What do you think?
Rate this book
Opening Wednesday at a Theater Or Drive-In Near You: The Shadow Cinema of the American '70s
When we think of ’70s cinema, we think of classics like The Godfather, Taxi Driver, and The Wild Bunch . . . but the riches found in the overlooked B movies of the time, rolled out wherever they might find an audience, unexpectedly tell an eye-opening story about post-Watergate, post-Vietnam America. Revisiting the films that don't make the Academy Award montages, Charles Taylor finds a treasury many of us have forgotten, movies that in fact “unlock the secrets of the times.”
Celebrated film critic Taylor pays homage to the trucker vigilantes, meat magnate pimps, blaxploitation “angel avengers,” and taciturn factory workers of grungy, unartful B films such as Prime Cut, Foxy Brown, and Eyes of Laura Mars. He creates a compelling argument for what matters in moviemaking and brings a pivotal American era vividly to life in all its gritty, melancholy complexity.
Celebrated film critic Taylor pays homage to the trucker vigilantes, meat magnate pimps, blaxploitation “angel avengers,” and taciturn factory workers of grungy, unartful B films such as Prime Cut, Foxy Brown, and Eyes of Laura Mars. He creates a compelling argument for what matters in moviemaking and brings a pivotal American era vividly to life in all its gritty, melancholy complexity.
199 pages, Hardcover
First published June 6, 2017
34 people are currently reading
951 people want to read
About the author
Charles Taylor
3 books15 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.
Charles Taylor is a journalist and film critic. He is a member of the National Society of Film Critics, and has contributed to several of the Society’s volumes. He has taught journalism and literature courses at the New School and the Columbia School of Journalism and is now connected to the Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute, New York University.
Charles Taylor is a journalist and film critic. He is a member of the National Society of Film Critics, and has contributed to several of the Society’s volumes. He has taught journalism and literature courses at the New School and the Columbia School of Journalism and is now connected to the Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute, New York University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 64 reviews
May 26, 2017
Any one of the essays, taken singly, would be a great essay with powerful and convincing interpretations on the B-movie it was analyzing. Put them all in a book and read them back-to-back, though, and the condescension and arrogance build up to the point of toxicity. The writing is good, the movies and Taylor's analyses are interesting (some more than others), but ultimately it comes across as an elitist old-man hipster complaining about the modern world, how popular trends are all garbage, and how true 'art' died in his childhood.
Taylor praises all the movies you would expect a 40-something film aficionado to praise, and looks down his nose (far, far down) on all the films you would expect a hipster who hates anything popular to hate. The weight of his arguments began losing pounds as soon as these knee-jerk biases were part of his analytical framework.
He has clearly spent countless hours searching for and analyzing obscure meaning and allegories in the low-budget, low-expectation movies of the 70s, but true to haughty disdain form he refuses to entertain the idea that some of those adolescent-aimed blockbusters of the past 40 years possessed any merit or art whatsoever. It's a typical and shallow approach/conclusion among a certain type of person, and once it became clear Taylor was among this snobbish, pompous class of movie-fan I began to lose interest in his truly well-written and interesting (if not always sound) interpretation of these B-films he so clearly admires. Which is too bad, because (individually) the essays do make you think about connections and cultures and times you would not have necessarily made (right or wrong, the opinions are interesting).
It's not a bad book, I suppose I just know too many people who talk about movies, music, art, (etc, etc, etc) in the exact same tone; the tone that says "I am right, my opinion is fact, and anyone who disagrees with me is obviously an idiot." And, honestly, I derive very little enjoyment from those discussions (because they are never true discussions) and exhortations, and it is not a tone I find enjoyable or enlightening in books, movies, music, or art.
Taylor praises all the movies you would expect a 40-something film aficionado to praise, and looks down his nose (far, far down) on all the films you would expect a hipster who hates anything popular to hate. The weight of his arguments began losing pounds as soon as these knee-jerk biases were part of his analytical framework.
He has clearly spent countless hours searching for and analyzing obscure meaning and allegories in the low-budget, low-expectation movies of the 70s, but true to haughty disdain form he refuses to entertain the idea that some of those adolescent-aimed blockbusters of the past 40 years possessed any merit or art whatsoever. It's a typical and shallow approach/conclusion among a certain type of person, and once it became clear Taylor was among this snobbish, pompous class of movie-fan I began to lose interest in his truly well-written and interesting (if not always sound) interpretation of these B-films he so clearly admires. Which is too bad, because (individually) the essays do make you think about connections and cultures and times you would not have necessarily made (right or wrong, the opinions are interesting).
It's not a bad book, I suppose I just know too many people who talk about movies, music, art, (etc, etc, etc) in the exact same tone; the tone that says "I am right, my opinion is fact, and anyone who disagrees with me is obviously an idiot." And, honestly, I derive very little enjoyment from those discussions (because they are never true discussions) and exhortations, and it is not a tone I find enjoyable or enlightening in books, movies, music, or art.
August 16, 2017
This would have gotten 4 stars if not for the conclusion.
I mostly enjoyed reading this book. Anybody who appreciates "Ulzana's Raid" is okay with me. He did a good job writing about that one and "Hard Times," and he's persuaded me to give "Eyes of Laura Mars" and "Citizen's Band" a try. (And to give "Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia" a second try.)
Then we reached the conclusion. Everything that has gone wrong with American movies is the fault of "Star Wars," and everything that's gone wrong with American society is the fault of Ronald Reagan.
Guess what, there were good movies made after 1977. Plenty of them. And to blame everything on Reagan seems to overlook the fact that Clinton and Obama were President at some point during the last 40 years as well.
Yes, movies have changed, and how we relate to them has changed, but that is the result of factors like globalization and the rise of new technology as much as one movie. (And he even talks about how "Two Lane Blacktop" finally found its audience thanks to people watching it by themselves on home video.)
Anyway, he threw away the goodwill he had earned with me.
I mostly enjoyed reading this book. Anybody who appreciates "Ulzana's Raid" is okay with me. He did a good job writing about that one and "Hard Times," and he's persuaded me to give "Eyes of Laura Mars" and "Citizen's Band" a try. (And to give "Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia" a second try.)
Then we reached the conclusion. Everything that has gone wrong with American movies is the fault of "Star Wars," and everything that's gone wrong with American society is the fault of Ronald Reagan.
Guess what, there were good movies made after 1977. Plenty of them. And to blame everything on Reagan seems to overlook the fact that Clinton and Obama were President at some point during the last 40 years as well.
Yes, movies have changed, and how we relate to them has changed, but that is the result of factors like globalization and the rise of new technology as much as one movie. (And he even talks about how "Two Lane Blacktop" finally found its audience thanks to people watching it by themselves on home video.)
Anyway, he threw away the goodwill he had earned with me.
January 19, 2018
There are some really good insights into the listed here. Unfortunately, many of them are punctuated with half-hearted apologies for them not being the true greats of the '70s and even more dismissal of more recent cinema and culture moments that are tedious enough as to substantially lessen any excitement I might have had to find those insights all in one place.
January 9, 2018
This book was a great start. I think the seventies were the golden age of cinema and was hoping for a thorough examination of the grindhouse b-movie genre. It had good information, but was sorely incomplete. There were scattered, brief discussions about a handful of movies. I just wanted more.
July 30, 2020
Charles Taylor's, "Opening Wednesday at a Theater Or Drive-In Near You: The Shadow Cinema of the American 1970s", was a piece that if I should take anything away from it, it would be to write with as much passion and such language as Taylor has done about what he treasures and dubs one of the last great eras in Hollywood history.
Taylor makes his theory of how we consume rather than engage with what is released in most theaters (and on streaming sites) crystal clear in how his essays and posed questions to the reader show a love for an time gone by. A time where the innocence of the audiences was challenged and lost, a time where cinema offered you a reality different from the era before, and the Reagan era cinema afterwards to today. A time where we shared a communal experience rather than the small screens of our individual phones. A time of discussion and study, compared to a quick thumbs up or down on a social media post. The films he paints vivid pictures of from his time in the theater and in the drive-in are gritty, grungy, raw, and at times far from the 'happily ever after' that those in power believe we want and want to see.
For all points Taylor made, and several I agree with as a film school alumni, film history buff, and self-proclaimed film analyst, there are some that I am sure he too would not fully be free from a level of hypocrisy. Even the most seasoned of writers and filmmakers have movies that they enjoy for the sheer mindlessness of it. Sometimes you want a film with little to no sound plot or production value. I am sure Taylor has a few titles that come to mind that fit this description, that have a place in his heart.
Nevertheless, what Taylor has composed is a lesson in film analysis for those who want to be critics and film historians/advocates. As a member of a film festival submission committee, I found that once I started this book my first review of a submission looked a level above what I had been writing in the past. I owe that to the storytelling and writing skills of Taylor, and to A.T. Chandler's narration in how it shared the emotional tones of the author when reflecting on the films of his youth.
I do plan on watching most if not all of the films mentioned in each essay, as I have not screened any of them and would like to experience their gorgeous grime for myself before concluding my own investigation into the cinema of the 1970's, as a amateur film critic, and as a consumer of films inside and outside of the drive-in parking lot.
Taylor makes his theory of how we consume rather than engage with what is released in most theaters (and on streaming sites) crystal clear in how his essays and posed questions to the reader show a love for an time gone by. A time where the innocence of the audiences was challenged and lost, a time where cinema offered you a reality different from the era before, and the Reagan era cinema afterwards to today. A time where we shared a communal experience rather than the small screens of our individual phones. A time of discussion and study, compared to a quick thumbs up or down on a social media post. The films he paints vivid pictures of from his time in the theater and in the drive-in are gritty, grungy, raw, and at times far from the 'happily ever after' that those in power believe we want and want to see.
For all points Taylor made, and several I agree with as a film school alumni, film history buff, and self-proclaimed film analyst, there are some that I am sure he too would not fully be free from a level of hypocrisy. Even the most seasoned of writers and filmmakers have movies that they enjoy for the sheer mindlessness of it. Sometimes you want a film with little to no sound plot or production value. I am sure Taylor has a few titles that come to mind that fit this description, that have a place in his heart.
Nevertheless, what Taylor has composed is a lesson in film analysis for those who want to be critics and film historians/advocates. As a member of a film festival submission committee, I found that once I started this book my first review of a submission looked a level above what I had been writing in the past. I owe that to the storytelling and writing skills of Taylor, and to A.T. Chandler's narration in how it shared the emotional tones of the author when reflecting on the films of his youth.
I do plan on watching most if not all of the films mentioned in each essay, as I have not screened any of them and would like to experience their gorgeous grime for myself before concluding my own investigation into the cinema of the 1970's, as a amateur film critic, and as a consumer of films inside and outside of the drive-in parking lot.
January 8, 2019
Oh boy. It’s like he doesn’t know how to address “the Black issue,” so he decides to make it an ode to Pam Grier. Except he focuses so fucking hard on all the times she was mistreated & he seems to revel in it just a bit too much. He talks about her acting chops over & over again, and yet every example is when she is being utterly destroyed—rape/heroin/whatever. & yes, he is pulling from Blaxploitation, but holy hell there has to be something else to prove your point. You’re just too comfortable and pleased with her misery, Charles Taylor. That whole chapter sits wrong, as does a whole bloody chapter about Cosby—which is, I might add, largely about his early television show, so why bother in a book about cinema?
& then he moves on to Peckinpah, allowing us to examine his misogyny just long enough to say that we should forgive/ignore it all for the sake of art. He goes on to state that Peckinpah implying women are stronger than men forgives the horrible things he puts said women through to prove this. Like, do you just like the depiction of rape on screen, Charles? Or being able to use the word “hooker” with abandon? Is that what you truly miss about the seventies?
& yes, we are looking back on it from a modern perspective, but so is he!
& that conclusion—what righteous bullshit. He certainly thinks there is a right & only way to watch movies & everything else is pedestrian. But guess what, Charles? Not everyone lives in a town where a multitude of movies will come to the multiplex, or even a town with a multiplex. Some of us have to watch at home, on TV screens and phone screens.
& for the love of Hitchcock, please stop sucking off Tarantino like he invented the ensemble cast ffs (in the same book where you touch on previous films that did it better, no less!).
Also, frankly, he hits on the same writers & directors chapter after chapter, so is it really about seventies shadow cinema, or just a small handful of directors? & that would be fine! But just call it as such & stop wanking to Faulkner. & maybe spend five minutes learning about a painter—any painter!— other than Edward Hopper, eh?
July 20, 2017
Though it suffers from a bit of "Old man yells at cloud", especially in the wrap-up chapter, this is truly a great book. Each chapter tells you of a film, as well as a constellation of stories which provide context for the film within the world of American cinema. Taylor tells this so well that I never wanted to read more than one chapter at a time, as I was always left wanting to savor the lingering mood his powerful prose creates - kind of like how you feel after having seen a truly great film!
And boy do I want to see many of the films discussed in this book, regardless of having been told several key moments etc. The couple of chapters on films I had already seen were plenty illuminating as well but, as he says at the introduction, it really doesn't matter if you've seen these films - odds are you haven't, as he is intentionally going for lesser known works.
If you want to better understand the appeal of a classic period of cinema's "lowbrow" fare, and the America that produced it, you should definitely pick this up.
And boy do I want to see many of the films discussed in this book, regardless of having been told several key moments etc. The couple of chapters on films I had already seen were plenty illuminating as well but, as he says at the introduction, it really doesn't matter if you've seen these films - odds are you haven't, as he is intentionally going for lesser known works.
If you want to better understand the appeal of a classic period of cinema's "lowbrow" fare, and the America that produced it, you should definitely pick this up.
June 28, 2017
This book is not t a "book/novel", but a collection of wonderful essays. The Author will have you wanting to find and watch all of these movies and after watching the movies youself, you will want to reread this collection.
July 26, 2019
Lively stuff, for essays on movies I haven't seen. Good writing and compelling me to search out some of these
July 16, 2017
4.5 stars. An antidote to today's box-office-obsessed movie coverage and a much appreciated acknowledgement of the power of castoff films from an earlier era. I don't share Taylor's politics - his recourse to movie-culture-as-defined-by-Reagan smacks too much of my late '80s/early '90s film studies curriculum - but his willingness to skewer his own side's inability to see nuance and thematic shades of gray in films they embrace as simpatico with their own worldview goes a long way with me. I've seen a few of the films covered in Taylor's collection, and I nodded along with much of his commentary on those movies. But the book's highlight is Taylor's essay on the unseen-by-me "Ulzana's Raid." If the film's half as good as Taylor's essay, it's got to be some kind of masterpiece.
April 21, 2018
This is a dandy look at those 1970s B flicks, seemingly created as disposable entertainment, that broke rules and defined the look and feel of a certain sort of film for at least 20 years. Solid reading.
Read
March 22, 2019👀read with eyes
November 27, 2017
while charles taylor can get a little greil marcus at times, opening wednesday is the most involving book on film i've read in ages. the best film books make you want to seek out the films you've already seen, in order to view them with new eyes, but the really great ones make you feel as if you're missing out by having missed others.
there's definitely a new list of movies to see after reading taylor's book. anyone who could make a film like citizen's band seem like necessary viewing deserves all the credit in the world for their writing, and the way opening wednesday simply and ably articulates vanishing point's perfection had me wanting to set the book down and rewatch it immediately. however, it's such an involving read, i had to see what the next films were, instead.
the homage to pam grier is amazing and kind of sad and you should probably watch jackie brown again.
there's definitely a new list of movies to see after reading taylor's book. anyone who could make a film like citizen's band seem like necessary viewing deserves all the credit in the world for their writing, and the way opening wednesday simply and ably articulates vanishing point's perfection had me wanting to set the book down and rewatch it immediately. however, it's such an involving read, i had to see what the next films were, instead.
the homage to pam grier is amazing and kind of sad and you should probably watch jackie brown again.
March 5, 2018
While I appreciate the author using this book to speak ill of Ronald Reagan and champion un-loved movies, ultimately this book didn't quite do it for me. While the writing was lovely and Taylor seems deeply knowledgeable about film, it was still an overly simple analysis of how great underground films were in the 70's versus the drivel that is pumped out today. He partly blames the source of all of our current cinematic trouble on Stars Wars and the Reagan-era that followed, but that sentiment doesn't make sense given Star Wars came out during the Carter administration. If the Reagan 80's was dominated by dumbed-down, suspended adolescence drivel, it is more likely a response to the huge popularity of Star Wars.
The films he focuses are on fascinating cultural examples of the 1970's. Granted, I haven't seen any of these movies, but based on his descriptions, I can see why he picked them. They are messy, filled with unsavory characters, often working class people and reflecting a broken down America. The case he makes for these largely unloved movies are compelling. You definitely want to see them after reading this book. However, as someone pointed out in another review, the book is framed by the idea that movies were more interesting and reflective of the everyday lives of Americans in the 70's than they are today - which is ultimately a pretty broad, overly simplistic view.
Lastly, the way he describes the role of female characters in these movies leaves me to think the 70's weren't a great time for roles for women. Taylor exults the virtues of quite a few movies about brooding men on the open road, or brooding criminal men who dally with prostitutes. It is a bit disappointing that he didn't pick up on that in his analysis.
The films he focuses are on fascinating cultural examples of the 1970's. Granted, I haven't seen any of these movies, but based on his descriptions, I can see why he picked them. They are messy, filled with unsavory characters, often working class people and reflecting a broken down America. The case he makes for these largely unloved movies are compelling. You definitely want to see them after reading this book. However, as someone pointed out in another review, the book is framed by the idea that movies were more interesting and reflective of the everyday lives of Americans in the 70's than they are today - which is ultimately a pretty broad, overly simplistic view.
Lastly, the way he describes the role of female characters in these movies leaves me to think the 70's weren't a great time for roles for women. Taylor exults the virtues of quite a few movies about brooding men on the open road, or brooding criminal men who dally with prostitutes. It is a bit disappointing that he didn't pick up on that in his analysis.
April 26, 2018
Charles Taylor's Opening Wednesday at a Theater or Drive-In Near You is a great film book for those who...hate movies. A look at some of the disreputable B movies of the 70s (even though most of the films discussed aren't actually B movies) topped with a heaping scoop of "old man yelling about how they don't make 'em like they used to" epilogue. Now, 70s American cinema IS the pinnacle of the medium and there is a lot of enjoyment to be gleaned reading about the (often, but not always) interesting films selected here. What cinephile wouldn't enjoy reading about the grimy Prime Cut or Pam Grier or Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia? I mean, any book that even obliquely touches on Lee Marvin and/or Warren Oates is worth a perusal, right? Taylor makes an admirable effort at tying the films to American society/politics of the 70s, but when it comes to films in general, whoa boy, it's hard to avoid the Armond White-ish stench. Pretty much all modern films are trash (althought somehow The Skeleton Key is as good a ghost story as any made since the original The Haunting………, Chinatown is merely a "self-satisfied grotesquerie" and some other howlers about how audiences of the 70s would have understood why a movie character wouldn't trust the police, unlike audiences of today (a statement demonstrating an avoidance of any film,TV show, or news program from the last five or thirty years) and that...wait for it...the 1976 remake of King Kong is "for my money, the best of all three versions"(!?) Ultimately, one of the more disappointing books I have read, taking a very interesting subject and selection of films, and then merely telling you how movies suck.
May 30, 2018
A cry for appreciation of trashy 70s movies that pushes far too hard for its thesis. Taylor wants to make the case for these B-movies as synecdoches of the struggles of the 70s, showing a gritty mirror of reality that is sorely lacking in today's blockbuster box office.
While many of the movies do prove open to deeper analysis than they're usually given credit for, Taylor leans too hard on them, praising their reach and impact even though most were initally epic failures lasting a couple weeks in theatres. A lot of modern films just as ambitious suffer the same fate, trumped by more generic, palatable fare.
This would work much better by simply staying on the subversive critiques these films offer, but sandwiched between Taylor's nostalgic pining for a golden age of B-movie success he does nothing to prove actually existed harms his point immensely.
Yes, trashy films can contain multitudes. No, this isn't a one-time era. There will always be such movies, from They Live in the late 80s to the modern Purge franchise.
The book works much better as standalone deep dives into the depths of "shallow" films. Ignore the waxing nostalgic, and appreciate the film criticism and you have a good book.
While many of the movies do prove open to deeper analysis than they're usually given credit for, Taylor leans too hard on them, praising their reach and impact even though most were initally epic failures lasting a couple weeks in theatres. A lot of modern films just as ambitious suffer the same fate, trumped by more generic, palatable fare.
This would work much better by simply staying on the subversive critiques these films offer, but sandwiched between Taylor's nostalgic pining for a golden age of B-movie success he does nothing to prove actually existed harms his point immensely.
Yes, trashy films can contain multitudes. No, this isn't a one-time era. There will always be such movies, from They Live in the late 80s to the modern Purge franchise.
The book works much better as standalone deep dives into the depths of "shallow" films. Ignore the waxing nostalgic, and appreciate the film criticism and you have a good book.
August 20, 2022
I started reading Charley's film criticism 20 years ago when he wrote for Salon. Like his then-wife and Salon colleague Stephanie Zacharek, he was a terrific writer who (one could not help but notice) parroted many of Pauline Kael's views. It came as no surprise to learn that he was an acolyte. Taylor frequently bristled at the label, claimed that he disagreed with Kael all the time. This book, while overlapping with the height of the Kael era, shows where Taylor diverges with his friend and mentor (kind words for John Ford!) and truly finding his own voice. Some of his representative choices from the 70s actually weren't the drive-in B-movie variety. He avoids the likes of Roger Corman and focuses instead on "artful" B-movies, rather than embracing the genuinely disreputable. Nevertheless a compulsively readable book.
January 1, 2018
I think I read this book the wrong way. I'd have appreciated and understood it far more -- and gotten more out of it -- if I had read these essays after watching (or re-watching) the movies discussed. As just a collection of essays, I felt out of my depth, as though I'd woken up and realized I was in a masters level course without having any recollection of undergrad.
That said, I admire Charles Taylor's love of cinema and his passion for these (nearly) forgotten movies and a bygone era. Audiences for these movies still exist; you just have to go to Weird Wednesday at the Ritz in Austin (where Laird is as passionate, if not more so, for these films than Taylor) or the murky corners of the web. It's sad, but these movies aren't gone, and that's in large part to books and authors like this.
That said, I admire Charles Taylor's love of cinema and his passion for these (nearly) forgotten movies and a bygone era. Audiences for these movies still exist; you just have to go to Weird Wednesday at the Ritz in Austin (where Laird is as passionate, if not more so, for these films than Taylor) or the murky corners of the web. It's sad, but these movies aren't gone, and that's in large part to books and authors like this.
June 10, 2019
Taken one-at-time, each essay is a love-letter to the particular film it covers, revealing a depth of compassion and perception for films that flew under the 70’s critical radar. Essays on Vanishing Point, Hard Times, Two-Lane Blacktop, & Bring Me The Head Of Alfredo Garcia conformed to my own visceral reaction to them as complicated triumphs. Other essays gave me new films to add to my ever-growing to-watch list (Cisco Pike, Ulzana’s Raid).
The problem is with the tone of the book when taken as a whole. Particularly present in the author’s afterword but permeating the entire text is a sanctimonious ignorance/contempt for the state of contemporary cinema as if many a filmgoer didn’t sit through his favorite 70’s “trash” and pine for an earlier era as he now does. It is a closed minded cinemaphile who can’t find a plethora of great films throughout each decade of film’s existence.
The problem is with the tone of the book when taken as a whole. Particularly present in the author’s afterword but permeating the entire text is a sanctimonious ignorance/contempt for the state of contemporary cinema as if many a filmgoer didn’t sit through his favorite 70’s “trash” and pine for an earlier era as he now does. It is a closed minded cinemaphile who can’t find a plethora of great films throughout each decade of film’s existence.
June 25, 2017
This isn't really a cohesive novel; It's more of a collection of essays, each analyzing one (in some cases two) films that you've probably never heard of (Two-Lane Blacktop) and a couple you've undoubtedly heard of if the subject mater interest you (Foxy Brown.)
After reading a few essays back to back, the whole concept begins to feel heavy-handed and repetitive, and the author's voice will eventually become grating. Taken together, the essays are a good introduction to to some decent low-profile 70's B flicks, but the analysis itself feels overlong, snobbish, at times even condescending.
If you're a fan of these types of films, borrow it from you library or wait until you can pick up a cheap second hand copy. Others should pass by, they will miss nothing that would interest them.
After reading a few essays back to back, the whole concept begins to feel heavy-handed and repetitive, and the author's voice will eventually become grating. Taken together, the essays are a good introduction to to some decent low-profile 70's B flicks, but the analysis itself feels overlong, snobbish, at times even condescending.
If you're a fan of these types of films, borrow it from you library or wait until you can pick up a cheap second hand copy. Others should pass by, they will miss nothing that would interest them.
April 12, 2018
It had me until the wrap up chapter which definitely reads more like angry sour grapes than actually commentary. Not to say what the authors is saying isn't right, the presentation just has more anger than the rest of the book. Even in the 70s, most of the films he talks about in other chapters also had less than stellar audience draws. Also calling SUGARLAND EXPRESS one of Spielberg's best films is....a reach. Oh it's good, don't get me wrong. Also man does this guy have a hate on for STAR WARS. Not holding that against him but what he hates about it is what made it so popular and that's not a bad thing like he states.
February 3, 2018
Maybe 2.5. My reactions to essays on film are often subjective — do I like the critic? Do I like his insights? Does he encourage me to be more insightful? — and Taylor really doesn't. Not that his analysis of various seventies films (Coffy, Citizens Band — which he likes way more than I do — and Two-Lane Blacktop [we agree that one's cool]) are bad, they're just not that interesting (I'm not sure if it's a style thing or differing perspectives, even on films we both like). And his bemoaning about how great movies are no more is, as it is with any critic who bemoans that, tedious.
November 23, 2017
Although Taylor's writing has a tendency toward some of the effete intellectualism that can become kind of enervating when taken all at once, this is a solid collection of B movies from the decade many label as Hollywood's greatest. Taylor does effectively inspire the reader to look under the surface for some of the depth that exists in these so-called "trashy" movies. Why have I never seen Citizen's Band?
April 20, 2018
Not a bad subject or selection of films for said subject. Unfortunately, the author is in many ways the 'eternal boomer' type in his outmoded leftist politics, moldy ethno-masochism, and ressentiment. At the same time, he certainly seems to love and understand the films he discusses.
Additionally, this book could have probably been three or four times as long. Indeed, it feels like a 'work in progress.'
Additionally, this book could have probably been three or four times as long. Indeed, it feels like a 'work in progress.'
March 15, 2018
The author is utterly incapable of talking about the films within without shitting all over anything produced after the release of Star Wars. The inability to make a case for his favorite films without resorting to tearing down everything else betrays a shallow wit even though it is cloaked it obtuse analysis and flowery commentary.
August 21, 2018
It does the job in that it makes me want to watch the movies Taylor writes about, but oof, is there a lot of "kids today don't know what real cinema is, all they care about is the explosions and the shootings and all that nonsense." His viewpoints on the individual movies he writes about are insightful and interesting, but not so much on the current state of movies overall.
August 11, 2017
The narrator called Jonathan Demme "Jonathan Dem".
August 12, 2020
What a pretentious and self-important writer.
June 26, 2017
Charles Taylor's first collection of film essays exudes energy, persuasiveness and a deep knowledge and love for movies and pop culture. He writes with a passion and unbridled enthusiasm that rivals Pauline Kael. OPENING WEDNESDAY AT A THEATER OR DRIVE-IN NEAR YOU (so entitled because most '70s exploitation films opened midweek, rather than on Fridays) is a love letter to some lesser-known American B-movies that came out in the 1970s. "Some are good, solid pieces of moviemaking, and some are shrewdly put-together junk," writes Taylor. "All the films in this book share an air of disreputability."
Each essay starts off focusing on one or two films but Taylor always brings a fascinating historical context to each film or genre. His appreciation of COFFY and FOXY BROWN ("Has any movie goddess ever done more with less than Pam Grier?" he asks) blossoms into an analysis of blaxploitation films, the "role model" characters that straight-jacketed much of Sidney Poitier's career and the current dismal landscape of roles for black, middle-aged women in films. Other films spotlighted include EYES OF LAURA MARS ("A celebration of sleaze as high chic."); Robert Aldrich's ultra-violent western ULZANA'S RAID; Sam Peckinpah's studio-ruined BRING ME THE HEAD OF ALFREDO GARCIA; Walter Hill's Depression-era boxing film HARD TIMES; Jonathan Demme's goofy CITIZEN'S BAND; and the oddball JFK assassination conspiracy comedy WINTER KILLS (featuring Elizabeth Taylor, Jeff Bridges and Toshiro Mifune).
OPENING WEDNESDAY is an intelligent, opinionated and fascinating introduction to some great lower-profile 1970s films. Film buffs will find Taylor's guide illuminating and indispensable.
Charles Taylor's introduction to lesser-known 1970s films is remarkably persuasive and written with energy and a deep appreciation for film and pop culture.
Each essay starts off focusing on one or two films but Taylor always brings a fascinating historical context to each film or genre. His appreciation of COFFY and FOXY BROWN ("Has any movie goddess ever done more with less than Pam Grier?" he asks) blossoms into an analysis of blaxploitation films, the "role model" characters that straight-jacketed much of Sidney Poitier's career and the current dismal landscape of roles for black, middle-aged women in films. Other films spotlighted include EYES OF LAURA MARS ("A celebration of sleaze as high chic."); Robert Aldrich's ultra-violent western ULZANA'S RAID; Sam Peckinpah's studio-ruined BRING ME THE HEAD OF ALFREDO GARCIA; Walter Hill's Depression-era boxing film HARD TIMES; Jonathan Demme's goofy CITIZEN'S BAND; and the oddball JFK assassination conspiracy comedy WINTER KILLS (featuring Elizabeth Taylor, Jeff Bridges and Toshiro Mifune).
OPENING WEDNESDAY is an intelligent, opinionated and fascinating introduction to some great lower-profile 1970s films. Film buffs will find Taylor's guide illuminating and indispensable.
Charles Taylor's introduction to lesser-known 1970s films is remarkably persuasive and written with energy and a deep appreciation for film and pop culture.
July 28, 2017
Quite frankly, this is the best book on American cinema and how it reflected our nation in the 1970s that I've ever read (and yes, there have been dozens about this particular era in film-making). Entertaining, enlightening, thoughtful and thought-provoking, I came upon it without reading a single review or recommendation. I saw the title, and said, "This is a book I want to read," and what I found behind that promising cover was prose light years past what passes today for movie writing. A slim volume with uncommon depth, and an examination of films that often are dismissed (the same films I recall with wonder from my childhood) such as "Vanishing Point" or "Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry," or even a film I've championed in the past, "Hickey and Boggs." Taylor argues successfully that these films, often shuffled out on the drive-in circuit without playing in major venues were a more honest examination of what the decade of the seventies was really about than more high profile films such as "The Godfather." He's honest and frank in his views, and admits that some of the films have issues that low budgets demanded (such as Pam Grier's tour de force work in "Coffy" and "Foxy Brown"), but that if you watch them with open minds and hearts, you'll see amazing things going on -such as in Grier's case, the performances she gives elevate the films she was a part of ... and which let to Quentin Tarantino's love letter "Jackie Brown," which Ms. Pam knocked out of the park. One of my favorites of 2017!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 64 reviews