Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Conversation (1974)

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 34 posts

Re: The Conversation (1974)

#21

Post by jfb »

danso wrote: post #4

I submitted the Netflix link last week but didn't comment in the discussion...I'll just chime in with this: * Reportedly Gene Hackman's favorite role of all time * Young pre-Star-Wars Harrison Ford plays a total asshole in this movie * Great ending * One of the 5 John Cazale movies (Fredo in Godfather) * The movie Coppola had scripted a decade before, but had to wait until Godfather was a success before he could fina…

OT: John Cazale had the most astonishing career of any actor ever. Six years, five movies, five nominees for Best Picture (The Godfather, The Godfather Part II, The Conversation, Dog Day Afternoon, Deer Hunter), three winners. And then he died. Just a remarkable life.

Re: The Conversation (1974)

#23

Post by jfb »

beloch wrote: post #5

Obviously, this is being posted because of the NSA and FBI scandals even though it was, originally, more of a response to the Watergate scandal. Even if you're sick of hearing about all of those this is still a fantastic film and well worth watching. Gene Hackman plays a private consultant who specializes in the surveillance of difficult targets, such as people talking as they walk through a crowd. Technology is hand…

It's also a great San Francisco movie.

Re: The Conversation (1974)

#25

Post by anigbrowl »

res0nat0r wrote: post #22
anigbrowl wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meh, that's a kid's film. A fun kid's film, but still.

Wut. That is one of the best "hacker" movies that has come out of Hollywood. Great film.

I don't agree. The McGuffin (the decryptor chip) is magic, the ethical conundrums are juvenile. It's teenage wish fulfilment for liberal geeks (and I say that as a liberal geek); a high-tech version of the Blues Brothers and just about every gang-of-mistfits-thwart-horrible-landlord film.

Sorry, but I saw it in the theater when it came out and it was just a total let-down - not my idea of a serious film at all.

Re: The Conversation (1974)

#26

Post by timmaxw »

olympus wrote: post #20
cleverjake wrote: post #2

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6348750

This was on the front page less than a week ago. It's technically not a repost, but it feels the same. While I am more tolerant of reposts of things that never made it to the front page, stuff like this makes me feel bad for HN as it indicates the arrival of one or more phenomena: 1. A reddit-like circle jerk where the same stuff gets posted and the same conversations are had multiple times. 2. A reddit-like continge…

I speculate that re-posts get voted to the front page because the users who are voting on them didn't see them the first time around.

The fraction of HN users that see a post on average depends on how long a typical post stays on the front page and on how often a typical HN user checks HN. I don't know what those parameters are, but I think it's plausible that a typical HN user sees fewer than half of all front-page posts, in which case it wouldn't be surprising for there to be some re-posts.

If something changed about those statistics--for example, perhaps more posts per hour leads to a typical story staying on the front page for a shorter time--then that could account for an increase in the number of re-posts.

Also, I'm not sure that there is actually a trend towards more re-posts on HN. It seems like the kind of thing that would be easy to mis-estimate.

Re: The Conversation (1974)

#27

Post by vorg »

beloch wrote: post #5

Obviously, this is being posted because of the NSA and FBI scandals even though it was, originally, more of a response to the Watergate scandal. Even if you're sick of hearing about all of those this is still a fantastic film and well worth watching. Gene Hackman plays a private consultant who specializes in the surveillance of difficult targets, such as people talking as they walk through a crowd. Technology is hand…

> "Obviously, this is being posted because”...

Or maybe it's part of someone showing off to someone else that they're part of the action.

Re: The Conversation (1974)

#28

Post by res0nat0r »

anigbrowl wrote: post #25
res0nat0r wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wut. That is one of the best "hacker" movies that has come out of Hollywood. Great film.

I don't agree. The McGuffin (the decryptor chip) is magic, the ethical conundrums are juvenile. It's teenage wish fulfilment for liberal geeks (and I say that as a liberal geek); a high-tech version of the Blues Brothers and just about every gang-of-mistfits-thwart-horrible-landlord film. Sorry, but I saw it in the theater when it came out and it was just a total let-down - not my idea of a serious film at all.

There aren't many better examples from Hollywood out there, so we have to take what we can get...

Re: The Conversation (1974)

#30

Post by zetazzed »

codebaobab wrote: post #8

"He'd kill us if he got the chance." "He'd kill us if he got the chance." "He'd kill us if he got the chance." "He'd kill us if he got the chance."

The line actually changes - it was recorded twice, once with each emphasis. Coppola expressed regret about the decision, since he also considered just using one take of the line and allowing the audience to imagine the different inflections.
Post reply on HN