JR's Movie of the Week -- "Mad Max" Trilogy (1979-81-85)

Status
Not open for further replies.

DeletedUser

Ok, today is sunday, and I've decided sunday should be the day a new film is picked.

Yesterday I saw a movie I wanted to discuss, the movie I saw was Clint Eastwood's Gran Torino.

So first off, before we go ahead and supply spoilers, I was wonderin who of you have seen it, and what was your general impression?


MOVIE OF THE WEEK IS GRAN TORINO by Clint Eastwood
 

DeletedUser

Ok, today is sunday, and I've decided sunday should be the day a new film is picked.

Yesterday I saw a movie I wanted to discuss, the movie I saw was Clint Eastwood's Gran Torino.

So first off, before we go ahead and supply spoilers, I was wonderin who of you have seen it, and what was your general impression?


MOVIE OF THE WEEK IS GRAN TORINO by Clint Eastwood


I learned a lot of new racist curse words so it was definitely educating!
 

DeletedUser

First movie in which Clint's character is killed. A new trend perhaps?
 

DeletedUser618

Another great Eastwood performance. But that is one ugly car, even in the day.
 

DeletedUser

Another great Eastwood performance. But that is one ugly car, even in the day.
That car was cool!
and i thought it was funny when he goes in the asain house when they have the family get-together
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

I think the language in this movie is a problem. Look...I get it... Part of what the movie is trying to do is to use racist terms so much that it desensitizes you to the use of those terms. You had Walt Kowalski (probably picked on for his polish background as a kid) who, although barked a lot, actually had a lot of integrity and cared about people when it counted. You had the scene with Walt and the Vietnamese grandmother exchanging slurs against one another, and although each couldn't understand the exact words that one another were saying, they both understood what the other meant. Great comedic moment.

But, let's face it, the abject racism of Walt was half of the movie. You could throw in some racism that the neighbors had, ageism and a whole bunch of other stereotypes, but Walt and his overcoming his prejudice was the biggest thing.

But, here's the rub...even Richard Prior gave up using the "N" word after traveling to Africa and seeing what real racism was like. In the end, we aren't left desensitized to racist terms and to pretend that you can go around making different slurs and yet somehow create racial harmony seems to be a bit of a farce.

So, I guess I couldn't connect to this movie like I should have.

I'll completely admit that the movie was well done, well acted and had an interesting story. I just disagree, fundamentally, with the message that this movie seems to want to project.

As a movie, I give it an A-
As a political statement, I give it a D.
 

DeletedUser

I thought it was an interesting movie, with a surprising end. The racism was poorly played out and the respect given to Eastwood's character when he stood up to the black thugs was unrealistic. The racist slurs in this movie were toned down and the tensions between different gangs was almost completely absent. The focus was on Eastwood's character's Vietnam-era issues and his neighbors. It was cute, but otherwise unimaginative.

I agree with Adelei's ratings.
 

DeletedUser

Adelei Niska makes an excellent review here, thanks for giving the first "proper" response on this weeks film. Onwards to the film.

Personally I belive we should not forget the message conveyed in the ending.

I'd also want you to think over the dramaturgic measures taken in this film, and observe the way Eastwood uses them for maximum impact.

It's because of the way he uses these tricks the ending comes as such a huge surprise.

I'd want to adjust Adeleis rating up from an A- to a standard A.
Tecinicaly speaking, Eastwood does a great job.

Also, you will notice the character of Eastwood using less and less slurs towards those whom he learns to know.
This is in no way new in films which focus on racism and prejudice. We've seen it before, yet it still works.

As for entertainment-value, and quality of production, the film scores straight A's.
It may not be the strongest movie when it comes to racism, but the ending does blow you away.

The realism of the slurs, or rather the lack thereof has been brought up.
I don't think this in any way weakens the movie.
 

DeletedUser618

What part of the ending was a surprise? Of course the Eastwood character was going to die. He was too flawed a hero to survive. The morality of a main-stream movie would not have the appeal if such a bigoted person lives. The bad-guy-turned-hero dies in Hollywood movies.

I enjoyed this movie but it is a basic plot that has been told many, many times. Good triumphs over evil.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

His death wasn't the huge surprise, but rather the way he chose to die.
We knew he was ill, we knew he was a fighter, and we knew he was violent.

There are several movies where a deeply flawed "heroes" do survive, so I do not belive his flaws condemned the role to die as such.

We could start by pointing at a famous Eastwood role; Insp. Harry Callahan.
I'd hardly call him a knight in shining armour.

Let's ask ourselves this though;
Would the movie have been better if Kowalski had survived?

I don't think so at all. His death adds to the artistic achievement of the film, whereas his survival would just have been cheesy.
 

DeletedUser

The meaning of the death in the movie was to portray the message of the movie:
Violence isn't always the answer.

Think about it, what happened after the gangsters shot the old man in front of all the neighbors?
Answer: They went to jail.
 

DeletedUser

The meaning of the death in the movie was to portray the message of the movie:
Violence isn't always the answer.

Think about it, what happened after the gangsters shot the old man in front of all the neighbors?
Answer: They went to jail.

I think you are both over-simplifying, and missing out on some other points made.

Edit: This goes for calling it the basic story of good vs evil as well.
The movie deserves better than such over-simplification.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser618

Personally I believe we should not forget the message conveyed in the ending.

It's because of the way he uses these tricks the ending comes as such a huge surprise.

What is the message conveyed in the ending? Try to steal the neighbor's car and then just wait around till you get it from his estate? Or is it good triumphs over evil?

I do not think anything in the ending of the movie was a surprise. I knew Eastwood was going to die, and the kid would get the car. What am I missing?
 

DeletedUser

What is the message conveyed in the ending? Try to steal the neighbor's car and then just wait around till you get it from his estate? Or is it good triumphs over evil?

I do not think anything in the ending of the movie was a surprise. I knew Eastwood was going to die, and the kid would get the car. What am I missing?

Self-sacrifice for starters.
THe man not using violence and having a bloody shootout next.
Thirdly one could say that the kid earned the car through his work.
And ofc, it is a delight of sorts to see the spoiled brat teenager missing out on the car when she sits at the lawyers office like a vulture.
 

DeletedUser

It was suicide by gangster.

That's one way of viewing it, but if suicide was the name of the game, he might as well have shot himself, or gone down gunning.

He sacrificed himself so that his neighbours and friends would be safe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top