Rating: 
Summary: To Be Watched With Your Ears
Review: The plot and charcters have been well described elsewhere, so I won't recount them here. Perhaps because I first watched (and rewatched, and re-rewatched) this film when I was 12 (I would see whatever movie the neighborhood theater was playing), the plot has an air of inevitability for me now. My current perspective is that far from possessing a "twist", the surprise in store for Harry Caul is one demanded by his personality, by his life. He realizes that he has become precisely what he proudly aspired to become: simply a tool, a lifeless extension of his fancy directional mikes, synchronized reel-to-reels, and homemade frequency filters--he is a vending machine that accepts envelopes of cash, and ejects high-quality tapes of anyone's most private conversations. As we see his character built piece by hollow, empty piece, the thin feeble ghost of what is left of his humanity emerges defiant, but ultimately impotent--he has been too "good" at what he does. His supercooled technician's distance cannot stably coexist with the white-hot emotional nature of his product, and his walls (literally, in the end) are torn down. As he unfolds his puzzle, he finds his paranoia has been grossly misplaced, and what he sees as emotional detachment is simply a profound naivete causing him to both lose and fatally misinterpret his own excellent recordings.But despite all this plot/character talk, I think this film has even more to offer at other levels. This is a movie that, as the title implies, repeatedly insists we "watch" with our ears. The sound is ostensibly hardcore realism (apart from a beautiful but minimalist piano score, and the occasional tension-emphasizing dark roars of white noise), but since the main character is basically a sound technician, the "realism" transforms into a montage of repetitive loops and rewinds, reverbed replays and frequency modulations insanely (and, it seems, annoyingly for some viewers) cavorting against a backdrop of everyday urban noises. And, of course, being a Coppola movie, the movie contains sublime photography and imagery: the scene where Caul is in a phonebooth, arranging delivery of the tapes, has him gradually consumed by sharp-edged overlapping planes of reflected city light that reminded me of the fractured bits of conversation he welded together from urban lunchtime hubbub [it is also interesting that, in that shot, the closer we get to him, the less discernable he becomes]; the dim, vast, mostly empty loft where he does his work produces one striking tableau after another (and is clearly symbolic); and the odd translucent raincoat that he wears in all weather underscores his ghostly nature. Simply put, I love this movie.
Rating: 
Summary: Hackman is great in a good movie.
Review: I see from the reviews that some people found this movie boring, but I found it quite intriguing. The Conversation shows what happens when a surveillance expert (Hackman) begins to question the morals of his chosen profession. Particularly poignant is the scene in which Hackman destroys his apartment in a fit of paranoia. Coppola and Hackman fans should find this movie to be a worthwhile addition to their collection. On another front, I was quite surprised to see the high quality of surveillance equipment that was in use in 1974. If surveillance was that easy back then, then our privacy must really be threatened today.
Rating:
Summary: An Excellent DVD
Review: I am very enthusiastic about the DVD packaging of fine films. The quality of the video is excellent, but more than that, the 'extras' are most enlighting to any thinking viewer. Certainly the DVD edition of "The Conversation" is no exception. The film itself is a superb character portrayal of the complex disintigration of a man. And in the age of technology, the themeof electronic surveillance and the web in which it catches the human imagination is most appropriate. The suspense and the surprise ending are artfully managed as well. But one of the most excellent parts of this DVD is the brief synopsis of the making of this film and the through and enlightening 'director's remarks'. Every serious viewer of the film as an art/entertainment form will appreciate these fine additional features and gain information and understanding from them.
Rating: 
Summary: Snooze
Review: Being a Coppola & Hackman fan, I was very interested in seeing this movie after reading all the excellent reviews listed above, and for me it was quite a disappointment. It's slow and dull, and annoyingly repetitious (the same sound clip plays over and over). And changes in technology over the last 25 years make the movie's look and feel seem unpleasantly out of date. I'd recommend going elsewhere if you're looking for a good film noir. Just didn't work for me.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Hackman; annoying movie
Review: Sorry, but with all due deference to those who liked this film, I found it slow, boring, and at times irritating (the constant replaying of the same tape segment, over and over, and over; Alan Garfield going on much too long with his annoying pestering of Hackman). The plot wasn't all that big a deal, nor was the contrived "twist" ending a terribly big surprise. Nonetheless, Hackman is terrific (as always) and the thing is well written and acted. Coppola is clearly using the film as a device to make a statement about privacy, but neither as entertainment nor suspense did it work for me. John Frye
Rating:
Summary: Good but not THAT good
Review: "Classic," "masterpiece," and "gem" are not words I would use to describe this film. But I'll use "good." Hackman's affect is mostly flat and unintersting, and his "dream sequence" is laughable. Much of the film has a cinema verite feel to it, but sometimes we get too much unfiltered reality -- the overly long party sequence at Harry's work lab, for instance. What's more, I found the ending sequence at the hotel to be murky and unsatisfying. The film's opening is very well done and makes me wish that the rest of the film had lived up to it. Are there deep philosophical themes in this film? Some posters seem to think so, but those posts are much to do about nothing. This is not a shallow film, but it is not deep either. It is fun seeing Gene Hackman with most of his hair, a youthful Harrison Ford in a striped 70s shirt, and a young Cindy Williams (who gives a brief but excellent performance).
Rating:
Summary: Haunting Film
Review: Francis Ford Coppola made The Conversation in between the first two Godfather films and although it doesn't get the fanfare of those two films, it is nearly their equal. The film is an allegory for the Watergate situation that was overtaking the country, with all the taping and eavesdropping of conversations. Gene Hackman plays Harry Caul who is the best in the business. One the reasons is his ability to stay detached from the situation. He had even taped conversations regarding murders, but it never bothered him. He then for some reason becomes involved in a situation involving a young couple. We see the normally cool and collected Harry becomes unraveled. In the end the hunter becomes the hunted and Harry becomes so paranoid that he literally rips up his apartment (even smashing a statue of the Virgin Mother) looking for bugs. The picture is filmed in a washed out style that adds to its starkness. The Conversation is a film about paranoia and you will be gripped by its power.
Rating:
Summary: A must see for film buffs
Review: This is not an action-packed, slam bang film but it is very exciting nonetheless. Ahead of its time.
Rating:
Summary: Wow! If Only Suspense Was This Good!
Review: I am only 13 and when I saw this film it took my breath away. This is now one of my top 10 good films, It deserved something. The reason why this is a good movie is Gene Hackman he is exceptionally good in this film, he is good enough to win an Oscar. This also is the spawning point of many good actors, Teri Garr (Tootsie) and Harrison Ford (The Fugitive). Francis Ford Coppola is a master at Suspense and this movie is intresting as it sucks the viewer into the plot. The gadgets and gizmo's are brilliant in this movie and it's only 1974! FRANCIS FORD COPPOLA I THANK YOU FOR THIS MOVIE!
Rating:
Summary: Hackman And Coppola At Peak Performance
Review: Hubby and I have seen this movie many times since it originally screened in the 1970s. It holds up beautifully and is absolutely top work from these two superstars. The plot was very popular post Watergate: paranoia especially about who might be checking you out and how. Hackman is superb as Harry whose career is listening in on others as the creme de al creme of surveillance experts. He happens to pick up the conversation of a man and a woman who are possibly involved in a murder plot. Like peeling an onion, we go through layer after layer of Harry's surveillance work. We will unravel this mystery but this movie offers so much more than a mystery. The genius of this film is that even though the technology is dated by our year 2000, the movie holds up because it is not really about technology. It is a very profound movie about much deeper subjects including the cumulative effects of loneliness, isolation and alienation. The one scene of Hackman that remains riveted in my mind for all time is him looking for a surveillance bug in his own house, tearing his place up plank by plank. His sole connection to his feelings, emotions and life itself is his relationship with his saxophone and I will always remember him playing it in the ruins of his house. This film also has other delights, including a supporting cast that contains Frederic Forrest, Terri Garr, Cindy Williams, Harrison Ford (briefly) and the wonderful John Cazale (Fredo from the "Godfather" films) who sadly died in his early 30s from bone cancer before we had more of his acting work by which to remember him.
|
