J. Edgar

J. Edgar Hoover was the driving force behind the establishment of the FBI in the early 1920's, and his vision helped the agency grow with forensic science and a national database as the key innovations behind his rise to power. He controlled Washington for nearly 40 years, intimidating Presidents, and taking credit for changing the way we view federal crimes today. He is an inspiring, driven man who is probably better known for being a closet homosexual than anything else. It's a story ripe for film depiction.

Clint Eastwood's latest is a biopic look at one of the most influential crime fighters in the history of the United States. It is delicately put together in a screenplay by Dustin Lance Black, and acted terrifically by Leonardo DiCaprio. It's truly an all star team, but the film doesn't quite take off the way you might expect.

It was a departure from Eastwood's recent critically acclaimed films, and frankly is a bit of a departure from his typical style as well. He seems to be entering the biopic genre with Flags of our Fathers, Letters from Iwo Jima, the Changeling, and Invictus recently made, but this seems a bit more overt than those. I miss the late 90's and early 2000's Eastwood films, clearly his prime; The plot twists or pivotal endings after careful development of likable and real characters. The simplicity of dialogue, tone, and music. OK, the music was very much Eastwood. Single piano key strokes in a very deliberate and whimsical manner.

The mood and scope of this film seemed a bit too large for Eastwood, and it showed at times. J. Edgar is a historical epic production, spanning decades with interwining subplots and monumental events and figures. Some of the casting was questionable, but that is another review for another time. Because of the vast time shift, it was necessary to choose between employing other actors, using CGI, or using old-fashioned makeup. Eastwood chose the latter, and it never quite seemed real enough for me. It reminded me of Johnny Knoxville of Jackass fame when he dons the old man suit, and that's not a good thing. Particularly, Armie Hammer's makeup was atrocious. His actions seemed almost comedic and satiric rather than biographical.

I had very high hopes for this film, and was impressed with how much respect and restraint exuded from the film. With so much rumor and supposition as to the demeanor, the agenda, and the personal sexual proclivities of the enigmatic man, he was portrayed in a very positive light despite his flaws or eccentricities.

For his part, DiCaprio did a very nice job which should garner an Oscar nomination this year. The rest of the cast was simply mediocre, and blurred into the background, even the much hyped Armie Hammer who played Clyde Tolson, Hoover's alleged unrequited gay lover. I appreciate the story for what it was, but it was not overwhelmingly well-done or fantastic.

Eastwood hasn't publicly stated his intentions for future projects, but I am always game for watching a film he has made. At this stage of his career, any film may be his last, and I appreciate the honesty and Hollywood magic that his movies seem to hold. An American filmmaking icon to say the least.

I would actually consider passing on this one, unless you have a burning interest in American history, DiCaprio films, or the justice system. Fortunately for me, I do have an interest in all 3 of them, so I give it 8/10.