I miss movies of this era. The feel, look and simplicity of telling a story in a complicated way. What? no CGI monsters? i'm okay with that. I like the tones of Information theory/ Information processing theory that the movie brings up. i did come here, after seeing this movie referenced in S4 of Mr. Robot

> *"In a world of lies, the truth becomes a dangerous weapon."* Joseph Turner (Robert Redford), a CIA researcher, returns from lunch to find his colleagues murdered. His flight through 1970s New York exposes a conspiracy within the agency itself that reaches the highest levels of power. ### **Why It Remains a Masterpiece** - **Architecture of Fear**: New York becomes a labyrinth of paranoia through meticulous cinematography that uses the World Trade Center as an impersonal symbol of power and claustrophobic spaces like phone booths to create visceral tension - **Bureaucracy of Betrayal**: The CIA is depicted not as shadowy villains but as career bureaucrats who discuss assassination and geopolitical manipulation with the dry professionalism of accountants reviewing ledgers - **Human Cost**: The relationship between Turner and Kathy (Faye Dunaway) provides emotional depth to the paranoia, showcasing how ordinary people become entangled in systems beyond their control ### **Defining Sequences** [spoiler] - **The Opening Sequence**: The peaceful routine of the bookshop—coffee brewing, colleagues chatting—makes the sudden professional violence that follows more shocking - **Phone Booth Confrontation**: Turner trapped in glass screaming for help while indifferent crowds pass by, creating perfect metaphor for isolation within society - **Joubert's Philosophy**: The hitman's chilling lesson about the nature of modern employment: "The question is not 'why?' It's 'who for?'" - **Final Confrontation**: Higgins' devastating question that destroys any hope of victory: "How do you know they'll print it?" [/spoiler] ### **The Ending's Legacy** [spoiler]Turner survives but doesn't win. He walks into a crowd of New Yorkers understanding that the system has absorbed his rebellion and will continue unchanged. His final expression shows a man condemned to perpetual vigilance in a world where trust is impossible[/spoiler] ★★★★★ — A prescient masterpiece that understood institutional power before we had the language to describe it. More relevant today than ever.

Recorded this move because I'd heard of it, but never seen it. Wasn't sure I wanted to invest the effort in it, so it sat unwatched for a while, but one extra boring evening, when I started watching it with the wife, knew it would only be a matter of time before the complaining started. :) But, after hanging in there a bit, got interesting pretty quick and we stuck with it. It seemed to be a pioneer of what would be many, more modern, conspiracy-romance-twist type movies to come. Robert Redford - very cool in his day.

First time viewing, due to the connection being made with Captain America: The Winter Soldier. While the action scenes are not at the same level as modern films, the intrigues were sufficient to keep my attention. One of the stranger sex scenes. The artistic choice made to edit the scene was an epic fail. Would have been more effective to just have faded to black.

Yes, he's Robert Redford. I get this. He's beautiful AF. But how would this happen? This creepy affaire - feels more like rape and Stockholm syndrome tbh - almost destroys this movie. It was not even necessary for the story. Otherwise an above the average thriller. Story is easy to follow (other thrillers often feature stories that are too convoluted to enjoy). Features some nice cinematography of 70's NYC (e.g. the all-new Twin Towers). Good sound (more like a film noire soundtrack). Good cuts. Good atmosphere. Awesome spy tech! One question though: Around the 30 minutes mark, when Kathy is buying her skiing stuff, what is happening here? Is the guy checking her credit card limits or account balance something? Is that how this worked for in the 70s?