Clint Eastwood’s ‘J. Edgar’ Opens Strong

COMMENTS (20)

• CAN’T WAIT TO SEE THIS MOVIE!!!!
  Thank you, Nikki!
  Best,
  Amanda

  Comment by Amanda — Thursday November 10, 2011 @ 7:54am PST  Reply to this post

• I think Leonardo will surely get a nomination for an Academy Award at least. He is incredible and he is amazing. And I think he will get it. It’s an incredible performance, just wonderful.

  Comment by William Forrester — Thursday November 10, 2011 @ 9:11am PST  Reply to this post

• I’m looking forward to seeing as well. Very surprised by DiCaprio being picked to play him since seen so many B&W pictures of Hoover’s mug, but if he pulls it off, hat’s off to him and Eastwood.

  Comment by jeb — Thursday November 10, 2011 @ 9:12am PST  Reply to this post

• anyone horrified of the make up job? WOW

  Comment by T — Thursday November 10, 2011 @ 9:53am PST  Reply to this post

  • Yeah! Scary!

    Looks more like J. Edgar should’ve been released Halloween week.

    Comment by jonmalibu — Thursday November 10, 2011 @ 2:37pm PST  Reply to this post

• Saw it. Not bad at all. What I thought Eastwood would emphasize, he didn’t. What I thought the movie would lack, hmmmm…. not so bad I must admit. I give it a 7.99 out of 10.

  No matter how intense certain moments were, I saw Leo. For the love of Buddha, how can you cast Leo as HOOVER? Just. Look. At. His. Face. Does it shout J. Edgar Hoover?

  Comment by frankie edgar — Thursday November 10, 2011 @ 10:33am PST  Reply to this post

• Half the reviews are glowing, but the other half – or 3/5 according to RT – have been downright pans. Can’t see this having legs to hold up past Thanksgiving.

  Comment by Michael — Thursday November 10, 2011 @ 11:14am PST  Reply to this post

• Made in California thanks to the state’s film incentive. Thanks Mr. Eastwood for a good film, but also for some good jobs.

  Comment by filmguy — Thursday November 10, 2011 @ 11:23am PST  Reply to this post

• Terrific. Some terrific supporting talent as well in small roles. But as always, Eastwood finds them!

  Thanks, Clint.

  Comment by Ellen R. — Thursday November 10, 2011 @ 11:58am PST  Reply to this post

• I guess they missed the Rex Reed review on the Observer.

  Comment by Who Asked You Anyway — Thursday November 10, 2011 @ 12:35pm PST  Reply to this post

• Interesting that this says it was number 12 while other sources have it at #16. It seems to be getting mixed responses though.

  Comment by Jerry — Thursday November 10, 2011 @ 1:41pm PST  Reply to this post

• Instant camp classic! The only thing more unintentionally funny than DiCraprio’s drag queen like performance is the script!

  Comment by Dorothy Palmer — Thursday November 10, 2011 @ 2:13pm PST  Reply to this post

• Seems rare to find a movie I actually want to see as soon as possible but I want to see this

  Comment by Aeiouy — Thursday November 10, 2011 @ 4:50pm PST  Reply to this post

• Leonardo DiCaprio in film Clint Eastwood it’s very interesting.I waiting this movie.

  Comment by yu-ma — Thursday November 10, 2011 @ 8:11pm PST  Reply to this post

• I have NO desire to see this, and, being a gay man, you’d think I would have an interest in seeing any movie in which Armie Hammer is in, especially one in which he kisses another man! Down boy! Down!
  Two reasons I won’t see it:
  Leonardo. No matter what anyone says, I think he can’t act. He has two modes of expression: The faraway look in his eyes, when he speaks all dreamy softly, and when he’s angry and. he. speaks. in. halted. sentences. and. gives. every, word. the same. emphasis.
  The other reason: Eastwood. I’m thrilled for him that he’s having a very long career, but, God alive, are his movies dull. He just plops a camera down, and films what’s there. He doesn’t bring any magic to the screen at all. His movies remind me of a wonderful line from Tim Burton’s Big Fish: he has all of the facts, but none of the flavour.
  Yeah, he tells a story, but it’s always a very dry, unimaginative version of it.

  Comment by brian — Thursday November 10, 2011 @ 8:20pm PST  Reply to this post

  • Gosh, @Brian, did you by any chance see “Forgiven” or “In the Garden of Good and Evil” (a tad long, but CERTAINLY not static. Actually, I really loved “Flags of Our Fathers” and “Letters from Iwo Jima.” (How many other English-speaking directors film an entire flick in Japanese?) And then there’s “Hereafter,” which evidently no one but me liked. I thought the premise fascinating and the alternating between characters’ stories (one in French w/ subtitiles) was hardly dry, flavorless, and static.

    Maybe it’s just different strokes but, dammit, I forgot “Invictus” which actually was more than a tad static, but Matt Damon and Morgan Freeman acted the hell out of the film.

    Guess that’s what makes horse races. Would love to know what your favorite directors and films encompass. (But I won’t be back to this site, so don’t bother replying.) Sorry we disagree so completely, but them’s the breaks.

    Comment by Chuck-E — Friday November 11, 2011 @ 3:28am PST  Reply to this post

• Clint`s an inspiration and defies all the old platitude`s that you lose it as you get older. Still beating the odds after 50 years in the biz.

  Comment by JJ Gittes — Friday November 11, 2011 @ 2:13am PST  Reply to this post

• You either have strange tastes, or don’t know what you’re talking about. Eastman is the reason I’m going. One of a small remaining handful of filmmakers left, with talent, taste and a mature vision.
  I’m really sick of teenage popcorn films. That’s all we’re dished up 90% of the time.

  Comment by GN — Friday November 11, 2011 @ 7:51am PST  Reply to this post

• Looking forward to seeing this film very much. A little nervous from the previews that the makeup has a little too much medellin (entourage) going on.

  Comment by Mrt — Friday November 11, 2011 @ 9:12am PST  Reply to this post

• clint eastwood movies “boring”…i think not.

  Comment by tommy — Sunday November 13, 2011 @ 4:42pm PST  Reply to this post