Richard Jewell (2019) & Spencer (2021)
Movies #1,067 & 1,068 • TWO FOR TUESDAY
In many ways, this was the perfect double feature: a pair of recent(ish) biopics made in opposing styles, one on a topic I was vastly interested in, and another which I wasn’t at all.
2019’s Richard Jewell by Clint Eastwood is indicative of his recent work: it’s competent and informative and just entertaining enough (though so visually flat, it almost has no style at all). And on the flipside, Pablo Larraín’s Princess Di Christmas movie Spencer is largely all-style (what substance is mostly imagined, fictionalized to the point of it being labeled a “fable” at the onset of the film). For the latter, I had to pivot about 45 minutes in and start thinking of it as a story about "a woman in trouble" (in the INLAND EMPIRE sense) and not a biopic about the Royal Family, which is just something I couldn't give less of a shit about. Honestly, on the "Less of a Shit Pantheon," they are at the very very top (or bottom feels more appropriate — this Pantheon is a pit and I've kicked this trash in it first). Equal parts insufferable and uninteresting, those blokes.
Though it was amazing how much drama they were able to milk out of a story which is essentially "lady doesn't want to eat dinner with her in-laws." And Kristen Stewart does (somehow) manage to transcend ‘Kristen Stewart doing a Princess Diana’ impression, which when you first see her on screen feels impossible. So, needless to say, I was able to enjoy this one much more than I anticipated at the onset. It’s well-acted and its lovely 16mm cinematography gave it a timeless vibe which really worked.
Conversely, my appreciation for Eastwood’s Jewell worked in a totally different manner. I was invested in the story from the get-go. I remember the Olympic bombing and subsequent hoopla surrounding the titular character but I was just a tween when it happened, so all of the details of this fascinating saga felt fresh to me. And I was able to overlook some of the bad writing (Olivia Wilde’s characters is a total mess) and stock pandering and/or exaggerated biopic stuff. Plus. Paul Walter Hauser is the real deal, and I’m not sure if the film would have worked at all with a lesser actor in the role.
SCORE: ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ (for both)
1 note
·
View note
Clint Eastwood by Herb Ritts. 1989
122 notes
·
View notes
Clint Eastwood, Via Veneto, Roma. Photo Elio Sorci
44 notes
·
View notes
expendables two much more watchable than the first one. it's not better but it's, impossibly, dumber and sillier
2 notes
·
View notes
Clint Eastwood fans will see ‘compassionate side’ of star in new wildlife doc ‘Why On Earth’: director
Clint Eastwood fans will see ‘compassionate side’ of star in new wildlife doc ‘Why On Earth’: director
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Clint Eastwood is set to appear in conservationist filmmaker Katie Cleary’s new wildlife documentary “Why On Earth,” and she recently shared how he ended up on the project and what it was like working with him.
The new documentary will focus on nature, wild animals and the relationship between humans, animals and plant life.
“We’re showing what’s…
View On WordPress
12 notes
·
View notes
Clint Eastwood Through The Years: From Actor to Award-Winning Director | In Trend Today
Clint Eastwood Through The Years: From Actor to Award-Winning Director
Read Full Text
or
Full Article on MAG NEWS
View On WordPress
0 notes
Sergio Leone - El bueno, el malo y el feo
55 notes
·
View notes