Oscar Watch: "J. Edgar"
"J. Edgar"
Directed by: Clint Eastwood
Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Armie Hammer, Naomi Watts
Nominations: TBD
Oscar season is nearly upon us, and with Billy Crystal tapped to host, I'm really hoping it'll erase some of the blah telecasts we've had so far. Nominations won't be announced for probably two more months, but whenever it's November and you see a Clint Eastwood movie at the multiplex, there's a good probability it'll up for something.
"J. Edgar" chronicles the life of J. Edgar Hoover, who is known largely for building the foundation of the FBI as it exists today, through methods both legit and questionable. Leonardo DiCaprio portrays the titular character, throughout various stages of his life. Eastwood presents the movie in an interesting narrative fashion. To me recollection, there are no dates shown on screen. The basic structure of the movie follows an older Hoover narrating a book about the FBI to some FBI agents, and the film recounts key events of the FBI's and Hoover's history. At times, this narrative structure could be a bit confusing. For instance, we go from a scene with a young Hoover, to one with an older Hoover on his mother's deathbed, and then to a scene somewhere between the two, with an older Hoover and his healthier mother. The placement of that deathbed scene was sort of tucked away there, probably for some larger narrative or artistic purpose.
Surprising to me was the undercurrent of Hoover's speculated homosexuality. According to wikipedia, Hoover's sexual preferences are controversial, with his relationship with Tolson (portrayed by Hammer) rumored to be sexual in nature by some, but simply brothers by others, like Mark Felt (aka "Deep Throat). The film showed Hoover cross-dressing and admitting somewhat subtly to his mother that he had no feelings for men. This may be the main drawback to the film. I am far from knowledgeable on Hoover, but if wikipedia is correct and this subject is up for debate, taking one side in favor of the other in this film could question the accuracy of the film's facts overall.
Side note: I love how the FBI agents back in the day wore those caps. Time to bring them back! And it's amazing how, before Hoover came to power, criminal investigations were rather lacking. No fingerprints, tampering of a crime scene, disposing of evidence.... any generic investigation show on TV (probably on CBS) would tell you that those seem to be investigation 101.
The film was set in a sort of off-color light, which felt totally appropriate for the period setting. There were sprinkles of subtle humor, but overall, it was rather serious, steadily-paced biopic. Solid acting and directing, but critiques of the film lacking coherency is definitely arguable. With the unique narrative structure of the story, it was sometimes difficult to get a good grasp on the temporal chain of events. Nevertheless, it was engaging. And realistic. As my friend pointed out after the film, Eastwood took a very realistic approach. The scene with Hoover's half naked, pale, dead body on the floor was shockingly realistic and inelegant, and showed that despite the major advances he made to the FBI and this country in his life, in the end, he was only human, like everyone else.
I just finished reading "Steve Jobs," the official biography by Walter Isaacson, and there were definite parallels, to me, between Jobs and Hoover. The intense, narrow focus, no-nonsense attitude, and intensity seem to be shared between the two. I also wonder if Hoover had a sort of "reality distortion field," based on how he acted and expected people to just do as he commanded, like when he assumed the professor was going to work for the FBI without even asking him.
Overall, an enjoyable biopic, but I would question certain facts as presented in the film. I think nominations should go to DiCaprio for lead actor, Eastwood for directing, possibly Hammer for supporting actor, art direction, and cinematography.
Directed by: Clint Eastwood
Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Armie Hammer, Naomi Watts
Nominations: TBD
Oscar season is nearly upon us, and with Billy Crystal tapped to host, I'm really hoping it'll erase some of the blah telecasts we've had so far. Nominations won't be announced for probably two more months, but whenever it's November and you see a Clint Eastwood movie at the multiplex, there's a good probability it'll up for something.
"J. Edgar" chronicles the life of J. Edgar Hoover, who is known largely for building the foundation of the FBI as it exists today, through methods both legit and questionable. Leonardo DiCaprio portrays the titular character, throughout various stages of his life. Eastwood presents the movie in an interesting narrative fashion. To me recollection, there are no dates shown on screen. The basic structure of the movie follows an older Hoover narrating a book about the FBI to some FBI agents, and the film recounts key events of the FBI's and Hoover's history. At times, this narrative structure could be a bit confusing. For instance, we go from a scene with a young Hoover, to one with an older Hoover on his mother's deathbed, and then to a scene somewhere between the two, with an older Hoover and his healthier mother. The placement of that deathbed scene was sort of tucked away there, probably for some larger narrative or artistic purpose.
Surprising to me was the undercurrent of Hoover's speculated homosexuality. According to wikipedia, Hoover's sexual preferences are controversial, with his relationship with Tolson (portrayed by Hammer) rumored to be sexual in nature by some, but simply brothers by others, like Mark Felt (aka "Deep Throat). The film showed Hoover cross-dressing and admitting somewhat subtly to his mother that he had no feelings for men. This may be the main drawback to the film. I am far from knowledgeable on Hoover, but if wikipedia is correct and this subject is up for debate, taking one side in favor of the other in this film could question the accuracy of the film's facts overall.
Side note: I love how the FBI agents back in the day wore those caps. Time to bring them back! And it's amazing how, before Hoover came to power, criminal investigations were rather lacking. No fingerprints, tampering of a crime scene, disposing of evidence.... any generic investigation show on TV (probably on CBS) would tell you that those seem to be investigation 101.
The film was set in a sort of off-color light, which felt totally appropriate for the period setting. There were sprinkles of subtle humor, but overall, it was rather serious, steadily-paced biopic. Solid acting and directing, but critiques of the film lacking coherency is definitely arguable. With the unique narrative structure of the story, it was sometimes difficult to get a good grasp on the temporal chain of events. Nevertheless, it was engaging. And realistic. As my friend pointed out after the film, Eastwood took a very realistic approach. The scene with Hoover's half naked, pale, dead body on the floor was shockingly realistic and inelegant, and showed that despite the major advances he made to the FBI and this country in his life, in the end, he was only human, like everyone else.
I just finished reading "Steve Jobs," the official biography by Walter Isaacson, and there were definite parallels, to me, between Jobs and Hoover. The intense, narrow focus, no-nonsense attitude, and intensity seem to be shared between the two. I also wonder if Hoover had a sort of "reality distortion field," based on how he acted and expected people to just do as he commanded, like when he assumed the professor was going to work for the FBI without even asking him.
Overall, an enjoyable biopic, but I would question certain facts as presented in the film. I think nominations should go to DiCaprio for lead actor, Eastwood for directing, possibly Hammer for supporting actor, art direction, and cinematography.
posted by DarthDooku at
10:57 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home