I think Clint may have an "in" with a lot of the Academy bigwigs.
Look at "Mystic River" or "Unforgiven". Both pretty mediocre offerings IMHO, yet they both got rave reviews and were lavished with praise as "groundbreaking" or "inspired" works of genius.
I think like most everywhere, who you know is more important...
Agreed... Million Dollar Baby was NOT the best movie nominated!! And what's with all the angst coming from Clint these past few years? Unforgiven and Mystic River were, in my humble opinion, the most "downer" of movies! I couldn't understand why everyone raved. It reminded me of the highly negative stories we had to read in school as kids... you know, the ones tagged as "classic" and "brilliant" that were about people with no hope. Guess some people think emotions are only good if they are grief, dispair, hate or anger???
I think Mystic River was terrific, as was Million Dollar Baby.
The Aviator was grand and spectacular, but soulless, a criticism you can't make about Million Dollar Baby. Ray was terrific, too. I think it's a toss-up whether it was better than MDB.
yes-but that's sort of the point of it. It was consistent with what those characters would do, and I don't think movies are supposed to reflect values in order to be worthwhile.
Years ago, while watching a Clint Eastwood flick at home (Pale Rider, I think), I was having trouble with the sound on the tv, and I watched it for a while with no sound. . . and was struck how all the people were scowling through the whole movie.
No happiness radiated at all.
And then I started looking for some good times radiated -- after all, it is "entertainment" which, for me means, "Glad I watched it. Had a good time."
Seems to me the message was, "Live life on your terms," whatever the cost. Maggie was willing to endure all kinds of pain, as long as she had hope. When hope was lost, the pain of living became pointless suffering.
The euthanasia scene was odd, with Freeman peeking around the corner, but I was glad the movie let its heroine go, rather than linger through an awful death.
Freeman's acting was fine, but I'm trying to remember anything great about it. He's done much better work. There were some scenes he appeared a little self-aware, as if they slid because Eastwood didn't want to make him re-do it. Who knows?
Maggie's character was heroic. Her life and death had a redemptive power over Eastwood's character, redemption he couldn't find at his church, and which the priest couldn't possibly grasp.
Had Freeman's character gone to Vegas, Maggie might not have been hurt. The chair would have been upright. That was the point, right? Yet Freeman's character refused any responsibility, when Eastwood turned on him, and rightly so. How could either of the men have forseen it? And who was truly guilty? The "Blue Bear," who hit Maggie not once but twice with cheap shots.
We never did learn why Eastwood's daughter hated him, or why Freeman felt obliged to tell her Eastwood's story.
quote:
From a Gaelic/Irish board:
"Mo chuisle" literally means "my pulse." It's from a longer phrase: A chuisle mo chroÃ," which means "pulse of my heart." It's an endearment. Normally when speaking TO the person, you would say "a chuisle"...you would only use "mo chuisle" when speaking OF the person.
Recommended Posts
outandabout
It was the only movie I saw that was nominated so I can't make any comparisons.
It was good but not great. And it WAS a downer.
Hillary Swank did a good job which was Oscar worthy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
I think Clint may have an "in" with a lot of the Academy bigwigs.
Look at "Mystic River" or "Unforgiven". Both pretty mediocre offerings IMHO, yet they both got rave reviews and were lavished with praise as "groundbreaking" or "inspired" works of genius.
I think like most everywhere, who you know is more important...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheHighWay
Agreed... Million Dollar Baby was NOT the best movie nominated!! And what's with all the angst coming from Clint these past few years? Unforgiven and Mystic River were, in my humble opinion, the most "downer" of movies! I couldn't understand why everyone raved. It reminded me of the highly negative stories we had to read in school as kids... you know, the ones tagged as "classic" and "brilliant" that were about people with no hope. Guess some people think emotions are only good if they are grief, dispair, hate or anger???
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I think Mystic River was terrific, as was Million Dollar Baby.
The Aviator was grand and spectacular, but soulless, a criticism you can't make about Million Dollar Baby. Ray was terrific, too. I think it's a toss-up whether it was better than MDB.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
Was anybody uncomfortable with the euthanasia scene?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hiway29
yes-but that's sort of the point of it. It was consistent with what those characters would do, and I don't think movies are supposed to reflect values in order to be worthwhile.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
outandabout
Yeah, there was some broo ha ha about that scene that I had heard before I saw the movie, but it does fit.
I didn't have a problem with it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kit Sober
I'm not surprised.
Years ago, while watching a Clint Eastwood flick at home (Pale Rider, I think), I was having trouble with the sound on the tv, and I watched it for a while with no sound. . . and was struck how all the people were scowling through the whole movie.
No happiness radiated at all.
And then I started looking for some good times radiated -- after all, it is "entertainment" which, for me means, "Glad I watched it. Had a good time."
Kit
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori001
I finally got around to seeing the DVD.
Seems to me the message was, "Live life on your terms," whatever the cost. Maggie was willing to endure all kinds of pain, as long as she had hope. When hope was lost, the pain of living became pointless suffering.
The euthanasia scene was odd, with Freeman peeking around the corner, but I was glad the movie let its heroine go, rather than linger through an awful death.
Freeman's acting was fine, but I'm trying to remember anything great about it. He's done much better work. There were some scenes he appeared a little self-aware, as if they slid because Eastwood didn't want to make him re-do it. Who knows?
Maggie's character was heroic. Her life and death had a redemptive power over Eastwood's character, redemption he couldn't find at his church, and which the priest couldn't possibly grasp.
Had Freeman's character gone to Vegas, Maggie might not have been hurt. The chair would have been upright. That was the point, right? Yet Freeman's character refused any responsibility, when Eastwood turned on him, and rightly so. How could either of the men have forseen it? And who was truly guilty? The "Blue Bear," who hit Maggie not once but twice with cheap shots.
We never did learn why Eastwood's daughter hated him, or why Freeman felt obliged to tell her Eastwood's story.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.