“Gran Torino” is a very good picture which rises above Clint’s occasionally wooden acting and the dialogue, which is uninspired. (The attempt to recreate the ball-breaking style of working class America is sometimes funny, but comes across as forced.) The story, however — Walt Kowalski’s realization of the humanity of his neighbors, at the same time as he is increasingly alienated from his family — is compelling and affecting. And the ending will prompt you to reconsider again the efficacy and meaning of violence, an important theme in other Eastwood pictures, especially “Unforgiven,” a truly great American film. Eastwood is a skillful director who will never be credited as a remarkable stylist or someone who has remade cinema. But by this point he’s made several good movies, as well as “Unforgiven,” which was utterly gripping and a conclusive deconstruction of the archetypal Western picture. (It is to Western films what Cormac McCarthy’s “Blood Meridian” is to literature.)
All that said, no big deal if you didn’t like “Gran Torino.” It certainly isn’t the sort of thing that is so good it demands an explanation from someone who didn’t like it.
A point to be made, and perhaps it already has been made (I didn’t read five full pages of posts before responding, sorry) is that Criterion doesn’t just create supply to satisfy demand; in many instances, their supply creates demand. So any explanation along the lines of “Criterion is a business, they have a bottom line, etc.” is too simplistic.
There is a very good purpose to this thread — it is to let the company know that there are viewers and fans of their releases who would very much like to see them pursue rights to films from other parts of the world. In my own case, I would like to see more Latin American films in particular. But I consider almost anything they put out, and I’m always interested in something new — as I’m sure most Criterion fans are. So films from Africa, China, etc. would be most welcome.
We might do well to let alone any questions of political correctness, morals, post-colonialism, whatever. The point is simply to let the company know that we love their work and would be interested in their looking around a bit more. I commend the original poster for pointing this out, as it wasn’t something that struck me myself until I read the post.
Nathan M., I think your analysis is exactly on point. I agree with your three reservations, and your point about how the language of the characters (Walt’s in particular) provides both evidence of and commentary on their development is insightful — thank you for pointing that out.
Did I miss something almost 3 years ago
“Gran Torino” is a very good picture which rises above Clint’s occasionally wooden acting and the dialogue, which is uninspired. (The attempt to recreate the ball-breaking style of working class America is sometimes funny, but comes across as forced.) The story, however — Walt Kowalski’s realization of the humanity of his neighbors, at the same time as he is increasingly alienated from his family — is compelling and affecting. And the ending will prompt you to reconsider again the efficacy and meaning of violence, an important theme in other Eastwood pictures, especially “Unforgiven,” a truly great American film. Eastwood is a skillful director who will never be credited as a remarkable stylist or someone who has remade cinema. But by this point he’s made several good movies, as well as “Unforgiven,” which was utterly gripping and a conclusive deconstruction of the archetypal Western picture. (It is to Western films what Cormac McCarthy’s “Blood Meridian” is to literature.)
All that said, no big deal if you didn’t like “Gran Torino.” It certainly isn’t the sort of thing that is so good it demands an explanation from someone who didn’t like it.
Go to Comment
Blu-ray release almost 3 years ago
Ah, just saw the standard version yesterday. What a film! I would so love to see a Blu-ray release. Should be gorgeous, especially in Capri.
Go to Comment
Can Colored Folks Get Some Love at Criterion too? almost 3 years ago
A point to be made, and perhaps it already has been made (I didn’t read five full pages of posts before responding, sorry) is that Criterion doesn’t just create supply to satisfy demand; in many instances, their supply creates demand. So any explanation along the lines of “Criterion is a business, they have a bottom line, etc.” is too simplistic.
There is a very good purpose to this thread — it is to let the company know that there are viewers and fans of their releases who would very much like to see them pursue rights to films from other parts of the world. In my own case, I would like to see more Latin American films in particular. But I consider almost anything they put out, and I’m always interested in something new — as I’m sure most Criterion fans are. So films from Africa, China, etc. would be most welcome.
We might do well to let alone any questions of political correctness, morals, post-colonialism, whatever. The point is simply to let the company know that we love their work and would be interested in their looking around a bit more. I commend the original poster for pointing this out, as it wasn’t something that struck me myself until I read the post.
Go to Comment
Did I miss something almost 3 years ago
Nathan M., I think your analysis is exactly on point. I agree with your three reservations, and your point about how the language of the characters (Walt’s in particular) provides both evidence of and commentary on their development is insightful — thank you for pointing that out.
Go to Comment