Clint Eastwood continues (and maybe concludes) a late-career streak of compelling films with a courtroom drama while Robert Zemeckis travels the years without moving the camera.
Is there any precedent at all for a major director remaining active and capable into his mid-90s? Hell - is there any precedent for *anyone* performing at the level Eastwood still performs, at anything, into their mid-90s? It's truly remarkable, and as much as all coverage of his new movies always mentions his age, I think we've gotten inured to the "Clint's getting old" narrative---but there's "old for 'Dirty Harry'", "old to be making movies", and then there's "94". It's amazing.
Yeah it's bonkers. Ridley Scott's getting up there too though and the scale of his movies dwarf Eastwood's. Curious to see how long he's going to keep at it although I suspect he's got other people handling a good deal of the production headaches.
I think about SPACE COWBOYS, an okay film but one in which Eastwood, Tommy Lee Jones, Donald Sutherland, and James Garner were test pilots everyone thought were already too old to be worth anything. And that was damn near a quarter-century ago!
"Clint is too old for this shit" was a theme of really a *lot* of his acting career - it was a bit of a frog-in-a-pot-of-boiling-water situation where that piece morphed from being a thoughtful criticism of how certain types of machismo don't age well into being "he's old, ha ha old".
What I appreciates about Eastwood as a filmmaker is the same thing I appreciate about Lumet, or writers like Donald E. Westlake and Elmore Leonard — sheer professionalism, sticking at it year after year with a high degree of craft, and making it work more often than not. I will try to get out to JUROR #2 this weekend and honor that! (While trying to put that empty chair shtick out of my mind.)
If "Juror #2" is indeed Clint Eastwood's last film as a director, then Warner Brothers needs to recognize this with something better than an incredibly limited release. If it's one thing you can count on in a Clint Eastwood directed movie, it's superb cinematography and editing.
“Juror #2” will be released in less than 50 theaters nationwide. It will play in only 4 theaters in New York City, 5 in Los Angeles, and 1 in Chicago. Warner Bros. currently has no plans to expand the release to more theaters in the coming weeks.
WB doesn’t have plans to release it more widely in future weeks, and it’s even considering not releasing box office numbers for the film.
However, I’d rather a very good film that isn’t a success, than a so-so film that is a success. Eastwood has had so much success throughout his career, and hopefully still is comfortable financially. This film will find its people, even if WB doesn’t give a hoot.
Only one theater in the DC area (Tysons Corner AMC).
You would think that Clint's status as a red-state icon would mean they release it in more conservative markets, but David Zaslav is not the brightest executive
Back in the Aughts, my memory is that two Eastwood movies were released with little to no fanfare, but ended up being big successes critically, and for one of them, financially: Million Dollar Baby (December 15, 2004) and Letters from Iwo Jima (December 20, 2006). Those were heady days for Eastwood, and it was an exciting time to be a film goer.
WB’s business results have been terrible recently, and they said they will do cutbacks. They may not really be dissing Eastwood. So hold on to your seats to see which of their properties, including Criterion Channel, are affected.
Those are kind of different cases. Eastwood used to be in the habit of getting movies done quickly, sometimes unexpectedly, in time for awards season. I remember thinking my top ten was locked the year MILLION DOLLAR BABY came out then, oops, I had to reconsider. With IWO JIMA, if I recall correctly, the original plan was to put it out the following year. But because FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS met with a tepid response its companion piece's release date got moved up. (I like them both, but IWO JIMA is the better movie, in my opinion.)
Not proud moment: I spent most of the HERE review trying to read, but mostly distracted by the header image and just looking for who the stars were in that picture... started with Zac Efron and "No clue" for the other, until I got nearer to the end and was like, OH, Tom Hanks and Robin Wright, sure, of course.
Part of me loves that Bob Zemeckis still gets a huge budget to do whatever he wants, even though nobody has really wanted to see his movies since 2015's THE WALK (which underperformed, but still, was worthwhile).
I just spent a couple hours of my Election Day with JUROR #2, and it was time well spent. Solid, solid picture, and it’s possible that (between this and a recent rewatch of FURY ROAD) Nicholas Hoult is starting to grow on me. Excellent work from Eastwood, and I also think this is exactly the kind of script that could get Jonathan Abrams an Oscar nomination.
Add The Favorite, The Menu (less so), and the Hulu TV show The Great for some more outstanding Nicholas Hoult roles. I love seeing that Hoult will be in a movie, it's a big plus in my book.
Glad I was able to get out to Juror #2 yesterday at an early-afternoon screening at one of the (apparently) very few theatres playing it. I don't feel like it's the kind of movie that will suffer or be diminished much by home viewing, but it's also the kind of movie I think would really pick up steam if it was given a chance (not that I'm some kind of box office expert). I also found Hoult to be quietly remarkable in it, especially when confronted by his wife about where he was and what he was doing on the night of the accident. I thought it was a really compelling performance, and it's even more impressive when you know that he only got like, two takes tops before Clint moved on to the next shot.
Is there any precedent at all for a major director remaining active and capable into his mid-90s? Hell - is there any precedent for *anyone* performing at the level Eastwood still performs, at anything, into their mid-90s? It's truly remarkable, and as much as all coverage of his new movies always mentions his age, I think we've gotten inured to the "Clint's getting old" narrative---but there's "old for 'Dirty Harry'", "old to be making movies", and then there's "94". It's amazing.
Manoel de Oliveira made films from the 1930s to the 2010s; Gebo and the Shadow came out when he was 104
Yeah it's bonkers. Ridley Scott's getting up there too though and the scale of his movies dwarf Eastwood's. Curious to see how long he's going to keep at it although I suspect he's got other people handling a good deal of the production headaches.
I think about SPACE COWBOYS, an okay film but one in which Eastwood, Tommy Lee Jones, Donald Sutherland, and James Garner were test pilots everyone thought were already too old to be worth anything. And that was damn near a quarter-century ago!
It movie equivalent of Rolling Stones going on "Steel Wheelchairs" tour 30 years ago.
"Clint is too old for this shit" was a theme of really a *lot* of his acting career - it was a bit of a frog-in-a-pot-of-boiling-water situation where that piece morphed from being a thoughtful criticism of how certain types of machismo don't age well into being "he's old, ha ha old".
Frederick Wiseman's still kicking pretty hard...
Cackling at the last sentence of the Here review; I wasn’t aware of the gimmick but the trailers made it look super sickly sweet treacly
What I appreciates about Eastwood as a filmmaker is the same thing I appreciate about Lumet, or writers like Donald E. Westlake and Elmore Leonard — sheer professionalism, sticking at it year after year with a high degree of craft, and making it work more often than not. I will try to get out to JUROR #2 this weekend and honor that! (While trying to put that empty chair shtick out of my mind.)
Who knew that we'd be getting an About a Boy and a Forrest Gump reunion tandem in these two?
I wonder if the following to Juror #2 will be Rural Juror #3...
No surprise at all about Here. It felt like a gimmick movie from the trailer.
It's a shame, because the "gimmick" is the same as in the graphic novel, but in that context the result is sublime.
I've got the graphic novel on hold from my public library right now.
Truly. And some of the things that have been kept are puzzling. The repetition of "Watch, wallet, keys" is there but with no payoff, for instance.
If "Juror #2" is indeed Clint Eastwood's last film as a director, then Warner Brothers needs to recognize this with something better than an incredibly limited release. If it's one thing you can count on in a Clint Eastwood directed movie, it's superb cinematography and editing.
I would think CLINT EASTWOOD’S LAST MOVIE alone would be enough to get people to come out.
“Juror #2” will be released in less than 50 theaters nationwide. It will play in only 4 theaters in New York City, 5 in Los Angeles, and 1 in Chicago. Warner Bros. currently has no plans to expand the release to more theaters in the coming weeks.
WB doesn’t have plans to release it more widely in future weeks, and it’s even considering not releasing box office numbers for the film.
However, I’d rather a very good film that isn’t a success, than a so-so film that is a success. Eastwood has had so much success throughout his career, and hopefully still is comfortable financially. This film will find its people, even if WB doesn’t give a hoot.
Only one theater in the DC area (Tysons Corner AMC).
You would think that Clint's status as a red-state icon would mean they release it in more conservative markets, but David Zaslav is not the brightest executive
Back in the Aughts, my memory is that two Eastwood movies were released with little to no fanfare, but ended up being big successes critically, and for one of them, financially: Million Dollar Baby (December 15, 2004) and Letters from Iwo Jima (December 20, 2006). Those were heady days for Eastwood, and it was an exciting time to be a film goer.
WB’s business results have been terrible recently, and they said they will do cutbacks. They may not really be dissing Eastwood. So hold on to your seats to see which of their properties, including Criterion Channel, are affected.
Those are kind of different cases. Eastwood used to be in the habit of getting movies done quickly, sometimes unexpectedly, in time for awards season. I remember thinking my top ten was locked the year MILLION DOLLAR BABY came out then, oops, I had to reconsider. With IWO JIMA, if I recall correctly, the original plan was to put it out the following year. But because FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS met with a tepid response its companion piece's release date got moved up. (I like them both, but IWO JIMA is the better movie, in my opinion.)
It's just so nuts that Clint Eastwood directed a WWII movie with an all Japanese cast in Japanese, and it's great.
Speaking of Eastwood and Japan, has anyone else seen the 2013 Japanese remake of UNFORGIVEN with Ken Watanabe? It's also great.
If I could put a shocked emoji here, I would. I had no idea this even existed!
Not proud moment: I spent most of the HERE review trying to read, but mostly distracted by the header image and just looking for who the stars were in that picture... started with Zac Efron and "No clue" for the other, until I got nearer to the end and was like, OH, Tom Hanks and Robin Wright, sure, of course.
Part of me loves that Bob Zemeckis still gets a huge budget to do whatever he wants, even though nobody has really wanted to see his movies since 2015's THE WALK (which underperformed, but still, was worthwhile).
I just spent a couple hours of my Election Day with JUROR #2, and it was time well spent. Solid, solid picture, and it’s possible that (between this and a recent rewatch of FURY ROAD) Nicholas Hoult is starting to grow on me. Excellent work from Eastwood, and I also think this is exactly the kind of script that could get Jonathan Abrams an Oscar nomination.
Add The Favorite, The Menu (less so), and the Hulu TV show The Great for some more outstanding Nicholas Hoult roles. I love seeing that Hoult will be in a movie, it's a big plus in my book.
Glad I was able to get out to Juror #2 yesterday at an early-afternoon screening at one of the (apparently) very few theatres playing it. I don't feel like it's the kind of movie that will suffer or be diminished much by home viewing, but it's also the kind of movie I think would really pick up steam if it was given a chance (not that I'm some kind of box office expert). I also found Hoult to be quietly remarkable in it, especially when confronted by his wife about where he was and what he was doing on the night of the accident. I thought it was a really compelling performance, and it's even more impressive when you know that he only got like, two takes tops before Clint moved on to the next shot.
It got extended a second week in DC and I, too, made the trek to see it. Surprisingly packed house!