This dissertation theorizes cinematic late style in the context of the contemporary streaming era, arguing that the late works of major auteurs constitute a critical aesthetic response to both biographical aging and the industrial transformation of cinema under platform capitalism. Drawing on the foundational accounts of late style developed by Theodor W. Adorno and Edward Said, the project reconceptualizes lateness as a mode of aesthetic persistence marked by formal reflexivity, historical consciousness, and tension with reconciliation. It extends these theories by situating late style within the conditions of twenty-first-century media culture, shaped by streaming platforms, algorithmic curation, and the erosion of cinema’s traditional institutional boundaries. Three extended case studies—Martin Scorsese, Jane Campion, and Spike Lee—demonstrates how cinematic late style emerges at the intersection of auteurist continuity and systemic disruption. Scorsese’s late films confront the ethical afterlife of genre and American historical mythology through slowness, retrospection, and moral reckoning. Campion’s late work articulates a feminist politics of intimacy and landscape, reconfiguring genre and temporality across both cinema and serialized television. Lee’s late phase intensifies a hauntological and intertextual aesthetic that fuses archival memory, political urgency, and formal experimentation to interrogate Black history and cultural commodification within global streaming infrastructures. Methodologically, the project combines close formal analysis with theories of cinematicity, arguing that late style today is inseparable from the conditions of platformized production and circulation. Rather than signaling artistic decline or nostalgic retreat, cinematic late style is shown to function as a mode of critical agency—one that confronts the flattening logic of “content” by foregrounding duration, ambiguity, and historical depth. This dissertation positions cinematic late style as a framework for understanding how auteurs negotiate authorship, legacy, and aesthetic autonomy in an era when cinema itself appears increasingly “late,” displaced, and yet persistently resistant.