AMERICAN SNIPER - YET ANOTHER CLINT EASTWOOD FILM ?

This was another big name last Oscar season, even though it only managed to take away the award for Sound Editing. Well, with names as big as Clint Eastwood and Bradley Cooper attached it could hardly help being in the limelight. I have infinite respect and admiration for Clint Eastwood. I quote High planes drifter on a regular basis when I write. But I do also have to point out that I – and quite a few other – people have accused him in the past of basically playing himself in films and making the same film over and over again. This time he has a rather extraordinary true story on his hands – so how has he fared? Same film again – or something a little different?

The hero of our story, brought to life by Bradley Cooper is legendary American sniper Chris Kyle. During his four tours in Iraq, Kyle quickly raised to rank of legend through his sheer dedication to service, accuracy when shooting and determination to do what is truly right. The men admire and support him, his superiors admire him and the public read about him with admiration in the papers… But one cannot see the things Kyle has seen without changing. Every time he comes home to his wife and children, Kyle finds it harder and harder to leave the war behind… In fact, even if he does survive the fighting, his memories may well end up consuming him… The question is, will he admit this – even to himself – and start fighting back in time ?

Looking at the list of wins, I can’t help but think that Bradley Cooper deserved a little more than he actually ended up receiving – his performance is pretty much what makes the film not just another Clint Eastwood film. Because given the subject matter, I cannot quite imagine anyone else making this film. And Eastwood makes it exactly the way we imagine he would make it. Kyle was evidently quite an extraordinary man, don’t get me wrong, but the way the story goes, how all American he is throughout, his easy rise to stardom as a sniper… It is all… Just too smooth. Eastwood finishes the film with real footage of Kyles funeral (I reckon his death is not a spoiler as it pretty much counts as common knowledge) which was of course a military, patriotic affair. No wonder his critics accuse Eastwood of tubthumping banality – it is JUST like a  million other films made to show the horrors of war. Smooth, polished but without an original bone in its body.

Take a film like The Hurt Locker. Jeremy Renners character William James is Kyles equivalent in the film and paints a completely different picture. He is a lot harder to like, he is a lot less of a gentleman, he has lost a lot of his positive emotions in all aspects of life and, to be honest, I think he is a much more realistic portrayal of what war can do to a good man. I almost feel the film is in denial about the sheer amount of trauma Kyle would have had to cope with. We do not see the grit and dirt of the matter at all, only the polished surface you present to visitors. 

Which is precisely why I say Bradley Cooper needs a few more accolades for the work he did here. Cooper sticks to the letter of the script, it is true. His character is always polite smiling and courteous, and yet… The nuances, the tiniest gestures, the little moments Cooper manages to insert into his all round good old American cowboy routine give us hair raising insights into what must be going through Kyles mind. It is without a doubt the tonic the films overly varnished surface needed – I just devoutly wish there were more of those hints. If our imaginations were meant to make up the rest of the horrors, well, the film does not give us enough to work with.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think that all films pertaining to war should necessarily end badly, be dark and not have any positive emotion in them at all. But the trauma Kyle went through lies at the heart of the story. The characters ark consists of his entering this state of trauma and coming out the other side – at least supposedly. We have to be able to see the trauma so we can rejoice with him and his family when he comes out on the other side. If we do not believe in the trauma in the first place, well, there is a part of the film that becomes completely pointless – the emotional journey has been aborted before it even began. Bradley Coopers extraordinary performance rescues the story to a certain point, but the other failing is, in my opinion, simply too great.

American Sniper is without doubt a good film. It is fascinating to watch, it is a story well worth being told. But it is, sadly, yet ANOTHER war film and something of a missed opportunity. By all means watch, but don’t expect it to change your world…    

"A FEW DOLLARS MORE" - COULD BE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LIFE AND DEATH!

I’m getting slightly hooked on these westerns. I really am. I totally see why there is a whole bunch of people out there who watch the old classics ad nauseam. Oh don’t worry; I won’t be subjecting you guys to the same treatment. But a few of the good ones will crop up in the blog now and again. The ones that are good, cinematically relevant you know… I kinda started watching Sergio Leone movies mainly because Quentin Tarantino is a fan (yes, I’m sad. But you see, Quentin Tarantino is a guy I am a MASSIVE fan of so I was curious. Plus Sergio Leone isn’t exactly an obscure character no one has heard of so I wanted to see what the fuss was about). Anyway. I now know what the fuss is about. I will attempt to convey said reasons.

We are, once again in the Wild West. When men were men and only those with sharp wits but even sharper shooting skills could survive. There are many ways you could use your wits and gun to live, and one of them is bounty hunting. And the bounty hunting stakes sky-rocket one fine day, when an infamous bandit and gang leader, Indio, escapes from prison. Munco (Clint Eastwood) and Colonel Douglas Mortimer ( Lee Van Cleef) cross paths and swords (well, guns) when they both start chasing the same man so an uneasy truce is formed between these two lone wolves. But as the chase continues deep into the heart of the desert and loyalties are tested over and over again, one thing begins to become painfully clear: Only one of the bounty hunters is actually after the bounty. The other one has a slightly different agenda ready for Indio.

I am actually pleasantly surprised by these films over and over again. We are – or at least I am – slightly prejudiced into thinking these “old” films are rather simplistic. They don’t have any special effects – but this we already knew – and they don’t have any “depth” in the story. You know, black vs white. Goodies vs Baddies. It HAS to be boring, right? Well, no. Not really.

I mean yes, it’s true, a lot of these films are “black and white”, but this is still often an occurrence, especially in mainstream cinema. It is a plain and simple fact that, for all our snobbery on the matter, we enjoy it. We want to cheer the good guys and boo the bad guys, get all worked up, but deep down know that the goodies WILL prevail in the end. When worded like that, that just sounds like an incredibly boring idea.       But this film appeals straight for our heart strings so cleverly, you just… Get sucked up. Besides, it is not a simple matter of good overcoming bad”. Firstly, this is the Wild West. Everyone is CONSTANTLY double crossing everyone else. You have to be constantly on your toes to follow the shifting alliances and you can never quite guess which way the plot is going to swerve next… Plus, there is the matter of the definition of “good” and “bad”. In this instance, Indio is as bad as bad can be. But the “good”… Well… I mean, to my mind, Clint Eastwood is automatically “good” but is he, here, in this instance? He is, basically, killing people for money. Ok I grant you, they are “bad” people but still. He is dangerously close to being a hired killer. And then there is the fact that he is very clearly quite selfish – in that he is out to protect number one – and ONLY number one. I mean, this being Clint Eastwood, his charisma carries him but still. Oh and by the way, you have NO idea how impressive Clint Eastwood is in a western role until you have seen it. No wonder he never quite drops the act (I mean I’m sorry but it IS true). As for Lee Van Cleef – the archetypal western villain – he seriously gives Mr Eastwood a run for his money as far as charisma goes. And that is really, REALLY saying something.

In short, if you need a whirlwind of cathartic emotion to whisk you away from your day to day troubles, Sergio Leone is your man, again. Highly recommended.               

THE THINGS WE GET UP TO TO MAKE A LIVING... "A FISTFULL OF DOLLARS"

I have, I believe, recently mentioned that I do not watch as many westerns as I should. It is of course up for discussion what “should” and “shouldn’t” be watched, but I pride myself in having more than just a passing interest in cinema. This is why I feel it’s a tad bit shameful I don’t know more about a genre that was the backbone of the entire art form at one time, not to mention the creator of so many sub-genres and cinematic traditions later on.  Hence, I have been a good girl, and have begun to properly research the subject. Now, am I influenced by the fact that Quentin Tarantino (yes, yes, him again) is such a fan of Sergio Leone in my choice? Yes. Unquestionably so. His films, starring Clint Eastwood and giving us so many moments and conventions that became cinematic staples later on are cinematic classics that should be watched though. Mind you there is a lot more than just duty that attracts me to this film. I know I moan on and on about originality and thinking outside the box but still. There is something very comforting about a simpler world, goodies vs baddies – both very clearly black and white, with the goodie winning out in the end. Mind you, in a fistful of dollars we can’t exactly call our goodie “white as snow” ethically speaking but hey…  At least there’s nothing complicated about who you’re meant to back… ;)

The beginning of the story is familiar to all, even to those of us who are complete foreigners to the genre. A nameless, sharp-shooting stranger rides into a little town close to the Mexican border. It is high noon and the town is shrouded in a deadly quiet, all but the coffin maker who always seems to have his hands full… The town is torn apart by the in-fighting of two rival families, both planted firmly on the wrong side of the law and both hell-bent on becoming the one and only masters of the town. The rivalry is all-consuming and the two gangs have no consideration for the consequences of this fight to the town. Our hero (Clint Eastwood), has other plans. He will play double agent, playing one family against another to make himself a wad of cash… And maybe, just maybe he might be able to do some good for the good folk of the town too. The stranger must be careful though. He walks a very dangerous path where one wrong step could cost him his life…

Well, first and foremost we are very much in the domain of comfort films ladies and gents. But you knew that already. It’s Clint Eastwood. It’s a western. You know how things are going to go down. It is a brilliant combination of “raah” moments and adventure, peopled with some of the badest baddies  you could possibly imagine. And, even though you may not be a huge fan of Clint Eastwood’s style – some are and some aren’t you know – you have to admit, here, it’s brilliant. The stranger has to keep his cards very close to his chest and not give a single shred of thought and emotion away as he negotiates the minefield that is the gang relations. But the true mark of a good director comes through here too because in with all the stuff we “know and love” is mixed a truly nail-biting story. We get caught up in it so very easily, and credit where it’s due, you have to admire the stranger’s shrewdness in playing the two families against each other (or in this case, the shrewdness of the scriptwriter). The story takes such twists and turns that it you never fall into the lethargy of knowing the “goodies will win in the end”, simply because you are never %100 sure what our hero is exactly up to. Well that and the fact that he does not really seem to be your common or garden “good guy”.  I mean, are we %100 sure  he “wins in the end”? You’re in for a jolly good adventure with this one, fellas. It’s the kind of film that makes you understand why kids were so obsessed with playing cowboys in the heyday of these films… If you’re looking to get away from your day to day life for an hour or two and go on an adventure from your front room, this is the fella to go for ladies and gents. And given the almost desert-like quality to the British weather at the moment, a rather fitting adventure at that. 

A SLICE OF HISTORY WITH "J. EDGAR"

First of all, I am surprised I am putting the review of this film in this particular category. I don’t know about you but I personally had no idea at all he was gay. But then again, the film contains a lot of revelations and new information – especially for someone whose knowledge of modern American History is ever so slightly rusty. This is, in fact one of the films that, for me personally, contains one of the highest levels of intellectual curiosity mixed with emotional involvement that I have witnessed in a film in a long time. Which is why I was even more surprised to find out that it was directed by Clint Eastwood. I have made quite a lot of fun of him in the past, especially Million Dollar Baby whose ending I felt contained every emotional tear-jerking trope known to man plus their dogs, but what can I say… The man’s style is growing on me…
J. Edgar is, a lot of you will have gathered if they didn’t know already, the life story of J. Edgar Hoover (played by Leonardo Di Caprio). As is right with such a public figure, the main emphasis is on his public life, his achievements and political machinations, not least among them the founding of the F.B.I and numerous American Federal laws that he helped come to life. But this is not merely a political film. A nice balance is struck with Hoover’s character and private life. Having lived for over half his life with and under the influence of his strict and domineering mother (Judi Dench) Hoover is reserved and has, shall we say difficulties in certain areas. He is also rather fussy and hard to work with if you’re not used to it. But he is also a brilliant tactician, capable of immense forward thinking and was truly built for police work. We examine the man, his life, his achievements and his relationships in an emotional rollercoaster that deserves every accolade it gets…
When he first made his “big break” on the big screens with Titanic, there were two “camps” about Leonardo Di Caprio. You either loved him (if you were in this category you probably had a crush on him too) or you hated him with a passion. I was one of the former (and yes I had a crush on him at the time too). I am glad to say however, think what you will of him on “other” planes (ehm), as far as acting is concerned I can happily confirm that I have backed a winner. He has turned out to be a brilliant, versatile actor capable of pulling off the most challenging roles. And he absolutely stuns as J. Edgar Hoover in this latest big screen hit. The role itself is challenging because the story itself is so fascinating. Hoover was a true blue eccentric (to put it mildly) and that in itself is something to marvel at. His lifelong relationship with Clive Tolworth is touching to the core, not least the struggle Hoover has to go through in his own mind as he tries to accept his own homosexuality. He is not an easy man, not even a pleasant one from time to time, but you cannot help but feel his pain, especially as Di Caprio does such a wonderful job of portraying him. Of course as long as we’re talking about acting a word must be said about Judi Dench as Hoover’s formidable (and slightly creepy) mother. Lastly, it is an excellent overview of modern American history and a behind the scenes look at events that I personally had just about only heard mentioned and new nothing about in detail. Don’t be intimidated by the length of this little monster (2 hours and 16 minutes). You will be so wrapped up in it that you will not notice the time fly by…

GREAT DIRECTORS MEDLY : CLINT EASTWOOD - "MILLION DOLLAR BABY"

Ok, I guess we all remember this one. Back in 2004 it wiped the floor with at the Oscars® and a lot of other reputed awards shows as well. We all heard of it. Some of us were vaguely surprised at the fact that Clint Eastwood (acting, producing and directing this one!) was still churning out winners. Some of us watched it. Others (me included) reckoned they had seen a few boxing films too many and decided to give it a miss. I was rather disappointed today, on watching it, to realize that my first judgment could also have worked. Million Dollar Baby is an excellent example of its genre, but not original. By a LONG shot.
The interesting one about this film is that it kinda mixes too films into one. It starts off as your typical common or garden sporting movie. Clint Eastwood is Frankie Dunn (heck, who am I kidding, he’s Clint Eastwood like in every single one of his films but that’s what he is called here anyway) and he is one of the best trainers for boxing in the US of A. He is a tough old fella, and has old-school principals. He runs a boxing gym along with his old friend Scrap (Morgan Freeman) and his life has been going on as it always has been until Maggie (Hilary Swank) enters his life. She is 31 (i.e. waaay too old to begin boxing) yet a complete beginner and yet she will NOT rest until Frank agrees to train her. Frank does not train girls. End of story. However Maggie persists. She persists and Scrap kinda gets on side and persists a bit with her and in the end (surprise surprise) Frank takes her on. She is as good as she claims to be. She works hard, develops a killer left hook and shoots up to the stars, match after match, round after round, win after win… Until the title match. The result of which will turn both her and Frank’s lives upside down – and I don’t mean in a good way…
Here the film breaks off and turns into a class A tear-jerker. A good tear-jerker but none the less, that’s what it is. By this time we have found out that Frank is estranged with his own daughter and that Maggie’s father is dead leaving her alone with her “hillbilly” family so Maggie and Frank are in fact a kind of surrogate father – daughter now. Frank is going to have to face is demons and both are going to have to make very, VERY tough choices.
I am in two minds about this one. There is nothing wrong with it. There are some brilliant “raaah” moments in it (you know the kind I mean don’t look all blank like that!). True, the fact that Maggie tends to knock her opponents out cold in the first round is a little well… Unbelievable AND annoying but Hilary Swank is so endearing as Maggie you tend to forgive her for that. Eastwood then takes every single tear-jerking storyline and sideline and stuffs it into the movie. I concede the fact that the film is an adaptation and I have not read the story it was adapted from but still… I mean, I reckon it could have been toned down a bit. The interesting thing is though, is that it works somehow. What I mean to say is if a mediocre filmmaker had tried to cram all the stuff Eastwood does into the film it would just be comical. Here it works after a fashion. You watch it to the end – and get excited about it – even though you can pretty much guess every single plot twist to the end. Not my kinda thing that, I like to be surprised (hence my love of Tarantino – I can never EVER guess where the guy is going to pop up from next if you see what I mean). It’s a good film, deserves the pat on the back that it got, and you should watch it. Do it in your spare time or something though, there is no rush.

LET THE ADVENTURES BEGIN, HERE COMES THE "HIGH PLAINS DRIFTER"

I have the utmost respect for Clint Eastwood. I didn’t actually like him much in the past though. I don’t know why, possibly because I had fed off too much of the clichés and not seen enough of the real thing to pass proper judgment. Now, personality-wise I wouldn’t know… But as an artist, well… RESPECT (Ali G. style). I honestly started watching this film as a fortunate discovery of a Western in my almost endless archive. I have mentioned before I believe that westerns are sorely neglected by yours truly, not out of any malice but well… So many films so little time. It is a western, but not a typical western. That much you can be sure of. But the plot twist at the end is of such a grandeur that I won’t give you any clues as to what it is, but bear with it to the end… I have a sneaking suspicion you’ll be surprised…
Lago is a small, sleepy town, much like any other in the Wild West. It’s a mining town and the main hub of business is the Lago Mining Company. Until, one day, a stranger comes to town. He doesn’t say much but he’s one hell of a shot. He proves this by killing three men within half an hour of arriving in town and raping a woman too. The trouble is the three men just happen to be the three paid gunmen the town hired to protect them. And the stranger has killed them when they were needed the most: Three known bandits and scoundrels are due out of prison any day, and the inhabitants of Lago know full well they have a bone to pick with them. Having lost one means of protection but being faced with the toughest and best shot they have seen in their lives, they approach the stranger, offering him absolutely anything, as long as he keeps them safe from the three bandits heading their way… The stranger accepts. But the price he demands is both high and unusual. But then again, Lago isn’t really your usual little mining town…
First of all, credit where credit is due… Clint Eastwood (who not only directed the film but also plays the stranger of course) is one heck of a good looking guy. All through the film, he is exactly what we expect a western hero played by Clint Eastwood to be. Lean, mean, tough , quiet, rugged and good looking. What is really fascinating is the town. What’s different about this film is that sure, there are “baddies”. You know, the bandits fresh out of prison, ruthless men, with no morals. But the real bad guys in this story are not just “bad”. They are not “black” to Clint Eastwood’s white. They are simply very human. Very, very human indeed. Not that one approves of this sort of thing but one knows it happens. Notice how I’m bending over backwards not to give the plot away? =) Well, you may even guess what it is, it’s not exactly earth-shattering but it definitely gives the film a kick. I strongly advise you watch it if you’re into the genre. It’s worth about 50 spaghetti-westerns and definitely a classic for a reason.

ANOTHER MIXED BAG: (AND A TIMELESS CLASSIC) THE GOOD, THE BAD THE UGLY

I’m not exactly sure how I never got round to watching a western in my life. I mean, how does one actually skip a whole genre? I really don’t get that (unless Lucky Luke counts – I was crazy about him but I never actually saw the movie just the cartoon, so I’m assuming it doesn’t count…). This occurred to me as I was searching for the answer of that eternal question “What should I watch today?” Almost overwhelmed by the panic brought on by the idea of thousands of films gone unwatched, I scrambled madly for the closest western to hand. It happened to be just about the only one; I think I have one more somewhere but that will be for later. This also happened to be a classic in its own right so I decided my quest of the day had ended… I have to admit that I was intimidated by the length of the film (have a heart it was the first time I faced the genre, what if it was something I didn’t like? It’s nearly three hours long for Heaven’s sake…) but I bit the bullet (so to speak). Now, although I can well imagine that the bad ones can get pretty damn repetitive and boring but very few can beat a good one in my humble opinion. Luckily for me, this was one of the good ones…
Well, meet Blondie (Clint Eastwood) and Duco. Two dastardly characters wanted all over the United States of America for pretty much every single thing you can think of. They’re not so much bosom buddies but business partners. Blondie’s a crack shot, so Duco turns himself in every once in a while, is condemned to hang and Blondie rescues him. Each rescue means the price on Duco’s head goes up, so they just rinse and repeat the act as they go along. Now, the couple are on the verge of getting bored of each other and are in the process of getting what we might jokingly called “a rather messy divorce” when they become aware of ?? million dollars worth of gold bullion stashed away. Now, the problem is that each one is left with half the location but they must work together if they want the money. Now quite apart from the fact that they don’t trust each other further than they can throw each other, not to mention the American Civil War going on full blast around them, they are not the only ones after the money. Notorious bad guy “Angel Eye” is also after the gold and they will stop but neither man will stop at NOTHING to get his hands on the money…
Now you’ll remember a few weeks back when I wrote about “Spirited Away”, how I told you about the benefits of escapism. Now to be fair, period films very rarely fulfill this purpose (they are usually either adapted from a very serious book and/or speak of very serious historical events… Not so with Westerns. Adventure, a different world, a lawless place where a man can pretty much make what he can of himself if he uses his head… The Wild West… I think it’s partly our desire to escape from the day to day routine and have adventures and partly the thought of riding off into the “land of opportunities” with everything to play for yet that attracts us to Westerns… I mean, escaping from the day to day run of the mill is one thing, having a clean slate to rewrite on as you please is a completely different kettle of fish… Well, let’s face it, America was never so wild nor full of opportunities as in its “Wild West” days… I therefore think it’s fair enough to go back and dream of those times every once in a while.. Don’t you agree?

INVICTUS

Do you know what I like most in a film? The ability to show me a different side of things. A different angle. So difficult these days as well, in our age of mass commercial film production, we seem to be rapidly running out of topics. That is, I think, why we are turning more and more towards real events, because real life is nearly always stranger than fiction. And this is how we can find fascinating stories even in the most famous events in history.

Take the election of Nelson Mandela (portrayed in the film by Morgan Freeman) as the president of South Africa. I’m sure we all have at least cursory knowledge of the Apartheid regime. And I’m sure we at least know that Nelson Mandela spent a lot of time in prison and was then elected president, right? The big question is what did he do after that? The Apartheid regime had ended, everyone was equal but that, in fact, was just the beginning. You see, think about it, the white South Africans had not just vanished over night… They were there, the memories of the Apartheid were there with everyone and the whole country seethed with enmity and division. Mr. Mandela was, therefore, faced with the rather formidable task of uniting his supporters with the very people they had been fighting against for all those years… The very people, in some cases, who had sent him to prison…

In troubled times like this, symbols gain more importance than ever. And the most mundane things sometimes suddenly gain symbolic meaning. Case in point, the Springboks, the South African National rugby team. Well, when I say National, don’t take it too literally, because at the time the team was seen as one of the tools of the Apartheid regime and black South Africans would cheer against literally anybody they were playing against just so they didn’t cheer for the Springboks. Not that the Springboks gave their fans much to cheer about, in 1990, when the story took place, they were going through the lowest of low patches performance-wise. Nelson Mandela quite unexpectedly for most, summoned François Pienaar (Matt Damon) the captain of the Springboks to tea at his residence one afternoon. You see, the people needed something to unite them. Something to rally behind. South Africa was hosting the rugby world cup in under a year. And the Springboks were the designated champions behind whom the people would rally… If François could motivate his team into getting their act together that is…

The film has a lot going for it to give it its due… It is produced and directed by Clint Eastwood – and that surprised me… I mean don’t get me wrong I have all the respect in the world for Clint Eastwood; however, his films generally tend have a rather “rugged, masculine” feel about them. This is especially pronounced if he is actually acting in them too. Now, I hear you protesting already: “Hey, it’s a RUGBY team. It doesn’t get more masculine than that, surely?” Ok, fair enough. And I won’t deny the fact that with the exception of ??? Mr. Mandela’s faithful assistant, almost all the female characters fell into nice little stereotypes (faithful wife, worried mother, homely housekeeper, serious secretary). However, the quiet, peaceful yet determined outlook of Mr. Mandela and the emotions of the South African people are portrayed with finesse and feeling – a fact that will surprise anyone who thinks of Mr. Eastwood as basically “A Cowboy”. I mean, naturally Mr. Morgan Freeman may have had just a touch to do with it – the man’s less of an actor and more of an institution as far as I’m concerned. Mr. Damon also holds his own – in fact both were nominated for Oscars ® this year for their respective performances in this film…

I am not a sports fan. I don’t see “the point” of a lot of sports (I won’t bore you with details that is the topic for a whole other entry). However, the power a sport has and the power of success are undisputable. This is a story about the vision of a truly extraordinary leader and a story of reconciliation – something the world truly needs a lot of these days. And I know I’ve ribbed Mr. Eastwood about being too macho in this article but it has to be admitted that the director of this films needs to be someone who “sees the point” of rugby (you know what I mean ladies – not the “esthetics” of the players but the actual sport ;) ) to tie it in with the social union of the people. A film of powerful emotion – and very deserving of a gander…