1
Eastwood News / Re: Life Icons Book
« on: September 11, 2012, 05:12:30 PM »
Looks great! I'll definitely buy this, and they're right: Clint Eastwood is the ideal icon with which to kick off what I guess is going to be a series.
DISCUSSION BOARD AND COMMUNITY - EST. 1996
| |
| News: Having trouble registering? Please feel free to contact us at help[at]clinteastwood.org. We will help you get an account set up. | |
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
Eastwood News / Re: Clint Eastwood to speak at Republican Convention tonight
« on: September 08, 2012, 02:10:16 PM »
I had my misgivings about the RNC appearance, but now, more than a week later, I really have to say Eastwood was effective and achieved what he wanted to do. The "Empty Chair" has taken on a life of its own with a Facebook page, etc, and has overshadowed anything that occurred at either political convention. And it isn't Eastwood who is being mocked. It's Obama.
3
Eastwood News / Re: Clint Eastwood to speak at Republican Convention tonight
« on: August 31, 2012, 11:42:14 AM »
If I would compare Clint Eastwood's speech to anything, it would be Bob Dylan's performance at the 1991 Grammy Awards where he was honored for his life achievement. Dylan came out with a band so loud you could barely hear him, and when you did, you had no clue what he was singing. It was bizarre, funny, and somehow cool. That's how I felt about The Clint last night: bizarre, funny, but still COOL! But I feel the same way about Eastwood as I do about Dylan. Clint. Eastwood. Can. Do. No. Wrong.
4
Eastwood News / Re: Eastwood's wife and daughters to appear on reality show
« on: December 15, 2011, 04:44:42 PM »
I don't believe it. How reliable is TMZ? I honestly don't know, but it's a pretty sleazy show: celebrity stalking.
5
Questions & Answers / Re: When did the offers start coming?
« on: November 15, 2011, 05:23:39 PM »
I've read interviews with Eastwood in which he seemed to suggest that it took awhile after the "Dollars" trilogy for the offers to come in. There was, he said, a stigma against actors who had worked in TV, as he was doing immediately before the Leone trio, and also a stigma against actors who worked in foreign film. But only seven months after "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" was released in the States, "Hang 'Em High" was in theaters, followed only two or three months later by "Coogan's Bluff." Not long after that came "Where Eagles Dare" with Richard Burton, who was a big star at the time. So it seems to me that he was being pursued right off the bat. I think he was still something of a "cult" hero, though, with an avid following, but it wasn't until "Dirty Harry" that he was launched into the superstar league.
6
Eastwood News / Re: Who saw J. EDGAR? Members' Comments (NO SPOILERS, PLEASE)
« on: November 11, 2011, 05:14:50 PM »
I saw it today at an 11:15 a.m. "Early Bird" showing where tickets were only $5.50.
I liked it.
I don't think it's a "great" film, and not Eastwood's best, but it moved along at a good pace, surprising considering its 137 minute length, and I found it a moving experience, also surprising since it concerns a man I have long believed to be more villain than hero. Those critics who call it a love story are correct, but it's an odd love story in that the lovers are too emotionally repressed to ever fully express their feelings. Overall, I think it's a rather sad film, and I do believe I heard some sniffles from audience members sitting nearby. This is not what I would have expected. This could have been more of an action-driven film concerned mostly with the hunt for bad guys, or an indictment of a man who abused his power. Instead, it's a mostly sympathetic portrait of a mostly well-intentioned, but seriously flawed human being.
Tom Stern's cinematography is nice and dark, rather noirish, I thought, and the period detail seems authentic. It shifts back and forth in time in clever ways. In one memorable scene, Hoover and Clyde Tolson step onto an elevator as old men talking about an incident in the past. When they get off, we're in that past, and the two are young again.
As for those critics who have criticized the makeup (Armie Hammer's old man makeup was "astonishingly bad," Leonard Maltin said), I really don't know what they're talking about. It looked fine to me, and Hammer's performance is absolutely first rate. He deserves an Oscar nomination as supporting actor. I'm thinking DiCaprio will not only be nominated, but could even win this time. What a gusty actor! After Titanic, he could have chosen to remain the heartthrob and do silly romantic comedies or brainless action movies. Instead, he takes on these parts that I don't think many other actors his age would ever consider tackling. Of course, he's also careful in his choice of director. It's hard to miss when you work with Spielberg, Scorsese, Christopher Nolan, and now Eastwood.
I liked it.
I don't think it's a "great" film, and not Eastwood's best, but it moved along at a good pace, surprising considering its 137 minute length, and I found it a moving experience, also surprising since it concerns a man I have long believed to be more villain than hero. Those critics who call it a love story are correct, but it's an odd love story in that the lovers are too emotionally repressed to ever fully express their feelings. Overall, I think it's a rather sad film, and I do believe I heard some sniffles from audience members sitting nearby. This is not what I would have expected. This could have been more of an action-driven film concerned mostly with the hunt for bad guys, or an indictment of a man who abused his power. Instead, it's a mostly sympathetic portrait of a mostly well-intentioned, but seriously flawed human being.
Tom Stern's cinematography is nice and dark, rather noirish, I thought, and the period detail seems authentic. It shifts back and forth in time in clever ways. In one memorable scene, Hoover and Clyde Tolson step onto an elevator as old men talking about an incident in the past. When they get off, we're in that past, and the two are young again.
As for those critics who have criticized the makeup (Armie Hammer's old man makeup was "astonishingly bad," Leonard Maltin said), I really don't know what they're talking about. It looked fine to me, and Hammer's performance is absolutely first rate. He deserves an Oscar nomination as supporting actor. I'm thinking DiCaprio will not only be nominated, but could even win this time. What a gusty actor! After Titanic, he could have chosen to remain the heartthrob and do silly romantic comedies or brainless action movies. Instead, he takes on these parts that I don't think many other actors his age would ever consider tackling. Of course, he's also careful in his choice of director. It's hard to miss when you work with Spielberg, Scorsese, Christopher Nolan, and now Eastwood.
7
Eastwood News / Re: Clint Eastwood Films on TV and Upcoming TV Interviews
« on: October 21, 2010, 04:44:20 PM »
Clint Eastwood is on Jimmy Kimmel Live tonight (Thursday October 12) on ABC.
8
Eastwood News / Re: "Directed by Clint Eastwood" second edition due early 2009
« on: March 28, 2007, 11:45:31 AM »
Schickel's book is filled with errors. One that comes immediately to mind is his claim that Unforgiven was nominated for 8 Academy Awards instead of 9. A minor error, but it makes me question a lot of the other "facts" in the book. He also mentions the rave review that Hang 'Em High received in Life magazine while neglecting to note that he was the one who wrote it. It's a sloppy book.
9
Eastwood News / Re: New Eastwood project: "The Changeling" with Angelina Jolie?
« on: March 10, 2007, 10:41:05 PM »
A period piece and a mystery. Sounds great to me. I wish they'd change the title, though. The Changeling with George C. Scott is one of my favorite supernatural thrillers.
10
Eastwood News / Re: LETTERS/FLAGS: Oscar Speculation Thread
« on: February 25, 2007, 11:45:00 PM »
I have to say I agree with Jack Black: Helen Mirren is hot!
Otherwise, this was one of the dreariest Oscar shows ever. I'm glad Scorsese won, even though Clint was more deserving this year. But if anyone but Scorsese had gotten the prize, I'm sure there would have been a backlash against the winner.
The best moment, though, was Clint and Ennio Morricone on stage together. Although the montage could have been better, and so could the choice of music. Where was "The Ecstasy of Gold" from The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly? That is a stirring piece of music, but then everything he wrote for the Eastwood/Leone films is brilliant!
Otherwise, this was one of the dreariest Oscar shows ever. I'm glad Scorsese won, even though Clint was more deserving this year. But if anyone but Scorsese had gotten the prize, I'm sure there would have been a backlash against the winner.
The best moment, though, was Clint and Ennio Morricone on stage together. Although the montage could have been better, and so could the choice of music. Where was "The Ecstasy of Gold" from The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly? That is a stirring piece of music, but then everything he wrote for the Eastwood/Leone films is brilliant!
11
Eastwood News / Re: Clint Eastwood will receive French Legion of Honor from president Jacques Chirac
« on: February 15, 2007, 01:05:04 PM »
And the honors continue...
Read it here at Yahoo News: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070215/en_afp/afpenterainmentfrance_070215171111
Read it here at Yahoo News: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070215/en_afp/afpenterainmentfrance_070215171111
12
General Discussion / Re: So why DOESNT Eastwood allow for extra's or bonus features?
« on: February 09, 2007, 11:31:10 AM »
Spielberg is another director who refuses to do commentaries on his DVDs, pointing out that he works hard to conceal this tricks, etc, and doesn't want to shatter the illusion of what he has achieved. I take it Eastwood agrees with him. As for the Flags DVD, I think it's obvious that the current release will be out of date in a few months. Before long, it will likely be included in a multi-disc set with Letters, hopefully with lots of extras. I'll wait until then before buying it.
13
Eastwood News / Clint Eastwood on Jay Leno Monday night?
« on: February 02, 2007, 12:04:40 PM »
I haven't been able to find any confirmation of this on the official NBC site, but according to Oscar Watch, Clint Eastwood is scheduled to appear on "The Tonight Show with Jay Leno" on Monday night.
Here's the link to Oscar Watch: http://www.oscarwatch.com/2007/02/how_do_we_know_its_voting_time.html
Here's the link to Oscar Watch: http://www.oscarwatch.com/2007/02/how_do_we_know_its_voting_time.html
14
Eastwood News / Re: Awards and Nominations for "Flags Of Our Fathers" and "Letters From Iwo Jima"
« on: January 23, 2007, 09:51:07 AM »
This is a welcome surprise. After both Flags and Letters were passed over for the Producers Guild nomination, and Clint apparently cancelled himself out with the Directors Guild, few of the Oscar prognosticators saw him being nominated. Since one of the presumed frontrunners, Dreamgirls, didn't make it into the best picture race, it looks like it is, indeed, a race, and Clint has a good shot at another win.
15
Eastwood News / Re: Awards and Nominations for "Flags Of Our Fathers" and "Letters From Iwo Jima"
« on: January 15, 2007, 10:50:12 PM »
Hooray! I think this win, even though it wasn't in the main category, will boost Letters from Iwo Jima 's Oscar chances. I hope so. If Clint isn't in the running, the "Dead People Montage" may once again be the highlight.
16
Eastwood News / Re: LETTERS/FLAGS: Oscar Speculation Thread
« on: January 13, 2007, 12:42:22 AM »
The DGA snub (if that's what it was) doesn't speak well of Clint's Oscar chances this year. Then again, if anyone could be the exception to the rule, it's Clint.
17
Eastwood News / Re: LETTERS/FLAGS: Oscar Speculation Thread
« on: January 09, 2007, 11:03:54 PM »
I wouldn't count Clint out of the Oscar race just yet. The voting members of the DGA did not get screeners of Letters, so not enough members saw it. Plus he may have cancelled himself out due to having two films this year. And I recently read an article about the PGA cracking down on late entries, a policy that hurt Spielberg last year with Munich. I think Clint will get an Oscar nod for directing Letters, and the film could still make the Best Picture race.
Still, I think Scorsese will be the victor this year.
Still, I think Scorsese will be the victor this year.
18
Eastwood News / Re: LETTERS/FLAGS: Oscar Speculation Thread
« on: January 01, 2007, 01:08:11 PM »
Because he's already won both Best Picture and Director twice, most recently only two years ago, I think Clint is unlikely to win this year, although I would bet that Scorsese is the only one standing in his way in the Director's race. By the way, since Best Picture goes to the producers, and Scorsese didn't produce The Departed, he wouldn't get an Oscar unless he wins for directing. I can see Scorsese winning Director, and Picture going to something else (possibly, but not probably, Letters). Still, I think The Departed has the edge.
19
Eastwood News / Re: Awards and Nominations for "Flags Of Our Fathers" and "Letters From Iwo Jima"
« on: December 28, 2006, 12:14:11 PM »
Clint Eastwood leads AFI's Moments of Significance!
"With a farewell tip of the hat to Robert Altman and a special commendation for Clint Eastwood, the American Film Institute completed its review of 2006 on Wednesday by highlighting what it calls the AFI's Moments of Significance.
Casting the spotlight on eight developments that had an impact on the worlds of TV and film, the list leads off with Clint Eastwood, dubbed "a national treasure," citing the fact that he completed two films, "Flags of Our Fathers" and "Letters From Iwo Jima" that "not only complement one another, but they resonate together to create one of the great motion picture experiences of the new century."
I couldn't find this announcement on the AFI's web site, but here's the link to the story at Yahoo:
http://movies.yahoo.com/mv/news/va/20061228/116730701600.html
"With a farewell tip of the hat to Robert Altman and a special commendation for Clint Eastwood, the American Film Institute completed its review of 2006 on Wednesday by highlighting what it calls the AFI's Moments of Significance.
Casting the spotlight on eight developments that had an impact on the worlds of TV and film, the list leads off with Clint Eastwood, dubbed "a national treasure," citing the fact that he completed two films, "Flags of Our Fathers" and "Letters From Iwo Jima" that "not only complement one another, but they resonate together to create one of the great motion picture experiences of the new century."
I couldn't find this announcement on the AFI's web site, but here's the link to the story at Yahoo:
http://movies.yahoo.com/mv/news/va/20061228/116730701600.html
20
General Discussion / Re: What if any other director------
« on: December 23, 2006, 10:46:55 AM »
Your post brings to mind what Eastwood told Charlie Rose about the importance of fate in one's life and career.
Without Flags, there would have been no Letters. Flags is, as you say, floundering, while Letters, made on a much smaller budget, will likely be a hit thanks to the rapturous praise it is receiving. Clint just may have made his most impressive film to date, and it came about almost accidentally. I know when I heard about these two films, I took it for granted that Flags would be the bigger of the two in all respects, and Letters would be a less ambitious companion piece.
It appears the opposite has happened. You just never know.
Without Flags, there would have been no Letters. Flags is, as you say, floundering, while Letters, made on a much smaller budget, will likely be a hit thanks to the rapturous praise it is receiving. Clint just may have made his most impressive film to date, and it came about almost accidentally. I know when I heard about these two films, I took it for granted that Flags would be the bigger of the two in all respects, and Letters would be a less ambitious companion piece.
It appears the opposite has happened. You just never know.
C L I N T E A S T W O O D . N E T