Advanced Search
Help

Knowledge

Knowledge Base
   Movies
     A
       A Decade Under The Influence


Articles





A Decade Under The Influence

Message Board
News
Links
Pictures
Multimedia
Feedback


a+decade+under+the+influence
Year: 2003

Directed:

- Richard LaGravenese
- Ted Demme

Actors/Actresses:

- William Friedkin




Shallow & self-serving & so disappointing.

I can only agree with those other viewers who found major gaps & omissions in the "documentary". No mention of Michael Ritchie or John Boorman that I could see. But lots of footage of "hot" & "trendy" folks like Mazursky, Avilsen & Hopper. Even the bit of commentary from Friedkin, Altmen & Coppola that might have given this effort some real substance is too slight & superficial to matter. It's stuff you've read or heard a thousand times before.
Too bad. They really blew it.


An incomplete look at a pivotal cultural moment

This quick, glitzy documentary, which looks at the maverick filmmaking that reshaped Hollywood in the late 1960s and throughout the '70s, has its ups and downs. At first I thought the lack of a central narrative voice, "telling" us what we're supposed to know, was kind of cool: "Yeah," I thought, "We're smart enough to understand what happened, and all these intelligent, thoughtful rebel filmmakers -- Coppola, Scorcese, Altman, Hopper, Dern, Eastwood, et al. -- can guide us through the history better than any dumb old narrator can... After all, they *lived* it, man...!!" But, sadly, this was not true: by the end of the three segments, I felt a little lost, and even a little cheated... I wasn't really sure what these advocates of independent cinema were trying to tell me, and while the parade of film clips and archival artwork (wish I'd taken notes!) was entertaining, it wasn't particularly well contextualized. The story arc, as such, was that Hollywood, having lost its bearings (and ability to produce hit movies) by the mid-1960s, almost accidentally discovered the rich offerings of low-budget, independent cinema. Suddenly, young, unproven writers and directors were given unfettered creative license, and throughout the 1970s they pushed the boundaries of artistic expression, breaking down taboos against exploring sexual, political and drug-related themes, as well as demolishing the boundaries of language and onscreen violence. Then, as the '80s opened, the push towards producing blockbuster hits reestablished the dominance of the old studio system. But the material between these central points is a diffuse parade of spectacle and insider asides, not as well structured or as informative as it could have been.
Also, on a technical note, why was the DVD version so hard to navigate? What was up with having to start up each segment of this film separately? Watching it on VHS might actually have been more rewarding...


WILL SMITH FILM FANS WILL NOT APPRECIATE THIS DOCUMENTARY

I was mesmerized by it all, plus I added several films to "My List" [of films to watch]. What a fantastic compilation of clips and testimony to mid-20th Century film. Going from films of the squeaky 50's and early 60's like Liz Taylor's "Giant", and Doris Day's "Pillow Talk", to darker, deeper films like "Midnight Cowboy", "Easy Rider", or "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" was a trippy journey, and the documentary takes you from one end to the other, and not without adequate homage to our European influences (the Europeans were at least a decade ahead of us/they had Fellini's art while we STILL had Doris Day's ever-lasting virginity).
There is no way to compile this cinematic metamorphosis in a single DVD, so the complaint that this was all too vague is asking for too much on one plate. For what this is, this is a brilliant, enlightening, delightful trip into America's film past.
So how could anyone not enjoy this compelling documentary? I suppose if you liked "Independence Day" you probably couldn't appreciate it.


Shallow ; self-serving ; so disappointing.

I can only agree with those other viewers who found major gaps ; omissions in the "documentary". No mention of Michael Ritchie or John Boorman that I could see. But lots of footage of "hot" ; "trendy" folks like Mazursky, Avilsen ; Hopper. Even the bit of commentary from Friedkin, Altmen ; Coppola that might have given this effort some real substance is too slight ; superficial to matter. It's stuff you've read or heard a thousand times before.P>Too bad. They really blew it.






Buy A Decade Under The Influence at Amazon.com
Buy posters at Allposters.com
Jamster - the latest ringtones for your phone!

Amazon.com






Search with Walhello on the Internet on A Decade Under The Influence
Search with the Priority Search Engine on A Decade Under The Influence




This page in other languages: Suomeksi | Nederlands | Deutsch



About Walhello | Add URL | Advertising | Searchbox | Terms | Feedback

International: Danmark | Deutschland | España | France | Italia | Nederland | Norge | Russia | Suomi | Sverige | USA

Partner websites:Autowebdir.com | Gnibo.com | PrioritySearchEngine.com

 
Copyright (c) 2000-2008 Walhello.com, All rights reserved