Sins of Omission - Entry #88: Million Dollar Baby (2004)

Running Time: 132 minutes

Directed By: Clint Eastwood

Written By: Paul Haggis, based on stories from “Rope Burns” by F.X. Toole

Main Cast: Hilary Swank, Clint Eastwood, Morgan Freeman, Jay Baruchel, Mike Colter

BROKEN

 

 

Sins of Omission - Entry #83: The Bridges of Madison County (1995)

Running Time: 135 minutes

Directed By: Clint Eastwood

Written By: Richard LaGravenese, based on the novel by Robert James Waller

Main Cast: Clint Eastwood, Meryl Streep, Annie Corley, Victor Slezak, Jim Haynie 

A BEAUTIFUL ROMANCE

   

 

SINS OF OMISSION - Entry #41: Mystic River (2003)

Running Time: 138 minutes
Directed By: Clint Eastwood
Written By: Brian Helgeland, based on the novel by Dennis Lehane
Main Cast: Sean Penn, Tim Robbins, Kevin Bacon, Laurence Fishburne, Marcia Gay Harden
Click here to view the trailer

WE BURY OUR SINS, WE WASH THEM CLEAN

Nothing great to say here. I actually saw Mystic River in the theater, when it was re-released for the Oscar campaign in 2004. We had actually gone to the theater with the intention of seeing The Passion of the Christ, but when that was sold out, chose Mystic River. Boy, am I glad we did. The Passion... is a fine film, but this is better. Great cast (needless to say because it's been said to death), great story and great, great score. Stills? Stills!

RATING: 9/10  Clint Eastwood's best? Probably, for my money. I will never get sick of this movie and really, it's one of those ones that I'll probably dust off and watch every couple years just because.

848. UNFORGIVEN (1992)

Running Time: 130 minutes
Directed By: Clint Eastwood
Written By: David Webb Peoples
Main Cast: Clint Eastwood, Gene Hackman, Morgan Freeman, Richard Harris, Jaimz Woolvett
Click here to view the trailer

THE LAST GREAT WESTERN?

I'm telling you guys I'm really committed to being all said and done by Halloween. I mean, when's the last time you saw me bang out this many reviews, in this short of time. This would make your third review in less than twenty four hours. Therefore, keep scrolling, cause there's likely to be new content below.

William Munny (Eastwood) is a former "rootin' tootin, bad ass, son of a bitch" who, after finding the love of a good woman, has reformed himself - giving up drink, women and killing. The woman is his former wife and at film's beginning, she's been dead for going on three years. Now widower Will struggles to raise two children on a fledgling pig farm. Meanwhile, a prostitute has been attacked by a client, who has left her face cut up, nearly killing her. The other prostitutes get together, pool their money and decide to offer a reward for anyone bringing them the corpses of the cutter and his partner. The prostitutes reside in Big Whiskey, Wyoming, which is sheriffed by "Little" Bill Daggett (Hackman). Little Bill is pretty vicious himself, being quick with a gun and brutal with his punishments. When Bill gets word that the girls are offering reward money, bringing certain death to his doorstep, he's none too happy. Back at the pig farm, Will Munny is approached by The Schofield Kid (Woolvett), who offers to split the $1000 prostitute reward with him, if Munny will tag along and help him bag the cutter. Munny turns down the offer at first, but then changes his mind, riding to the homestead of his former partner, Ned (Freeman) and together, the two catch up to The Kid. Also, there's this whole subplot involving a cowardly gunfighter named English Bob, but I won't even get into that here...perhaps below the spoiler line...

SPOILER ALERT!

I REALLY didn't get all the English Bob stuff. What was the point of it all? Richard Harris' character didn't even interact with Clint Eastwood's and the whole movie really revolved around Will Munny, making English Bob a complete moot point. I mean, I guess you could make a case that it was to establish Hackman's character as a bad ass, but I think there were other ways of doing so. Speaking of Hackman's character, I think a lot of the appeal of this film lies in the fact that the traditional western roles are reversed. If you listen to the history, Will Munny is a former killer of women & children, yet here he's the hero. On the other hand, the sheriff is the main villain and it's kind of cool how that works out. Whomever had the initial idea to make the killer the hero and the sheriff the bad guy was really on to something. However, I didn't care too much for the execution this go around (I'd seen the film a few times prior) and I'd argue that the Best Picture Oscar that year went to the wrong film (I'd personally have given it to Scent of a Woman, an old favorite of mine, but then again, I've never seen Howards End).

Here's a thought: We're supposed to already know the "old Will Munny" through Eastwood's prior performances. The Will Munny of the past is simply Clint Eastwood as he existed in countless prior westerns, right? However, I'd argue that that's really not true. Did I miss the western where Eastwood played a murderer of women & children? I mean, he usually played the good guy right? Sure, he was a bad ass, but his bad assery was always justified, was it not? Anyway - here comes the thought - what about Eastwood directing one more western someday, a prequel to Unforgiven. You could reverse the roles back to traditional good guy/bad guy, with the Munny character being the villain (hell, have Scott Eastwood play it, if you want) and a new sheriff (not Daggett) playing the good guy. He's a vicious killer, the sheriff is hunting him, yada yada yada. Then in the very end, Munny meets and falls in love with a girl, who becomes his wife and the rest we already know. You'd have to be real careful, which is why I think Eastwood should direct it, or else it could end up like a Nicholas Sparks type thing and that wouldn't be good for business. I'm not saying I'd go see this or anything, I'm just trying to throw Hollywood a free bone, that's all.

In conclusion, I just wasn't THAT thrilled with this. It had some decent elements and I liked the role reversal aspect, but otherwise, this was a pretty standard western and while the genre isn't my favorite, I've seen better. I realized here that Eastwood REALLY wasn't THAT good of an actor. He was alright, I guess, but I didn't care for him here and when I started thinking, "Well what was he really good in?", I had a hard time coming up with anything. I LOVE LOVE LOVE Escape from Alcatraz, but it's certainly not because of his performance or anything, ditto Dirty Harry, ditto The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. Hell, even Morgan Freeman didn't turn in anything worth writing home about here and he's usually always fairly decent. However, Hackman, as per usual, was fantastic and earned his Oscar.

RATING: 5.5/10  Close to a '6', but not quite. I really expected this to be a shoo in for the next TOP 20 list, but I had to look at it honestly and honestly, it's not THAT good.

MOVIES WATCHED: 947
MOVIES LEFT TO WATCH: 54

August 8, 2015  7:47pm

608. The Outlaw Josey Wales (1976)

Running Time: 135 minutes
Directed By: Clint Eastwood
Written By: Sonia Chernus, Philip Kaufman, from the novel Gone To Texas by Forrest Carter
Main Cast: Clint Eastwood, Chief Dan George, Sondra Locke, Bill McKinney, John Vernon
Click here to view the trailer

A DOUBLE SHOT OF EASTWOOD: 2 of 2

So the whole "let's do our own things on Tuesdays" agreement between my wife and I seems to have been a success, as I managed to watch more movies in one day (yesterday) as I've been averaging in one week lately. As my beloved Pittsburgh Pirates fight for their life on the screen behind me, I bring you the second of a two part salute to Clint Eastwood - The Outlaw Josey Wales.

The film begins with Josey Wales' (Eastwood) family being murdered by a band of Union soldiers, as they set fire to his home. He buries his son and wife and weeps by their grave sides as a band of Confederates ride along and he winds up traveling with them. Through the opening credits we see victories by Josey Wales and his new friends the Confederacy, however, as the movie gets underway, their Captain Fletcher (Vernon) tells them that it's time to surrender, just as all other bands of Confederates have. With the exception of Josey Wales, the rest of his brothers in arms head to a Union base where they plan to wave the proverbial white flag and call it a defeat. However, it turns out that Fletcher has betrayed his brothers and has pledged his allegiance to the Union, as they open fire on the newly surrendered Confederate band, killing many. Josey Wales, still up in the hills, hears the commotion and manages to come to their aid - except he's too late and really only manages to save one kid. However, in the process he takes out a slew of Union men and becomes a fugitive from justice - an outlaw, if you will. Now, he's on the run from Captain Fletcher and other powerful men including Captain Terrill Redlegs (McKinney). As he runs, Wales gains infamy by the day, becoming notorious as a fast handed gunfighter and his legend follows him, growing all the way.

Oy vey, where to begin? I mean, it's pretty much the same movie as High Plains Drifter isn't it? I mean, you have the exact same Eastwood: a gruff, no nonsense, badass, man of few words who gains reputation as a cooler than cool gunfighter who kills many. I mean sure, here we're talking Civil War and there we were just talking random old west, but it's TOmato/TAmato. Let's just suffice it to say that I didn't like this one either. In fact, while I didn't have much problem putting up with High Plains Drifter, this one was actually a little more difficult to endure and now that it's done, I'm glad to have it behind me. It all started out quite harmless: a good ol' fugitive story - who can't get behind that? You had Eastwood and this kid running from Fletcher and Terrill and it was a fine film, as Eastwood obviously knew how to play the part and John Vernon was pretty good too (that voice that commands attention). However, once we started adding in the Indian characters and the others, including Sondra Locke's Laura Lee, it became too muddled and ultimately lost me. By the time we hit the ninety minute mark I was tapping out and ready to call it a night at the movies.

I can't decide whether I hate Eastwood the director or Eastwood the westerner with no name. I'm pretty sure it's the latter, as it seems like Eastwood really phoned these roles in, plus I'm no western fanatic to begin with. I mean, would it have killed him to differentiate these characters a little bit? It was the same old song & dance. You could argue that just like audiences forty years earlier had paid to see Fred & Ginger sing & dance, they also paid to see Eastwood don a five o'clock shadow & a duster and be gunfighter. But it just isn't working for this reviewer. Sure, I loved it when Leone was behind the director's chair and coaching Eastwood to a career making performance in The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, but here (and with High Plains Drifter) it just seemed like Eastwood was just going through the motions. How either of these pictures that I've reviewed in the past two days got the acclaim that they did is beyond me and honestly, I'm glad to be done with them.

RATING: 4/10  I'll go '4' just because, but honestly, that'll probably lower with more reflection. I was hoping that this little Eastwood double shot was going to be something that added a bit more value to my upcoming TOP 20, but it was a total bust.

MOVIES WATCHED: 852
MOVIES LEFT TO WATCH: 149

October 1, 2014  8:28pm

546. High Plains Drifter (1972)

Running Time: 105 minutes
Directed By: Clint Eastwood
Written By: Ernest Tidyman
Main Cast: Clint Eastwood, Verna Bloom, Billy Curtis, Mariana Hill, Mitchell Ryan
Click here to view the trailer

A DOUBLE SHOT OF EASTWOOD: 1 of 2

So my wife and I have decided to make Tuesdays (which is basically our Saturday, as we have every single Tuesday and Wednesday off work) our day to have to ourselves. Basically after realizing that we like to spend Wednesdays together and that we like to spend our weekday evenings together and that I can't make it up past 10 o'clock anymore, I needed one day a week to do my thing and she agreed that she had things she'd like to do to. So it all worked out perfectly today, as I retired to my little TV watching room to feast on some Louie and finally catch High Plains Drifter which had been sitting on my side table for several weeks.

The film opens with Clint Eastwood riding a palomino into the town of Lago, where months earlier the Sheriff was whipped to death by three men and left to die in the middle of the street, while basically the whole town looked on in horror - just watching him die. Once there the stranger (we never get a proper name) wastes no time showing off his gunslinging skills, killing three who try to give him a hard time while he's getting a shave. During his first day in town he also manages to rape a woman, Callie Travers (Hill) and rile up just about everyone else. One thing the townspeople can agree on though is the fact that the man can handle his guns and with him on their side, they'd be invincible. Why do they need backup? Because the men who killed the Sheriff are getting out of jail and word has it that they're headed back to Lago and are none too happy. The townsfolk feel that when they get back, they're going to need the help of the stranger and his guns to survive or else the vicious three will see them dead. So, they make a deal with the stranger telling him that he can have anything he wants in the town for free in exchange for him teaching some of the residents of Lago how to shoot and sticking around to help deal with the three men himself. The stranger agrees and spends the better part of the middle portion of the film taking advantage of the townspeople, getting free drinks, free clothes and free everything and then devising a plan to paint the town red...literally. Meanwhile, the three men are loose and have already killed a party in order to take their horses and are headed back to Lago to get some revenge for the year of their life they lost.

SPOILER ALERT!

THE BOOK notes that Clint Eastwood's character may have been the ghost of the dead Sheriff or maybe even his brother. I think that's a superb theory and furthermore, think the film would've benefited in including that little tidbit in, as the film needed a SOMETHING at the end to give it a little flair. I mean this film just felt so flat and severely lacked substance. Can someone explain to me the point of painting the town red and renaming it "Hell"? Or of setting up a picnic table and hanging a big sign out front that read "Welcome Home Boys"? Was this meant to be mind games on the part of the stranger so that he could throw the three men off guard? Was there ever any doubt in ANYONE'S mind that Eastwood's character was going to make short order of these three clowns? What I'm saying is the film was incredibly predictable and the ending left a lot to be desired. I kept thinking throughout that maybe the big payoff with the bed sheets and the two hundred gallons of red paint would all be worthwhile, but it wasn't and like I've already noted, it just didn't make much sense. Eastwood's character was a major bad ass who didn't need red buildings and mind games to overtake these three, who could've simply stood on the roof of the five & dime and took them out one by one as they rode into town, easy peasy.

Also, was anyone else thrown off by the fact that there wasn't anyone to really root for. They surely didn't expect me to root for Eastwood's stranger did they, a rapist? Furthermore, we couldn't get behind any of the Lagonians, since they were all cowards who stood by and watched as their Sheriff was bull whipped in the middle of town, bleeding to death before their eyes. No, I just couldn't settle into this one at all and while it wasn't even close to being the biggest waste of time THE BOOK has had me endure, it wasn't great by any means either. It seemed to me that what Eastwood was trying to say with his second directorial feature had already been said much better by the likes of Sergio Leone and his "Man With No Name" films. I mean, wasn't that what this was - just another of film with a man with no name, riding roughshod over town, taking laws into his own hands and being a bad ass. It had been done before - with the same actor no less. I'm not saying it couldn't have worked again, but I think that would have required a little more creativity on Eastwood's part and a much better, more imaginative script. This was just *blah* as is.

RATING: 5/10  Call it average. It went fairly fast for being close to two hours, it was just really easy to rip apart in the end.

MOVIES WATCHED: 851
MOVIES LEFT TO WATCH: 150

September 30, 2014  5:41pm