This movie sucked, why the hell does it have 8 stars?

[deleted]

you dumbass *beep*

"This film was very controversial at the time of its release and the degree of violence depicted had never before gone that far. It caused a shift in filmmaking and what could be shown on film. It is a classic that has greatly influenced American film."

Thank you, nicole33, for saying it so succinctly. I saw this in the movies in 1967, and let me assure you it was an experience I've never forgotten - a true watershed both for myself and the cinema.

"I don't use a pen: I write with a goose quill dipped in venom!"---Waldo Lydecker

"This film was very controversial at the time of its release and the degree of violence depicted had never before gone that far. It caused a shift in filmmaking and what could be shown on film. It is a classic that has greatly influenced American film."

This is probably why I'll resist from slagging the movie completely. Otherwise though and subjectively speaking, the movie did nothing for me. I really didn't feel anything for anyone. Towards the end of the movie, I was dearly hoping for the title duo to be riddled with bullets.

---
Instant fail words: overrated, major flaw, plot hole

It has influence American film, and much for the worse. Up until that time, it was the most violent movie ever produced, and had an incredible shock value. I saw it at age 11, have only seen it once, and can never forget the disgust of seeing a man shot in the mouth on the running board.
But it romanticized a particularly craven episode of American history, and I also can't forget my older sister's lament at their deaths: "...but they were in love,"
never taking into account the many lives they'd shattered with robberies of people's meager savings during a worldwide depression, and the murdering and maiming of several others.
Yet even now, people use such words as, "daring," "groundbreaking," "cinematic genius," and other such nonsense.
It was a well-marketed snuff flick, glorifying behaviors that none of us would really like to be involved in. It was an utter waste of two hours and lifelong memory.

[deleted]

Said perfectly!

Oh, and thrill me.

Not just "at the time." Even by today's standards, it's pretty violent, particularly the ending.

I have no opionon really of note. I watch it from time to time to see warren beatty :) I also love the randomness of it. one minute clyde is stealling bonnie's mom's car, the next minute she's walking to the shops with him, watching him rob someone..how sweet.

Another cool scene was when Clyde brings the bank teller out at gunpoint,to explain to bonnie why there's no money in the bank. how romantic.but yes, maybe it is a bit overrated!!!


when the lord closes a door, somewhere he opens a window - Julie Andrews, the sound of music

[deleted]

the fact that this movie was "controversial at the time of its release and the degree of violence depicted had never before gone that far" (pfffff) doesn't make it a good movie.. u must have many many other factors which i'm not going in to right now... So if u really like this movie and u think it's a classic just cause it has more blood and violence scenes than any other movies in it's days, then you should understand what a classic means...REQUIEM FOR A DREAM, DOGVILLE, OLDBOY, A SPACE ODYSSEY, Dr. Strangelove....now these are classics
so just comparing it to all of these is really really immature..
really GROW UUP!!!!!!!!!

Reefer madness was a propaganda flick, a completely ridiculous one that, I feel is completely unenjoyable as cinema, and to even appreciate it at all... You have to be really high I guess, and that might not even do the trick. Either way, Requiem on the other hand wasn't trying to demonize drug use, it just made an intense drama out of the situation. And that's it's power, it's drama. Many people, by the time the credits roll in Requiem, they're in some sort of cinematic shock for a minute. Not saying it was the greatest movie ever or anything, but it does have what I think are some really powerful emotions. You can't compare that to Reefer Madness. Personally I think Requiem should be Top 50. This is not related to Bonnie and Clyde but I just wanted to point out, I hate anti-drug stuff but Requiem for a Dream is absolutely amazing no matter how many times I watch it

Well said dstcroix.
I had to watch this film today at university and my lecturer - who is the course leader and has worked in Hollywood as a writer - described it as a classic, and I can understand why. The story was based on truth, but also adapted to capture the "spirit of the time". It wasn't met with great reviews in the U.S when submitted, but the Europeans (who at the time had a more developed culture e.g the beatles etc.) loved it and that's probably one of the reasons it's a classic; you have to look at the film not just as it stands but in it's true dramatic depth to really understand what was intended during the production. Don't forget that it is a dramatic portrayal of true events, true characters and their lives.

^Is that supposed to be your sad attempt at an explanation for the IMDB population's consensus of the film? And then you cite a movie released less than ten years after to illustrate what I presume is some sort of "opposing" example. WTF.

[deleted]