The last line in the movie (from Redford) may be the final instance of the 1960s anti-materialism jag:
Asked if he’s sticking around for his share of the cut, Hooker answers, “Nah. I’d only blow it”.
According to the (non-fiction) book about The Big Con, the rise of the Wire was just prior to 1900; booming during the 1920s in number and size with the post-War crop of millionaires (e.g., Gondorff is known to have taken $375,000 from a banker in a single score during this period), but with the boom dying away and the Depression and the increasing power and effectiveness of the Feds since 1930, the big stores started to move overseas. Therefore, it pretty much had to be a period piece. The events of the movie supposedly take place around 1936, and even then they remark that the con is ten years out of date.
The book goes into more detail about the division of labour and organization of the ancilliary economy supporting big cons.
IIRC the movie starts off by saying this is in 1938.
I think the original “Terminator” movie has not only held up well but has become even more relevant because we are moving towards AI controlled warfare. Back in 1984, it was wild SciFi, but now it seems almost inevitable.
Dr. Strangelove is still pretty effective, both hilarious and terrifying. Even the technology doesn’t seem terribly out of date. Considering that American nuclear bunkers were still using big floppy discs within the past few years, I could see the manual switch-based receivers on the bombers still being in use decades later.
The same bombers are still in use, so the receivers may be.
With both approaching 40 years of age and my teenage kids only recently introduced to them I’d have to say…really well.
Also honorable mention for “The Godfather” half a century old and still eminently watchable.
That’s another one! during the pandemic lockdown we made a big list of classics that we wanted the kids to see. “Vinny” was one of those and they adored it.
Watching it again I have to say that there is simply not an ounce of fat in that movie. It never drags, it is always quotable, you are always eager for the next scene and it doesn’t outstay its welcome.
Watcha need?
I think the original Manchurian Candidate holds up very well.
Except for the fact brainwashing doesn’t work like that.
It’s another movie, like Pelham 123, that didn’t need to be remade, and changed!
Oh was just meaning I don’t know what the massive plotholes are.
So I cannot recommend the soundtrack album (for The Sting). It’s only 3-4 songs, with 2-3 versions of them. If interested in the music, but the individual songs.
Still, the music is good. Just don’t overpay like I did.
Okay.
-
They find Luther like, the same day. Whack him. That’s okay. He was well known. But they can’t seem to identify Hooker because he was the new kid. But they somehow manage to find out where he lives, and lay in wait for him. But they still can’t connect him with a name or face, especially since he’s actively dealing with Lonigan? That’s just silly.
-
Everything about the Hit Woman. She presumably is able to figure out who her target is, but never bothers to relay this info to anyone? Instead, comes to town, rents a room and gets a job in a diner in hopes of somehow trapping Hooker somehow after god knows how long. Then, her big play is to shoot him in an ally? She coulda done that on Day One of hitting the city limits. That whole sub-plot or whatever you call it is just ridiculous
The Eiger Sanction is just stoopid. They somehow manage to figure out the assassin walks with a limp and is part of this mountain expedition (My God, what a weak-ass premise!). It seems they could have ruled out everyone but Kennedy’s character with about 10 minutes of half-assed detective work. Woulda, shoulda been a 20 minute movie. No ropes needed. 
Linnerman.
(Jeez, I crack myself up.)
I watched the Sting with my middle-school kids some years ago. They’d never seen it, not really sure what it was about. Upon Paul Newman’s first appearance, my 10-year-old remarked “Wow - he has really blue eyes!”
The impact of Paul’s baby blues had not diminished over the intervening years. Probably not exactly what the OP was thinking of, but perhaps Paul would have been pleased to know.
Except the CRM-114 is totally a prop built by the movie’s production team. In the early 60s the B52 was cutting edge technology and on reading the script, the USAF refused any cooperation. The cockpit set was built based on a single photo in a British aviation magazine. The device was described – and named – in the novel the movie was based on, Red Alert.
To ensure the enemy cannot plant false transmissions and fake orders, the CRM 114 is to be switched into the receiver circuit prior to receiving attack or attack cancellation orders. The three code letters of the period are to be set on the alphabet dials of the CRM 114, which will then block any transmissions other than those preceded by the set letters from being fed into the receiver.
From the Wiki article above:
Prior to the introduction of addressed digital communications, some real-world analog communications systems performed a function very similar to the fictional CRM 114. Some aircraft radios used SELCAL (selective calling), which muted the receiver unless an assigned tone was received. Ground mobile radios used a similar system called CTCSS (Continuous Tone-Coded Squelch System).
Under the Joint Electronics Type Designation System an AN/CRM-xxx would be air-transportable Cargo, Radio, Maintenance or test assembly. A genuine device doing what the CRM was supposed to be doing would likely be designated ACR (airborne communications receiver) or ALT (airborne countermeasures transmitter)
I recently caught The Hot Rock (1972), with Redford and George Segal as career thieves exploring whether crime pays, and even if it does, is it worth it? (along with Zero Mostel as the sleaziest lawyer ever). Even though it is a pure representation of the 70’s, it holds up really well, both the characters and the situations.
This is such a pure coincidence (that he doesn’t twig, and say “No, not place. I want this put on Lucky Dan to win” or that he actually does put it on Lucky Dan to place) that the entire plot depends upon, that it costs me pleasure in following the plot. The whole set-up, dozens of fake bettors and the rented gambling den, and they rely on Shaw to misunderstand something verbal? Don’t buy it, never will.
I saw that on TV a few years back, and the one thing that leapt out at me as being different was how quickly everyone just started believing him. “Oh, you were brainwashed? Okay, let’s get on with dealing with that!” In a modern movie, he’d probably spend half the run time trying to convince everyone he wasn’t just paranoid and delusional.
Thanks, they are pretty good points, I think I just choose to put my fingers in my ears and ignore them when I’m watching it because it is just so damn entertaining!!