The 70s are often considered the second golden age of Hollywood. Emboldened by the success ofDennis Hopper’sEasy Riderthat closed out the 60s, many of the studios showed a willingness to entrust young producers, writers and directors to give a whole new voice to cinema. The result was a unique slate of classics from new filmmaking mavericks such asMartin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola, Robert Altman, Woody Allen, Bob Rafelson, Terrence Malick, Steven Spielberg, Hal Ashby, William Friedkin, George LucasandPeter Bogdanovich, to name a few. How they differed from previous greats was through forgoing classicism for a closer association with reality, through more sounds or rock ‘n roll songs instead of scores, through more intimate plots in following a character more than their story and venturing off the sound stage and out into the real world.
Although many of those names were the lynchpin of new storytelling success for the decade, the 70s had many great films that also tapped into the rebel spirit of the new auteurs without continuing to receive a classic shine. Every decade has forgotten films, but the 70s are a treasure trove of movies that are rebellious, eccentric and alive, but no longer mentioned.
To create this initial list, I just had one criteria: the film had to receive less than 10,000 votes on IMDb, which seems to be a good barometer on whether or not a film has been left behind in the retrospective zeitgeist. With this methodology a few things were discovered. First, many of the films that could potentially land here were experimental with narrative, or grindhouse or foreign, which is of no surprise, of course. But more surprising was that many of the great American films from this decade that seem to no longer have a fervent following but were directed by an accepted auteur such as Altman orKen Russell, frequently featured a female lead.
The great 70s films largely belonged to men, were made by men, and told the stories almost exclusively through the eyes of men and tried to de-code what it means to be an honorable man. They’re still great films, of course, but 70s cinema was the first real gender barrier for movies; all the praise and awards were going toThe Godfather, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Rocky, The French Connection, The Deer Hunteretc. and it’s stark in comparison to previous decades where female-led films likeThe Apartment, My Fair Lady, The Sound of Music, etc., could still win the top film prizes through the 60s. The 70s is when the acclaim and prestige really became one sided and the vast majority of prestige pictures focused on men. I might argue that that was when the idea of a man’s picture and a woman’s picture really splintered as well. Since the 70s also gave us the idea of a blockbuster that forever changed film, withStar Wars, that divide increased in the 80s and we’re only now starting to see a return to prestige female pictures being made from major directors.
That’s not to critique the amazing films likeThe Godfather,Apocalypse Now, Badlands, Dog Day Afternoon,and more and more that came out in the 70s, but it is worth noting that most of the films on this list – that did not receive initial studio support and no longer have the support of a voting system like IMDb – feature women in the leading roles. The rest are foreign, fringe and naughty. Or in some cases, they are the directorial debut of a director who’d go on to have a cult following, likeWalter HillandElaine May. Peruse some of the picks and sound off on which films you agree with or might want to check out, or which mega classics you think are overrated.
The Lickerish Quartet (1970)
Radley Metzgerwas a pioneer of erotica. While his contemporaries likeRuss MeyerandTinto Brassspent the 70s highlighting specific female features (Meyer the bosoms and Brass the butts), Metzger was making art that occasionally featured fornication. Don’t just take my word for it,Andy WarholcalledThe Lickerish Quartet“an outrageously kinky masterpiece” and UCLA has restored his film prints and held retrospectives to highlight his work. It’s academic.
The Lickerish Quartetbegins at a European castle where a wealthy family watches an old “blue movie” (as one does with their family in a castle), then they travel down to a circus where they watch some daredevil tricks. They notice that a female motorcyclist (Silvana Venturelli) looks very similar to the woman that primarily featured in the dirty film they just watched. So, of course, they invite her back to their castle, where they talk about bike tricks, show her the naughty video and invite her to fulfill each of their fantasies, one by one. Meanwhile, she repeatedly asks, “who has the gun” and the patriarch of the family (Frank Wolff, who had small roles in bothOnce Upon a Time in the WestandThe Great Silence) has flashbacks to his time in war. Yes, there’s sex and there’s some goofy fantasy music, but what makesLickerish Quartetimpressive—and one of the few films of its kind where you may watch for cinematography, story and production design and still hold your snobby cinephile card—are the imaginative set-ups, editing and set changes (a library transforms into a dirty dictionary, for example). You might get hot, you might have a laugh, but you’ll also feel bad about war and parents.
Investigation of a Citizen Above Suspicion (1970)
Investigation of a Citizen Above Suspicionis the rare masterpiece that I’d also love to see an updated remake of. Its governmental concerns are so timeless, so ripe, so woven into the past and future fabric of corrupted governing society. Donald Trump once boasted that he was so popular with his base that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and never suffer any consequences. Well, that’s this as a movie, except far more intelligent, curious, and concerned by what that open admission actually means.
A Citizen Above Suspicionintroduces the Roman Chief of Police (Gian Maria Volonte) as he enters the apartment of a lover who asks how he’ll pretend to kill her tonight, except instead of engaging in their usual role play he does kill her; he leaves a mess of clues on purpose, curious to see if his status, which is what the woman was attracted to, could actually save him from any repercussions for a capital offense. TheEnnio Morriconescore, which is just a repeated theme composition, includes a jaw harp blast which lets you know that it’s okay to find the humor in everything that unfolds. But, though the social commentary and satire itself is very strong, the true mastery ofElio Petri’s film is in how he uses the flashbacks between the Chief of Police and the murdered woman, Augusta Terzi (Florinda Bolkan). We see her set a trap, unbeknownst to herself, by being bored one night and drunkenly calling the police station to bate whoever answers by describing herself being nude in her apartment with an intruder and she’s curious if anyone there would save her or if they’d just let her be raped and ignore any future report. The Chief comes to inspect and interested in his power, she continues to push him to do things for the thrill of being too high in power to receive any knuckle-rapping.
Importantly, though Augusta is involved in this dance of the macabre, Petri never casts any blame on her for her demise. Bolkan performs Augusta as a woman who is rebelling against society but that rebellion pulls her close to men of power and also to men on the revolutionary side who want to snuff out said power; she’s consistently stirred by breaking laws but immediately falls into a depression of awareness, where he captor does not.
An important distinction inAbove Suspicionis who gets named and who doesn’t. Most of the men in government positions are not referred to by name, but instead their rank, making them not human but the State personified. Those who are named are either victims or those who are under surveillance for their Communist leanings. It’s an important distinction that post-Mussolini, Italy’s fascism was allowed to continue, fester, and grow, simply due to the fear of Communism replacing it. Additionally, as Petri cuts between his attempts to be found out and his past relationship with Augusta, we come to realize that his sociopathic undoing is tied to what it most often is for men of power, a blow to their ego on their sexual virility. Though it’s not said, we get the sense that the reason he commits this crime is so that he can move over to the Head of Political Police, to listen in on the revolutionaries associating them with Augusta’s sexual preference because she sneaks away to make love to a Communist youth after rebuffing him on the beach.
This is a simply marvelous work of corruption, desire, and sociopathic tendencies that become entwined and fostered by power, and becomes corruptible. A room full of men flexing the type of power that allows such perversions of trust to continue. Nameless men, protecting their own, victims and truth be damned. Sound familiar?
The Music Lovers (1970)
The Music Loverselicited this response from one of the all-time great film critics, Pauline Kael: “You feel (like) you should drive a stake through the heart of the man who made it.” The man who made it isKen Russell. Historically speaking,The Music Loversfollows the doomed heterosexual attempts by famed composer Pyotr Tchaikovsky (Richard Chamberlain) as he rises through the musical world by turning his back on his homosexuality and takes part in a sham of a marriage. It’s about the power of music but it’s also about the destructiveness of withholding sex—from one’s self and from others.
After potentially outing himself to the veteran composers of Russia’s famed Mighty Five, Tchaikovsky chose his wife from a series of love letters that she had written him without ever meeting him. In his mind, because she only knew his music that is all that she needed to love him. But Antonia (an amazingGlenda Jackson) needed more than his music. She also needed sex to feel loved. That sentence might sound crass and Russell does sometimes present it as so, but it’s also heartbreaking. There is humiliation in both turning down someone for sex and in being turned down.
There is a magnificent scene on their honeymoon where Tchaikovsky specifically gets Antonia very drunk on a train so that he won’t need to have sex, but she still tries. She passes out naked on the floor of their train car and the bumps of the tracks make her body sway back and forth violently; Tchaikovsky looks in horror at her vulnerable body. It’s this horror of sexuality that perhaps provoked the stake reaction from Kael. For Russell, as a director, is anything but classical. He, like Tchaikovsky here, was new on the scene in 1970. And he radicalized what could be done with a historical epic. This isn’t David Lean. This is a film that re-enacts the visions we create when he hear music. And one that looks at an insane asylum as a breeding ground for, well, insanity. This is the most unusual and loud film to ever receive the brushstrokes generally reserved for adventure epics.
A New Leaf (1971)
Woody AllenandMel Brooksreceive most of the accolades for American comedies in the 70s, butElaine Maydeserves to be mentioned as their equal (fittingly, Allen recently cast her as his wife in his Amazon series,Crisis in Six Scenes).The Heartbreak Kidis her masterpiece (and darn near a perfect entertainment) butA New Leafwas her fantastic start.
Leafconcerns Henry Graham (Walter Matthau), a trust-fund dimwit who has no real hobbies or knowledge. We meet him when he’s informed that he has no real money; he spent it all. In a last ditch effort to keep going to the country club and live high society he makes a bet with his Uncle that he could be married to a rich women in six weeks. If he succeeds, his debt will be forgiven and eventually he’ll kill off the bride soon after the ceremony to receive her inheritance. May herself plays the potential bride, a clumsy and bookish woman who no one talks to at the high society club.
A New Leafis a classicPreston Sturges-inspired slapstick comedy with a devilish lesson by the end of its run time. Matthau’s deadpan delivery is perfect to represent an untalented but entitled oaf and as the 70s created the framework for growing income disparity, his foolishness is extra cutting now. But the sinister satirical twist that May has up her sleeve is the idea that the reason men so easily dispatch of women and relationships is because they’re seeking someone who will give them a legacy. For many, that’s an heir to run a company with their name on it, but for Matthau’s fop, it’s having a new species of plant named after him. Will such a gesture make him turn over a new leaf and think of someone other than himself?
The Boy Friend (1971)
Ken RussellgivesSandy Wilson’s Broadway smashThe Boy Friendsome movie razzle-dazzle. The play itself is about the roaring twenties and two young people falling in love against their parent’s wishes. This adaptation concerns an understudy (Twiggy) at a struggling 1920’s London playhouse, who’s thrust into rehearsals after the star (aGlenda Jacksoncameo) suffers an injury for the production of, you guessed it, what will become “The Boy Friend.” Many of Wilson’s popular songs remain here, with a side story about a movie producer being in the audience looking to cast the next big thing, and the understudy beginning to fall in love with the male lead (Christopher Gable) as he helps boost her confidence throughout the rehearsal.
The Boy Friendis overlong but has some of the most amazing set and costume designs of any musical. Because this is Russell, those designs create daydreams of the performers as well, not just the production. It’s a dazzling movie for design. And Twiggy, the model, is quite natural as the unnatural star that has the it factor that the movie producer is looking for. Russell said that he made this film as a pallet cleanse for the tumultuous and studio meddledThe Devils(see below). As such, it’s easy to see why it’s overlong, as Russell probably just needed some shiny joy in his life. Fans ofLa La Landwill find a few set design nods here.
The Devils (1971)
Ken Russell’sThe Devilsis less forgotten and more just really fucking hard to find. It’s consistently requested to be added to the Criterion Collection but Warner Brothers seems hell bent on never EVER letting go of the rights. The studio has blocked the release of a Blu-ray, allowed BFI only to show it in England if it’s listed as an educational experience and the version that myself and many film fans have seen, stateside, comes directly fromMartin Scorsese’s own collection, which he lends out for an occasional screening (just to hype you up). To add to the intrigue,Guillermo del Torohas accused WB of 40+ years of censorship by never allowing it to hit home video. Now this is the studio that widely releasedThe Exorcist—which included a scene of a possessed pre-teen girl stabbing her vagina with a crucifix and then forcing her mothers face into her privates while grumbling, “lick me”—just two years later. So in a day and age when studios’ back catalogues are widely available, why does this film sit under lock and key?
The Devilscenters around a vain priest (Oliver Reed) and the hunchback nun (Vanessa Redgrave) who lusts for him so deeply that she accuses him of witchcraft and other nuns at the convent join in on the accusation because the accusation allows them to behave like they’re under a sexual spell and thus they’re more free to practice their desires than the church will allow. It’s a loony masterpiece, as many of Russell’s films are. And when the nuns indulge it brings out the anarchic and chaotic side of the auteur. This is one of Redgrave’s greatest performances and it’s an interesting critique of religion and the suppression of desire. Now, the film is so hyped from its own suppression that it’d probably seem tame by today’s standards, which makes WB’s behavior even stranger (in WB’s mode of thinking, blasphemous presentations thrust upon a child in possession are more okay for the public, but blasphemous presentations that are being faked by a convent are not).
Note, there are two masturbation scenes that were cut from the theatrical print to receive a brief X-rated release in both the UK and the USA, oh which I’ve seen one, and it’s not graphic but is both unsettling and darkly humorous, calling into question whether all Christians practice their religion to make pure their heart or because it gives them the ability to control others. Perhaps it’s the obvious desire of outside cinephile sources like the Criterion Collection to release that footage as a bonus feature that keeps this film suppressed. Or maybe, like Birth.Movies.Deathnotes, it’s just some old crotchety executive who has a personal vendetta against the film and we just need to wait for that person to die off (like many backward approaches to thinking these days) and we’ll finally all be able to decide for ourselves if we can handle this movie or not. If you ever see this film listed in your local listings for a one-night showing, go.
10 Rillington Place (1971)
Attn: Murderinos,10 Rillington Placeis a riveting and uncomfortable forgotten true serial killer tale in which the most huggable man from ourJurassic Park/Miracle on 34thStreetchildhood,Richard Attenborough, gasses women, has sex with their unconscious bodies, strangles them, buries them in the yard, and frames someone else for it! Something that grounds this film, rather than sensationalizing the acts, is how it repeatedly shows how patriarchal society (and veteran-worshipping society) allows the killer to operate with ease. He earns trust through his educated voice and his declaration of previous medicinal practices. His tenants (John HurtandJudy Geeson) are a young, very poor couple with one child. The wife wants an abortion because they don’t have the money for a second child because he’s illiterate and the only one able to join the workforce. John Christie (Attenborough) is their neighbor and he is able to order his wife (Pat Heywood) to leave whenever necessary for his “work” as the sole provider himself. It’s his war record that keeps his previous arrests suppressed. And it’s the system that favors vets, educated men, and a lazy police force that allows him to continue even after bodies are discovered.
Attenborough is nauseating and riveting, Hurt is magnificent, and directorRichard Fleisher(The Fantastic Voyage) takes well to Britain’s kitchen sink realism after Hollywood discarded him after a few studio flops. The sadness in Attenborough’s posture when he pours a poisoned tea that he won’t be able to use for rape and murder because the plumbers have come over is such a nice attention to the amount of control this man is used to having within his house.
Audiences weren’t as used to serial killer films in 1971 as they are now, so starting the film with a beloved actor dragging an unconscious woman to the ground to have his way with her, was shocking in 1971 so it’d make sense that Fleisher would focus on two grizzly acts and the miscarriage of justice and not force the audience to endure more killings from the true story. But now that we have a serial killer obsession in film/tv those final 10 minutes of miscarried justice could be its own movie; how this monster continued and why the UK abolished the death penalty because of it. Still, even though there’s a rush through a trial at the end, this is expertly paced, nauseating, and beautifully performed.
Wake in Fright (1971)
Australia’sWake in Frightis the most artisticHangover-styled movie and my personal nightmare: being surrounded by a horde of degenerate men who drink, gamble, fight, dismiss women, and shoot animals for sport, with no available option to leave them behind.Gary Bondis a schoolteacher who makes a bad gambling bet and is then marooned in a town full of drunk and violent men (led byDonald Pleasance) who attempt to force him to be just as drunk and violent as them.
This story of male malfeasance is more frightening thanDeliverancebecause these men are more identifiable, and the desire to sexually dominate other men is hinted at rather than outright shown. The orange desert expanse is lensed beautifully. But be warned, the kangaroo hunt is vomitous, it looks real because directorTed Kotcheffused real footage that he’d found; this was to confront his audience, with growing illegal kangaroo hunts occurring for manly sport, and was integral to increased regulations, but 40 years later without that awareness of the time, it’s incredibly difficult to watch, so knowing that beforehand is not only a necessary warning but also necessary to know the reasons it was included in the first place. And the negative traits of men in groups making the worst choices over and over is timeless. Though he attempts in numerous ways, the schoolteacher can’t seem to leave them behind; it’s like he’s in a sand globe.
Kotcheff is most well-known for directing the firstRambomovie,First Blood, but he would numb these fraternity themes for American party movies such asNorth Dallas FortyandWeekend at Bernie’s(!!). Even though the men inBernie’s are hanging out with a dead guy, I’d much rather kick it with those dudes than these monsters.
Little Murders (1971)
I was introduced toLittle Murders, a hilarious satire of marriage fever, through a friend who was getting married. She wanted the person who was overseeing her vows to watch the clip ofDonald Sutherland’s pastor as he delivers a wedding introduction about how the “business of marriage” deserves “an abandonment of ritual in the search for truth.” The subjects that Sutherland talks about whileElliott GouldandMarcia Roddawait to marry are how many of the weddings he’s presided over have ended in divorce and the many reasons why those failed marriages took place; masturbation, drugs, disinterest. It’s truly a mesmerizing, hilarious and yes truthful analysis of rituals and marriage and how everyone’s reason to marry is “all right” and so are their decisions to leave, because as much as we like to look at marriage as a melding of two identities, that’s the untruthful version.
Watch the monologuehereand if you agree that this is a pretty groovy speech, giveAlan Arkin’s directorial debut a spin. It’s full of wit, immensely intelligent, although it does take an odd detour for the third act, it’s one of the funniest films from a decade that was moving from the swingin’ 60s back to timeless rituals. As for the murders? Like many films on this list, it’s a time capsule of the extremely dangerous and grimy New York ‘70s. And as for the wife-to-be who introduced me to the film? She’s still married and putting the finishing touches on aHal Ashbydocumentarythat should begin screening in 2017. And for anyone reading this list, that’s a must look for, because Ashby is perhaps the most forgotten major auteur of the 70s.
Minnie and Moskowitz (1971)
Minnie and Moskowitzcould easily be retitled as “Men Who Yell atGena RowlandsAbout Why They Should Be an Item”. But withJohn Cassavetesscript, the yelling is fun. Exhibit A, Zelmo Swift (Val Avery), a funny-named rich guy who’s “terrified of women” and a really bad date conversationalist but pure movie gold for the date from hell who goes on and on about her appearance and how “terrific” she is without ever allowing her to speak. Exhibit B, the wildly mustached valet, Seymour Moskowitz (Seymour Cassel,Jason Schwartzman’s dad inRushmore). Moskowitz rescues Minnie from the end of that date and then immediately tries to take her out on a hot dog date. Unlike Zelmo, he does ask her questions but Minnie barely responds.
Minnie and Moskowitzintroduces its two main characters while they have a separate conversation about cinema. Ultimately, this is an insight into their worldview. Seymour sees movies as an escape and Minnie sees them as false hope (“They set you up. And no matter how bright you are, you still believe it.”). Cassavetes follows the meet cute/knight-in-shining-armor formula of a movie romance, but instead has “the prize” be a woman who’s given up and close to comatose in concern to any emotional feelings at all. Minnie represents how ugly the world can be and how sad movies can thus become for giving hope and Seymour represents how alive the mundane can become with just a mindset of looking for entertainment. One is successful; the other is a step above a bum (but he’s also kind to bums and kind of mean to successful people). Seymour’s pursuit isn’t exactly romantic but romance does feel possible between them and that’s this movie’s journey: presenting the possibility of romance instead of the movie version where romance is sealed by the end credits.
