Okay, guns and fisticuffs are involved, but the film is so much more than that. Joining Mr. Eastwood in the film is Christopher Carley as Father Janovich, a determined priest who knows little of real life as lived by Korean war vet Kowalski; Ahney Her, entrancing as Sue Lor, the spirited Hmong girl next door who just won't let Kowalski continue living isolated and alone; and Bee Vang as Thao Vang Lor, called Toad by Kowalski who becomes his surrogate father and role model, teaching the young Hmong how American blue collar guys bond and behave.
As the film opens, Kowalksi is in church for the funeral of his wife, a woman he characterizes later as the best woman in the country that he managed to catch. You won't catch Kowalksi moving into assisted living though his stereotypical sons would love to sell the family home in the old neighborhood and put him where they could justifiably say, "He's being taken care of." He's an embarrassment and an emotional anvil around their necks just as they are a puzzle to him.
The trouble with the old neighborhood isn't that it's been taken over by Asians, but that the gangs - Asian, black, Hispanic - have a stranglehold on the decent people who are trying to find their piece of the American dream while still clinging to their traditions and values.
Gran Torino isn't so much about knocking heads, defending the old neighborhood, and facing down gangbangers as it is about character growth and discovering that family doesn't necessarily mean the people you're related to by blood. Eastwood gives a layered performance that is worthy of Best Actor. In fact, there are several stellar performances in this film i.e. Carley's priest and unknown actors Ahney Her and Thao Vang Lor. Even Clint's son Scott Eastwood, credited in the film as Scott Reeves, is good in his role as the gutless Trey.
The ending is surprising. And poignant. If you're an Eastwood fan, you'll love the film. If you abhor Eastwood, you'll be surprised how this film stays with you. I'm just surprised Eastwood didn't sweep all the major film awards. Awards don't make a film a classic. Make no mistake, Gran Torino will become a classic.
(not so) Grand Burrito... - Andrew Ellington - I'm kind of everywhere
Betty, I know you are going to hate me for this, but I have to be honest here. This movie was just horrible. It's hard for me to put into eloquent words all of the missteps this poor little film made, because part of me just feels like rambling off a list of bad decisions.
First, I'll lay out the plot.
Walt is a bitter and grumpy old man who is an unapologetic racist dwelling in a community overrun by those with which he has hatred for. His family has all but written him off, and this visibly irks Walt. When his neighbor, young Thao, attempts to steal his Gran Torino (as part of a gang initiation), Walt finds himself in a situation (with individuals) he never foresaw. After inadvertently saving Thao from the clutches of his cousin's gang, Walt is further introduced to Thao's family, and despite being hesitant he begins to warm to Thao after he officially apologizes. Walt then has Thao become his `handyman', putting him to work around the house doing odd jobs here and there. Things seem to go well for the two, and a bond is formed, but if we know anything about gangs we know that this will not be the end of things.
The story felt VERY clichéd and it didn't really try to compensate for those obvious generalizations. Some make remarks like "this is far better than `Crash'" but in the end they are both rather embarrassing reflections of racism to be quite honest. I'd like you to explain to me HOW this is better than `Crash'. I won't say it is worse (although I gave `Crash' a C, my feelings for that film have dropped considerably), but it is hardly better.
So let's take this apart, shall we.
I'll start with the script. Like I said, there are clichés that pretty much mount one on top of the other here, from the formulaic way in which Thao's family is represented to the ridiculously generic way that Walt is presented to us. There is nothing genuine about his character. Everything feels pulled from another performance or character developed in an Eastwood movie. This is Eastwood playing Eastwood. He is grumpy, and everyone knows it, and his family has distanced themselves from him (who can blame them) and yet we are supposed to feel an urge of sympathy for him because he overcomes his racism and befriends Thao and his family? I found the scene in the barbershop with Thao to be rather ridiculous too. Yes, this is the type of guy that Walt is, but it's nothing to feel all chummy about. The way the film ended I thought was (somewhat) clever, and then it went all Hallmark sentiment with the final frame, which I found a tad squeamish.
How about the direction, since that is what Eastwood is all about? Honestly, this film lacks tremendously in that regard. Now, for all of you out there (yes, you MKIA) who think that I am an Eastwood hater and that I'm blowing this out of proportion, realize that I gave `Million Dollar Baby' an A+ and still highly regard that film (and it's direction), not to mention an A for `Unforgiven', and despite not caring for it collectively, I gave pretty high marks to `Changeling' as well. This film though, is just poorly constructed and realized. The direction is very stagy. Look at the scene when the family is worried about Sue and she comes in the door, and Walt drops his drink. Watch how the camera zooms into a closeup of the drink, telling us that Walt is going to drop it before he does and then, what does Walt do...he lets go. It's not a `disoriented slip through his fingers' drop, it's an `open my hand and make a statement' drop. It just feels fake. Decisions like that one give this film an air of unnaturalness that ruins any connective tissue.
But, the acting takes the cake here. Casting `non-actors' is kind of a vanity thing for a director, but in the end there are moments where it works. This is not one of them. Bee Vang has to carry about as much of this film as Eastwood (we'll get to him in a minute) and so he needed to be more authenticated. I love how one reviewer makes the statement that while Vang comes off wooden, "there is no substitute for authenticity." Sorry, but that wooden quality strips the performance of authenticity. He's obviously trying too hard. Eastwood, like I mentioned earlier, is just playing himself. Yes, the script is at fault for handing him a caricature (I don't care what you say about his character arc, it just boils down to a mess of generalities) but Eastwood doesn't put any real life into it.
Snarling and growling and looking all mean and stuff is not really emoting, like at all.
In the end, this overcooked film is just a mess. I'm sorry Betty, I know you love your Clint (and I won't hold that against you if you don't hold this review against me) but this film is just plain bad. Maybe the whole racism subject should just be left alone, since no one can really seem to get it right (is it just me or was this another one of those `white guy saves the day' kind of message films), but then again it is a potent subject that has potential to really create something poignant.
This is not poignant.
Gran Torino - JoannaFL - Florida USA
HORRENDOUS- What can be seen on our streets/in our schools every day...why pay for/be'enertained'by/ this???
another Eastwood classic! - Anthony T. Moffett - Tamp, Fl USA
I've always liked Clint Eastwood outside the "western genre", and Gran Torino is a great "don't get mad, get even" role for the famous actor.
Posts
