MovieChat Forums > Escape from New York (1981) Discussion > Please would fans explain why they enjoy...

Please would fans explain why they enjoyed this movie


Hi all. I feel I am missing something when I see such high ratings for this movie. Please can I get some feedback as to what people enjoyed about escape from NY.

reply

[deleted]

You have to be a fan of John Carpenter's style of film-making to enjoy ESNY really. This film has bags of atmosphere and I think the low-budget look gives it a gritty edge. Kurt Russell is also superb as Snake Plissken, one of the coolest characters in movie history. I can understand why some might not like it though. It's a love or hate thing!

reply

If you didn't grow up with it, you will probably never understand. It's a late 70's vibe, even though it was released in 1981, same year as Raiders Of The Lost Ark. Think about what was going through an 11 year-old's brain watching these films at that time. Kurt's interpretation of Snake Plissken is beyond legendary. The costume is maybe the greatest basic cinematic combat uniform ever. The genius is in its simplicity, much like the film itself. Snake is more badass and iconic than Indy, Solo, Batman or any other hero/antihero. Kurt was born to do this and no one will ever top it. Many have worn an eye-patch, but no one ever did it better than Kurt Russell as Snake Plissken. And it didn't even matter if it was low budget and not even shot in NY (save one shot). Production designer Joe Alves (JAWS) and cinematographer Dean Cundey (Jurassic Park) created an atmosphere (as stated above) that was epic and unique even with such limited resources. You cannot do this with a computer (see ex. EFLA or don't cuz it sux). The low light in the darkness creates a visual second to none for a film shot almost entirely at night. Cundey's use of anamorphic lenses, even though other low budget filmmakers would never have done this, was genius. Carpenter and crew were young and brave and they made an iconic masterwork.

reply

"Think about what was going through an 11 year-old's brain watching these films at that time."

Yep, you hit the nail on the head. It's a generational film.

One need look no further than the 1996 sequel to see the weakness of the next generation and the mediocrity they strive to achieve.

reply

One need look no further than the 1996 sequel to see the weakness of the next generation and the mediocrity they strive to achieve.


Very unfair, considering Escape From LA was made by the same gang as Escape From New York. It's hardly the fault of the 'next generation' if John Capenter lost his way.

reply

everlone_2000 wrote:
"Very unfair, considering Escape From LA was made by the same gang as Escape From New York. It's hardly the fault of the 'next generation' if John Capenter lost his way."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not unfair if John Carpenter, in his effort to resuscitate his career on a commercial level, was pandering to the dumbed-down and less serious tastes of his audience. He also had to get the project green lighted by the producers, who obviously gave their blessings (if not demanded) the more cornball approach.

reply

If John Carpenter can't be in control of his own creation, no one is at fault but himself... you want to blame a complete generation about it? good luck on trying to fight the world instead of yourself.

reply

I do not agree that it's a generational film. My mother and I saw this at the drive-in, and we both love it to this day. My mom often quotes it! I was 31 then, and she was in her early 50s. I am certain that my father also would have loved this film, as he was a major film buff who loved science fiction perhaps more than any other genre.

At science fiction conventions, this film always had a major following, no matter what ages they were when they first saw it in the theater or on HBO. For several years, you could count on Snake Plisskins of all sizes at the costume contests.

Yep! I'm watching it for the "umpteenth" tine on BBC America. How many new fans will it bring in this time around?

For me, everything still works together beautifully~actors, sets, music, the very bleak, gritty atmosphere. It's actuallyeven greater now when it's compared to the pitiful stuff that has been offered viewers for far too long a time.

EDIT: After reading all of the posts down on this movie, I'm changing my score: It junps to 10/10 just to help counterbalance the less-than-savvy viewers. I've been watching movies for 60 years, and this film has never diminished in my views. I don't sit here and nitpick. The film immerses me in this world, and I have actually grown to appreciate it more throughout the years.

*** The trouble with reality is there is no background music. ***

reply

What you said, but also the 2 posts before yours as well.

I managed to record it when it was on cable, so when I was a kid I saw it about a million times.

The cast was great. Kurt Russel played Snake perfectly and who can complain about Lee Van Cleef and the rest of them? Isaac Hayes, Adrienne Barbeau, Harry Dean Stanton, Ernest Borgnine. Donald Pleasance seemed like an odd choice for president but he played the part perfectly. "Y-You... You are the Duke of New York! You're A-Number One!"

It probably also helped that I was the perfect age for this movie when it came out. If I saw it now for the first time I'd probably think it was okay but nothing special.

reply

[deleted]

I agree that the atmosphere of the film is great. But great atmosphere alone isn't enough to make a great movie. You also need a great story and great performances. The story is underwhelming and despite boasting an awesome cast Kurt Russel as Snake is the only really memorable performance.

What are words for when no one listens anymore

reply

You have to be a fan of John Carpenter's style of film-making to enjoy ESNY really.
I'm a big fan of Carpenter's style. I've seen nearly all of his films and enjoyed most of them but I still find Escape from New York boring to the point that's it's tough to sit through at times.

What are words for when no one listens anymore

reply

"Snake Plissken is THE definition of antihero."



Really.

Try John Proctor from 'The Crucible'. Or the narrator of 'Notes from Underground'.


Debt and debt and debt and debt and debt and then All will be enslaved.

reply

[deleted]

Imagine my head shaking slowly and endlessly, eyes closed...

Debt and debt and debt and debt and debt and then All will be enslaved.

reply

Know your audience, Magyius. When I read your post I did a little head-shaking of my own.

reply

No kidding. Who the hell reads The Crucible outside of the required reading in high school.

reply

i only watched it a few minutes ago and i love sci-fi
its pretty good but still i feel it had a great concept just well the movie wasnt as good

the performances were mixed
yes kurt russel is very cool in this but his performance is annoying. he whispers half the time.

another thing is that while it was an action movie there wasnt much action sequences (the rest were just kills)

i give it 7/10
worth watching if you like sci-fi and have the time







i was once dkchewy

reply

Atmosphere, Kurt Russell, plot, retro-cool factor (weapons, gadgets, MUSIC and 'future 1997' scenario). If I'm going to be honest I'd give this film 8/10 (I'd much rather be ' oh, what the hell!' and give it a 10/10), but its still awesome. On a serious note I felt this film has more in common with the action films of the 70s rather than 80s, cause ya know, there are some interesting contrasts between those two eras of film-making for the Action genre...

Btw this film was released 8 years before my birth, so you can politely do away with a 'my generation' speech.

Anyway, essential viewing for any fan of 'alternative history', dystopian sci-fi, and people who wants to know why a certain famous computer game character was dedicated to the main protaganist in this film (I'll give you a hint *whispers* 'Because he's awesome')

Oh and don't get me started on people who call films like this 'dated'... just, don't.

reply

I just watched the movie (again!), decided to check the IMDB page, followed this thread and here I am.
This thread started well from the get-go, the lost its tracks and now got back on.
TG88, you nailed it. It's just like you say it.
In order to understand, you have to realize how much ahead of his time John Carpenter relly was. This came a year before Blade Runner and three years before the first Terminator (btw. James Cameron worked as a matte painter on this one). John Carpenter capitalised with cyberpunk property (William Gibson ("Mona Lisa overdrive") credits this as an influence) much like George Lucas capitalised on comic-book/sci-fi property with "Star Wars".
With this movie Kurt Russell also VERY succesfully shed his Disney - skin.
To fully realize this, picture Selena Gomez winning a Bafta award. Not impossible, just extremely unlikely.
Actually I think the movie is "only" three and a half stars out of five, and the Snake Plissken character is five plus stars out of five. One of the few badasses on screen I buy despite what comes out of their mouths. Because if I don't, they come out of the screen and bang my head against my keyboaröosieggnölkbgöjbafökdfibdf-klndfvknldbv0griorenwjg. b-odbpodb -nkgr-nlgw-öngrn

reply

The most important reason: The character of Solid Snake was developed from Snake Plissken. He even uses the last name of "Plissken" when going under cover in MGS2 =)

Though I think Kurt's acting in this film is horrible, though I like most of his other movies.

reply

*Spoilers* and sorry for all the text.. four cups of coffee.


I first saw this movie when I was ten years old and have loved it ever since. I notice details now that I didn't think about back then however. Most of those only serve to make me like it more! Like when early on in the film Snake gets shot in the leg by a crossbow. It says Snake may be a very experienced killer but in the first real confrontation with the badguys, realistically bad luck still applies to him. He's wounded and spends the rest of the film limping around. Shortly after that he's captured and goes unconsious and when he wakes up it is suddenly daylight. He's lost his wrist watch (that counts down to his death) and isn't sure exactly how long he was out. The sun could be setting again in thirty minutes for all he knows.
There's an unspoken desperation throughout the movie that really creeps up on you, or me atleast. His choice to rip up the tape at the end just shows that Snake truly has no loyalties, he's not "the bigger man" and it's just so plain badass as it can get. He may even be something of a psychopath, well maybe not, but his behaviour is so unpredictable and self serving. Interesting nonetheless to have this character be the "hero" of the film. A true antihero.

Also the atmosphere is just really dark and gritty without overdoing it, the camerawork and use of light and shadows is beautiful. The soundtrack is one of the coolest ever and the use of old synthesizers are popular these days so it doesn't feel as odd now as it perhaps did ten years ago.

I was born the same year "Escape.." came out so I guess I'm pretty young for a die hard fan of this film. I CAN however see why teens today don't go crazy for this movie as it is almost thirty years old, it was low budget even then and there is no unrealistic spectacular action. It has aged, but not as badly as most films from around it's time.


reply

Yes this movie contributed to the greatest character ever being created.

reply

Hi samuel-84. I feel I am missing something when I see a semi-trollish character such as yourself fishing for explanations as to why people like a movie, without offering up even a single opinion of your own about the film. Please can I get some feedback as to what you did not enjoy about escape from NY.

reply

Alot of people have summed up alot of things nicely, many I agree with. But really, I hate to say it, it's one of those things where if you have to ask you wouldnt understand it. I know that's an ass of answer but that's a big part of it.

First off, this movie came out in 1981, before the vhs explosion of the 80s. When video chains and mom and pop stores started to rent vhs tapes, it created an entire industry of direct to video low budget cheapies. Movies noone intended to be released like in theaters, but just for people to rent. If you've already rent Star Wars, and it cost the same to rent Escape From The Bronx (a real italian movie) you may rent Bronx. And it cost a fraction of what Star Wars did to make. So after 30 years there have been countless movies with a post apocolyptic world and leather clad anti heroes fighting for survival. But it many ways it was a more novel idea in 1981.

BTW - I know westerns had alot of anti heroes, but I'm saying alot of science fiction were a little more good vs evil at the time, alot less of the Vin Diesel guy just doing a mercenary job thing at the time.

So the characters, setting, and costumes were all amazingly novel. I've read that the movie was the first to have the concept of customizing cars. Not sure if it's true, but cant recall a movie that had similar messed up cars before 1981. Sure, a ton after... but not before.

So it was a very original and well done move at the time. Since then, a ton of movies and ripped the tone and atmosphere of this and Blade Runner to death. So it looks hacky, when really it's where the hacks were stealing it from.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Another reason for the appeal of Escape from NY is that at the time of its release the events of the film were 16 years in the future. 1981 was a time ripe with urban decay and high crime and fearful murder rates. Along with Detriot, NYC was the most hellish hole in the States and as the city was 13 years away from being rescued by Giuliani. In 1981 it was no stretch of the imagination to think that Carpenter's distopia could actually happen.

I was looking forward to this exciting future and was disappointed when the (real) calendar rolled to 1997 and Manhattan hadn't become a walled prison. But during the 80's thoughts of this literally happening gave the movie added punch.

reply

Too bad Detroit has hardly changed, still a dump thanks to political "leaders".

reply

Carpenter has a way of telling a story that ...hmmm...how do you describe it? He has a certain "flow" that I guess you either love or don't get. And I don't mean don't get in a condescending/dismissive way. It either works for you or it doesn't. For me, his movies have an almost poetic way of creeping up on you until all of a sudden you realize you are completely immersed in this world and it's fantastic. I think EFNY and The Thing are perfect examples but Big Trouble does it in it's own way too. Even EFLA has "it" just to a a lesser extent. For Escape, there is something about the combination of the lighting, the music, Plissken, and the story that just works.

I won't even begin to try to explain the appeal of Plissken. Aside from the fact that I am a woman and Plissken is 100% aesthetically pleasing, there is something so untouchably cool and smooth about him that you route for him from the first second. He is the bad-ass other bad-asses want to be but not in an over-the-top way. He just kind of quietly goes about doing what he needs to do. They never relent and have him doing typical heroic stunts. He's not out to save the world or the damsel in distress. He's just doing what he can to get himself out of a bad situation. You put everything Carpenter is a master of together with what Kurt did with Plissken and - BAM - you have a legend.

Do yourself a favor. Erase any and all preconceived notions you have about the film. Try not to worry about what differences would be apparent because 30 years has passed. Don't worry about lack of action in an action movie. Try to forget what you think you already know about the film. Go in with no expectations and just let it kind of wash over you. I don't mean that to sound preachy. It's just such a great movie. If you go in expecting it to be The Matrix you are going to miss some great stuff.

Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle.

reply

I wonder the same thing really.

I gave this movie 1/10, it's got to be one of the worst I've ever seen! (I try to avoid them.) I can always find at least something positive to appreciate about films, but this one is complete crap except the DVD menu and perhaps the soundtrack!



~ Observe, and act with clarity. ~

reply

"I can always find at least something positive to appreciate about films"

At least Carpenter knows where to put the camera. Maybe you had a bad day.

reply