His final line speaks to something that I think we all look for in cinema-a duality that is both current and timeless. Movies still “do not very often reflect the full range of human life.” And when Roger writes about the “curiously bloodless quality” of American movies of 1967, it’s not hard to think about how much the PG-13 summer blockbuster still retains that tone. ![]() In that sense it is both a piece of criticism that speaks very much to the culture of 1967 and the timelessness of why we go to the movies at the same time. There’s nothing that feels five-decades-old about it. Much has been written about how much Roger served as a tastemaker, often sensing changes in the industry before writers or even filmmakers saw them coming, but what I find still remarkable about his writing on “Bonnie and Clyde” is how much it reads like something that could be published today. As you might imagine, I often find myself going back to some of Roger’s best reviews, noting how delicately he could balance a conversational turn of phrase with deeply intellectual insight, and “Bonnie and Clyde” remains a timeless piece of film criticism.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |