In this review of the 1967 movie Bonnie and Clyde it discuses how the film by Warner Brothers intertainment was a "slapstick comedy" and that it was not a real representation of the actual film. It also goes on to say that "Arthur Penn, the agressive director, has evidently gone out of his way to splash the comedy holdups with smears of vivid blood as astonished people are machine-guned." This movie review is bashing the film for its contents and not what it is good for, saying that this film is a slapstick comedy is like saying the godfather is funny. But then at the end of the article the author goes on to say that "This is the film that opened the Montreal Film Festival!" So what is he really saying? I believe the author is torn from this film because of its vast differences of any other film in the late 1960's. Movies back then were not as graphic or grusome but if they were they were nothing like some mid west bank robbers. Non the less this film has changed the way critics think and the way movies have been made ever since that time on. It should be one of the most recognized films in the world.
Sources:
http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=EE05E7DF173CE361BC4C52DFB266838C679EDE
No comments:
Post a Comment