My 'Million Dollar' Answer: Why would a conservative criticize Clint Eastwood's latest work?

The Wall Street Journal Opinion Journal ^ | February 17, 2005 | Michael Medved

[bdeaner]

I respectfully disagree with you that "Million Dollar Baby," as a film, is deceitful. If you watch carefully and read the subtext of the film, the ending is telegraphed from the very beginning. There is tons of foreshadowing.

Perhaps you can blame the marketers for giving the public a false image of the film, but the film itself doesn't mislead the viewer, in my opinion. I didn't know about the ending, but I predicted it within the first 20 minutes of the film.

Don't get me wrong. As I said in a prior post, I disagree with the implied endorsement of assistant suicide. But the film can also be read as an indictment of the absurd brutality of violent sports.

[Nachum]

Good grief people! It was first a short story. A little known work that a classy director took a chance on. Eastwood made it into a film. It was a good film, period.

You don't like it? Fine. Don't see it.

[Andy from Beaverton]

What kind of box-office has it done?
No where near what they expected.

[mcg1969]

Fair enough, FoxInSocks. And in all honesty, my comparison with the Crying Game is a poor one, because the surprise element in that movie is central to its design.

Not so, in my opinion, with Million Dollar Baby. They just flat out didn't market the movie honestly. In fact, in the radio spots I heard, there was no mention whatsoever about the boxer's injury and hospitalization. So even if we take the assisted suicide off the table, it doesn't matter. They marketed this thing as a triumphant tale of a female boxer and her crotchety old trainer.

So I agree with Michael Medved that the problem is not the content itself but the deceptive marketing of it. If I go to a movie I want to be told what it's about in advance. Yes I will forgive a surprise that was central to the enjoyment of the movie but I don't think that case can be made here.

[mcg1969]

You don't like it? Fine. Don't see it.

Now that we know what it is actually about, we can indeed make such a decision for ourselves. I just wish the movie studio would have given us that courtesy.

[sam_whiskey]

I don't think Eastwood should be condemned either---but don't expect me to praise this film. Seems like the same ol' song to me--somebody in Hollywood expresses a controversial opinion--and everyone whines because we DARE express our disagreement.

[republicanequestrian]

Hasn't done as well as "The Aviator," thats for sure. Medved's criticism had nothing to do with the fact it didn't do well in the box office, but Hollywood will refuse that notion. Its a blame game, especially if they can blame a conservative.

[Patton@Bastogne]

.


Quidnunc


Clint Eastwood's Million Dollar Baby ?


One of the best damn movies I've seen in years ... right-up there with the recent Kevin Costner flick "Open Range" ...


I'm a Pro-Life Conservative ... and think that Clint Eastwood's character did the RIGHT THING with his "adopted" daughter ...

Those knee-jerk Christian Pro-Lifers give the rest of us "thinking folks" a bad name ... especially with their "as expected" criticisms of this movie ...





Patton@Bastogne
Free Republic Member since 1998.



General George S. Patton Jr. Website




.

[Richard Kimball]

I heard about some guy in a wheelchair that started a conservative web site, and it was responsible for taking down a major network anchor, and revealing several media hoaxes that could have seriously damaged President Bush. Can't think of his name, offhand. You know who he is?

[Nachum]

What are you talking about? Million dollar baby cost $30 mil to produce and The Aviator cost a $110 mil. Eastwood brought it in for a small budget and guaranteed himself a profitable movie. The last director to do that was John Huston.

[radicalamericannationalist]

"Christopher Reeve was a living example."

Stephen Hawking, anyone? Imagine if the euthanasia lobby had had their way with him.

[lotusblos]

Hey, a movie is a movie and Clint Eastwood makes some of the best. If you need to see the ending you expect, write it yourself and get the movie made. If you can't handle surprises, just stick with Michael Moore, he won't disappoint.

[mcg1969]

Hold on, I'll get it, I'll get it... :)

[mcg1969]

What are you talking about? Million dollar baby cost $30 mil to produce and The Aviator cost a $110 mil. Eastwood brought it in for a small budget and guaranteed himself a profitable movie.

Actually, that depends on whose accountants you talk to :) But I'll bet Eastwood secured some gross points for himself so I imagine he's doing fine.

[radicalamericannationalist]

"I don't think portrayal of an issue equals advocacy."

It all depends on how the issue is portrayed. Works like Uncle Tom's Cabin or Schindler's List portray slavery and the Holocaust. However, one cannot say that they were sympathetic to evils.

[mcg1969]

Those knee-jerk Christian Pro-Lifers give the rest of us "thinking folks" a bad name ... especially with their "as expected" criticisms of this movie ...

I tell you what. I'll send you my brother's address. Go knock on his door, and when he answers, tell him that you think it's alright to enable someone's suicidal tendencies just because they happen to be disabled. When he's done beating the crap out of you, maybe you'll realize he's a parapalegic.

[FoxInSocks]

and everyone whines because we DARE express our disagreement.

Nothing at all wrong with differing opinions -- they make the world go 'round. We do have that free speech thing here.

However, I think a lot of people didn't give the movie a fair shake due to things they'd heard about it.

[Clemenza]

The fact that crap like Meet the Fockers and anything starring Will Smith, the Stepin Fetchit of our time, makes that much money makes me sicker than any movie about mercy killing.

[Electrowoman]

This is not a reaction of knee-jerk pro-lifers. This is an issue that is enraging disabled groups around the country, who belive it sends the wrong message--which is that it's preferable to give up.

I for one, felt completely duped by the film...tons of forshadowing?! So what? So I should paid to see the movie, have figured it out 15 minutes into the film , gotten up and left, gone to the cashier and demanded my money back? FORGIVE those of us who just aren't enlightened film connoisseurs!