J. Edgar

[Impact]

Review, Discuss and Have Fun

[rockNrollaDIM]

I'm hearing VERY mixed reviews on this.

Edited November 9, 2011 by rockNrollaDIM

[CramaG12]

I was really looking forward to this movie, but the reviews have been sub-par at best to this point.

[rockNrollaDIM]

Well, as expected based on reviews, this was a let down. The script, editing, and pacing are bad. The way it jumps back and forth between present and past at random is aggravating and feels very unnecessary. The entire film is cold and not in a good way, it's unfocused and I think they had trouble deciding what kind of story they wanted to tell (biopic, FBI origins, kidnapping, love story?). Whereas the disappearance case in Changeling was incredibly interesting, the Lindbergh kidnapping wasn't nearly as compelling and I think that hurt the narrative...

Leo and Hammer I thought were both very solid; they weren't totally memorable performances but the effort was there. I will say, "Old Hoover" was not convincing; awful makeup job and Leo is does not look or sound believable as an 80 year old. I thought Naomi Watts (who actually had great aging) was wasted here; considering the notoriety of Helen for destroying the files I thought she would have a much more substantial role in the film.

Regarding the love story, I've seen people complaining that it was too subtle and that Black/Eastwood didn't fully commit to it. On the contrary I was surprised at how unsubtle it was. They made it perfectly clear that Edgar and Tolson were gay for each other where I was expecting them to only imply it. Sure it didn't show them as "lovers" necessarily but they also showed that Edgar had serious intimacy problems to begin with, so whether it was anything but an emotional relationship isn't important IMO.

It had some bright spots but for the most part it was a bit of a mess. The best part of this, actually, was Richard Nixon. He got a couple big laughs from the crowd.

B-

Edited November 13, 2011 by rockNrollaDIM

[acsc1312]

I didn't think this was nearly as bad as it's made out to be. It's certainly not the best film this year, but it's a solid biopic. I do agree that the narrative was a little shaky at points, but it had some truly engaging moments throughout. Leo and Hammer were great in their roles, and I still expect Leo to get the Oscar nom (just not the win now). Dench's character was one of the better in the film, and the relationship between her and Edgar was tough to watch at times. I thought the relationship between Hoover and Tolson was handled well, strongly implying, but not overdoing it. Solid drama for Eastwood, but it could've been better.B/B+

[baumer]

While I thought the film was okay, I also thought that Eastwood made it was too safe and way too vanilla. He didn't really take a stand on anything in the film. This was a story about the basic elements of Hoover's life. There is so much more that could be told, and for that it left me unsatisfied.Having said that, I will say that I think Leo was outstanding. I really hope he gets nominated this year. He really dove head first into the role. I haven't seen a better performance this year.7/10

[CoolioD1]

Old age Armie is fucking terrifying.I wish a better director had made this, Clint always succeeds in making his films dull as dishwater, though I think he accidentally made a few compelling scenes involving some of the FBI investigations, that and Leo's good performance don't save what is ultimately a snorefest though.

[TheMovieman]

Really disappointed in this film and, frankly, in Eastwood's last three movies with Hereafter, Invictus and now J. Edgar, it's a film that at the end I only ask, "So what?". However, I think I was more frustrated with this movie compared with the other two because you could see there was passion behind the scenes between the costume design and production design but unfortunately the story never really finds the right pacing especially cutting back and forth between young and old Hoover. As for the make-up, it wasn't bad but whenever we get to old Hoover, it's distracting seeing DiCaprio in old man make-up; I think that aspect of the movie (i.e. the older versions of the characters) would've been better served just casting an older actor (like Jon Voight as Hoover).

At the end of the movie, I just couldn't muster up any kind of emotion either way. And given I just spend over two hours learning about this man, I'm not sure I really knew more about him than I did before (and who even knows what is true and what is mere peculation). Performance wise, DiCaprio was fine given his devotion to the roll but Naomi Watts was almost forgottable. Judi Dench at least brings a bit more depth but it's not nearly enough to save this film.

**½ / ***** (C, 4.8/10, 2/4)

[mattmav45]

I kind of liked it more than others, but it's still a big mess.

DiCaprio's performance obvioiusly carries the film, but I feel was a really great movie trying to get out amidst all the clutter. It works best as a biopic centering on the personal life of Hoover, but unfortunately there are simply too many weird edits cutting to either present time, the kidnapping (which was really bland), or the development of the FBI in general. A better film would have resulted if the film focused on the personal life, but was complemented by the other subjects. Instead, it was really uneven and constantly broke its own momentum countless times during the movie. I will say Clyde's make-up job was absolutely brutal, he looked like something out of an 80's monster film.

I enjoyed it overall, but lots of missed potential here.

B-

Edited December 12, 2012 by mattmav45