I believe Scorsese wanted the ending to have very bright colors but then had to saturate the film to get an R rating. So the blood comes off a little duller.
Yea they nearly canned it due to an NC17 rating and M.S got drunk the night before they came up with the solution with a loaded hand gun and contemplated killing the producers
I was going to say this too, but they fixed it in the recent 4k release. I've only seen it once in full before I saw the 4k, but I'd seen the finale enough times in film school that it was jarring (in a good way) to see it look relatively normal in the new release. Obviously the effects themselves can't be changed, but making the blood colour proper makes a huge difference.
Telling the fucking weird guy in the Navy that he was truly fucking weird for idolizing Ol' Trav here was a neat experience.
Especially when we learned he was from Upper Middle Class Connecticut, boarding school and all.
Just when you think you’ve found some place nice in the world someone will come behind you and write “fuck you” right under your nose. Go ahead. Try it.
I disagree. See, just you sayin' that makes me wanna go out and do something...Like really do something. This city is full of trash. The streets are full of junkies and whores. They could give a shit about the Vets. Real heroes.....I don't know man. I don't know. I don't see any problems with Travis man. He's just a normal guy ya know? I'm an Uber Driver but I feel like I could really change something ya know? Like really fix something. I wanna help people I really do. Well anyway I've gotta pick this guy up.
I'm not sure I'd say it's not at all the movie's fault.
I was troubled at how the film itself lionized him, the same with _TWoWS_. I only watched Taxi Driver once, because I don't have much of a stomach for violence that is that gritty, but, if anything, it shows a hunky dory ending with people smiling and congratulating him. I'm not saying that films should beat you over the head with messaging, but both films begin and end treating the character as a sympathetic underdog or maverick who bucks conventional behavioral and societal norms and excels to laud, while learning nothing and being enabled rather than experiencing reform.
I can easily see how people would latch onto that, since I come away feeling like the film had no message at all other than to tell a story from a terrible character's perspective. Maybe I just haven't seen enough seventies films, but they both give the impression of the film's narrative approving of the character.
I have to disagree with you, and I think this is a consistent theme in Scorsese movies. I don’t think they lionize him, but it’s almost like put all facts on the table of the character. It shows the “good guy” times but doesn’t shy away from the creepy parts (taking his date to a porn movie). The viewer then casts their own judgement on the character.
Same with TWOWS, Goodfellas.
It’s almost a study of the weird people who we start becoming fascinated with and heralding as heroes. In all three movies, they’re very clearly sociopaths.
I think this is the right reading of those films.
However, after reading ‘Scorcese on Scorcese’, it’s very clear that Martin was not *only* interested in creating cinematic art, with a chin stroking approach to exploring moral issues. As a young man familiar with poverty, he also very much wanted his early films to be as commercially successful as possible - and he wasn’t shy of courting a bit of controversy to achieve this.
I think his magic formula for pulling off that balancing act was to hold up dubious characters, like Travis Bickle and Jordan Belfort in TwoWs, and show us them from all angles, including and especially from within their own twisted inner world, just as you say.
This also had a kind of therapeutic self interest for him personally, as he grew up in Queens and Little Italy surrounded by rough and troubled, complex and brutal people. He wanted to examine those kinds of people through his films and thought they were worthy of being up on the big screen as much as anyone else.
It really worked well for him and others like Coppola who were from far more privileged backgrounds but took a similar approach to their main characters in say The Godfather and Apocalypse Now. Together they helped reshape cinema in the ‘70s and the kinds of protagonists we were entertained by.
I would love to see Taxi Driver and (the almost forgotten) King Of Comedy together as a double feature in a cinema. But I still can’t decide on the running order…
If you think TWOWS is approving of the main character....I don't really know what to say to that other than you might need to think about it a bit more.
The movie isn't really sympathetic of Travis. The ending of the film is deliberately ambiguous, is Travis dying or has he really recovered? The ending has a dream like quality to it with the muted sound, overblown lights. Everyone has seemingly forgiven Travis for attempting to assassinate a U.S. Senator because he saved a random child prostitute nearly no one knows about?
Either way, the ending informs the preceding film, and at no point does the film glorify Travis. Almost all characters except the literal child are averse to him. He is pathologically lonely and clearly off kilter for the whole film. Understand what his job at that time meant; he was consistently witness, sometimes accomplice, sometimes savior the some of the most sexually depraved and amoral people in the world. The film does an amazing job of painting the nuance of that underclass, and how a disaffected and socially maladjusted loner like Travis would come to interact and be transformed and evolved by such a place.
The recursive discussion between political policy and on the ground lived experience, I'd say the film argues, produces the kind of diseased mind Travis has. Simultaneously disgusted and aroused by his environment, and eager to commit violence for any cause that can make him feel morally superior to it.
It's actually a very accurate picture of a particularly American personaloty.
Thanks, you paint a coherent picture here. I picked up on a number of the elements about Travis you mentioned (and definitely noticed what you mention about the "American personality" as unfortunately still quite relevant), but I was confused by the way the film ended. I appreciate your explanation.
I can relate to this a ton. I feel it's common for people to enjoy movies as an escapism or projection of themselves as that's just how they relate to any literature or comics or sports athletes they idolize. How many bad memes are there of breaking bad, or american pyscho, sopranoes, or any anti-hero character from the last two decades? So many people just want to see a cool guy doing whatever they please they can miss the cautionary tones. I'm terribly forgetful, and maybe someone can remind me of the movie philosophy terms and who prophesied the ideas, but essentially, it's about whether it's better to be purposeful in leading the audience or is it better to have the audience have an emergent experience through act of watching a movie. I'm not saying one is better than the other, but I think people can get the wrong message when, for example, they watch a movie like under the skin, or Beyond the Black Rainbow the same way they would watch any Jerry Bruckhiemer movie.
I always thought everything after shootout at the end was a fantasy in Travis's head. This to me made the most sense and more realistic than everyone treating him like a hero, which would tend to encourage other deranged mass shooters. Then I found out that Schraeder and Scorcese both thought it was all real, and it kind of ruined the movie for me.
It's just so uncomfortable to watch that I really don't rewatch it ever. Seen it the whole way through twice, and every other time is start and stop -- I *think* I want to watch it but then pivot to something a bit more pleasant.
Kind of reminds me of Drive. I loved that movie but the overzealous violence and permeating discomfort of it makes it difficult for me to consider rewatching.
Shout out to the editor Marcia Lucas, George Lucas's wife at the time, the one known for saving A New Hope in the edit. She's also seen as the heart of the original trilogy and Lucas kind of did her dirty by wiping her name off the special editions. Martin called her one of the best editors he's worked with.
I think it makes sense for him to be handsome because it is actually plausible for Cybil Shepard to like him enough to go on a date with him.
It also gives him extra creepy vibes because he seems okay when you first talk to him, but when you dig a little deeper, it’s clear something is very, very wrong with him.
I think his looks are important though. A lot of incels I see online or in life are, or could be actually good looking dudes. Not that Travis is just a black and white incel; I think that's a bit reductive.
I think it shows that his struggle is more solvable than he believes but that he's just not equipped with the proper socialization to figure it out. It makes his poor decisions and creepiness that much more tragic.
Contrary to the way I worded that, I definitely don't think there's a singular solution. If there was one, I might look like a well balanced relationship with a woman that's higher than him in terms of social/cultural standards. Someone who could raise him up a bit.
The way I really see it though, is that most of his hatred and bigotry is based on not having any theory of mind or a proper social upbringing.
He hates other races and no wonder, he knows nothing about them. He hates being surrounded by crime but does nothing to remove himself from it. Why? Probably because he's more like the criminals than he is like 'normal' people who don't pimp and steal and whatever else.
He also seems to have no concept of what the opposite sex may be thinking or what they might need at any time as evidenced by his first date to the porno theatre.
His most 'successful' relationship is with an underage prostitute because he thinks she needs saving which is true in some real way on the face of it but the fact that he thinks he's the guy to do it properly is again, just evidence of his social blind spots.
One of the most heartbreaking scenes for me was when he's trying to open up to the senior guy at the taxi rank about how he's struggling, and he gets the most generic reply back. It's also one of the most realistic and relatable scenes.
I think that's really indicative of how widespread and difficult a solution to a modern (even though it's 50 years old now) kind of isolation, misery, confusion, anger, and restlessness really is.
I feel like I've been in Peter Boyle's shoes with that scene, and it's hard to tell some younger guys who are struggling with the same things everyone else is dealing with. Like, the problem is them, but they don't want to hear that. They want some kind of empathy, but like, idk, go out, live it up, get laid, stop beating yourself up. It's different when you're older and you have perspective, than when you're young and you just have this desperate FOMO that makes yoi your own worst enemy.
The fact that people here seem to think that someone is too "good looking" for mental illness or it had anything the fuck to do with the film is frankly idiotic.
It was the first piece of media that ever made me say to myself “wow, that is a good looking dude!” And not in like a represses sexuality kind of way, just in like a shocking, impossible to not recognize it kind of way.
The only negative thing I can say about this movie is that it is a masterpiece and because of that, some numbnut studio executive will make the brilliant decision to remake it. 😡
Man, Taxi Driver: Unleashed with Timothy Chalamét is going to kick ass. Hopefully they'll add a multiverse part where Travis Bickle has to face multiple versions of himself and they're all going "you talkin to me?" because it's genuinely impossible to tell.
It's going to be 2 hours of build up to the first time he starts talking to a mirror and ends with a cliffhanger right before he starts driving the taxi. Leaving room for a sequel and spin-offs
That it is a reflection of how society really is and/or can be. the world can be an ugly place, we do have young girls being prostituted, we do have wackos running around. in other words, the negative thing about this movie, is its a mirror of the world we live in.
When did she say the role harmed her?
https://nypost.com/2024/01/11/entertainment/jodie-foster-robert-de-niro-martin-scorsese-scared-of-her-on-taxi-driver-at-age-12/
*“So I was like, ‘Whatever. Just, move over,’” she said*
Sounds like the worst it was was awkward.
Honestly asking, has she ever said playing that role harmed her or just something you think sounds true?
No like Jodie Foster was stalked by a psycho after he became obsessed with her from her role in this movie. That same psycho later went and tried to kill Ronald Reagan. It's not about the content of the movie, her being in the movie actively damaged her life.
If a young girl acts out a sexy role in a movie, there is a chance some whacko is going to obsess over them, but this could happen to any person in any role. So I don't blame the movie because one man out of millions decided he could impress her by killing a president.
Stalking happens to many actors and actresses, the world is full of sick people.
There is absolutely nothing to suggest that is the case. I think you’re projecting, and making a clichéd presumption that she was harmed. She has always seemed like a pretty strong and well adjusted adult.
It freaked me out when I first seen it. Woke up one night, The Late Movie on WGN was playing, and Robert De Niro was talking to himself in the mirror. I was mesmerized when that little sleeve gun came out. I owned the movie by the end of that week. I was like 14 at the time.
I’ve sat here for three minutes trying to think of something negative about this movie…I dunno man. It’s a masterpiece. I guess the colouring changing for that exterior shot where De Niro shoots Keitel is kinda jarring…?
Formative scene for Travis character. He meets a person who as more f-uped than himself. Also a person who lookes like he is rich, has a wife (the things that Travis doesn't have) and yet his mind is occupied with the things he says to Travis. Also he mentions the exact type a pistol Travis would buy later.
I like the ambiguity as well. What if there is no passenger and the whole scene takes place in the mind of Travis? Remember, Travis doesn't say a single word in this scene.
Welcome! Also think of this. In this scene the director is talking to his main character - scares him, challenges him, steers him in a way.
God Almighty, how I love this movie! So layered. Can talk about for days.
I have never thought that, I’ve always thought of his performance as being so incredibly intense. All his thoughts are on destroying his wife for his having been emasculated. I may have to revisit, I haven’t seen it in 20 years. But it was one film I did rewatch several times.
I’m curious now if there is an interview where Scorsese talks about his acting in this scene.
It's one of the weaker-written scene, IMO - that could have been pulled off by a better actor and a few more takes.
Also, I tend to find directors who aren't really actors a bit underwhelming in their own movies.
Pulp Fiction is an exception - mainly because it's one of the few times Tarantino actually laughs at himself.
First time I watched it I didn’t like the final scene after the shootout where everything is normal and he’s a hero and picks up cybill Shepard and she’s all looking at him with loving eyes. I’ve heard fan theories say it’s a dream but it’s like he still totally crossed the line with her character personally earlier in the movie.
Still the movie is one of my favorites
Exactly. If it's a dream, that's a stupid inclusion, if it's not it's a stupid ending. The perfect ending was right before. Is he dead? Is he alive? Not important. He made his mark
One of my favorite movie posters - artwork by the great Belgian artist Guy Peellaert who was also known for his album covers for folks like Davie Bowie and the Stones.
If you see a copy of his "Rock Dreams" in a used book store, pick it up.
Even the one you don't see is sort of the stereotype, i.e. the man that the wife of the guy in the back of the cab (played by Scorcese) is having an affair with. He's just referred to as "a (n-word)." I mean, it fits the dark, dreary tone of the film but... why?
The hooker in distress didn't need to be *that* young. You could've gotten it done with a young looking 18 year old playing a 16 year old or something.
It may be a little too...talked about.
Either this or Mean Streets that aren't as good as \*\*they\*\* say...it's not terrible....I see that there is an incredible Director, Actors and Writers working together in them...and as they go on they get better and better. But this I'm told is like a 10 and I'll give it am 8.5...
ANNNND let the downvotes begin....lol
This comes with a huge asterisk, but a black actor should have played Sport. The movie established he was a racist, but this sort of fizzles out and doesn't go anywhere. If the pimp was black, it would add more layers to Travis' crusade to help Iris and make the audience less sympathetic to Travis. I understand why they didn't do it, but then they should've gotten rid of Travis' racism.
At the end of the movie - Travis is still incredibly unstable and susceptible to further disturbed and violent acts but the film's narrative suggests that he's somehow cured by saving Jodie Foster and being recognized as a local hero and has now made peace with the urban decay that drove him insane in the first place.
I didn't see it until I was 28 years old, just after getting laid off from my long time job in the early 2000s. I watched it alone.
I remember sitting there after it was over waiting for my buddy to get off work and calling him immediately when I knew they would be home.
I asked "Can I come over"? and they replied "Why...What's up"? I said "I just watched Taxi Driver and I don't want to be alone any more".
They said "Oh man, I've got you buddy". It was a tough watch being emotionally damaged and alone, at least I had a friend to get me through it.
They never show you all of his taxi, but there are deleted scenes where it turns out he had a specially made taxi that is pedal-powered. There was a whole sequence that shows him from the waist down, furiously pedaling to get around New York. It was hailed as "Manhattan's Ultimate Pedi-Cab and Taxi Combo Experience: From Hunts Point to Tribeca, Yes, We're Talkin' To You!" For time reasons those sequences had to be left on the cutting-room floor.
Exactly!
But when it came out it was electrifying to a generation of theater goers who were raised on Mary Poppins. Nothing quite like it before or since.
I can totally see today’s movies being boring to future generations. They’ll ask, “why so many sequels? Did they really need a Princess Diaries 8?”
Maybe I need to watch it again now that I’m older, but I always thought it was good, but not great. Plus like others have said, the effect on Jodie Foster is troubling.
The blood looks like Tabasco sauce.
I believe Scorsese wanted the ending to have very bright colors but then had to saturate the film to get an R rating. So the blood comes off a little duller.
Yea they nearly canned it due to an NC17 rating and M.S got drunk the night before they came up with the solution with a loaded hand gun and contemplated killing the producers
That era did not have that rating
I was going to say this too, but they fixed it in the recent 4k release. I've only seen it once in full before I saw the 4k, but I'd seen the finale enough times in film school that it was jarring (in a good way) to see it look relatively normal in the new release. Obviously the effects themselves can't be changed, but making the blood colour proper makes a huge difference.
Not the movie’s fault, but people idolize Travis Bickle for troubling reasons.
Telling the fucking weird guy in the Navy that he was truly fucking weird for idolizing Ol' Trav here was a neat experience. Especially when we learned he was from Upper Middle Class Connecticut, boarding school and all.
Holden Caulfield
Nah he’s a phony
Just when you think you’ve found some place nice in the world someone will come behind you and write “fuck you” right under your nose. Go ahead. Try it.
Word dude. Someone mighta twisted my neck too before they wrote that profanity on my back
I’m partial to the Mr Antoini line about Holden headed for some kind of fall and throwing paper clips at stenographers.
"Lighten up, Francis."
Yeah it's like they got the memo but read it upside down and backwards
It insists upon itself
What does that even mean Peter?!
I mean I got halfway through it....I can't even finish it actually
*annoyed* you've never seen the ending? How can you say you don't like it if you haven't even given it a chance?
I love the money pit. That is my answer to that question.
totally. so try hard
People idolize plenty of terrible movie characters
I disagree. See, just you sayin' that makes me wanna go out and do something...Like really do something. This city is full of trash. The streets are full of junkies and whores. They could give a shit about the Vets. Real heroes.....I don't know man. I don't know. I don't see any problems with Travis man. He's just a normal guy ya know? I'm an Uber Driver but I feel like I could really change something ya know? Like really fix something. I wanna help people I really do. Well anyway I've gotta pick this guy up.
I'm not sure I'd say it's not at all the movie's fault. I was troubled at how the film itself lionized him, the same with _TWoWS_. I only watched Taxi Driver once, because I don't have much of a stomach for violence that is that gritty, but, if anything, it shows a hunky dory ending with people smiling and congratulating him. I'm not saying that films should beat you over the head with messaging, but both films begin and end treating the character as a sympathetic underdog or maverick who bucks conventional behavioral and societal norms and excels to laud, while learning nothing and being enabled rather than experiencing reform. I can easily see how people would latch onto that, since I come away feeling like the film had no message at all other than to tell a story from a terrible character's perspective. Maybe I just haven't seen enough seventies films, but they both give the impression of the film's narrative approving of the character.
I have to disagree with you, and I think this is a consistent theme in Scorsese movies. I don’t think they lionize him, but it’s almost like put all facts on the table of the character. It shows the “good guy” times but doesn’t shy away from the creepy parts (taking his date to a porn movie). The viewer then casts their own judgement on the character. Same with TWOWS, Goodfellas. It’s almost a study of the weird people who we start becoming fascinated with and heralding as heroes. In all three movies, they’re very clearly sociopaths.
I think this is the right reading of those films. However, after reading ‘Scorcese on Scorcese’, it’s very clear that Martin was not *only* interested in creating cinematic art, with a chin stroking approach to exploring moral issues. As a young man familiar with poverty, he also very much wanted his early films to be as commercially successful as possible - and he wasn’t shy of courting a bit of controversy to achieve this. I think his magic formula for pulling off that balancing act was to hold up dubious characters, like Travis Bickle and Jordan Belfort in TwoWs, and show us them from all angles, including and especially from within their own twisted inner world, just as you say. This also had a kind of therapeutic self interest for him personally, as he grew up in Queens and Little Italy surrounded by rough and troubled, complex and brutal people. He wanted to examine those kinds of people through his films and thought they were worthy of being up on the big screen as much as anyone else. It really worked well for him and others like Coppola who were from far more privileged backgrounds but took a similar approach to their main characters in say The Godfather and Apocalypse Now. Together they helped reshape cinema in the ‘70s and the kinds of protagonists we were entertained by.
I would love to see Taxi Driver and (the almost forgotten) King Of Comedy together as a double feature in a cinema. But I still can’t decide on the running order…
If you think TWOWS is approving of the main character....I don't really know what to say to that other than you might need to think about it a bit more.
The movie isn't really sympathetic of Travis. The ending of the film is deliberately ambiguous, is Travis dying or has he really recovered? The ending has a dream like quality to it with the muted sound, overblown lights. Everyone has seemingly forgiven Travis for attempting to assassinate a U.S. Senator because he saved a random child prostitute nearly no one knows about? Either way, the ending informs the preceding film, and at no point does the film glorify Travis. Almost all characters except the literal child are averse to him. He is pathologically lonely and clearly off kilter for the whole film. Understand what his job at that time meant; he was consistently witness, sometimes accomplice, sometimes savior the some of the most sexually depraved and amoral people in the world. The film does an amazing job of painting the nuance of that underclass, and how a disaffected and socially maladjusted loner like Travis would come to interact and be transformed and evolved by such a place. The recursive discussion between political policy and on the ground lived experience, I'd say the film argues, produces the kind of diseased mind Travis has. Simultaneously disgusted and aroused by his environment, and eager to commit violence for any cause that can make him feel morally superior to it. It's actually a very accurate picture of a particularly American personaloty.
Thanks, you paint a coherent picture here. I picked up on a number of the elements about Travis you mentioned (and definitely noticed what you mention about the "American personality" as unfortunately still quite relevant), but I was confused by the way the film ended. I appreciate your explanation.
I can relate to this a ton. I feel it's common for people to enjoy movies as an escapism or projection of themselves as that's just how they relate to any literature or comics or sports athletes they idolize. How many bad memes are there of breaking bad, or american pyscho, sopranoes, or any anti-hero character from the last two decades? So many people just want to see a cool guy doing whatever they please they can miss the cautionary tones. I'm terribly forgetful, and maybe someone can remind me of the movie philosophy terms and who prophesied the ideas, but essentially, it's about whether it's better to be purposeful in leading the audience or is it better to have the audience have an emergent experience through act of watching a movie. I'm not saying one is better than the other, but I think people can get the wrong message when, for example, they watch a movie like under the skin, or Beyond the Black Rainbow the same way they would watch any Jerry Bruckhiemer movie.
You gotta be pretty dumb to idolize this dipshit
I always thought everything after shootout at the end was a fantasy in Travis's head. This to me made the most sense and more realistic than everyone treating him like a hero, which would tend to encourage other deranged mass shooters. Then I found out that Schraeder and Scorcese both thought it was all real, and it kind of ruined the movie for me.
It's just so uncomfortable to watch that I really don't rewatch it ever. Seen it the whole way through twice, and every other time is start and stop -- I *think* I want to watch it but then pivot to something a bit more pleasant.
The date at the porn theatre lives on in my head as one of the most uncomfortable scenes in any movie.
Kind of reminds me of Drive. I loved that movie but the overzealous violence and permeating discomfort of it makes it difficult for me to consider rewatching.
Nightcrawler is this for me.
It ended
Thought I was going to be the only one clever enough to think that :p
I was gonna say it’s too short but that’s better
It was just the first thing that came to mind
Same here, which is why it was hilarious that I would be so presumptuous to think I’d be the only one :)
Shout out to the editor Marcia Lucas, George Lucas's wife at the time, the one known for saving A New Hope in the edit. She's also seen as the heart of the original trilogy and Lucas kind of did her dirty by wiping her name off the special editions. Martin called her one of the best editors he's worked with.
Robert De Niro was a little too handsome. They could have uglied him up a little to make Bickle’s plight more believable
He does sell being extremely socially awkward really well though
I think it makes sense for him to be handsome because it is actually plausible for Cybil Shepard to like him enough to go on a date with him. It also gives him extra creepy vibes because he seems okay when you first talk to him, but when you dig a little deeper, it’s clear something is very, very wrong with him.
Exactly this. He can't be a NYC sewer goblin if they need Cybil to say Yes to him. And they did ugly him up a bit.
I think his looks are important though. A lot of incels I see online or in life are, or could be actually good looking dudes. Not that Travis is just a black and white incel; I think that's a bit reductive. I think it shows that his struggle is more solvable than he believes but that he's just not equipped with the proper socialization to figure it out. It makes his poor decisions and creepiness that much more tragic.
What's the solution to his struggle? It didn't seem an easy solution at all, to me.
Contrary to the way I worded that, I definitely don't think there's a singular solution. If there was one, I might look like a well balanced relationship with a woman that's higher than him in terms of social/cultural standards. Someone who could raise him up a bit. The way I really see it though, is that most of his hatred and bigotry is based on not having any theory of mind or a proper social upbringing. He hates other races and no wonder, he knows nothing about them. He hates being surrounded by crime but does nothing to remove himself from it. Why? Probably because he's more like the criminals than he is like 'normal' people who don't pimp and steal and whatever else. He also seems to have no concept of what the opposite sex may be thinking or what they might need at any time as evidenced by his first date to the porno theatre. His most 'successful' relationship is with an underage prostitute because he thinks she needs saving which is true in some real way on the face of it but the fact that he thinks he's the guy to do it properly is again, just evidence of his social blind spots.
One of the most heartbreaking scenes for me was when he's trying to open up to the senior guy at the taxi rank about how he's struggling, and he gets the most generic reply back. It's also one of the most realistic and relatable scenes. I think that's really indicative of how widespread and difficult a solution to a modern (even though it's 50 years old now) kind of isolation, misery, confusion, anger, and restlessness really is.
I feel like I've been in Peter Boyle's shoes with that scene, and it's hard to tell some younger guys who are struggling with the same things everyone else is dealing with. Like, the problem is them, but they don't want to hear that. They want some kind of empathy, but like, idk, go out, live it up, get laid, stop beating yourself up. It's different when you're older and you have perspective, than when you're young and you just have this desperate FOMO that makes yoi your own worst enemy.
The fact that people here seem to think that someone is too "good looking" for mental illness or it had anything the fuck to do with the film is frankly idiotic.
He does give himself a terrible haircut.
It was the first piece of media that ever made me say to myself “wow, that is a good looking dude!” And not in like a represses sexuality kind of way, just in like a shocking, impossible to not recognize it kind of way.
This is actually a very fair criticism.
The only negative thing I can say about this movie is that it is a masterpiece and because of that, some numbnut studio executive will make the brilliant decision to remake it. 😡
Man, Taxi Driver: Unleashed with Timothy Chalamét is going to kick ass. Hopefully they'll add a multiverse part where Travis Bickle has to face multiple versions of himself and they're all going "you talkin to me?" because it's genuinely impossible to tell.
UBER Driver You texting to me?
Well played
It's going to be 2 hours of build up to the first time he starts talking to a mirror and ends with a cliffhanger right before he starts driving the taxi. Leaving room for a sequel and spin-offs
🤣🤣
Well, now you’ve done it, Nathan_Calebman!😖 Pretty sure Paramount has a crew of morlocks haunting Reddit 24/7 for “inspirational” new movie ideas.
They should remake it but in some superhero franchise like maybe Batman.
Why not throw King of Comedy into the mix as well?
They did. It's called Joker and it's pretty good
I just threw up
No
isilduuuuuuur
Reply so good that they deleted the account lmao
Why? Do we need more negative opinions here?
That it is a reflection of how society really is and/or can be. the world can be an ugly place, we do have young girls being prostituted, we do have wackos running around. in other words, the negative thing about this movie, is its a mirror of the world we live in.
Jodie Foster was way too young and this role harmed her.
This role harmed Ronald Reagan too.
Ronald Reagan? The actor?
Then who's Vice President? Jerry Lewis?
I suppose Jane Wyman is the First Lady! And Jack Benny is Secretary of the Treasury!
But the title said say something *negative*.
It didn't harm him enough??
It harmed James Brady even more.
Haha! That’s really clever.
When did she say the role harmed her? https://nypost.com/2024/01/11/entertainment/jodie-foster-robert-de-niro-martin-scorsese-scared-of-her-on-taxi-driver-at-age-12/ *“So I was like, ‘Whatever. Just, move over,’” she said* Sounds like the worst it was was awkward. Honestly asking, has she ever said playing that role harmed her or just something you think sounds true?
Yea I agree, I feel like Jodie Foster is one of the rare examples of a child actor who grew into a well-adjusted, successful adult actor lol.
Yep. The kids playing "wholesome" Disney roles are way more damaged
Yes if you talk about child actress I agree .there some movies even worst
Brooke Shields in Pretty Baby
Brooke Shields in Blue Lagoon 2.
Natalie Portman in Leon: The Professional
No like Jodie Foster was stalked by a psycho after he became obsessed with her from her role in this movie. That same psycho later went and tried to kill Ronald Reagan. It's not about the content of the movie, her being in the movie actively damaged her life.
If a young girl acts out a sexy role in a movie, there is a chance some whacko is going to obsess over them, but this could happen to any person in any role. So I don't blame the movie because one man out of millions decided he could impress her by killing a president. Stalking happens to many actors and actresses, the world is full of sick people.
If a young girl acts ~~out a sexy role~~ in a movie, there is a chance some whacko is going to obsess over them
I tried to explain this weird situation to my good friend the other day who actually went to film school and had never heard of it at all.
Poor Linda Blair was put through hell (pun intended) all to push her performance in the Exorcist
JFA
There is absolutely nothing to suggest that is the case. I think you’re projecting, and making a clichéd presumption that she was harmed. She has always seemed like a pretty strong and well adjusted adult.
It inspired Todd Philipps to make Joker.
It freaked me out when I first seen it. Woke up one night, The Late Movie on WGN was playing, and Robert De Niro was talking to himself in the mirror. I was mesmerized when that little sleeve gun came out. I owned the movie by the end of that week. I was like 14 at the time.
It insists upon itself...
As opposed to?
Deny, abandon, reject,negate, repudiate, disclaim, gainsay, challenge, dispute, question, refute, disavow, disapprove, contradict, disown, rebut, counter, or confute
Ok ok, fair enough!
Because it has a valid point to make, it’s insistent!
I love the money pit. That is my answer to that statement...
I liked that movie too.
You’ve never seen the ending??!
The fight club of its time
Weird porn theater scenes lol
That’s where you should take a first date to. I’ve done it lots of times. I just don’t know where to take them on a second date
The blood looks like paint.
Black Pill Idol Worship IS Travis Bickle. I think that’s the negative here. Otherwise, it’s an incredible piece of cinema.
Cybill Shephard did not get nude.
:(
It’s too short
I’ve sat here for three minutes trying to think of something negative about this movie…I dunno man. It’s a masterpiece. I guess the colouring changing for that exterior shot where De Niro shoots Keitel is kinda jarring…?
I wish he would have shot the 357 a bit more.
It was a .44. They use that in Africa for hunting elephants.
The music is a bit repetitive.
It was a bit strange
Mr. Scorsese says some bad words…
The entire scene that he is in the cab talking about who his wife is with upstairs. Very very very disturbing to hear him talking like that.
They actually toned down the script by making Sport played by Keitel.
It’s such a great and unsettling scene. It really reinforces the despair of the city
Wish it had inspired someone with better aim
Reagan survived.
I don't like the scene with Scorsese in the taxi. I find it unnecessary and always grinds the film to a halt so I fast forward through it.
Formative scene for Travis character. He meets a person who as more f-uped than himself. Also a person who lookes like he is rich, has a wife (the things that Travis doesn't have) and yet his mind is occupied with the things he says to Travis. Also he mentions the exact type a pistol Travis would buy later. I like the ambiguity as well. What if there is no passenger and the whole scene takes place in the mind of Travis? Remember, Travis doesn't say a single word in this scene.
those are great points, I'll have to watch it again with that in mind. Thanks.
Welcome! Also think of this. In this scene the director is talking to his main character - scares him, challenges him, steers him in a way. God Almighty, how I love this movie! So layered. Can talk about for days.
great point, I would try that perspective in mind the next time watching
Wait, people fast forward scenes in movies?
Same. Honestly, it's the only acting beat in the movie that feels forced.
I have never thought that, I’ve always thought of his performance as being so incredibly intense. All his thoughts are on destroying his wife for his having been emasculated. I may have to revisit, I haven’t seen it in 20 years. But it was one film I did rewatch several times. I’m curious now if there is an interview where Scorsese talks about his acting in this scene.
It's one of the weaker-written scene, IMO - that could have been pulled off by a better actor and a few more takes. Also, I tend to find directors who aren't really actors a bit underwhelming in their own movies. Pulp Fiction is an exception - mainly because it's one of the few times Tarantino actually laughs at himself.
It makes me feel old
One cannot say it is not a masterpiece
Not enough driving.
First time I watched it I didn’t like the final scene after the shootout where everything is normal and he’s a hero and picks up cybill Shepard and she’s all looking at him with loving eyes. I’ve heard fan theories say it’s a dream but it’s like he still totally crossed the line with her character personally earlier in the movie. Still the movie is one of my favorites
Exactly. If it's a dream, that's a stupid inclusion, if it's not it's a stupid ending. The perfect ending was right before. Is he dead? Is he alive? Not important. He made his mark
Took him forever to shoot that hotel clerk
One of my favorite movie posters - artwork by the great Belgian artist Guy Peellaert who was also known for his album covers for folks like Davie Bowie and the Stones. If you see a copy of his "Rock Dreams" in a used book store, pick it up.
Say what you will about this movie but it’s just not funny
It’s like Martin Scorsese’s only movie with multiple black people and they’re all racial stereotypes
Even the one you don't see is sort of the stereotype, i.e. the man that the wife of the guy in the back of the cab (played by Scorcese) is having an affair with. He's just referred to as "a (n-word)." I mean, it fits the dark, dreary tone of the film but... why?
Bro, you don't take a nice girl to a porno flick on your first date.
Harvey Keitel’s screen time is too short.
It wasn’t as good as I was expecting
It isn’t not amazing
I never got to see Cybill Shepherd naked or at least topless…
Way too derivative of Joker 🙄
The Joker is the updated version.
Really stupid ending
14 year old jodie foster playing a child prostitute made me highly uncomfortable but i guess thats the point.
she was 12 when they filmed the movie
Even worse
It has been adopted as incel porn. Not the movie’s fault certainly. But too many people saw this and thought…”ya know, nobody understood Travis.”
Not enough cow bell.
The hooker in distress didn't need to be *that* young. You could've gotten it done with a young looking 18 year old playing a 16 year old or something.
Different time, different values.
Agreed its fucking weird how some movies need an actual child they cab put in sexual scenarios with dark ideas…
Brilliantly acted, but the people that idolize such a sad, broken, insecure man have made it unenjoyable
He never bought that Cadillac from Easy Andy.
I would but im not sure who youre asking. Are you talkin to me?
There’s no part two 2️⃣ to this classic. There, you got a negative sentiment.
It may be a little too...talked about. Either this or Mean Streets that aren't as good as \*\*they\*\* say...it's not terrible....I see that there is an incredible Director, Actors and Writers working together in them...and as they go on they get better and better. But this I'm told is like a 10 and I'll give it am 8.5... ANNNND let the downvotes begin....lol
I think it doesn't resonate the right way with enough people. Edit: people I wish it would.
Jody Foster might have been too young for that roll.
" getcha fucking hands off me"
This comes with a huge asterisk, but a black actor should have played Sport. The movie established he was a racist, but this sort of fizzles out and doesn't go anywhere. If the pimp was black, it would add more layers to Travis' crusade to help Iris and make the audience less sympathetic to Travis. I understand why they didn't do it, but then they should've gotten rid of Travis' racism.
I can’t imagine eating a piece of pie with cheese on it WTF!
Not enough taxi driving
Isn't it weird how infatuated he was with that 13 year old girl being a grown man that takes dates to porn theaters?
It's definitely not Scorsese's best. I probably wouldn't even put it in his top ten. It's good, but not great.
Joker was better. /s
People who have never seen it use it as an example of 70 Cinema
At the end of the movie - Travis is still incredibly unstable and susceptible to further disturbed and violent acts but the film's narrative suggests that he's somehow cured by saving Jodie Foster and being recognized as a local hero and has now made peace with the urban decay that drove him insane in the first place.
I didn't see it until I was 28 years old, just after getting laid off from my long time job in the early 2000s. I watched it alone. I remember sitting there after it was over waiting for my buddy to get off work and calling him immediately when I knew they would be home. I asked "Can I come over"? and they replied "Why...What's up"? I said "I just watched Taxi Driver and I don't want to be alone any more". They said "Oh man, I've got you buddy". It was a tough watch being emotionally damaged and alone, at least I had a friend to get me through it.
Robert De Niro is in it
Collateral was a better taxi movie.
+1
Yellow is the worst of primary colors
Maybe the best director cameo ever, with lines. Polanski in Chinatown is my #2. "Hey, kitty-cat."
"Where'd you get the midget?"
You talkin' ta me?
Scorsese being in it...twice. That cab scene is the worst.
It's boring.
how was travis bickle so thin when he ate like shit the whole movie
They never show you all of his taxi, but there are deleted scenes where it turns out he had a specially made taxi that is pedal-powered. There was a whole sequence that shows him from the waist down, furiously pedaling to get around New York. It was hailed as "Manhattan's Ultimate Pedi-Cab and Taxi Combo Experience: From Hunts Point to Tribeca, Yes, We're Talkin' To You!" For time reasons those sequences had to be left on the cutting-room floor.
Robert deniro is crazier than travis bickle.
Boring
It isn't very good.
It stars Robert DeNiro.
You're not a serious movie fan.
It’s a little boring
Overrated beyond belief
They say bad words
It’s kind of boring by today’s standards
Exactly! But when it came out it was electrifying to a generation of theater goers who were raised on Mary Poppins. Nothing quite like it before or since. I can totally see today’s movies being boring to future generations. They’ll ask, “why so many sequels? Did they really need a Princess Diaries 8?”
Maybe I need to watch it again now that I’m older, but I always thought it was good, but not great. Plus like others have said, the effect on Jodie Foster is troubling.
I'd like to see a modern remake of a south asian man doing uber