J. Edgar

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vD99zwj-ZUg

Are you guys ready for the greatest movie of all time?

edited 6th Nov '11 9:45:01 AM by Dragonzordasaurus

I have to admit, I kind of went bananas when I saw the tv spot for it. It's got a fantastic aesthetic, so I must see it.

Plus, Clint Eastwood is directing.

DiCaprio I can either take or leave, in general, but with Eastwood and Ron Howard involved, I'll probably give it a watch when it comes out.

Early reviews aren't favorable: Rotten Tomatoes has it at a 50% rating (4/8). One critic even called it Eastwood's worst film.

edited 6th Nov '11 10:56:04 AM by Buscemi

D:

Well, there goes my enthusiasm.

Will still watch regardless. It's fucking Eastwood, dammit.

Why trust the critics? If it looks good to you, and there's nothing obviously objectionable about it, go see it and make up your own mind.

Never trust critics. You're much better off finding people who know what you like and asking them.

Yeah, it's still early yet.

Although I concur that Oliver Stone would have been the saucier choice to direct.

Now down to 43% (6/14).

And Variety agreed that Stone should have directed.

If this really is one of those "screw the critics, watch it anyway" movies, I'm definitely not seeing it.

It's got a 7.6 from 491 users on Imdb, so this looks like it's shaping up to be one of those movies audiences liked but critics didn't care for. Still, it's not officially out yet, so all the reviews haven't exactly been pouring in. I think the tomatometer will probably be get least a bit higher over the week.

The IM Db rating is almost guaranteed to drop. They're always quite high until the film they belong to is actually released widely.

Currently 41% (15/37). Most of the complaints lay in the script (Dustin Lance Black can't seem to catch a break post-Milk) and Eastwood not being daring in the direction. Critics like Dicaprio though.

Hey, I may be a latecomer to DiCaprio (as weird as it may seem, the first movie I ever saw that I was actively aware that he was in it was Shutter Island...and I still haven't seen Titanic), but I haven't seen a movie with him in it that's let me down yet.

And of course the Tomatometer rating is very subject to change regarding early reviews. Considering how high-profile this movie is, 37 critics isn't the best sample size.

edited 9th Nov '11 1:41:26 AM by 0dd1

There are 64 reviews in now. Current rating: 45% (29/64).

In regards to Stone making this movie instead, I can't say the idea exactly thrills me. I think he's a pretentious overrated douche. Eastwood may fluff it now and then, but he doesn't leave me feeling like my intelligence has been insulted.

I saw it today, and in my opinion, it's not bad. It's not perfect, but not bad. All the performances were really good and it was pretty interesting. The old age makeup they used on Leo looked really convincing and I totally bought him as an old Hoover. Unfortunately, Armie Hammer's wasn't nearly as convincing, and in one scene it looked like his face was going to fall off. They mostly did a pretty good job of balancing out the focus between Hoover's business and personal life, but segments focusing his personal life sort of dominated the last part of the film. The main problem is that some parts were kind of slow, while others weren't long enough, so you'll get a shot glimpse of some investigations, see how they started and ended, but not the process of solving them. The main FBI investigation the film focused on was the Lindburgh baby kidnapping, and that was done pretty well. It sort of jumps back and forth between that investigation and his managing of the FBI. I think it was worth seeing, but if you miss it in theaters and rent it on disc, you won't be hurting.