Machete

Title: Machete (2010)
Director: Robert Rodriguez, Ethan Maniquis
Genre: Action
Lead Actor(s): Danny Trejo, Jessica Alba
Rating: R
105 minutes

This is a crazy movie. At one point Machete (Danny Trejo) swings out one window and into the window one floor down with a man’s intestines. This was originally seen as a fake trailer between Planet Terror and Deathproof. Basically Machete is an ex-federale who was burned by a drug pin, Torrez (Steven Seagal), and emigrates to Texas trying to work as a day laborer when he is offered $150,000 to kill Senator John McLaughlin (Robert DeNiro). It turns out to be a setup to bolster the senator’s poll numbers. Now a massive manhunt is looking for Machete and Machete is looking for the men who hired him. This is basically a 2010 mexploitation.

I love Cheech Marin as Machete’s brother, a gun-toting priest. He was incredibly funny in the part and oddly convincing when blowing people’s heads off. He is a fallible priest who knows he is fallible.

Danny Trejo is a badass. That is all that really needs to be said about him and his character.

There is footage from the original Grindhouse interspersed in the movie, sometimes it is more noticeable than others. There is gratuitous blood and gratuitously bloody shots. Really this is just a fun movie. You can have a good time watching it and it is different from just about any movie that has been released recently.

If I judged this movie based on quality and cinematic value, it would be ** 2/10
If I judged it based on how much fun you can have and how much enjoyment can be had while watching it, I give it a ********* 9/10

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo

Title: The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo or Män som hatar kvinnor (2009)
Director: Niels Arden Oplev
Genre: Crime, Thriller
Lead Actor(s): Michael Nyqvist, Noomi Rapace
Rating: R
152 minutes
Swedish

I’m sure this will shock and surprise everyone, but there will be an English adaptation as well. This one follows the book well. Michael Blomkvist (Michael Nyqvist) is found guilty of slander after writing an article for the periodical he co-owns, Millenium. Taking a break from the investigative journalism for the safety of the magazine, Blomkvist accepts a position from wealthy businessman, Henrik Vanger. His mission is to find out what happened to Vanger’s niece, Harriet, when she disappeared in the 1960’s. Blomkvist eventually enlists the help of Lisbeth Salander (Noomi Rapace) to follow up on some leads he finds. The truth ends up stranger than anyone ever expected.

Before I discuss the merits of the movie, I feel the need to warn against a fairly graphic rape scene. It is not as long or awful as in the book, but because it is visual here as opposed to words, it is just as rough. The movie is called “Men Who Hate Women” in Sweden and so there are some atrocities. If things like this are hard for you to watch, I advise against seeing the movie.

I think the decision to go with an actor not as gorgeous or chiseled as some of the other Swedish ones actor was a brilliant decision. Michael Nyqvist is not as attractive as, say, Alexander Skårsgard, and that is right for the character. Daniel Craig is slated to play him in the English adaptation and he is a great actor, but I am not sure how I feel about casting this really fit action-y. The stature of Nyqvist helps us feel the danger Blomkvist finds himself in quite often. Nyqvist also has the kind of charm necessary for the character. His eyes are remarkable in their ability to enhance his acting. He has looks that no one could argue was not Blomkvist.

Noomi Rapace is utterly amazing in an extremely difficult role. She is able to control the darkness of the character. That takes strength. She also doesn’t seem out of place when she is defending herself or when being belligerent with a number of people. Her entire body becomes Salander. The way she walks, moves her arms, holds her head are all carefully thought out and consistent throughout the movie. She gives an incredibly nuanced performance with a very terse and complicated character.

I would argue that the biggest detriment to the film would be the score. There are elements in the movie that could have strongly benefited from an appropriate score and there was little to speak of. I am not suggesting that all of the wonderful quiet and tense moments need some sort of music destroying them, but there could have been a little more floating through gently enhancing the emotions of the moments. It also would have been nice to show a little more development between Salander and Blomkvist. They meet halfway through the book and that is ok, but here I think a few more scenes of them interacting would have bolstered the climax.

Overall, this is a very good movie. As of now I somewhat doubt the English version will be as strong as this one. As I mentioned there are some elements that can be hard to watch and the movie is in Swedish, but this movie is just a good movie as well as being a fair adaptation of an intricate book. There are some minor flaws, but that shouldn’t stop anyone who can handle the material from seeing this movie. It is currently streaming on Netflix, so you might not even have to pay extra or wait for it.

********* 9/10

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid

Title: Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969)
Director: George Roy Hill
Genre: Western
Lead Actor(s): Paul Newman, Robert Redford
Rating: PG
110 minutes

This is one of the first buddy films. It springs from a strange genre. The Western is often a fairly lonely movie, where the only things the hero cares about are his gun, horse, and woman (usually in that order). This movie is based off the titular bandits. It follows their exploits in the states and their subsequent life in Bolivia.

While I could easily write paragraph after paragraph about the two leads individually, what makes this movie so great is the intimacy between the two male leads. I would be hard pressed to think of a movie where the chemistry between two male characters is so spot on. It was originally thought that Paul Newman should play Sundance because he doesn’t do comedy, but George Roy Hill smartly realized that Butch isn’t a comic. He is a clown, a trickster, an optimist, a genuinely agreeable personality. From every thing read or talked about Newman this rings true with the actor’s personality. Sundance is the yin to Butch’s yang. Sundance is a lethal killing machine, where Butch has never shot a gun. Butch is full of grand ideas, where Sundance is mostly quiet and reserved. Sundance is somewhat of a pessimist, where Butch always sees the good in the situation. Robert Redford plays Sundance with a quiet power. The two actors were able to establish such a good relationship that it bled on to the screen. It is remarkable how easily these two find a balance with each other.

A big part of the chemistry between Sundance and Butch comes from an excellent script by William Goldman (he also wrote The Princess Bride). So much of it reminded me of Joss Whedon’s style of banter. One scene, if not read in context, can come off like a Robin Williams comedy, but Goldman uses these comedic moments to showcase the truth of the characters.

Katherine Ross is the only main female. She plays Etta Place, a school teacher and Sundance’s main squeeze. She follows them to Bolivia and even takes part in some of their schemes. I think Ross needed to play her a bit stronger. She is attractive to these two powerful men, and yet she seems to fade in their presence.

The scenery and treatment of the film is fantastic. It helps set the mood for the movie instantly. The montage in New York is unique and fun. There are some very smart techniques back in a time when it wasn’t possible to send it through a computer and alter it there.

With the exception of the awkwardness of Etta, this movie is one of the best westerns, while completely turning the concept of a western upside-down. It also is one of the first times where a deep relationship is shown through two male characters. This is not to suggest that there is a subtext that Butch and Sundance had the hots for each other. There is just a true intimacy in their interactions with one another. This really is a great and entertaining movie. The only downfall is the submissiveness of Etta. Even if you hate westerns, or if you think they are the best genre ever, this movie can, and most likely will, appeal to you.

********* 9/10

Inception

Title: Inception (2010)
Director: Christopher Nolan
Genre: Drama, Sci-fi
Lead Actor(s): Leonardo DiCaprio, Ellen Page
Rating: PG-13
148 minutes

Christopher Nolan is quickly becoming one of my favorite directors. Inception is trippy and thinky and great. Leonardo DiCaprio plays Cobb, the best “extractor” around with a very preoccupied subconscious. Extractors go into people’s dreams to unlock secrets for other people. Cobb and Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) are recruited for a big job and they must build a team including a forger, Eames (Tom Hardy), an architect, Ariadne (Ellen Page), a chemist, Yusuf (Dileep Rao), and the benefactor, Saito (Ken Wantanabe) to go deep into a mark’s mind.

Cobb has the most story in the movie and it is very complicated. DiCaprio handles such an intricate character with the taut skill he has become adept at. That being said, I would like to see him as a lighter character. His recent choices for characters never have a chance to smile and he was just as good at characters that smile. Back to his performance in this movie, I completely understand why Nolan only intended for DiCaprio for the role. This character is constantly tormented by personifications of his subconscious. He literally faces his evils in a more concrete way than the average person can dream. Cobb, however, feels that he has to continue. It doesn’t matter if he puts his whole team at risk. This gravity ways on DiCaprio as heavy as an anchor. Every movement, facial expression, every inflection is defined by this evil.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt is absolutely magnificent. He is half of the comedic relief (the other being Hardy as Eames) and also a more balanced and level person than Cobb. He is more dimensional than Cobb as well. Gordon-Levitt is just fun to watch in the movie. DiCaprio is tormented and marvelous, but Gordon-Levitt just helps pull the audience away from a constant and sharp decline with Cobb. Gordon-Levitt has really grown into a fun and talented actor.

The one actor I was probably most disappointed with was Ellen Page. She was great the first 20-30 minutes, but as soon as she started discovering Cobb’s back story, I thought she dropped the ball a bit. I know that Page can do serious, even frightening. She proved this in Hard Candy. As such I am not entirely sure why when things got darker, she distanced herself from the character. I think Gordon-Levitt’s character would have been just as effective in the role this character had to play.

The directing and writing, both done by Nolan, were interesting and made the movie more of an experience. I am dying to know how he did those hallway scenes. I also want to say I loved the villain. There were times where it was so utterly unsettling. The villain really bumped the movie to the next level. I am trying not to give too much away because it would ruin the movie and the ad campaign was so careful to reveal so little. That is how I like my trailers. They need to leave some mystery so I don’t come out of the theatre feeling like I could have saved my money and just watched all the trailers to get to the end.

If Inception is not recognized for certain elements come award season, I will be very disappointed and it will probably just make me like Nolan more. I urge everyone to see this movie. This is what great movies can be. They don’t have to be in 3-d, if they have a good plot, fun and interesting characters, and the director can use his imagination. Too many directors are relying on 3-d to make their movies. If Avatar had not been in 3-d, there is no way it would have made the massive amounts of money it did. It certainly would not have been nominated for Best Picture. I will now get off my soapbox and give one last plea to see this movie. There have been practically no good movies, not made by Pixar, out this summer and finally this arrived. If it were not for Ellen Page, this movie would have gotten a 10.

********* 9/10

V for Vendetta

So I wrote this almost 2 weeks ago and just never posted it. Whoops.

Title: V for Vendetta (2005)
Director: James McTeigue
Genre: Drama, Action
Lead Actor(s): Hugo Weaving, Natalie Portman
Rating: R
132 minutes

This movie stars two actors that are truly skilled. Evey Hammond (Natalie Portman) is out past curfew in a totalitarian Britain when some cop-like agents threaten to assault her. She is saved by a masked man self-named V (Hugo Weaving). She is then pulled into V’s schemes to overthrow the government and expose the corruption within.

Just as the role of Mathilda hinted at the amazing possibilities, the role of Evey proves that Natalie Portman has developed and matured into an astounding and capable actress. The evolution of the character could have seemed fake in another actress’s hands, but due to the strength of Portman’s performance, it is natural and almost makes the audience feel that they have developed along with her. She especially shines during the torture scenes. The power of her performance can be displayed in the scene where she has her head shaved. By the way, Portman is still as beautiful bald as she has always been.

Hugo Weaving is just as powerful. Despite his face never showing, he is able to convey such depth and emotion that it seems his mask slightly changes depending on his mood. Physically V can go from the extremely dramatic (his “V”-laden speech) to the soft and subtle (his preparations for his finale). When describing his origin, the pain is palpable in his voice. He has a heartbreaking tendency to his voice in the latter part of the movie. His part in the twist is also quite well done.

A last actor whom I would like to highlight is Stephen Fry as Dietrich, the host of a variety show who secretly defies the government by collecting contraband among other things. Although not as powerful a character as those above, Dietrich is nonetheless important and Fry knows this. He plays the monkey to the government when needed, but when in private with Evey, he shows strength and power. Fry excels at this role as he does with most.

While I understand the frustration of Alan Moore, the author of the comic, I still find the movie to be executed with skill and precision. I have read the source material and find it to be slightly better. It is much more brutal than the movie and rather than just freedom from the current government, V desires anarchy in Britain. The thing I find especially lacking from the movie that was far better in the novel is the description of the government. We lack a lot of information in the movie that made the book much more powerful. For instance, we only see the fingermen, the cop-like agents, in detail in the movie, whereas in the book, the government is based on the human body and so there is an ear, eye, mouth, etc..

I love this movie and on its own, it is a great movie, but when compared with the book, the flaws of the movie begin to come out. I highly recommend seeing it for the performances of Weaving and Portman, but I also suggest reading the graphic novel. It is excellently written and enhances the movie.

********* 9/10

Sin City

Title: Sin City (2005)
Director: Robert Rodriguez, Frank Miller
Genre: Comic Book, Noir
Lead Actor(s): Mickey Rourke, Bruce Willis, Clive Owen
Rating: R
124 minutes

I love the way the movie is shot. I am a fan of spot color when it is done correctly and here I believe it is done so. It is also wonderfully similar to the limited pages of the comic I have seen. Frank Miller has a very particular and striking artistic style and while not as important in The Dark Knight Returns or even Ronin, but in Sin City the style is critical. The movie covers 4 of the stories from the Sin City universe: The Costumer is Always Right, The Hard Goodbye, The Big Fat Kill, and That Yellow Bastard. The first story is a short about a hitman. The Hard Goodbye feature Marv (Mickey Rourke), a giant of a man and somewhat of a brute. He seeks revenge for the death of a hooker who chose to sleep with him. His investigations lead him to a conspiracy involving a high ranking cardinal. The Big Fat Kill centers around Dwight (Clive Owen) and the hookers in Old Town. After returning from somewhere, Dwight finds out that his girlfriend, Shellie (Brittany Murphy), has been abused by an asshole named Jackie Boy (Benicio Del Toro). After being spurned by Shellie, Jackie Boy heads to Old Town, but pulls a gun on one of the girls and is murdered. Due to some circumstances, it is vital that the body not be discovered and that leads the plot. The final story sort of bookends the film. It begins the film with Detective Hartigan (Bruce Willis) saving an 11-year-old Nancy from a murdering rapist. It finishes the film showing that Hartigan is charged with the murders and rapes instead of the son of a senator. He is put in jail for eight years and when he is released he finds a now grown up Nancy (Jessica Alba), but he is followed by the real rapist.

Sorry for that long summary, but it is a bit of a complicated plot. My least favorite story is The Big Fat Kill. I love Rosario Dawson as Gail, the head of the hookers, but there isn’t a lot of depth or strength to the story in my opinion. I love The Hard Goodbye. Mickey Rourke does a wonderful job playing Marv, a man who “had the rotten luck to be born in the wrong century.” There aren’t many who could give a man like Marv a run for his money but Kevin (Elijah Wood) does as a mute incredibly fast cannibal. I also love any movie that has the audacity to put creepmaster Rutger Hauer in a cardinal outfit. While never being a big fan of Jessica Alba, I do like her story. I think Detective Hartigan is the more interesting character. He plays a classic character in noir, the wrongly accused. Bruce Willis is also just quite good at playing such a cut and dry good guy. The final scene of the story is visually stunning.

I admire Rodriguez’s ability to faithfully adapt and yet not get so lost in the faithfulness that the spirit is lost as Zack Snyder did with Watchmen.  From the little I have read of the series, the tone and feeling of movie seems rather spot on. The characters all look eerily similar to their comic counterparts and there are scenes that seem like reproductions of the comic. I also want to mention Alexis Bledel’s performance as Becky, a prostitute in Old Town. She does a wonderful job in the film in my opinion and although, not a big part, her performance does stay in my mind.

This is one of the good adaptations. For the most part, the stories are all interesting and fluid. The cuts between stories are not awkwardly abrupt and the images on the screen are all interesting and gorgeous. Frank Miller’s comics are not always adapted well, but this one is. I highly recommend seeing it, although there are certain scenes that may be hard to watch and I do think the R rating is appropriate.

********* 9/10

The Incredibles

Title: The Incredibles (2004)
Director: Brad Bird
Genre: Family, Adventure
Lead Actor(s): Craig T. Nelson, Helen Parr
Rating: PG
115 minutes

As mentioned in my previous review of Up, I love Pixar movies. This is one of my favorite three. This movie follows the Parr family. The parents were superheroes before they were married, but an act of congress forces all superheroes into a witness protection kind of program. Bob Parr/Mr. Incredible begins working for a secret organization and this helps the family connect to each other and their powers.

This definitely the most human centric Pixar movie. None of the characters are talking animals or robots or personified objects. Craig T. Nelson has the everyday quality that was needed for Bob Parr. Although I am probably reading too much into it, I think the common nature of the super Bob is trying to say something about the human race. Everyone has a super in them. Nelson does an excellent job of changing from rather cocky as Mr. Incredible, to the beaten down Bob Parr, to the more confident reboot of Mr. Incredible, and finally as the happy combination between Incredible and Bob.

Mrs. Incredible/Elastigirl/Helen Parr is voiced by Holly Hunter. I have never been completely sold on her voice, but her acting is fine. The character of Dash Parr is the quintessential little brother. His personality is also reflective of his power, super-speed. He has a constant mania about him. Violet is a shy teenager. She uses her ability, the same as The Invisible Woman/Sue Storm, to disappear when in an awkward situation. The writing and character development is wonderfully strong. These are often sacrificed in children’s movies. Pixar never does this and is another reason why I love them. They make movies like those Disney movies I grew up with. Adults and children are capable of enjoying them.

This movie is also much more action-y than the other Pixar movies. Aside from Cars I would say that this is Pixar movie little boys would like the most. There are wonderful supporting characters such as Samuel L. Jackson’s Frozone, Jason Lee’s Syndrome. My favorite character is Edna Mode, the fashion designer for superheroes, who is voiced by the director, himself.

This is an intelligent, fun, interesting, and well-crafted film. Several levels can be attributed to it, but it is not a necessity. It is one of Pixar’s best and that is saying a lot. Now if only they would finally make a sequel with The Underminer.

********* 9/10

Moulin Rouge!

Title: Moulin Rouge! (2001)
Director: Baz Luhrmann
Genre: Drama, Romance, Musical
Lead Actor(s): Nicole Kidman, Ewan McGregor
Rating: PG-13
127 minutes

This is probably another one I am slightly biased on. David Bowie had a lot to do with the movie including singing the opening song. I also just love the movie. For those who don’t know, McGregor stars as Christian, a writer who when first introduced looks savage and tortured. The movie is a flashback as he writes a novel based on his experiences. The bohemians, including Toulouse-Lautrec, who live above him recruit him to write a musical for Harold Zidler, the owner of the Moulin Rouge. When they go to the Moulin Rouge to arrange a meeting through Satine (Kidman), Zidler’s star, Christian is mistaken for a Duke who is also pursuing the prostitute. This mistaken identity leads to Christian and Satine falling in love with each other.

Both stars do their own singing as do most of the other cast. The movie takes classic songs, such as “Like A Virgin,” “Roxanne,” and “Rhythm of the Night,” and uses them to further the story line and arranges them in a more musical fashion than originally done. My personal favorite is the powerhouse “The Show Must Go On.” The astounding Jim Broadbent is the larger than life Harold Zidler and his amazing voice brings the drama to the song. He also is utterly ridiculous playing the virgin in “Like A Virgin” opposite Richard Roxburgh as the evil Duke. McGregor and Kidman also have wonderful voices. Kidman is especially good at conveying her emotions in her singing. There are times her singing is almost heart-breaking.

Kidman is just exceptionally good in this part. Often she seems out-of-place or robotic in her roles. As Satine she is full of life and vibrant. I think she is choosing the wrong kinds of movies. She is at her best when her characters have life in them and are a little wild. When they are too prim and proper it just makes her look robotic. There is a wonderful way of being prim and proper and not being robotic. This character is rich and deep and Kidman is always on point.

McGregor is fine as Christian, but I definitely don’t find the character to be as interesting or intriguing as the others. In my opinion the two scene stealers in the movie are John Leguizamo as Toulouse and Jim Broadbent as Zidler. Leguizamo had a hard role play Toulouse. Leguizamo is 5’8″ and Lautrec was 4’11.” After the movie he had to go to physical therapy due to the positions he had to stay in for long periods of time. Leguizamo plays Lautrec not just as a crazy bohemian who liked to hang around with whores. He is aware of the ridiculousness of his life and situation. There is a wonderful sense of self-humor about his Lautrec. Zidler is also a bigger than life character. He is the ringmaster of a circus of whores. His career is to placate and pleasure the vices of those who visit his club. Broadbent plays Zidler as both king and fool and he does so wonderfully. I love Jim Broadbent and unfortunately for my friends, I tend to say that whenever we watch a movie with him in it. He is not well-known, but he is an excellent actor in everything I have ever seen him in. He understands his characters in a way not many are capable of.

This is apparently going to be a long post because I have not yet gotten to the directing. Baz Luhrmann has a unique and intelligent way of directing. Every piece of scenery was built on a sound stage. Luhrmann creates beautiful images and manipulates them with lighting and effects so that they completely change. His vision for this movie is unlike anything I can think of. This movie had to be big. The subject matter was big. The setting was big. The characters were big. This is not a movie that calls for calm subtlety. It would have been a horrible failure if Wes Anderson or Woody Allen or even Christopher Nolan had taken charge. It needs a big director with a bit of an ego.

It is a great movie if you love musicals, the type of songs I have described, the director, or the actors I have mentioned. The soundtrack is wonderful and each song is a new telling, not some awful karaoke or poor attempt at mimicry. I really do believe that this is Nicole Kidman’s best performance. I do wish, however, that McGregor or Christian were stronger. He is the male lead and has the most screen time, but he is often overshadowed by the female lead or the supporting characters.

********* 9/10

Labyrinth

Title: Labyrinth (1986)
Director: Jim Henson
Genre: Adventure, Family
Lead Actor(s): David Bowie, Jennifer Connelly
Rating: PG
101 minutes

I may be slightly biased in rating this. I love David Bowie. I love Jim Henson. I love muppets. This is also the movie that introduced me to David Bowie and his music. He has become my favorite singer despite the fact he was making music around 20 years before I was born. I have always loved Jim Henson and the muppets. This was my favorite movie growing up. I also want to make it clear that one of my friends hates this movie and is actually kind of scared of it.

Anyways, Jennifer Connelly plays Sarah. She is a teenager with a new stepsibling who she is baby-sitting. She says a silly rhyme and David Bowie as Jareth, the Goblin King, comes and takes her baby brother, Toby. He then gives Sarah 13 hours to go through his labyrinth to get her brother back. There is original music sung by David Bowie and numerous adorable and imaginative creatures made by Henson.

David Bowie is wonderful as Jareth. Some of the other people considered for this part were Michael Jackson and Sting. I think it would have been horrendous if either of these people were Jareth. David Bowie has a quality about him that works so well for this kind of fantasy storyline. I also can’t imagine either of them in the costumes that Bowie wears. In my opinion he never seems creepy or off-putting despite basically kidnapping a baby boy. He also is able to hold his own with these crazy characters that inhabit the world. In some of Henson’s movie the humans are very overshadowed by the muppets, but the eye keeps returning to Bowie in this movie.

Jennifer Connelly is good as Sarah. The whole movie is really just about her learning that she needs to grow up. She does sometimes get a little lost amongst the amazing Bowie and the fantastical creatures.

The creatures are wonderful. There is a big red/orange sweetheart named Ludo, who can control rocks. There is a short kind of hobbity creature named Hoggle, who is completely under Jareth’s thumb. There is also a Don Quixote type little dog named Sir Didymus who has a trusty steed/big furry dog named Ambrosius. There is also a group of bird like creatures called Fireys who can take their body parts off and juggle them and such. These also used to give some of my friends nightmares. There are also just random goblins and things. Every creature is wonderfully detailed and imaginative.

One of my favorite things about the movie is the songs. They are all very catchy and can be listened to at any time. When they occur during the movie it is more like watching a well incorporated music video than a musical. My favorite is probably “Within You” or “Magic Dance.” The script is also better than some of the children movies of the 80’s.

I still really like this movie. I have liked it for years and will continue to like it. Should I ever have kids, they will definitely watch it. It is just a fun movie with great songs and fun creatures. The costumes may be a bit dated, but it gets away with it. If you haven’t seen it, I suggest watching it at least one. It may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but I love it.

******** 9/10

Gran Torino

Title: Gran Torino (2008)
Director: Clint Eastwood
Genre: Drama
Lead Actor(s): Clint Eastwood, Bee Vang
Rating: R
116 minutes

I saw this for the first time two days ago. If I had posted yesterday instead of going to the zoo, which was so much fun, I would have posted this review. There are several times in the movie that there are excellent pieces of dialog could turn into wonderful monologues. I think the movie could easily lend itself to an excellent play. The screenplay is excellent in my opinion. I usually find that if the author of the original material is also involved in transforming the piece for the screen, the screenplay reflects that and is better due to it.

Clint Eastwood really is an excellent director. If you have never seen his first film, Play Misty for Me, I highly recommend it. He likes natural film-making. By that I mean, he likes little make-up on his actors and he likes to get his shots done in one take. This doesn’t mean that he produces sub-par scenes. Instead he well prepares his actors and describes to them his vision in a way that only one take is really needed. This natural film-making makes his films seem more real in a way. The emphasis is on the acting, story, and directing. The make-up and costuming is more like a condiment than a defining ingredient.

Eastwood also stars as the grumpy Korean War veteran, Walt Kowalski, who has very recently become a widower. He lives next door to a family of Hmong. The son of the family, Thao, is pressured by his cousin to join his gang and his initiation is meant to be stealing Kowalski’s 1972 Gran Torino. This doesn’t happen and to make amends for attempting, Thao is made to work for Kowalski.

Eastwood does a wonderful job as the slightly racist Walt. He brings depth to a character that could have just been a grumpy old man. His actions seem natural and genuine. He also never loses his gruffness despite forming a relationship with the family. Bee Vang plays Thao and I don’t think the character actually speaks for the first 15 minutes. He is a quiet shy person who was pressured into something by his evil cousin, Spider. His relationship with Walt is mutually beneficial, giving Walt a sort of purpose and giving Thao a male role model.

My favorite character is Thao’s sister, Sue. She is as strong as Walt but in a very different way. She has adopted the American sensibilities far more than her mother or grandmother, who lives with them. She is the one who really brings Walt into her family’s life after Walt protects her brother from their cousin and his gang. The actress, Ahney Lor, does a marvelous job bridging Sue’s gap between the tradition of the Hmong and the sensibilities of the American.

This movie is marvelous. Every aspect is well crafted and thought out. There are elements of violence obviously, but aside from one small part they are not vicious or even very present. There are several elements of language, including several elements of racist language. This movie is not just enjoyable but it has an important message as well. It is an excellent movie and one of Eastwood’s better ones in my opinion

********* 9/10