To my Conservative Friends: Posted on 01/12/2009 4:29:13 AM PST by gopmike.com
To my Conservative Friends:
I have been receiving emails and phone calls over the past week from my Conservative and liberal friends alike saying to me - "Mike - You gotta see Gran Torino!!"
So, in the middle of the snow storm on Saturday night, I trekked out to see the film I had heard so much about...
The film is about a man named Walt Kowalski, a 70-something, cranky Korean War Vet who lives in a mid-west neighborhood that has been steadily changing to a Black/Asian community. Walt, living alone now after his wife's death, is one of the last "white guys" in the community and is an extremely old-school guy with a very, very non-Politically-Correct attitude and he doesn't give a shi- who knows about it.. In fact, I don't think Walt ever heard of the term "politically correct".
Those of you who regularly read my articles know that I ....
(Excerpt) Read more at gopmike.com ...
If I can I will add one. It has elements of The Wild Bunch. A guy who’s time has passed and feels like he is out of place doing the only thing he thinks he can to change the situation..
His best work was with a star revolver, a side by side, Morgan Freeman, Richard Harris, and Gene Hackman as Little Billy.
His best work to date, was “The Unforgiven”
At least till I see this new one.
The main thing I came away with was the way Walt lived the main part of his life in contrast with the last part. He shut out his family (other than his recently deceased wife). He shut out any self-examination or any coming to terms with his Korean experiences. He shut out God.
What he had at the beginning of the movie was his dog, a few old buddies who were a lot like him, and his possessions. The song Cat's in the Cradle came to mind when I saw one of his sons say: 'I'm busy now Dad, call me this weekend.' He failed to connect as a father (he admitted this) and spoiled his kids with material goods who then in turn spoiled theirs.
By the end of the movie, he grew enough to have true friends who loved him in return, some sort inner peace (though not Jesus), and a purpose for both his life and possessions. To me as a Christian it was a compelling story of a partial but not total redemption.
“His best work was with a monkey as a sidekick”
Eastwood or Reagan?
Publius:
Yes - Best Actor Oscar is what I meant - He clearly deserves it as one person on the board put here - I don;t think any other actor could have pulled off such a performance...
GOP Mike
MKJ:
Thx for the comment and I am enjoying FR very much...
Happy New Year to you and yours as well...
GOP Mike
Saw it over the weekend and he’s right, it’s a great film. Completely caught me off guard because I was expecting a completely different story line. And he is right...when it was over there was no ‘mass exodous’ to the exit. People stayed in their seats when it was over. You will not waste your money on this (note: there is considerable profanity is parts of the movie)
I did not finish watching Million Dollar Baby because I did not find Hilary Swank believable as a boxer or Clint believable as a boxing trainer. But Clint always contended that the film did not glorify euthenasia. In fact, he claimed that the decision made by his character nearly destroyed that man.
Is that not accurate?
Been debating about going to see this.(one of our New yrs resolutions is give Hollwood as little money as possible)..Guess I will check it out, see if the message lines up..
I don't know. But, as Roger Ebert once told a class, well, here I'll give you the quote:
Film critic Roger Ebert mentions this in his 2001 book The Great Movies, saying that his students suggested Chance may be walking on a submersed pier. Ebert comments, "The movie presents us with an image, and while you may discuss the meaning of the image it is not permitted to devise explanations for it. Since Ashby does not show a pier, there is no pier--a movie is exactly what it shows us, and nothing more."[1].
He was speaking about the movie "Being There." The premise is simply valid no matter what. Movies are elaborate constructions of images that communicate something. What you see is what you get. The guy killed the disabled lady. How much sophistry you invoke to call it something besides murder is your bag, not mine.
Sophistry? You pulled that one out of thin air!
I simply asked a question based on a comment made by the man who made the movie and acted the role. I did not add one iota. In fact, I stated clearly that I did not finish watching the film.
Sophistry?
Yes, you did. Consider it generically rephrased so as not to imply it was your sophistry. Now that you've raised this point, I am more than curious about the way it's portrayed. I avoided seeing the movie for the very reason that the good solid source who recommended the movie to me brought up that last bit.
I trust in the end, however, Ebert's thesis will hold. As one poster pointed out, some people think it's "conservative" to "control one's life and death." Perhaps that's Eastwood's message: "Oh, it's so painful, look how I suffer, but I did the right thing." I disagree with that.
I'd be interested in hearing your opinion on this point.
I trust in the end, however, Ebert's thesis will hold. As one poster pointed out, some people think it's "conservative" to "control one's life and death." Perhaps that's Eastwood's message: "Oh, it's so painful, look how I suffer, but I did the right thing." I disagree with that.
And I am with you if that was the message portrayed.
I recall Clint being interviewed by Bill O'Reilly. IIRC, he told O'Reilly along the lines of; "...it went against everything that this man believed. And by doing it it nearly destroyed him."
Which kind of begs the question, "What was your point, Clint? That it was his sacrifice? Or is it more subtle, that he bought into the popular lie and that destroyed him?
I'll chat about this with my "source" next week when I see him -- he's extremely perceptive and film savvy.
I live east of Cody near the Big Horn mountains & in fact am watching the sun rise over them now.
You do not want to drive fast on I-80 this time of year, you never know when you’ll hit a patch of ice. I once split my clinic time between Rawlins and Rock Springs, I hated that drive. I also hated the wind and snow in Rawlins where I lived for about 5 years before moving up here.
Have a safe trip today, some of the roads in the Rawlins area were closed yesterday due to blowing snow and ice.
Outstanding film for all the reasons Mike listed — and more.
A MUST SEE FOR SURE!!
And if you’re NOT moved to tears by the final scene (which solved Walt’s and Tao’s problems), check for a pulse.
Walt was more of a Christian than most of the Christians I know in real life.
Have a safe trip today,
Thanks, it was.
You do not want to drive fast on I-80 this time of year,
Agreed. Although there were 6 of us that hooked up from Rock Springs to Rawlins and managed to make the drive interesting.
I had looked at the WY cameras and wx info and things were supposed to be clear, but true to form a storm had turned Rawlins to Casper into an interesting drive of another sort.
WY 220 was snow covered but not real slick and east of Casper as if the snow just turned off. I was grateful the eleven and a half hours Mapleton UT, to Rapid City, was only 30 minutes longer than summer trip time, so I couldn’t complain.
Especially since some of the most difficult, dangerous, and challenging winter road experience in my life has taken place on Wyoming highways.
Saw it yesterday. Interesting to note were lots of men in the theater that were probably 75+.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.