In Like Clint
I know I promised to stop linking to Salon so much, but I had to point you all to this review in which Charles Taylor brutally savages Clint Eastwood's boxing movie Million Dollar Baby. The movie's getting great buzz right now (I have not seen it, though I think it's out in LA at this point), and Clint's taken the Best Director prize from the New York Film Critics Circle.
Taylor takes apart not only this movie, calling it a cliched, sap-ridden mess, but Eastwood's entire directorial career, calling his films pained and boring. I for the most part agree. Everyone seemed to love Mystic River, but it wasn't near as interesting, personal or colorful as the Dennis Lehane novel upon which it was based. His adaptation of Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil was a disaster. Really, with the exception of Unforgiven (the reason I hedged my bets with that "for the most part" above), his directorial career is surprisingly undistinguished.
But then there's those New York Film Critics. Are they just totally wrong on this one? I often find Taylor overly critical and smug, as in his takedown of Alexander Payne's tremendous Sideways. So, I thought I'd check out who the NYFCC has awarded Best Director to in the past few years...
Last year was Sofia Coppola for Lost in Translation. Okay, I'm with them so far. The year before that, 2002, was Todd Haynes for Far From Heaven. Another solid pick in my book (though I'd probably have gone with Scorsese for Gangs of NY). 2001 was Bob Altman for Gosford Park, another great choice (though David Lynch's Mulholland Drive of that year would have taken the prize at the Lons Awards). And 2000? Steven Soderbergh took the prize for the dual projects Erin Brockovich and Traffic, content to award David Gordon Green's magnificent George Washington with Best First Film. Good enough for me.
So, I'm thinking Taylor's just being his usual snarky discontented self, and this movie's actually quite watchable. I could be convinced to check it out...Let you all know if I do, of course. Cause that's what I do.
3 comments:
So, you're reviewing a review for a movie you haven't seen, in an attempt to bolster an opinion you have of the director's work? What's the point? "Million Dollar Baby" IS, indeed, a high point for Eastwood, and a far more substantial late-period work (assuming the man won't live forever) than "Mystic River"...
When 98% of the smart people who contribute to the Tomatometer rave about a movie, why would you fixate on the one negative review?
I really didn't mean for this comment to sound like a complete dismissal of Clint's talent as a filmmaker. I just thought Charles Taylor's scathing review was an interesting read, and then commented on my assessment of his argument. Like I said, I think "Unforgiven" is a great movie, and "Outlaw Josie Wales" is a cool one as well. I just meant that I don't think Eastwood is among out most talented filmmakers, particularly in light of his last few works.
Alright, it's official that I've gotta see this movie. That's just too many people saying how incredible it is. I'll refrain from commenting any more about it until I have seen it and can say from experience what I think.
Here's my question...Why haven't we heard more about it until now? I follow movies pretty closely, and I swear it was only about a month ago I'd even heard there was a new Clint Eastwood movie. I haven't seen a single commercial on television or preview or poster in a movie theater. Why have they kept it so under wraps if it's so great?
Post a Comment