If you ever want to enrage the masses of critics and
amateur critics that plague the Internet these days, the surest way in which
you can achieve your goal would be to create a piece of failed Oscar bait.
Nothing gets a critic hot under the collar like a film that aspires to win
awards but doesn’t bring the goods required to secure such attention. Even if
said Oscar bait turns out to be a half-way decent film, that won’t matter
because it intended to be more and therefore should be held to a higher
standard. I usually rail against this viewpoint as I feel a film should be
judged based on what it is not what it isn’t. In this case, however, I’m
jumping on the bandwagon and will now proceed to lambast J. Edgar.
Like any year, 2011 brought us a number of truly bad
films. Everyone agreed that Priest, In Time, and The Change-Up were terrible and I especially despised The Sitter. But I would contend that the
makers of each of these films knew they weren’t working on the next Citizen Kane and they each gave us a
movie that was up to par with the time, effort, and money spent on the project.
So while one could argue that there’s no way J. Edgar is worse than The
Change-Up, I would argue that given its pedigree and the maddening ways in
which it wasted my time in an effort to be “substantial”, this is the worst
movie of the year (or at least the worst I saw). I’m not as universally on
board with Clint Eastwood’s directorial decisions as some of my colleagues are
but even still, I expect a great deal more from a filmmaker of Eastwood’s
ability than what he provides here.
J. Edgar is a
haphazard attempt at shedding light on a controversial figure but focuses so squarely
on being revelatory and shocking that it forgets to actually tell the story it
sets out to tell. As a result, J. Edgar
comes across as virtually toneless and painfully dull while at the same time
layering itself in a pretentious importance that doesn’t measure up to the film’s
protagonist (or at least he protagonist as portrayed here). The narrative,
which jumps back and forth between Hoover’s last days and the events of his
younger days, is structured in the most convoluted way possible. It’s as if
Eastwood took the script, cut it into tiny pieces, threw it into a bag, and
then pulled the pieces out one at a time and forced them together into a
jumbled jigsaw puzzle that doesn’t make a lick of sense. It isn’t even that I
couldn’t follow the storyline, it’s that after about 10 minutes I didn’t want
to. Eastwood does nothing to make Hoover a compelling character which creates a
Grand Canyon-like distance between the audience and the subject matter. On top
of that, Eastwood chose to wash virtually all color out of his film resulting
in a look that thoroughly matched the film’s dull tone. It is overly dark and
ugly and it feeds directly into the grumpy old man perception younger viewers
have of Eastwood.
For his part, DiCaprio brought his A-game to his
performance and the role will do nothing but cement his stature as one of the
industry’s very, very best. He appears to be all-in here and it’s just too bad
that he’s completely and totally overshadowed by the miserable way in which
this film is presented. Point blank, this is an awful film and only a great
lead performance keeps it from taking up residence on the list of “Worst Movies
Ever.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.