Friends of Torino #5
The N.Y. Times' Manohla Dargis and Wall Street Journal's "JoMo" Morgenstern are the latest elite-print-critics-who-still-have-a-job to join the Gran Torino horn tootin' street parade.
"Twice in the last decade, just as the holiday movie season has begun to sag under the weight of its own bloat, full of noise and nonsense signifying nothing, Clint Eastwood has slipped another film into theaters and shown everyone how it's done," Dargis starts off. "This year's model is Gran Torino, a sleek, muscle car of a movie Made in the U.S.A., in that industrial graveyard called Detroit. I'm not sure how he does it, but I don't want him to stop.
"Not because every film is great -- though, damn, many are -- but because even the misfires show an urgent engagement with the tougher, messier, bigger questions of American life.
"Few Americans make movies about this country anymore, other than Mr. Eastwood, a man whose vitality as an artist shows no signs of waning, even in a nominally modest effort like Gran Torino.
"Dirty Harry is back, in a way, in [this film], not as a character but as a ghostly presence. He hovers in the film, in its themes and high-caliber imagery, and of course most obviously in Mr. Eastwood's face.
"It is a monumental face now, so puckered and pleated that it no longer looks merely weathered, as it has for decades, but seems closer to petrified wood. Words like flinty and steely come to mind, adjectives that Mr. Eastwood, in his performance as Walt Kowalski, expressively embodies with his usual lack of fuss and a number of growls."
Morgenstern begins his review thusly: "No one makes movies like Gran Torino any more, and more's the pity. This one, with Clint Eastwood as director and star, is concerned with honor and atonement, with rough justice and the family of man. It raises irascibility to the level of folk art, takes unapologetic time-outs for unfashionable moral debates, revives acting conventions that haven't been in fashion for half a century and keeps you watching every frame as Mr. Eastwood snarls, glowers, mutters, growls and grins his way through the performance of a lifetime.
Gran Torino "is a meditation, as affecting as it is entertaining, on the limits of violence and the power of unchained empathy. It seems to be exactly the movie [Eastwood] wanted to make at this point in his long career. It is defiantly old-fashioned, and occasionally, albeit endearingly, self-indulgent. Most of all it's heartfelt, and for me the feeling was mutual."
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on December 11, 2008 at 10:07 PM
comment #1
taylor cruz
says ...
I think more people will like it than not.
Posted by taylor cruz
at December 11, 2008 11:49 PM
comment #2
Aris P
says ...
Hey Wells, who's blowing you in the Torino Camp and/or how much are you getting payed to shill for this simplistic and silly movie?? Enough already. You've had 5 separate posts in the last week about this film. Whatever you feel about this film, IT'S NOT THAT GOOD. You going to post a new link every day till the Oscars?? I like Clint too, filmmaker emeritus, ad infinitum, but it's getting embarassing already. It ain't Citizen Kane.
Posted by Aris P
at December 12, 2008 12:02 AM
comment #3
EDouglas
says ...
I really think critics like Dargis should start critiquing what's actually on screen rather than commenting on all the behind the scenes, political bullshit if they still want to have a job come this time next year. The movie is mediocre at *BEST* even for Eastwood.It's The Visitor if Richard Jenkins was replaced by Dirty Harry, no more, no less... it's no Letters from Iwo JIma and not even up to the par of Million Dollar Baby. Then again, I'm not sure why anyone would be buying the WALL STREET JOURNAL for a movie review... really?
Posted by EDouglas
at December 12, 2008 3:34 AM
comment #4
EDouglas
says ...
(Oh, and yes, I know that Dargis doesn't write for the Wall Street Journal... those were just the two examples given and they're both ridiculously overhyping a MEDIOCRE movie.)
Posted by EDouglas
at December 12, 2008 3:35 AM
comment #5
Josh Massey
says ...
I wish there was a website you could go to and see all the critics' reviews in one place. Maybe with a kind-of meter that would give you an idea of the overall consensus.
Until then, though, keep these posts coming.
Posted by Josh Massey
at December 12, 2008 5:03 AM
comment #6
BurmaShave
says ...
I'm not thrilled by the veiled connection that those who see the light on this movie are also still employed. This had better not turn into "if you don't get this you're completely disconnected and it's time to go".
Posted by BurmaShave
at December 12, 2008 5:16 AM
comment #7
raygo
says ...
Attention Josh Massey:
"I wish there was a website you could go to and see all the critics' reviews in one place. Maybe with a kind-of meter that would give you an idea of the overall consensus."
You need to check out Metacritic.com ... it has links to all major reviews and assigns grade point average to them, 0-100. Grand Torinoi so far has a 79 out of 100 score.
Posted by raygo
at December 12, 2008 7:07 AM
comment #8
Daniel Tayag
says ...
I can't believe this film already leaked on the torrents. Comments for the film on one forum I frequent: "This movie was fuckin' awesome." "I fucking LOVED this film. Eastwood is a GOD." "This is one of my top movies of the year." "This movie was the shit."
Posted by Daniel Tayag
at December 12, 2008 7:12 AM
comment #9
Nick Rogers
says ...
raygo is:
A) incorrectly interpreting Massey's dig.
B) adding a delicious meta-layer to Massey's comment.
C) a Metacritic intern.
D) A and C
E) Why the hell doesn't Jeff just live-blog critics typing up their "Gran Torino" notes?
Posted by Nick Rogers
at December 12, 2008 7:43 AM
comment #10
raygo
says ...
None of the above, or maybe 'B'. Some of us are just regular working folk who live outside the LA factory, love movies, and by extension, movie sites. Sometimes I am happily surprised by how naive I am, as opposed to the jaded souls who camp here.
Posted by raygo
at December 12, 2008 7:58 AM
comment #11
Nick Rogers
says ...
"B" it is, then. I can't see the factory from my house, either, and I'm only jaded after watching shit like the third "Mummy."
Posted by Nick Rogers
at December 12, 2008 8:07 AM
comment #12
Discman
says ...
EDouglas wrote: "Then again, I'm not sure why anyone would be buying the WALL STREET JOURNAL for a movie review... really?"
I'll tell you why: Because Joe Morgenstern is one of the best film writers working today. He founded the National Society of Film Critics and won a Pulitzer Prize for criticism. None of that would matter if I didn't think the guy was worth reading, but he is -- consistently.
In this case, however, I'm afraid I don't understand the hype. I'll watch "Grand Torino" again, but on first viewing, the film was not memorable, except maybe in a "Golden Turkey" kind of way.
Posted by Discman
at December 12, 2008 8:21 AM
comment #13
raygo
says ...
On a Friday, adding a delicious meta-layer to Massey's comment suits me just fine, especially with snow and ice outside.
Posted by raygo
at December 12, 2008 9:29 AM
comment #14
qwiggles
says ...
Jeff, with an average score of 79 on Metacritic, Gran Torino is no longer considered critically reviled as it might've been when you posted friends...#1. It's time to give it a rest, or whatever, keep posting reviews, but not as some sign of the turning tide. There is no tide! It's reviewing well! No more!
Posted by qwiggles
at December 12, 2008 1:57 PM
comment #15
lipranzer
says ...
I was prepared not to like this, especially with the trailers, but I actually did, more than CHANGELING, anyway. It's not going on my top 10 list - some heavy-handed moments, and the acting from the non-professionals does vary in quality - but it did take a surprising turn near the end, and I do give Eastwood credit for his continuing to explore the consequences of violence.
Posted by lipranzer
at December 12, 2008 9:36 PM