Posted on 6/14/12 08:57 PM
I've started this new trend where I tend to avoid as many bad movies as possible. So far I've been pretty successful but of course I would run into a bad film sooner or later. Two actually, Contraband and J. Edgar. While Contraband did have many flaws I did find a few good things with it unlike J. Edgar.
Me and my friends almost saw J. Edgar for my birthday, but at the last minute we decided to go see Hugo. Even if J. Edgar was passable as a decent film Hugo would still remain supreme for how fascinating it is.
That's the main problem I had with J. Edgar. I didn't find anything interesting with it. After the film was over I didn't want to learn anything else about Edgar. The only thing I found interesting was the Charles Lindbergh case, that was fascinating. The movie should've focused on that. I would like to know more about that.
The story, of course, follows J. Edgar Hoover's life. It switches back in time when Edgar is old and young. Telling a story like this can be tricky and it doesn't work out so well here. I never felt attached to the story at all. I felt like the story was trying to make itself an epic on Edgar's life but it just felt so empty. This seems like an interesting life. It just isn't told the correct way.
Leonardo DiCaprio performance has been called powerhouse performance. I can't agree with that at all. I saw little emotion with his character even when he broke down over his mother's death. I never felt symphony for his character and I didn't believe the relationship between himself and Clyde Tolson played by Armie Hammer who does a good enough job. I think this is DiCaprio's worst performance since he doesn't do any justice towards Edgar.
It seems that Clint Eastwood has been of his game ever since his wonderful Gran Torino. Hereafter was just decent and this is just a mess. His direction is really anything spectacular. He, along with DiCaprio, don't find anything good to do with J. Edgar Hoover's life.
I don't know if I noticed this on my own or because of that little analysis of the film next to the tomatometer score, but I thought that the look of the film was just terrible. I just felt unclean watching it if you know what I mean. The look of the J. Edgar is a soar on the eyes to me. Also the makeup is complained about in the little analysis. On DiCaprio it didn't look to good when he was the older J. Edgar but the makeup on Armie Hammer, as an older gentleman, looks horrible. It's some of the worst makeup I've ever seen. It just looks like someone tossed an old man's face on him without any care.
This is easily one of the most disappointing films I've seen in 2011 if not the number one. To be honest at points I found the film almost unwatchable, or maybe I'm just exaggerating. But, you have Leonardo DiCaprio, newcomer (I think) Armie Hammer, Naomi Watts, Judi Dench, and director Clint Eastwood working together and we get this. I wanted to watch J. Edgar to know a little more of the life of him and I ended it wishing I didn't watch it in the first place.
"What's important at this time is to re-clarify the difference between hero and villain."