Showing posts with label clint eastwood. Show all posts
Showing posts with label clint eastwood. Show all posts

November 06, 2011

J. Edgar (2011)

4/5

Clint Eastwood's biopic of J. Edgar Hoover is a compelling portrait of a unique character in American history. The plot follows the controversial rise of J. Edgar Hoover (DiCaprio) to the director of the FBI--his anti-Communist crusades, criminal forensics, and government blackmail--and then analyzes how those same ideas eventually contributed to his public downfall. It tackles his personal relationships and his political ambition in equal parts, forming a tapestry of contradictions and dichotomies inherent in everybody but rarely projected onto the big screen with such clarity and precision. It chronicles his complex love for his mother (Dench), his secretary (Watts), and his number two man (Hammer) with tenderness and honesty instead of the gaudy spectacle and homophobic fantasies that seem to have incessantly plagued his reputation.


DiCaprio's understated performance is remarkable, providing depth and subtlety alongside rage and hidden feelings. He is able to generate empathy for a hard, rigid, oftentimes unlikeable man. His portrayal serves as the foundation for this phenomenal film. While the supporting cast throws in stellar performances, they quickly fall by the wayside in the grand scheme of things. Without DiCaprio in the lead, J. Edgar would still be a good movie, but it would be a forgettable movie as well.

The movie has its fair share of imperfections. Eastwood did not do enough to lift the screenplay out of its decidedly literary beginnings and translate it to the medium of film. There are often "profound" ramblings by Hoover--unrelated to the images on screen--that were arbitrarily lodged in anytime there wasn't dialogue. The timeline would flip between eras too eagerly, making it difficult to get a sure footing on the time and place of certain events. The cinematography was post-processed too much, giving it an inconsistently old-timey look that felt disingenuous. Minor side characters, like Robert Kennedy and Richard Nixon, were cast to mimic the famous political figures instead of to act as them. They focused on the accent instead of the words and the motivations behind the words. Despite these minor niggles, this is a terrific film and should not be missed.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1616195/

December 29, 2009

Invictus (2009)

3/5

Clint Eastwood's Invictus is a simple sports movie that was poorly advertised as a political biopic of Nelson Mandela. The film attempts to straddle multiple genres, and it actually does so quite well, but the problem is that none of the component parts are very fleshed out or satisfying. For example, Nelson Mandela is painted as a man who is filled to the brim with provocative quotes on life, but you never really figure out his motivations or reasonings. Matt Damon's character makes the observation that after being imprisoned for so long, he walked out ready to forgive those who put him in prison. He doesn't understand why, and neither do we. We never truly discover what makes him so perfect. Not only that, but hinting at a failed marriage is not enough to make him "complex." It seemed like Eastwood was more checking off the "imperfect" box than actually making Mandela realistic. The same shortcomings could be said of the rugby aspect. Invictus is an exciting sports movie, but it was not truly inspirational as it was very adamantly trying to be.

The technical aspects were also a mixed bag. For example, the acting was spectacular but the characters were incompetently written. Most of the cinematography and editing was adequate, but the final few minutes featured horrendous slo-mo that was so obviously overdone that it made me cringe. For every pro, there's a comparable con. The movie is not a great movie, but it also isn't a bad movie. It's just somewhere in the middle. So watch it if you feel like you've been waiting for this movie, but otherwise I'd say pass.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1057500/

March 14, 2009

Changeling (2008)

4/5

Clint Eastwood's Changeling tells the emotional true story of LA mother Christine Collins (Angelina Jolie) whose missing son Walter is claimed to be returned by police captain J. J. Jones (Jeffrey Donovan). Except the boy is not her son, and the police deny their mistake. She finds an ally in Reverend Briegleb (John Malkovich), who encourages her to fight the corrupt LAPD. After she publicly announces the police's error, they lock her up in a mental asylum, force-feed her medication, and threaten electric shock therapy. I will leave the rest of the story's twists and turns open for you to discover yourselves.

While the drama was a bit overwrought and overbearing in the beginning, it works. We feel her pain and sympathize with her quest for truth, hanging on every new piece of evidence in the hopes of discovering what happened. Jolie does an exemplary job here; we are not watching an actress, but a distressed mother at her wit's end, with every imaginable injustice cast upon her and no end in sight. The abuses of power, by both the police and the psychiatrists, are horrifying, ugly, and almost unbearable.

Eastwood directs the film with intensity and brilliance. He has imbued Changeling with astute set design, painterly lighting, and evocative cinematography. The editing and pacing are spot-on as well, thanks in no small part to the story and its writing. Most movies sag in the middle half, but Changeling shifts into an exciting suspense thriller halfway through to help us get through its 2 hour 22 minute running time while still remaining true to its dramatic roots.

The ending, which is as inconclusive as all historical mysteries, is still extremely satisfying. Changeling exposes fears that I'm sure any parent can relate to, and it does so without simplifying or sugar-coating them. But it is not just for parents. It is for anyone who has ever loved a family member or friend to the point where they cannot stop loving them. And so I wholeheartedly recommend this movie to anyone who fits that description.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0824747/

January 02, 2009

Gran Torino (2008)

4/5

Clint Eastwood's Gran Torino is a drama about a retired Korean War veteran named Walt Kowalski who befriends his new Hmong neighbors Sue and Thao after his wife dies. A local gang picks on Thao incessantly, and Walt realizes what he has to do to save his newfound friend. For those who've seen the trailer, then you know the growling, cantankerous Walt that Clint Eastwood plays. And he is perfect in his role. We understand and appreciate his existence, even if we don't like his gruff exterior. His open and overt racism appears to be a measure of his love, not hatred, for the "dagos" and "zipperheads" he interacts with. And it's more hilarious than Crash.

The plot is rock-solid, with classic pacing and storytelling. The cinematography and editing are equally good. But the acting by everyone except Eastwood was awful. The Hmong teenagers had no acting experience, and it showed. It was painful to watch: eye-gougingly painful. And had bad sound recording. I don't know how it made it into this movie. But the rest of the movie is amazing. Highly recommended.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1205489/

July 19, 2007

Letters from Iwo Jima (2006)

3/5

Letters from Iwo Jima follows the infamous battle from the point of view of the Japanese fighting for the island. The titular letters did nothing for the movie except foster cheap soap-opera melodrama and sloppy filmmaking. I found the cinematography pedestrian and the desaturated colors worthless. It was long and supremely unexciting; and it brought nothing new to the war movie genre. There were too many superfluous characters and side plots to the point where the story itself got to be confusing. And the sense of time in this movie was extremely difficult to follow (a month or two would pass randomly and we would have no idea) thanks to the plebeian editing. What I did like about the movie was the depiction of war. This is not your typical war movie because these men are not fighting, but merely trying to survive. There were some events that I wasn't expecting that jarred me and kept me interested. I really liked almost all of the acting. And it's not bad per se, there's just nothing new here. Not recommended.

IMDb link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0498380/