A Squalid Shoot-'Em-Up
The initial reviews for 'Bonnie and Clyde' were not just bad; they were venomous. Leading the charge was Bosley Crowther, the powerful and respected critic for The New York Times. He called the film, "a cheap piece of bald-faced slapstick comedy that
treats the hideous depredations of that sleazy, moronic pair as though they were as full of fun and frolic as the jazz-age cutups in 'Thoroughly Modern Millie.'" He wasn't alone. Variety dismissed the characters as "bumbling, moronic types," while Newsweek's Joe Morgenstern initially called it a "squalid shoot-'em-up for the moron trade." Faced with such a uniformly negative reception, the studio, Warner Bros., lost faith and gave the film a limited release, effectively burying it. For a moment, it seemed Arthur Penn's gangster film was dead on arrival.
Too Violent, Too Funny, Too French
The core of the problem was that critics in 1967 had no framework for a movie like 'Bonnie and Clyde'. For decades, the Hays Production Code had enforced a strict moral standard where violence was sanitized and criminals always met a just end. This film, however, was different. Influenced by the French New Wave, it veered wildly in tone, mixing folksy humor with sudden, brutal violence. Audiences found themselves laughing one moment and gasping the next. The film also dared to make its outlaw protagonists charismatic and sympathetic, a direct challenge to cinematic convention. Its finale, a ballet of slow-motion bullets and blood, was unlike anything mainstream American audiences had ever seen. The movie's violence and moral ambiguity weren't just shocking; they were confusing to an old guard of critics accustomed to clear heroes and villains.
The Critical Tide Turns
Just as the film seemed destined for obscurity, a counter-narrative began. Star and producer Warren Beatty, who had championed the project relentlessly, refused to let it die. A few younger critics began to champion the film. Roger Ebert gave it a perfect four-star review, calling it a work of brilliance. But the two most significant shifts came from unexpected places. First, Newsweek critic Joe Morgenstern, haunted by his initial reaction, went to see the film again with a public audience. Hearing their enthusiastic response, he realized he'd been wrong and, in an almost unprecedented move, published a second review retracting his first pan. Then, Pauline Kael, a rising critic, penned a long, passionate essay for The New Yorker, eloquently defending the film and articulating what made it so revolutionary and important. Her piece gave intellectual cover to the film's fans and helped solidify its artistic importance.
The Birth of New Hollywood
The turnaround was swift and decisive. Buoyed by the new wave of critical support and incredible word-of-mouth from a younger generation that identified with the film's anti-establishment spirit, Warner Bros. re-released 'Bonnie and Clyde' widely. It became a massive box office hit and a cultural phenomenon, earning ten Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture. More than just a commercial success, the film's journey from flop to classic marked a seismic shift in the industry. It exposed a deep chasm between the old guard of critics and the emerging counterculture. Its success, along with that of 'The Graduate' and 'Easy Rider', proved to the studios that there was a huge audience for daring, director-driven films that grappled with complex themes. The old rules were broken, and an era known as the New Hollywood—the age of Coppola, Scorsese, and Altman—was born.
