Posts Tagged ‘clint eastwood’

Blu-ray Review: “Gran Torino”

Gran Torino (2009, Warner Bros.)
purchase from Amazon: DVD | Blu-ray

I enjoy a nice Unforgiven viewing as much as the next guy, but I’ve never really bought into the whole cult of Clint — for movies that are supposed to disassemble and analyze the various aspects of American manhood, Eastwood’s films often strike me as curiously dull. During A Perfect World, for instance — a movie I went to see knowing full well that Kevin Costner was Eastwood’s co-star, and hoping two negatives would produce a positive — I’m fairly certain I had an out of body experience, during which my spirit floated to the ceiling of the nearly empty theater and took a long nap. I went into Gran Torino, in other words, expecting very little; I certainly didn’t plan to feel a bitter swell of nostalgia as the closing credits rolled. But life is full of surprises, and as it turns out, Clint — and by extension Gran Torino — has a few too.

Billed in advance as a sort of unofficial sequel to the Dirty Harry movies, Torino stars Eastwood as Walt Kowalski, a retired auto worker who, as the movie opens, is in attendance at his wife’s funeral. It quickly becomes clear that aside from his dearly departed better half, Walt wants very little to do with anyone — not his kids, nor their kids, nor the young, well-meaning priest that reluctantly promised Walt’s wife he’d look after him. And certainly not the families on his street, which no longer have familiar Polish surnames; Walt’s neighborhood has changed, with an influx of Hmong immigrants replacing the solidly Caucasian blue-collar demographic with which he identifies. He’s a grumpy, openly racist old man, but Nick Schenk’s screenplay does a better job of generating empathy for the character than you might think; surrounded by clueless kids, grasping grandchildren, and neighbors who seem to have no pride in their homes, Walt comes across at first as a sort of seething, epithet-spouting version of Dick Loudon, the character Bob Newhart played on Newhart, a guy who feels like the last oasis of sanity in a world gone mad. (more…)

The Bigger Picture: The Big Three, Part Two

barrelofagunLast week I began a three-part series about the three biggest movie taboos, at least in American cinema — the things we seem to often have both a disdain for and a sick fetishistic fascination with. This week, I’ll be discussing the use of violence in cinema.

We’ve all heard the argument about art imitating life and vice versa. This tends to be similar to the evolution vs. creationism debate. Both sides are so stuck in their ways that they cannot see any wisdom or validity in the opposing argument; however, in both cases, we have two sides that are wasting their time in a pointless argument. Neither side really has a real conflict with the other; it is, in fact, a fabricated quarrel created by those who have a lesser understanding of the situation.

To say that a movie containing scenes of violence will spawn copycat cases in real life is a fairly ridiculous argument. To start with, that would be a very definite statement, similar to saying that everyone who eats at McDonald’s will become morbidly obese. Yes, we do have isolated incidents in which we actually know  someone has attempted to reenact a scene from a movie or video game. Neither side can really ever win the argument, not only because both sides have evidence supporting their claims, but also because they both happen to be correct.

These particular instances of violence, however, can be triggered by anything. I was a high school student when the Columbine massacre happened. The very next day there were rumors and whispers about a troubled student at my own school. We could all envision him doing something like that, because he had an irrational and volatile personality. Even if these individuals never see a violent movie, surely they will gain inspiration from a historical act or merely from the chaos of life.

My intent is not to apologize for some of the more irresponsible uses of violence in film. The problem is that finding the very definition of “irresponsible” is so subjective. I’ll give a few examples of how the argument can swing.

In my recollection of violent films, few stand out above The Passion of the Christ. Here we have a movie so exceedingly violent that it makes the Saw movies look tame by comparison. Imagine if the main character were not the Christ, but some buxom young teenage girl. There would be an outcry over the movie, and the very same Christian organizations that praised Mel Gibson would instead decry the film as torture porn. Bear in mind that I am not a Catholic now, nor have I ever been. Perhaps this explains why I view the violence in Gibson’s film to be irresponsible. To me, it’s like making a movie about the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. that is only five minutes long and only shows the bullet entering his cheek from multiple angles and different camera speeds, all the while expecting people to empathize with his message. (more…)

DVD Review: “My Name Is Bruce”

Cover of "My Name Is Bruce"I have to admit, I’ve always been more a fan of B-movie living legend Bruce Campbell’s personality than I have any of his films. Like most celebrities, there are conflicting stories of whether Bruce is a duke or a douche, but from every interview I’ve ever seen or read concerning him, he seems to be a very down-to-earth guy who’s well aware of his place in the universe, and which in turn makes him appear to be a more affable guy than most…and in the long run, makes watching those few films I’ve seen him in(the big ones like the Evil Dead trilogy, and the seldom-seen like Terminal Invasion) easier to enjoy.

I love any actor who’s willing to poke fun at themselves and deflate their perceived image whenever possible, and in his newest flick, My Name Is Bruce, Campbell pokes long and hard, and does a whole lot of deflating. Playing a sleazy version of himself–jackass on set, living in a beat-up trailer and drinking Shemp Whiskey out of his dog Sam’nRob’s (one of the many homages within the film to friends, associates and others during his long and storied career) bowl–this Campbell is at the lowest point in his life, making a sequel to CaveAlien, the crappiest film in his crappy career. About to fire his agent (Ted Raimi, brother of Evil Dead and Spider-Man director Sam), Bruce is lulled into a false hope that his agent has bigger and better things in store for him when he’s told a big “surprise” awaits him on his birthday. Shortly thereafter, Bruce is approached by Jeff (Taylor Sharpe), a teenager who tries to convince him to come to the small town of Gold Lick, which is being menaced by a vengeful Chinese demon/warrior god named Guan-di (played by James Peck, and based on the actual legendary Chinese warrior/deity Guan Yu). When Bruce refuses, Jeff abducts him.

Finally let out of Jeff’s car trunk, Bruce is at first ready to sue the townsfolk, until he catches a glimpse of Jeff’s hottie mom, Kelly (Grace Thorsen). Thinking this whole Guan-di thing might be a more upscale flick set up by his agent (and very much wanting to get into Kelly’s pants), Bruce decides to play along…little knowing the menace of Guan-di is very real, and that the townsfolk–identifying him a bit too closely with his kick-ass Evil Dead character Ash–expect him to face down the warrior deity and save their town.

My Name Is Bruce proudly displays its B-movie pedigree on its sleeve–the blatant fake background behind cars when they drive, the obvious dummies attempting to pass for beheaded corpses, the fact that teenagers seeking sexual congress in graveyards are distinct wrongdoers who must be punished–and is more of a fun ride for it. In some ways, it has no choice: shot for a budget of just $1.5 million, and having its widest release in only four theaters (thus amassing not even $200,000 as of this writing), the guerilla-style nature which Campbell as director (he also produced the film) was forced to employ would do Ed Wood proud…and believe me, in this case that’s actually a compliment. (more…)

No Concessions: Every Which Way With Clint

noconcessionsClint Eastwood is having the last sneer on the Oscars. As three of the five best picture nominees struggle for a box office bounce (and one, The Reader, has become a laughingstock, the poster child for questionable taste among led-by-the-nose Academy Award voters) his latest, and presumably last as an actor, Gran Torino, is pulling up at the $100 million mark and will easily outperform the others. It’s the only one of the highly touted December releases still drawing crowds in a January that has gone to the (Hotel for) Dogs and bear-hugged Paul Blart: Mall Cop. Critics mostly adore it, as they have just about every Eastwood picture since the long-time pariah was welcomed into the church of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences with 1992’s Unforgiven.

“‘Deserve’s’ got nothin’ to do with it,” his death-haunted old gunslinger muttered over Gene Hackman as he sent him to that great prairie in the sky, and the Academy loved him for it when at the end we were left with a “statement” on the futility of violence, and not a celebration of its consummation. I wasn’t convinced. On first viewing, the film felt very studied to me, wearing its closing dedication “to Sergio and Don” (which had the auteurist critics swooning) on its sleeve. The message was decidedly mixed: After two hours of expressively photographed moping around the Old West, it was those final gunblasts, a typical Eastwood holocaust, which woke everyone up. The adrenaline rush, combined with the arthouse pretension that crept up like ivy around the foundation of a standard-issue oater, awed the tastemakers into submission. The guy who had his day made dozens of times over in the five Dirty Harry pictures, who dispatched armies of desperados at a Gatling gun clip throughout assorted prior Westerns, who killed 300 Nazis in Where Eagles Dare, who had a warmer and more intimate relationship with his simian rather than female companion in Every Which Way But Loose and Any Which Way You Can—he had grown up, become part of the pat-on-the-back Hollywood humanists club. It was as if a mangy, flea-eating gorilla had clambered to its feet and become a man, stunning the zookeepers. (more…)

Film Review: “Gran Torino”

Gran Torino finally opened to wide release this weekend, and rapidly earned the number one spot at the box office.

It deserves every single dollar it’s made.

Many have been calling it a type of Dirty Harry film, harking back to the old days when director/star Clint Eastwood (Million Dollar Baby, Changeling) ran around as Callahan, asking punks if they felt lucky before blowing a hole in them with his .44 Magnum. Indeed, the trailers make it seem as if Gran Torino is a last hurrah action film for Eastwood, before he takes his final bow somewhere down the line.

The truth is, Gran Torino is not an action film by any true meaning of the word. Yes, there is action in it, but it’s action not just for the sake of showing some blood and violence; it’s organically grown from the storyline, from the result of consequences brought about by the acts and doings of the characters within the film. In short, Gran Torino is a character piece about an irascible Korean War vet who also happens to be an unrepentant bigot, who doesn’t exactly learn the error of his ways, but learns that some people he hates are better than others, and chooses–just as he did in the war–to stand up for those who can’t stand up for themselves.

It’s an impressive and important thing that Gran Torino is an Eastwood starrer. In many ways, it has to be: the thought of a 78 year-old man going head-on against youthful gang members would be laughable had any other actor played the lead…but because it’s Eastwood, the man who virtually invented scowling, whose fed-up cop Callahan beat the path for all other “loose cannon” cops to follow in his footsteps… the suspension of disbelief necessary to invest in the film not only clicks on automatically, it’s maintained throughout the film without one instance of being lost. Eastwood’s steely gaze, the simmering quiver in his jaw and a patented growl that might very well have belonged to Wolverine’s father, provides much of the dramatic forewarning and humor–yes, there is well-placed humor to be found–for the majority of the picture. (more…)