News: In theaters now: THE MULE, directed by and starring Clint Eastwood!

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.

Messages - shabby chic

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
Eastwood News / Re:Eastwood sues McGilligan
« on: February 13, 2003, 04:41:09 PM »
Don't frett, Doug.  The same group who you're upset with are the same group that will revisit his films in years to come.  Hawkes wasn't a legend 'til well after his prime.  Many directors are discovered late.  Midnight Good Evil was very well received in Europe, probably because that obnoxious book wasn't so popular there.  And for that matter I personally think his best films (and the reason why I am part of this group to begin with) are Bronco Billy and Perfect World.  And I should say this, though I hope not to anger people, but I think his true genius is directing.  I think he's a fun and very good actor, but I'm more drawn to him as a director.  He's in the very small rank of director/actors to reach such heights in both.

General Discussion / Re:The Beguiled and Blood Work
« on: February 13, 2003, 04:31:05 PM »
The only thing they have in common is that I watched them side by side.  It didn't make Blood Work look very strong.  I think he should either act or direct, but not both.

Eastwood News / Re:Eastwood sues McGilligan
« on: February 12, 2003, 02:17:24 PM »
The main problem I had with the book is that the person who wrote it knows nothing about movies.  It complained that each character in Space Cowboys has one attribute.  First, that is standard for a genre piece.  Second, the same could be said of Rio Bravo.  Third, it doesn't even mention Howard Hawkes, the man who's being saluted by this film (e.g. aviation, cowboys, men on a mission, love story between two tough men, etc.)

General Discussion / The Beguiled and Blood Work
« on: February 10, 2003, 10:21:56 AM »
The Beguiled was great.  I think after Dirty Harry, this is Clint's and Siegel's greatest effort together.  Really worth a another look!  It's great looking.  Faulkner meets "Misery."

On the other hand, I watched BW for a second time this weekend.  There are moments of greatness in this film.  But it's also sloppy.  Why didn't Clint leave with the woman and child?  Daniles would have been trapped?  You could say that Clint felt connected to Daniels, but then why didn't the woman ask him to leave?  "Ill let her heart guide me" is a painfully bad line.  It's a little muddled too with the corpse he and the woman cop find.  Who was that?  It wasn't the computer guy because he's found later.  And then the Russian guy was used to throw people off, but then the killer leaves another clue the following day.  

Eastwood News / Sight and Sound review of Blood Work
« on: February 10, 2003, 10:14:56 AM »
I can't find it on the web, but the latest edition of the British mag Sight and Sound has the best review of BW I have read yet.  I was happy that the article blasted the awful performance of De Jesus, calling her performance an "assertive talk show host."  I'll type it up if I can't find it, but it's really worth checking out.  I think it's a very fair review.

Eastwood News / Re:Blood Work rental grosses....
« on: February 10, 2003, 10:09:55 AM »
That's quite sexist.  

What`s wrong with Sonja Braga`s part in The Rookie?I think it`s only good thing in that movie ;D
Anyway Im glad Eastwood used De Jesus instead of Braga.I saw her in a couple of Sex And The City episodes and first could not recognize her.Marvellous actress but she has changed a lot since Rookie.

General Discussion / Spielberg & Eastwood
« on: February 07, 2003, 01:37:41 PM »
He directed a Spielberg screenplay once, for that boring tv series Amazing Stories.  Did anybody see it?  If so, how was it?

Eastwood News / Re:Blood Work rental grosses....
« on: February 07, 2003, 12:26:59 PM »
Should have wrote "overly budgeted"  ;)

A director of Clint's caliber shouldn't have to adhere to some page-turning novel non-sense.  

Welles added the Mexican role to his last masterwork Touch of Evil.  Maybe Clint should have subtracted.

Lucas, the character is a Latina in the book.

To be "way over budget" means "to greatly exceed the budgeted amount," in most people's understanding of the phrase.  

Eastwood News / Re:Blood Work rental grosses....
« on: February 07, 2003, 12:22:05 PM »
I really hope that's not the reason, rather lame of him.  Anyway, he could have used Sonja Braga again, and this time had a good part for her.  Also she's a little bit closer to his age.  I'm tired of Clint kissing women who were born during his middleage!  ;)  

His wife's a Latina. Maybe she pressed him to add the part.  ;)

Eastwood News / Re:Blood Work rental grosses....
« on: February 07, 2003, 10:18:27 AM »
Why does she have to be Latina?  So Eastwood can be "in" with Latinos?  The scene where she's on the phone as the restaurant is dreadful acting, though reciting that dialogue with such pedestrian direction, this was probably Clint's fault.

oh... I see what you mean KC.

I must disagree with Lucas. Huston should NOT have been the female lead. The character of Graciella in the book was that of a Mexican/Latino. Im glad they kept at least one other thing from the book in there. ::)

De Jesus did fine. It was Rodriguez that got me weezy. And that Dylan Walsh guy hardly had any lines, his character couldve been completely written out, and it wouldnt have affected the movie in any way.

But this type of discussion would best be discussed here:;action=display;threadid=263

Eastwood News / Re:Blood Work rental grosses....
« on: February 07, 2003, 10:15:11 AM »
hi KC!  I didn't write "exceed," I wrote "way over budget" meaning that his budget was too high for such a modest scale and production appearance.  I'll watch my diction.  ;D

I saw that on the Box Office Mojo site, too, Nightwing. But if that was the budget ... that was the budget. Who says Eastwood exceeded the budget?

General Discussion / What director do you think Clint should work for?
« on: February 06, 2003, 01:55:44 PM »
Don't you wish that Clint would star in another director's film again?  And I mean a top tier director, not some guy Clint hired so he could push around.  Who do you think could really utilize Clint well in a film?
My vote: Wes Anderson

Eastwood News / Re:Blood Work rental grosses....
« on: February 06, 2003, 01:51:14 PM »
I don't know about that.  Jackie Brown and Pulp Fiction both cost less than 12 million to make.  I think Clint just really $#!t the bed with Blood Work.  It was way over budget and hardly any of it appears on the screen.  His film could have been made for 12 million (as opposed to it's 50 million budget plus ads).  His casting choices were all wrong, too.  Why didn't he dump that awful De Jesus and promote Huston to the female lead?  And get rid of Paul Rodriguez!  Daniels was the only actor given a good supporting role in the film, and good supporting roles have usually been a hallmark of Eastwood films.  I watched Blood Work again, and I have to say, he took a big step backward artistically!  The boat at the end was not organic to the story.  It was a mess.  

Movies can cost quite a bit.

Theres the whole production crew that you have to pay, plus theres permits for parking and using guns and locations and stuff. Then you gotta rent the equipment and buy film. Visual effects cost money. Catering.

Theres many other factors that determine how much a movie will cost.

Just be thankful Clint didnt go all Matrix like for Blood Work, the budget wouldve been well over $100 million. :o

General Discussion / Re:Heartbreak Ridge
« on: February 05, 2003, 10:12:25 AM »
The problem isn't so much that van peebles is a bad performer.  the problem is that he's performing without a mic or a band.  It ruins any form or realism, and looks straight out of the worst tv movie making.

Maybe clint wanted it to be bad due to the fact that afterward Van Peebles gets screwed with by some big rednecks.  Maybe it was to make you think of how bad van peebles character is at singing or beiing in the band.  "You know man, The Iotola Of Rock'N'rola!

Eastwood News / Re:Blood Work rental grosses....
« on: February 04, 2003, 01:57:29 PM »
Well, it cost 70 million.  The actual profit is the theatre rentals, not the return, I believe.  But still, I think a lot of older people rent his films, and they're played on tv a lot.  I wouldn't be surprised if it broke even in, say, five years.

Doesnt really matter. Some of the box office intake goes to the theatres, and some of the rentals and sales goes to the stores.

In the end, when its all said and done, Blood Work was a financial loss for the WB. But that doesnt really matter, they had so many hits this year, I doubt they care.

And with their amazing line up next year, I really dont think they care.

General Discussion / Heartbreak Ridge
« on: February 04, 2003, 01:55:41 PM »
I can't recall.  Somebody please remind me.  What was that really awful scene that had Van Peebles (spelling?) singing a song at a bar?  There was something really stupid about it.  Was it that he didn't have a microphone?  Or was it that there was a band playing but no band present?  I can't remember what it was.  Does somebody remember?  That was one of Clint's best performances, but probably some of his laziest directing.  I was surprised by how bad the scene was, especially given Clint's respect for live musical performances.  

Questions & Answers / Re:Eastwood as a director
« on: February 03, 2003, 10:37:27 AM »
These are great points, KC.  If you look at an outline of unforgiven, one would think that Little Bill was the hero and Eastwood the villian. Little Bill practices strict gun control, doesn't tolerate violence, tries to be fair.  He is not corrupt in the least, it's just that his brand of justice is highly personal and flawed.  Eastwood is a murderer of children and women and has a very SPOOKY sense of religon that is very creepy.    

I think, though, that you'll find that in some of Eastwood's best films, things aren't nearly that black and white. It's true especially of the three most recent films on your list, Unforgiven, A Perfect World and The Bridges of Madison County. In each of those films, the main characters are complex human beings, not just "good" or "evil" people. It would be hard to say that either of the first two films has conventional "good guys" and "bad guys" at all, while the third film is a small-scale domestic tragedy in which any choices made by the main characters are going to hurt people they love.

It is true that a recurring Eastwood motif is the hero trying to overcome a personal "demon," something he's haunted by from his past. Originally, it was most often something he'd suffered at the hands of others (such as the extermination of Josey Wales's family, or the wounds borne by the Preacher in Pale Rider. Starting about with The Gauntlet, Eastwood's heroes have often been men who are themselves deeply flawed, or scarred in some way by "the things I done" (as his William Munny, in Unforgiven, puts it) in the past. That's something you might want to look into a bit more closely for your paper.

Web Site Announcements / Re:Eastwood Film Discussion of the Week
« on: January 30, 2003, 05:56:21 PM »
This is a pristine example of a movie that is infinitely better than the book.  Godafther and Saint Jack are other examples.  The book BOMC was complete grabage, and a very nice movie was made from it.

Boy, that was sillier  ;)

General Discussion / Re:james dean and clint eastwood
« on: January 29, 2003, 06:03:03 PM »
Apples and oranged.  Dead was method.  Clint was that other thing.  I can't recall its name, but it was more focused on a physical approach.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6

C L I N T E A S T W O O D . N E T