Blog

Movie of the Week: J. Edgar

Last night it was me and the old liberal Jewish brigade at the NY Times film club preview screening of J. Edgar, the new Clint Eastwood film starring Leonardo DiCaprio as the most powerful law enforcement figure in American History.   Despite my pleas for most movies to trim the fat, this movie chronicles a 48 year FBI career, spanning eight presidents in an even two hours.  And it feels too lean.  The movie is certainly not bad, which would be nearly impossible given DiCaprio and Eastwood’s credentials.  But it just isn’t the great movie I hoped it would be.

 

DiCaprio will certainly get an Oscar nomination for his performance, but unlike his Oscar performance in Blood Diamond, which I still think is his best, this is really an obvious Oscar grab.  His portrayal of Hoover spans five decades so there is makeup, and fat suits and an accent and odd speaking cadence.  In fact old Hoover looks like present day Jack Nicholson.  It all spells Oscar nomination.  Plus throw in the Brokeback Mountain element involving J Edgar’s long-standing relationship with his second in command, Clyde Tolson, played by Armie Hammer, known for playing the Winklevoss twins in The Social Network (I still think he deserved a nomination more than any actor in that film) and the odds of a DiCaprio nomination stand at 99%.

As much as I liked Hammer in The Social Network, something felt off with his performance in this movie.  First off, in the older scenes, it appears all the efforts in good makeup were directed to DiCaprio.  His older Hoover looks natural, but the old version of Tolson bears a resemblance to Dan Aykroyd in the 90s “comedy” Nothing But Trouble.  Secondly, Hammer channels the same affluent air that combines smugness and decency that he carried so well in The Social Network, but in more emotional scenes with DiCaprio he appeared a bit awkward.

Of course one of the most intriguing elements of a story of a man who spent his life collecting secrets to blackmail people in power is that he had lifestyle that clearly could have been problematic for him.  And yet it never seemed so much of an issue besides one emotional fight.  The cowboys in Brokeback Mountain had more problems than Hoover, according to this film.  That may have been the case, but it is hard to believe.  The film does its best to portray the relationship as a long standing, powerful bond, but without a lot of the details of the relationship it is hard to feel as invested in it as you are supposed to.

What the movie does really well from a historical perspective is show why Hoover was both a vital figure in law enforcement development (his early encouragement of using science in police work, getting the FBI significant power, etc.) and such a villainous figure as well  (his secret files that he used to blackmail political figures, his inflation of his own hands on legacy in apprehending criminals, and a particularly awful phone call to Bobby Kennedy).

And just one issue with Eastwood – why is the movie so fu*king dark?  I don’t know if that is for film critics who will say, “the dark tones of the film evoke the shadiness of Hoover,” or “the film’s dark style helps draw out the classic eras it evokes,” or some other stuff, but I would have preferred a few more lights on set.

I enjoy biographies and I like biopics.  And other than Lord of The Ring films, they are the only genre of film where I gladly watch long movies, as long as they provide a full picture of the subject’s life.  That is why Malcolm X may be my favorite biopic.  J Edgar hits on many of the significant pieces of Hoover’s professional life and gives the viewer a decent outline of his personal life.  But in the end I would have preferred a bigger and more detailed film that could have delivered a fuller look at both sides of Hoover.

Final Grade – B/B+

Blog

Could Madea Make A Successful Middle East Movie?

I was disappointed to see Matt Damon and Paul Greengrass’ new movie, “Green Zone” make a relatively low amount of money this weekend. Not because I have any ownership in the film, but because it is sort of disappointing that Americans don’t want to engage the Wars in the Middle East on any level, even fictional.

It is sort of a Catch 22 that films like Green Zone, which is somewhat political (if you consider the truth, albeit fictionalized, “liberal”) and 2009’s Best Picture, The Hurt Locker, completely apolitical, are unsuccessful because of American society’s war fatigue.  If we had such aversion and fatigue over war, where was it in 2003 when troops marched off to war in Iraq?  In other words, if people were as tired of war and wanted to hide their eyes from it as much in 2003 and they do in 2010 then films like Green Zone and The Hurt Locker would never have been made.

Sometimes I have friends who say, I just want to go the movies for a diversion, something mindless, not for some high minded message movie.  But how much mindlessness can we actually tolerate – Facebook, Twitter, reality television, Internet, video games, porn – and that is just my day before noon!  At some point don’t people want something thought-provoking that isn’t a 90 second clip on The Daily Show?

But I was actually very surprised to see a Matt Damon movie with such a good director fail, no matter what the topic. It raises a question in my mind: is there anyone who could actually sell a Middle East War movie successfully to our half apathetic/half-indignant society?  Here are some ideas I am pitching:

1) Scorsese directs DiCaprio in “The Enlisted”.  DiCaprio plays Tommy Coughlin, a Boston tough who joins the Army and is sent to Iraq as an alternative to going to prison.  There is a ton of Rolling Stones music, a lot of quick shots and of course, DiCaprio gets to speak with a Boston accent all while shooting a lot of brown people.

2) Will Smith & Tom Hanks in “I Am Soldier” directed by Steven Spielberg – probably the best bet for a successful Middle East War Movie.  Tom Hanks plays General Michael White who is asking Captain John Black (Smith) to go on a dangerous one man mission.  When it seems like Capt Black will fail, Sandra Bullock shows up as a sassy southern enlisted woman who is lost and helps him complete his mission. (Captain Black and General White could be role reversed, at which point instead of Sandra Bullock, Tom Hanks companion in the desert would be a volleyball).

3) “I Can Do War Torture By Myself “or “Why Did I Enlist” by Tyler Perry – the wild card here – this film will be about a man whose marriage to Janet Jackson is on the rocks because he is not living a Christian lifestyle.  After receiving advice from his 6’6″ transgendered grandmother  the man decides to enlist in the war to prove that he, like Jesus Christ, is willing to sacrifice his life for a greater cause.

4) “Sandstorm” – starring Robert Pattinson and Taylor Lautner.  Pattinson plays an English enlisted man fighting in Iraq, but he can only fight at night because of his deep brooding nature and a secret he has (he’s a vampire).  Lautner plays an American fighting alongside, but harboring an even deeper secret (he’s a gay werewolf and if either of those things is found out he will be kicked out of the armed forces).

5) “Memorial Day” – starring the cast of Valentine’s Day.  The concept of this movie is simple – every cast member of this film actually volunteers for active duty in Iraq as part of a documentary with an option for a reality television spin off.

Let me know which you think has the best chance.