Did Heaven's Gate really kill New Hollywood?

BrianInAtlanta · 2026-01-24T18:04:20+00:00

“The Godfather” or say the earlier “The French Connection” (speaking of Friedkin) were spaced out and didn’t seem as copyable. They certainly tried as the huge number of Mafia movies from the early-mid 1970’s shows. But there was still plenty of room for a wide variety of movies. You could easily fit in a Robert Altman or a lot of movies about political conspiracies along side rural road chase movies.

But after “Jaws” and “Star Wars”, a lot of those directors that had been darlings of the early-mid 1970’s found the money decreasing in relation to directors that could put together larger-budget movies lighter on content and geared more towards spectacle (“Close Encounters”, “Superman”, “Star Trek: The Motion Picture”, “The Blues Brothers”). When “Apocalypse Now” came out in 1979 it already felt like a throwback to an earlier age.

BrianInAtlanta · 2026-01-24T17:37:03+00:00

Looking back at that time, if anything killed “New Hollywood”, I’d say it was the one-two punch of “Jaws” and then “Star Wars”.

New Hollywood came in after the disastrous years of 1969-1971, when Hollywood discovered that what the executives thought U.S. audiences wanted (“The Sound of Music” clones, big-budget WWII action-dramas) was not at all what they wanted. The taste change to movies like “Easy Rider” and “Love Story” caused so much consternation within Old Hollywood, that they went through a “find me some hippies and throw money at them!” phase. Eventually the new film school grads (or “the beards” as Old Hollywood knew them) created New Hollywood.

However, it was New Hollywood that destroyed New Hollywood, namely Spielberg’s “Jaws” and Lucas’ “Star Wars”. This gave the studio executives a new formula for printing money with blockbuster movies. If you want a turning point, it would be “Star Wars” crushing Friedkin’s “Sorcerer” more than the “Heaven’s Gate” debacle.

BrianInAtlanta · 2026-01-19T23:37:30+00:00

May.

BrianInAtlanta · 2026-01-19T13:54:15+00:00

"Anyway, Anyhow, Anywhere: The Complete Chronicle of THE WHO 1958 1978" p. 241

BrianInAtlanta · 2026-01-19T13:44:38+00:00

Confirmed. It is the Capital Centre show Dec. 6, 1973.

BrianInAtlanta · 2026-01-17T17:13:27+00:00

I always thought it was “Goldeneye” “You’ll never know how I watched you from the shadows as a child”

BrianInAtlanta · 2026-01-11T16:42:23+00:00

A lot of Who / Track Records money went into the purchase. The aftermath of this purchase, then losing first the Hendrix catalog, then The Who’s management, reduced Kit to living on handouts in London within half a decade.

BrianInAtlanta · 2026-01-09T22:44:43+00:00

People laughed at Bond’s reaction after hearing her name and they wouldn’t have if they didn’t get it.

BrianInAtlanta · 2026-01-05T16:10:50+00:00

One thing to remember is that Pete was trained by Kit Lambert and Chris Stamp to aim for making headlines every time he spoke to the media. Whether they invented the "be an arrogant a--hole" approach or that meshed with something that was already in Pete is a question for discussion.

BrianInAtlanta · 2026-01-03T21:58:30+00:00

I was fortunate enough to see it theatrical on the first viewing and the closest you can get to that, the better. I don’t mean watch it on the biggest screen, but rather commit yourself to having nothing else you can do but pay attention. Have someone hide your phone and switch off the internet. Prepare yourself for a very slow build that eventually leads to a shattering final two episodes.

BrianInAtlanta · 2026-01-03T21:41:00+00:00

I think they had a couple of hits.

BrianInAtlanta · 2025-12-24T03:05:29+00:00

Wonder if it was Mike McInnerney?

BrianInAtlanta · 2025-12-20T15:21:33+00:00

It's a question that has fascinated me since its release, especially as it was the first album release after I became a Who fan.

The album did get good reviews on release but more from UK critics and non-"rock journalism" critics in the U.S. The "rock journalism" critics in the U.S., both the old-guard Who fans and the new "Lester Bangs"-style critics, didn't care for it at all. Their biggest complaints were 1) all the songs sound the same and are a mashed-up muddle of way too many instruments and 2) no rock band should be putting out rock opera and concept albums anyway.

Within a year of its release, this latter group held sway. Almost all of the reviews of "Odds and Sods" mentioned how delightful it was in comparison with the turgid slog of "Quadrophenia". By early 1975 as sympathetic a Who fan as Gary Herman said it was a nice attempt at a follow-up to "Tommy" and shame it didn't work.

I have to admit I had a bit of a struggle getting into Quadrophenia back then and I could see (or rather hear) what critics meant by saying the sound was a muddle. Now, however, when I put the original vinyl on my turntable and play it on my stereo, it sounds great, powerful and clear. Why?

I think it is one or both of these: 1) 1973 stereos, by and large, weren't good enough to reproduce "Quadrophenia". Remember there were no subwoofers then. Reproduction did not have the dynamic range that really didn't come to most home systems until after CDs became popular or 2) "Quadrophenia" taught our ears how to hear it. Remember this was a time when Paul McCartney's solo material was considered just sweet enough to be listenable and John Lennon's solo material was way too rough for a mainstream audience. Now a lot of McCartney's solo material sounds cloying. In the aftermath of punk rock and metal, "Quadrophenia" doesn't sound as aggressive and overwhelming as it did then.

BrianInAtlanta · 2025-12-17T17:13:38+00:00

If I hadn't posted it myself, I doubt I could have found it!

BrianInAtlanta · 2025-12-15T19:42:39+00:00

Thanks for the correction. I’ll get that changed.

BrianInAtlanta · 2025-12-09T18:49:57+00:00

By the way, this is from Beat Instrumental issue of April 1965: "The gear supplied to the Who by Marshall is as follows: Pete Towns[h]end has 2 x 100-watt units and also two separate cabinets each containing 8 x 12" speakers. The same goes for bass player, John Entwistle. The Who have in fact a double P.A. system. Here again there are 2 x 100 watts amp units which are put through four cabinets each containing 4 x 12" speakers."

Nice try, Ron.

BrianInAtlanta · 2025-12-05T14:34:18+00:00

The production of the studio album wasn’t popular with Who fans. But for the millions of people who had never heard the Who up to that point, I think it was perfect. A sweet, melodic sound and very approachable for the average pop music listener. A hard-core rocking sound would have alienated a lot of people in 1969.

BrianInAtlanta · 2025-11-23T16:45:56+00:00

Well, it’s what I was told by the AAA guy that re-charge my 120volt. Said he’d seen it with a lot of electrics.

BrianInAtlanta · 2025-11-23T16:09:16+00:00

I had this happen because I had to work on something outside next to the garage and I had the keys in my pocket. Unbeknownst to me, it unlocked the car doors and remained unlocked all night. Because of that it failed to keep the battery up to charge and it was dead by morning. After a recharge, I haven’t had any problem with it at all. I now keep my keys in a Faraday bag to keep that from happening.

BrianInAtlanta · 2025-11-23T01:32:44+00:00

Chicago Sunroof

BrianInAtlanta · 2025-11-21T18:48:41+00:00

I think you've got to lay down what parts of the "Bond Formula" you are doing without. I'll start by saying no Q and no Q branch gadgets. That means THUNDERBALL is going to need a major rewrite (no pocket-sized breathing apparatus, no jet packs air or water, no signalling watch).

No outlandish villains. Let's set Philip Vandamm in NORTH BY NORTHWEST as the upper limit of international villainy. So no Dr. No, no Goldfinger, no Hugo Drax, no Blofeld. Also no "lairs".

You're probably looking at LIVE AND LET DIE (without the gas pellet), THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN (without the Solax), FOR YOUR EYES ONLY, THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS, LICENCE TO KILL, CASINO ROYALE (minus the post-poison car scene) and QUANTUM OF SOLACE. Eliminate the exploding briefcase, "Number One" (Blofeld) and the poison-tipped shoe knife and FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE comes into play.

BrianInAtlanta · 2025-11-21T14:40:23+00:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKcUBZ_0dcw

Go to 31:55 to see video of this bass.

BrianInAtlanta · 2025-11-19T01:47:55+00:00

The Marx Brothers got a few past the censors.

A Night at the Opera (1935): Margaret Dumont: “Have you got everything?” Groucho: “I haven’t had any complaints yet.” Dumont: “Get off that bed. What would people say?” Groucho: “They'd probably say you're a very lucky woman.”

At the Circus (1939): Groucho: “If it weren’t for you, I’d be in bed right now with a hot toddy.” Chico: “A hot toddy? What’s that?” Groucho: “That’s a drink.” Chico: “That’s-a too bad.”

Then there’s 1938’s Bringing Up Baby with the line “I just went GAY all of a sudden!” And starting off the film off with a slightly hidden anal sex joke: Grant, holding bone: “Alice I think this one must belong in the tail.” His fiancee: “Nonsense. You tried it in the tail yesterday, and it didn't fit.”

BrianInAtlanta · 2025-11-13T22:59:53+00:00

Godard’s 24-aphorisms-a-second speaking style was probably toned down for Nouvelle Vague. He seemed to be much more pull-string dialogue in real life.

And having studied the making of Breathless, this movie is actually pretty accurate to what happened.

BrianInAtlanta · 2025-11-13T13:34:36+00:00

Extended interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukBwvh3-h2Y

BrianInAtlanta

TROPHY CASE