality.

[–] snepts (11123) 5 years ago

Now wait a sec. There must be hundreds of movies from the 70's on where Women were the Top Billing. Jane Fonda? Julia Roberts? Need I say more?

[–] Underdog_73 (756) 5 years ago

Julia Roberts? How old do you think she is?

[–] snepts (11123) 5 years ago

She's 8 years younger than me, which makes her 51 now and she was 9 when TD came out. So JR wasn't the best example to use - technically. But I don't think it's hard to think of women who were top billed in almost any decade. Maybe not the 60s. But Sally Field was a big star in the 70s (at least I hope she was).

[–] FredBurroughs (19699) 6 years ago

This movie made me lust for Jodie Foster's cock. On a related note, I think a remake of this movie (shot digitally, of course) with Tommy Wiseau in Harvey Keitel's role would work.

[–] KD637 (488) 5 years ago

You sir, are a genius.

[–] Alex (1477) 4 years ago

Anyway, how's your sex life? Wanna tear up this Lisa? :D :D :D

[–] liscarkat (16496) 4 years ago

There was some good stuff from the '70s, but yeah, a lot of schlock was introduced to the movies that persists to this day and not only doesn't make them any better than movies of the '60s and earlier, it makes them worse. But nothing is so bad as the practice that seems to have begun in the 1990s or early 2000s of intentionally making it difficult or impossible to understand what people are saying. Actors are frequently mumbling, or the background sound is too loud, or the music is drowning them out, or a combination of all three. There is no technological excuse for this--there are many movies in existence that are from eighty to ninety years old, in which every word of dialogue is clearly audible. There is no artistic excuse--making dialogue unintelligible, a fundamental failure to communicate, does not enhance the artistic quality of a film. It's just plain stupid film making.