What was the moral of the story?

what was the moral of the story?

lust /= love

plastics

Youth is wasted on the young.

When Uncle Terry's been drinkin you don't fuck with him.

D R O P P E D
R
O
P
P
E
D

his old friend was darkness

Never stop fighting, righteous user.

Never stop fighting 'til the fight is done.

*hello darkness my old friend*

>hello darkness my old friend plays
>they're not even at a funeral

I don't remember. Autistic people can be smart too?

The moral of the story is: the entire movie should have been about Benjamin's relationship with Mrs. Robinson because the movie completely fell apart when the daughter entered.

Don't chase the girl out of lust, you may be disappointed when you get her.

The person you can't have isn't always the person you want

97x BAAM the future of rock and roll

97x BAAM the future of rock and roll

97x BAAM the future of rock and roll

97x BAAM the future of rock and roll

Only wanting can distract you from the void.

kek

>60's era meme

based

>nazi

Just because you don't know what you want yet, don't go crazily after something because it seems right.

might as well kill yourself

young people are just objects to be flaunt by their parents to their friends in the excessive materialism of US's 60s. Ben's relationship with mrs robinson was just to show how broken of a home her's was. Elaine was being pressed into marrying so she ran away with Ben, it was just an act of rebellion by both of them and that's why after the thrill passes they realize they are in the same purposeless situation.
That's what I got from it. I dont think it has anything to do with love/lust, instead it was about oppression by parents. Any other ideas?
>hello darkness my old friend starts playing

>OMG you fucked my mom im going to marry someone else
>proceeds to know, engage and marry someone else a couple of weeks later

wtf people use to do this shit? no wonder my parents hate each other

I hear a remake is out where she runs off with a black man

I hear a remake of your life is out where you're not a massive disappointment

Resist not, for slight reasons, constituted authority.

Don't be mad because you're a gender-swapped soft reboot.

Future is freaky

That the sexual revolution of the 60s was a flashpoint of real, unironic, visceral misogyny, and women were much better off under the patriarchy they had thousands of years' experience in gaming to their own advantage.

tl;dr: Hippies caused Reaganism, same moral as every youth hit of that decade.

Don't get all salty because you still haven't been hired as an extra in the movie adaptation of the sequel to your life

Love makes you do stupid things.

Joltin Joe has left and gone away

don't trust womyn or marry them because they'll fuck you over. basically every male character gets stabbed in the back except dustin hoffman.

Empty rebellion is the same as empty living, and both lead to the same place

That Jews are destroyers of Christian purity and the institutions that support the same.

Watch the movie again, it's pretty clear there's not a single loving relationship in the movie. That's what makes the penultimate scene feel so powerful, and the final shot totally torpedos even that big rebellion of love. It's perfect.

>Mike Nichols often remarked about how Ben and Elaine in the final scene looked frightened and confused after their initial elation over escaping on the bus. Yet during an appearance on Inside the Actors Studio (1994), he said the looks on their faces were due to being nervous and scared after he shouted at them to laugh during the scene. He liked it so much, he decided to keep the cameras rolling and cut it into the final movie.

It means sometimes people overanalyze movies.

People are a buncha jerks

How is thinking about the images presented "overanalyzing?"

What should the audience reaction to the scene be if not morbid realization that it's all hollow?

>How is thinking about the images presented "overanalyzing?"
When you begin to create artificial scenario and realities instead of actually analyzing what's on screen.

World Peace could be a good example. Some guy goes flying across the room in a clear example of physical comedy, and you got an army of "culture critics" insisting that the scene must represent the denial of the holocaust. That's overanalyzing.

>When you begin to create artificial scenario and realities instead of actually analyzing what's on screen.
Are we still talking about The Graduate?

I agree with you, but my point was that everyone's thematic analysis of the ending is in line with what's in the film. What Nichols first intended to do but didn't or how he happened on the ending is completely irrelevant

You're referring to how the image was created, which has nothing to do with what it meant when used, which was as it's been described here, you massive pleb.

Not him but isn't auteur intent the be-all-end-all?

Or are you saying that them not saying anything created a better ending that Nichols decided to use, with the interpretation?

He put the shot in the movie, that is intent. I'm not sure what you're getting at. Obviously this "bad" take changed his perception of the story, but it was still his decision to change the ending no different than if he changed it in the third draft or had it improvised

>Are we still talking about The Graduate?
Yeah. You have to realize that every single image on screen has been carefully manipulated to look as close as it was originally intended, or they're a result from unforeseen circumstances.

They're not happening in a natural way, so yes, there comes a time when analyzing becomes useless. The context of the scene and the context of the way the scene was filmed won't change, so you can actually reach the limits of rationality in your attempt to analyze literal accidental footage that was repurposed for an artistic vision.