Boucher, Geoff. "The stickup that shook it up; Warren Beatty and Arthur Penn recall how their cinematic spree of 'Bonnie and Clyde' transformed Hollywood." Los Angeles Times 23 Mar. 2008. LexisNexis Academic. LexisNexis. 26 Mar. 2008. http://proxy.library.upenn.edu:5591/us/lnacademic/returnTo.do?returnToKey=20_T3420152182


The Los Angeles Times article interviews Warren Beatty and Arthur Penn to provide unique insight into the production and impact of Bonnie and Clyde. Boucher describes Bonnie and Clyde as a “jarring film” full of bloody realism, thrills, and anti-establishment themes. While some critics and older viewers saw the film as a sign of amoral society, the film really resonated with young audiences because it was new and different. Penn called the film “part Texas, part Paris”, which signifies the integration of American themes and French New Wave cinema. Additionally, Beatty recalls how Jack Warner consistently reminded him of “who’s name was on the water tower” to assert his power. Regardless, Penn and Beatty agreed not to change the script or the graphic depiction of violence; defying a studio head was a groundbreaking move. Furthermore, instead of filming on the Warner lot, Penn moved production to small towns throughout Texas to enhance the realism of the film and depict the desperation of the rural countryside. Both Beatty and Warner recall how they were unaware of how influential the film would be.
These interviews lend unique, first-hand support to the idea that Bonnie and Clyde changed Hollywood institutions and set new standards. Penn and Beatty both acknowledge that they did things their own way, and not necessarily how things had been done in the past, which contributed to the immense success of this film. They inspired a new generation of filmmakers who had a personal vision, and attracted younger audiences by breaking tradition.

Hoberman, J. “If You Are a Bonnie-and-Clyder…:The Birth of Radical Chic.” The Dream Life: Movies, Media and the Mythology of the Sixties. New York: The New Press, 2003.

Hoberman discusses the influx of violence in American society, and how Bonnie and Clyde simultaneously changed the depiction of violence on screen. In fact, he uses the term “pornoviolence” to explain the new cultural fascination with violence. Released in 1967, Bonnie and Clyde was preceded by a summer of extreme turbulence, ranging from race riots to the Black Panthers violent crusade. Bonnie and Clyde’s release was extremely provocative (including the slogan “They’re young, they’re in love…and they kill people”). The film endears viewers to the main characters, especially in the beginning with the outlaws’ comic slipups. Furthermore, the criminals are depicted with both symbols of power (such as guns) and freedom (such as fast cars). This heightened the controversy surrounding the film because never before had cold-blooded killers also been seen as likable and alluring. Yet, given the cultural context, the rebellious nature of the main characters was well received by a society full of upheaval and protest.
Hoberman’s analysis clearly supports the idea that Bonnie and Clyde broke taboos and glamorized forbidden lifestyles. Hoberman says that Bonnie and Clyde introduced a carefree, enchanting, yet rebellious “bonnie-and-clyder” attitude in society. More specifically, he says this movie led to “the birth of radical chic," which he defines as a trend away from convention and toward radicalism. Arthur Penn made violence entertaining and created sympathetic perpetrators, which established a new way to portray criminals and violence.

Crowther, Bosley. "Bonnie and Clyde." The New York Times 14 Apr. 1967. 5 Apr.
     2008 <http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/
     review?res=EE05E7DF173CE361BC4C52DFB266838C679EDE>.

    Bosley Crowther’s original New York Times review condemns Bonnie and Clyde, most famously declaring, “This blending of farce with brutal killings is as pointless as it is lacking in taste.”  His review criticizes both the lead actors and director for combining slapstick comedy with gory violence, which he finds neither entertaining nor purposeful. This review clearly demonstrates how appalled Crowther was with the level of violence and “ridiculous” portrayal of crime. Not only does he find the combination of comedy and violence horrific, but says the film is not at all representative of the real story of the Barrow Gang. Lastly, Crowther attacks the portrayal of a “sleazy, moronic pair” as fun-loving, carefree, and sympathetic characters.
    This review lends unique insight into the immediate and controversial reception of the film. Crowther clearly represents those critics who belive this movie was too graphic and insensitive in its glamorization of crime. It is significant to note that despite such scathing reviews, the film was a huge success, which demonstrates Bonnie and Clyde’s ability to speak to and attract audiences.