Well, old films is one thing, arthouse films another. Don't confuse the age of the film with the intention behind it and methods used. It's just that a lot of the films that have stood the test of time (or have their memory kept alive by critics, at least) are more than skin deep, so experimental, slow and "difficult" films from the past are overrepresented.
Howard Hawks, Truffaut or Hitchcock - these are not going to be a chore to sit through for anyone (except people who shut down their senses at the sight of black & white, let alone subtitles). Hawks has more rapid-fire dialogue than Sorkin, Truffaut more deadpan whimsy than Wes Anderson and Hitchcock more suspense than ANYONE, dead or living. These guys were very concerned with being entertaining, and succeeded masterfully.
Where as it can be just as imposing to head into an old Bergman or Bresson film as, say, the latest Mallick or Kiarostami, or even a David Lynch or PTA film if the arthouse fancy strikes them. That's because they don't intend to hold your hand and feed you the film half-digested. Their aim is to engage you, not necessarily entertain you. And it's fine that you're not always up for such demanding viewing (I sure ain't) - but don't use the age of the film as an excuse when you're feeling lazy.
I use Final Cut Pro X (mainly Final Cut Pro 7 before that), and while I do believe it is phenomenal software, and a lot of bang for the 300 bucks, it handles a bit differently from all the other NLE's - meaning it will be hard to switch to a new program if you learn the ropes in FCPX. Seeing as you are a total editing virgin however, I think FCPX might come just as easy (or hard) to you as any other program. So go for it. It is almost unquestionably faster than anything else.
Having said that, nothing can compete price-wise with the TOTALLY FREE DaVinci Resolve, if you just want to dip your toe in. The caveats are that it is a) rather rudimentary b) requires a beefier computer than most, I think, and c) not very intuitive, which was your main criteria.
Good luck and have fun!
Great video essay, thanks for highlighting.
Mr. Robot's look is all about eschewing such standard practices, commonly framing faces at the very bottom of the screen, with empty sky or ceiling filling most of the frame. This is also done to reinforce how off-kilter the protagonist is, how uncomfortable in his own skin and social situations.
Hmm, the upload quality on the video makes it very hard to judge the footage. It's a blocky mess at any ISO...
20 minutes of magic hour, pfff... I live in Iceland. June-July, we get upwards of 4-5 hours as the sunset and sunrise bleed into one another - though that is then the very middle of the night. In December almost all the sun you get (around 4 hours) is also very low in the sky...