A list of all the Top 10s lists movies chosen annually by the critics of Cahiers du Cinéma.
Clint Eastwood plays Steve Everett, a journalist recovering from alcoholism, given the task of covering the execution of murderer Frank Beechum (played by Isaiah Washington). Everett discovers that Beechum might be innocent, but has only a few hours to prove his theory and save Beechum's life.
Eastwood decided to make another thriller based on a novel following Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil, this time it would be among his bigger commercial failures. In the grand scheme of Eastwood's career it is obscure for a reason, showing his vanity by playing a role that he is at least 20 years too old for (hotshot womanizing reporter) and even throwing in a kissing scene with a character we are told is 23! I' d put this in the same category as Blood Work another clunky thriller in which Clint for some reason takes his shirt off and unleashes his inner Romeo despite being well past retirement age.
The plot is really not that great, feeling…
Remember the end of The Player? This is that movie.
True Crime gets somewhat of a bum rap and perhaps deservedly so. Eastwood was already owning it hard with brilliant work throughout the 90's (his Oscar-winning revisionist beauty Unforgiven, the absorbing manhunt drama A Perfect World and that oh so beautifully unhurried The Bridges of Madison County), but his final film which ended the decade is unable to truly cut it for me. It still retains the man's notion of an amoral image in this unlikely hero role; but with small increments of grace, class or focus. And his worst offense is deeply thickening the seriousness of its plot with womanizing subplots and this déjà vu divination in the limited time-frame. It's ridiculous how these clues are even "detected". But…
The second recent disappointment from Clint Eastwood's back catalogue. This one is woefully paced, badly miscast and contains at least one entirely superfluous subplot with pointless characters. The only actor who comes out with reputation intact is James Woods. Everyone else is poor, especially Eastwood in his own film, playing a character whose traits are of a 35-40 year old. Clint looks 30 years too old.
The other major issue is with the pacing where Clint spends a day finding information on the execution of a prisoner. However he spends most of the day goofing around and at one point takes his daughter to the zoo. It's a scene that if you didn't already hate Eastwood's character, that'll do it.…
The second of Clint Eastwood’s great crime procedurals of the late 90s and early 00s sees him as Steve Everett, a reporter for the Oakland Tribune, who’s called in to cover the execution of Frank Beachum (Isaiah Washington), a Death Row inmate on Alcatraz. The entire film is set over one day in San Francisco, as Everett starts to suspect that Beachum might be innocent, and tries to rope together the evidence to prove his hunch. Among other things, that makes for a wonderful evocation of the quotidian fuzz, clutter and texture of the city, as Everett moves from one source of information to another, while trying to spend quality time with his daughter and estranged wife. As the day’s…
"I just had a terribly ridiculous day."
The scene with James Woods eating a candy bar.
Clint's arguably (undeniably) way too old to be the womanizing reporter but it perfectly exemplifies something only an iconic movie star (carrying memories of previous films and many associations along with him) can pull off.
His miraculous/tragic assignment of a death row case of a wrongly convicted black man sees a mirroring of the two men across one day in a silent movie tragedy race against time through the prism of unwieldy idiosyncrasy. Most effective in the devastating "speed zoo" sequence with Clint and his daughter juxtaposed with Isaiah Washington's final moment with his daughter. A child's drawing fluidly links/collides with restaurant art. Brings to mind that Eastwood dramatizing of the confronting of mortality is top shelf (Unforgiven, Changeling)
This looks as though it was made 25 years earlier than it actually was. And nothing wrong with that: Clint Eastwood’s thrillers tended to look like the work of his mentor, Don Siegel, and there is a direct line from Eastwood to Siegel back to the old Warner Bros no nonsense action movies of Humphrey Bogart and James Cagney, which I find vastly preferable to the frantic editing and glossy images of most Hollywood action movies of the past 25 years. But I can’t help feeling that Eastwood the actor is playing a role he would have been better suited to some 20 years before: when he propositions a young reporter in his first scene I can’t help thinking she…
Clint is always Clint. Crumpy outcast with an attitude and an excellent sound track.
Clint was almost 70 when he made this. He looks like a dried-out turkey, wears his belt at breast level, yet still plays a notorious horndog with a three-year-old daughter. God bless him.
I feel like I've hit the conservative jackpot. Clint Eastwood, James Woods and Dennis Leary all come together in a crime film based on a book by Andrew Klavan.
I haven't read any of Klavan's books, but I listen to his podcasts pretty regularly. There's plenty in this film to remind me of him: the sardonic mockery of political correctness, the tough-guy protagonist with flaws, the sinner who finds grace in Jesus Christ, the value of family, but also the stark, disillusioned complicated view of the real world. The script here is top notch, where characters banter their way through personal issues but also reveal details of the plot almost on the side, up until Clint Eastwood cuts to the…
Any plot about a man trying to saving another human life however immoral he may be, is a fair watch.
A fairly standard, by the book, crime drama. One of Eastwood's lesser films to be sure.