A Decade Under the Influence

2003
A Decade Under the Influence
7.6| 3h0m| R| en| More Info
Released: 25 April 2003 Released
Producted By: Constant Communications
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

A documentary examining the decade of the 1970s as a turning point in American cinema. Some of today's best filmmakers interview the influential directors of that time.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Constant Communications

Trailers & Images

Reviews

MartinHafer This three-part documentary was produced for the Independent Film Channel and is about the American film industry during the late 60s to about 1980--give or take. It's clearly much more than a single decade despite the title. The first part is about the context for change in American films with the rise of international cinema and its influence on young filmmakers. The second about the freedom of the 70s and the gritty social dramas. And, the final portion is about the changes that brought about the death of this sort of filmmaking and a rise to giant corporately produced blockbusters. It's all very interesting and features not only directors but writers, producers and actors and I marveled at the large number of interviewees used in making the documentary. In fact, it really excels in an area in which most film documentaries fail--it gives plenty of time to the subject and you don't feel short-changed. My only real complaint is that although the people and films are OFTEN identified, this is not always the case--and unless you are very familiar with these people, you may forget who is who. This is not a problem for advanced film students and cinemaniacs like myself, but for the more casual viewer it might pose a minor inconvenience. Still, it's like sitting in an advanced film class where you learn at the feet of the masters. Fascinating throughout.By the way, although this film was clearly not intended for kids, I should warn the viewer that there are LOTS and LOTS of obscenities in the film---LOTS. So, for the very sensitive sorts, perhaps this isn't the film for you. Also, there are no close captions or DVD captions--which is a shame, as my deaf daughter could not enjoy this documentary.
christopher-underwood A surprisingly good documentary. My surprise was mainly due to the fact that I was confused by the title. I assumed this was about the influence of the drug culture on film making but no it is a much more far reaching and intelligent film than could have been expected. Demme has done a great job in encapsulating the period from the late 60s to the late 70s. From, 'Easy Rider' and the collapse of studio influence, through all those introspective 'real life' movies, where brilliant young directors tried to express themselves politically, sexually and artistically, through to the beginnings of the blockbuster and the return of the reigns to the money men and their studios. As someone who saw the 'real life' movies of Britain and the rest of Europe through the sixties and then the revolutionary US films of the 70s and is sad that the sequel to the sequel is so much the order of the day, this was a most fascinating film. The interview clips are measured (thanks to DVD the full interviews are available as extras!) and the film clips well considered. Also, as someone who has only just caught up with, 'Joe', I am impressed that this important little film gets its well deserved entry here.
cinebuff-3 The 1970s opened the door to the largest, most diverse era of film in its history. Some films were great ("The Godfather", "The Conversation", "Mean Streets", Chinatown", "The French Connection", "Five Easy Pieces", "Jaws", "McCabe And Mrs. Miller") Others were not so great ("The Getaway", "The Outfit", "Badge 373", "Joe", "The Taking Of Pelham One Two Three", "Brewster McCloud", "Castle Keep") And others were barely worth the price of admission.Yet every one was a fresh breath of air compared to today's Corporate Hollywood. Where every film is given a Big Weekend to recoup its cost. Or go straight to HBO and rental.What "Decade" does so well is to relate the sudden and rarely experienced sensation of freedom to be given money to make and direct a film. Perhaps personal. Perhaps not. Sometime with a clutch of extras. Sometimes, in the middle of a busy street before the cops show up. Long before the Corporate Overseers, Suits, Committees and Lawyers ever became part of "The System".The commentaries are superb. Especially Julie Christie and Dennis Hopper. Though as you listen, you'll slowly discover just how many Big Directors today (Coppola, Scorsese, Ron Howard, Dennis Hopper, Peter Bogdonovitch) got stated as "Roger Corman Commandos". Working long hours with short pay. Shooting a film in under a month. Learning all the steps and tricks of the trade by doing it themselves. Turning in product that was on-time and under-budget.See "Decade" for its message. And for a long and varied list of films to watch made through those wondrously turbulent years.Though, I would not complain if IFC decided to devote another documentary solely to that most under-rated Grand Pioneer of film, Roger Corman.
barbarella70 As it stands for right now, Ted Demme and Richard Lagravenese's valentine to 70's film and their makers is an almost average, almost dull look at an incredible moment in the history of cinema; I think even hardcore film buffs will be a bit disappointed, especially if they've seen Raging Bulls, Easy Riders which covers exactly the same territory with much more thoroughness and compulsively compelling narrative. It doesn't seem fair to judge what they've done considering this is a gutted version of what will be a three-part, three hour show on IFC sometime in August but as it stands 'Decade' serves as a celluloid 70'S MOVIES FOR DUMMIES for those who are curious.It walks the typical tightrope of grainy movie clips from beloved classics --The Godfather, Chinatown, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest-- intercut with that decade's most famous (and beautifully lit) characters --Robert Altman, Peter Bogdonovich, Francis Ford Coppola-- and yet there's no new observations or insight into that time or its films. For the first hour or so, you're slammed over the head again and again with their "We needed to shake up the old studio system, man!" message and the back-slapping, self-congratulatory machismo that runs rampant yet when shown the result of their anger and angst, it looks almost silly --i.e. Midnight Cowboy, Panic in Needle Park, Easy Rider-- and ADUTI comes dangerously close to nearly capsizing.The only moment where something fresh seems to be said comes when both Julie Christie and Ellen Burstyn comment on the lack of roles for women during this reverential pissing contest. A brief salute to Jane Fonda for They Shoot Horses, Don't They and Klute and Jill Clayburgh for An Unmarried Woman and suddenly it felt like the filmmakers were taking you down a street that's been closed for quite some time but then it was back to the world of Martin Scorsese, Paul Schrader, Peter Bogdonovich, William Friedkin, and Coppola. (Christie and Burstyn are only two out of four women interviewed for this documentary --the others being Polly Platt and Pam Grier-- and it makes you wonder why Gena Rowlands, Faye Dunaway, Diane Keaton, Liv Ullman, Shelley Duvall, and Fonda herself either declined or weren't even approached.)The best thing about ADUTI is its never-given-its-full-due undercurrent in how most of today's filmmakers and actors are confronted with the same b******* these mavericks were in their struggle for personal vision and expression. Where are our "Klute"'s and "Scarecrow"'s and "Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice"'s and "Network"'s in this A Beautiful Mind/Gladiator/Braveheart/Chicago movie world.Maybe the full, unedited show will be more satisfying.