Hacker Cinema
American Graffiti
1973 · Film · 112 min
Directed by George Lucas
A couple of high school graduates spend one final night cruising the strip with their buddies before they go off to college.
5 positive1 negative19 neutralfrom 25 commenters
Where to watch
No streaming data for this title.
Videos commenters linked
From YouTube links in the comments below. Most are clips and trailers; “Full” means the uploader says so.
27 comments on Hacker News
American Graffiti didn't depict boomers, they were kids who had graduated high school in 1962, that was Silent Generation.
It's referred to as a nostalgia movie, which on one hand seems fitting if you've watched it, but on the other hand, it was written in 1972 about a period in time ten years older. Would a movie screenplay written today by a 28 year old depicting being an 18 year old in 2015 be seen as nostalgic in the same way?
"American Graffiti"; when I was growing up they were going back before I was born too. I don't mind though because, for example, that film is excellent (and is that filmmakers best film ;-)).
Seriously though I have been musing as to how the children of a generation get to define their parent's generation, more or less wrest if from them, in film, etc. Sometimes (often) they take a fairly dim view of the world they grew up in, a dim view of their parents. (And maybe now I am channelling a film like "The Graduate", for example.)
The fact that Valli topped the charts again in 1978 with “Grease” still boggles my mind.
Not if you were living through the 1950s nostalgia revival which was going strong at the time and lingered through the early 80s. It was on TV (Happy Days and Sha Na Na), the movies (American Graffiti, Porky's) and a bunch of retro musical acts (The Stray Cats) or retro projects by established artists returning to the music they grew up with (Robert Plant's The Honeydrippers).
The sound of rock music undoubtedly changed between the beginning and middle of the 1960s. But by looking at the Billboard Hot 100, we can see if that change in sound was being made by a fleet of new groups or a bunch of older acts adapting.
This methodology leaves out a lot of bands, and not just the long tail that never cracked the top 100. There are MANY locally popular bands that never broke out nationally and therefore never made it to the Billboard Hot 100. There were also bands doing types of music that never charted particularly well yet were influential in their own way. For a sampling of this, go to the MIT/WMBR archives (https://wmbr.org/cgi-bin/arch) and listen to "Lost and Found" which highlights a lot of these types of music. Or search for things like "60s garage bands" "60s funk" etc. on YouTube.
The author also mentions the 1991 change to the Billboard methodology which really calls into doubt a some of the "hits" that came before. In a nutshell, music charts in the United States were based on a sample of self-reported sales from record store managers. You can imagine the bias and BS that went on with those numbers.
Then there was manipulation further up the funnel. Record companies weren't supposed to give outright cash payments to DJs (wink wink) but there were many other ways of exerting influence on influential media gatekeepers.
Some of the influence was obvious. Picking artists that had the "right" look. Promoting "safe" artists. Forcing hitmaker producers on new and established artists. Selective access and backroom benefits for powerful DJs and music journalists and other influencers. Ignoring, sidelining, or co-opting trends bubbling up from the underground, from proto-metal in the late 60s to punk in the 70s to rap in the 80s.
As soon as Soundscan was implemented, there was an immediate realignment, with rap and grunge and techno and country storming the pop charts.
Background on the 1991 Soundscan change is here, if anyone is interested: https://ultimateclassicrock.com/billboard-soundscan/
I punched in 1972 and there were some fantastic movies that year (The Godfather, Deliverance, Cabaret, Solaris, Jeremiah Johnson, Aguirre - the Wrath of God, The Last House on the Left, Silent Running, The Heartbreak Kid, Fat City, etc.).
Also tried 1973 — same (The Day of the Jackal, Soylent Green, Westworld, The Wicker Man, Papillon, American Graffiti, The Sting, Serpico, Mean Streets, High Plains Drifter, Don't Look Now, Badlands, The Long Goodbye, Jesus Christ Superstar, The Three Musketeers, Fantastic Planet, etc.).
I think they simply made better movies decades ago.
I think so too but I'm conflicted. I wouldn't want to give up my infinite jukebox that I have on my phone, but at the same time I think the loss of shared culture is real.
American Graffiti is the movie that first made me think about it. The DJ (Wolfman Jack) is a central character in that movie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZ9Gp6Qc8LQ
Fun fact: long credits at the end of the movie were invented by George Lucas for American Graffiti in 1973 [1]. He didn't have the money to pay everyone so he offered to put their names in the credits instead.
And thus started a new chapter in the exploitation of film crews, where you don't get paid enough but hey, at least your name is in the credits. All the other producers were immediately like -- that's a genius idea to pay the crew less! So now all movies (and even TV shows) are full of hundreds and often even thousands of names in the credits.
[1] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0069704/trivia/
That's partly why the [spoiler] of The Empire Strikes Back is effective, but that movie also has a different tone right from the start (even before that, with the title), and doesn't really tell a complete story but sets up the next sequel to provide resolution and the inevitable heroic victory.
Silent Running is a dystopian setting, so the ending is unsurprising, and American Graffiti is a of genre that often has bad outcomes for some characters as cautionary tales.
Apologies if this is too much of a spoiler, but you might be a bit surprised by how the film's immediate sequel plays out.
Edit: And considering when it was made and who made it, a happy ending was by no means guaranteed. Compare and contrast with the endings of Silent Running or American Graffiti.
I think it goes deeper than that. Look at Lucas' filmography as director. THX, American Graffiti, ANH . . all with Marcia editing credits. And after that . . well, you'll be hard pressed to find any directing credits at all, until the Prequels, more than two decades later. So devil's due to old George: it's been 22 years since I looked at SAP BAPI, and if you sat me down in front of an IDE to program the stuff I would probably be even worse at it than Lucas was at directing movies in 1999. Granted, I know this, and I would not take a BAPI gig without thoroughly warning my would-be employer that I am going to suck at it.
There must have been a sort of magic there, something greater than the sum of its parts, but that's true for an awful lot of great films. There's always some great unexplainable They seem to happen by accident, by lucky intervention from a gifted cast, by a once-in-a-century musical agglomeration, by a herculean labor of love from everyone concerned, through the titanic efforts of singular madmen (who often become as much of a story as the one they are trying to film). The directors we remember are the ones most likely to appear with these miracles on a semi-regular basis. Maybe George and Marcia were one of those thermodynamic miracles, great unexplainables.
I haven't seen it since it came out. But if my memory serves (and likely it does not) it was a meh film.
No one yet has done anything for hacking like "Real Genius" did for nerdy Physics majors. (And even that film is flawed in a number of ways.) I would love to see a film set in the 80's that gets hacking/phracking right. The "Stranger Things" fans would go nuts for the cultural references.
Something like "Densha Otoko" (Train Man) meets "American Graffiti". (Holler if you're interested in me writing your script, ha ha.)
I'll find and watch the film again though. I may have relaxed a bit on my criticism of films depicting computer users.
Alien vs The Andromeda Strain vs Taking of Pelham One Two Three vs The Godfather vs American Graffiti vs Animal House vs Apocalypse Now vs Tora! Tora! Tora!
Honestly I don't see much connecting "70s-ness" thread between these. You can kind of take a guess at the era by the color tones, or for those movies with a contemporary setting, the style of clothing and cars. But otherwise there is huge range in old movies.
I've got this theory that although technology advances and social mores change with different social standards being imposed on art (e.g. Hayes Code), artistic merit is more or less evenly distributed through time. That is to say, old things are about as likely to be meritorious as new things, there's no general trend of newer = better. However the general public realizing this would be bad for business, new productions don't want to compete with the best of old generations, and so there are efforts to persuade people that old content is unwatchable and a waste of time to even consider. People are strongly encouraged to favor new content over old, for instance by having an averse "eww icky" reaction to black and white movies or even technicolor. Technical developments in film stock, SFX, etc are touted as being extremely meritorious and are heavily emphasized in the promotion of new movies because this is the competitive edge for modern productions.
If you really want to jump into the time machine, rent the movie "American Graffiti."
When all they had was AM, that was the social network for teenagers.
Just not a good writer.
He was telling a personal story with American Graffiti. SW was his backup because he couldn’t get rights to Flash Gordon. Being interested in mythos, Kurosawa and servicably well educated in film he was at the right time as the FX were reaching a level of being not laughable.
But he was an even better business guy, and at least at that time smart enough to turn Empire over to Kirshner and Kasdan.
Everything else was pretty much downhill from an art standpoint.
this nation has changed dramatically in the last few decades...the elites have clamped down on the little people in so many ways...so many laws and regulations now...i was reading a comic book from the 1950s the other day, and the premise was that a female college student was having an affair with her professor...and there were other plot elements...but the amazing thing was that the other characters did not think the relationship was unusual at all...nowadays, in a movie or in the media, such a relationship would be portrayed as scandalous...
the hit movie american graffiti from the 1970s showed a high school teacher having an affair with one of his students...but it was just a casual aside in the movie plot...no one made a big deal about it...
this nation is entering some sort of neopuritanical hell hole...and it aint gonna be pretty...
I get what you're saying (I worked in fiom and tv for eons before switching out), but you can't really do it like that. Comparison needs to include both what the movie was built on, leading to it, and then also to consider directors own body of work leading to it. That takes into account period of work and release as well. What came after (not immediately) is not relevant to the work itself since it's out of period (in future). To even start talking in this direction you'd have to invoke, serially, works like Clockwork Orange, American Graffiti, Taxi Driver, and then Midnight Express to even start outlining the silhouette of what is to come.with Blade Runner.. and that's just a start since Ridley Scott's path is a bit unusual, and that movie's genesis especially so (see Legend he did sonce it's close to the period). That only covers the basics of the basics of discussing of what and specifically why this particular work is the way it is and why emulating the moves later (2049) didn't yield the same.
Edit: typing on mobile. Screw it, I hope it's at least somewhat readable.
True, American Graffiti was pivotal in him getting the shot he did. What I am saying is I don't think that plays out the same way today given movie budgets, you can't just have one person like one film you made and force through the production budget of a AAA film anymore.
> George Lucas definitely didn't have the name or history necessary when Alan Ladd gave the go ahead to make Star Wars that you would need these days for a comparably ambitious film.
I don't know if that's entirely true. George Lucas had come off the back of American Graffiti, which was an incredible commercial success. It had made 50x its budget, and in 1977 was the 13th highest grossing film of all time.
The question was really whether Lucas could turn his hand to a completely different genre. It's down to American Graffiti's success that Lucas was able to re-negotiate a deal for Star Wars that gave him merchandising rights.
Go back and watch films from the early 70s - the comedies are farcically stupid and the serious films are violent and paranoid, because between Vietnam, Watergate, and other political issues, its was a tough time and people were angry, disillusioned, and pessimistic. Spielberg's first commercial film Duel is a very fine piece of cinema but it's far from being 'fun.' Likewise Lucas' early work like THX1138 or American Graffiti is shot through with anxiety about the future and lost innocence. Hitchcock could do great screwball comedies but he alternated them with nightmarish vortexes on taboo subjects.
What you want are optimistic films where people get into trouble but keep their sense of humor and eventually bounce back. That requires a social and cultural environment, and a showbusiness industry, in which people can do the same. Have you heard many stories lately where a talented director goes way over budget or even bombs but makes a great comeback because people are forgiving and want to support a real artist? You have not, because the arts are heavily professionalized these days and computers have made accountants very powerful.
American Graffiti (1973) is very enjoyable. I consider it a great movie. Great ensemble cast. Highly recommended.
It would almost certainly be on my Top 100 list as well. I think it stands up pretty well. Those other two are pretty classic too--although I'm not really a horror film fan.
(That said, I could see people not being able to identify with the where/when the movie was set. I certainly wasn't part of that either but I still really enjoyed it.)
But, yeah, the films Lucas directed go way downhill after American Graffiti and Star Wars.
Regarding American Graffiti, it was a huge hit, before anyone heard of Star Wars. It was the number 3 grossing film of 1973 after The Sting and The Exorcist. It made AFI's list of the top 100 movies.
George Lucas post 1976 is a mediocre director, and a worse writer. Even before 1976 he wasn't that great either - American Graffiti is a forgetable coming of age movie. If it wasn't made by Lucas of later 'Star Wars' fame nobody would remember it today.
What he is actually known for is being great at worldbuilding once, with Star Wars (beginner's luck?). Middle age took that ability away though after the eighties, like a punk band trying to be relevant in their 40s: only for hardcore fans.
And I say it regretably. I'd too wanted a great Star Wars 1, 2, and 3. That said, most modern S.W. movies are also crap. The J.A. ones were so much a blatant copy of the original story plots as to be useless, whereas Han Solo bordered on camp. Rogue One was somewhat decent though, and I hear good things about the Mandalorean...
Spielberg on the other hand is a true master...
It is somewhat depressing to watch American Graffiti, or for that matter soviet movies, and see people just going out to the boarding stairs and getting on the plane like they would a bus.
What's life like for a young Iranian?
"With the sexes segregated at school and boys and girls discouraged from socialising together, trying to get to know members of the opposite sex is a huge preoccupation for Iranian teenagers. They hang around shopping malls, in cafes and parks, parade up and down boulevards and spend lots of time cruising around in cars."[0]
I once saw a TV doc on life in Iran. The night-time cruising reminded me a lot of the film "American Graffiti". I imagine Iranian youth would not be happy with any increase in the price of fuel.
I take your point though that widespread protests signal more than just the discontent of youth.
[0]https://www.lonelyplanet.com/iran/background/other-features/5dfe99c7-3ffb-4664-a7de-4ba79bcc016d/a/nar/5dfe99c7-3ffb-4664-a7de-4ba79bcc016d/361011
Movies have always been bad. Always. Look at how many movies are made in Hollywood each year. Hundreds and hundreds. Maybe 10 each year are worth the time to watch. Maybe 1 will end up having enduring value. The rest just disappear.
Tropes get recycled, new genres come and go, are rediscovered, and then fade. Formula has always been important in cranking out the volume of productions. The odds are stacked against any one movie being a success, either critically or financially. Who would have thought that Spielberg would follow up Jurassic Park with such a stinker?
The studio system was no ideal world; actors were stuck in their contracts and had horrible bargaining power. Censorship was the norm, writers were not given much leeway. Today's movie industry is far healthier, with more outlets, more customers, and more opportunities.
The problem today isn't on the distribution side, but on the production side. Creating a movie is just so expensive. Same problem facing the video game industry. Think you can create a movie for $4M? That's the inflation adjusted budget for American Graffiti. Or Star Wars at $47M. Not a chance. The FX alone would probably cost that. Rogue One was over $200M...
Believe you missed American Graffiti. (1973)
THX1138 is pretty special. I'm still trying to find a version without the typical Lucas retroactive CGI spliced in.
Fun fact: there's a scene in the movie (no spoilers) that was filmed, sideways, in the then-unfinished BART transbay tube. If you've seen the movie I bet you'll know which scene.
I should have clarified: there's no sampling bias. These are incredibly popular movies. Here are some movies not on Netflix streaming that I've wanted to watch this year: Gladiator. Star Wars IV. Shawshank Redemption. The Wizard of Oz. When Harry Met Sally. The Princess Bride. All Star Trek movies. Goodfellas. Lord of the Rings. Gone with the Wind. All Godfather movies. Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Airplane. American Graffiti. The Usual Suspects. All Jim Carrey movies except a bad one (the Grinch) and one I've never heard of (the Number 23). Toy Story. There's Something About Mary. All Austin Powers movies.
The last time I tried searching for a good movie to watch on Netflix streaming, I gave up after 10 minutes. I'd think of one movie after another after another. Nothing was there. All it could suggest was "related titles," as if that's what I would want.