The Twilight of Clint Eastwood (Movie Review)

Insidecatholic.com ^ | 1/09/09 | by Joan Frawley Desmond

[Scotswife]

There were black gang members in the film too. I don’t recall seeing hispanics.

Asians were the minority that the film concentrated on, showing mostly the good side of them.

I believe this is due to the main character’s experience in Korea and his search for redemption.
The war and his job as a Ford assembly worker also instilled prejudice and hostility towards asians.

Once you see the ending you realize why the focus was on asians.

[Scotswife]

“I want to know when — or who — gave permission for Eastwood and Hollywood to debase our culture?”

One thought that struck me was maybe this was partly Eastwood’s response to Spike Lee’s accusations of racism.
It’s almost like he’s saying “you want racism? I’ll give you racism!” - except it shows EVERYONE being racist.

Most of the racist laden diatribe were conversations between friends who enjoyed teasing each other.
And the main character wasn’t exactly supposed to be a likeable guy.

“I think it spoiled the intent of the movie.”

I disagree.
Sometimes you don’t realize how bright the light is, until you’ve seen the darkness.

We cringe at Walt’s words and at first we sympathize with his poor family who cannot feel close to him (who could?)

Then we slowly get to know him better - watch him wrestle with his mortality as he comes to terms with his past.

I thought it was a beautiful thing.

[Mrs. Don-o]

The Cross is contrary to all game theory.

[nahanrac]

There is also a Mexican gang. The story is just set in an Asian neighborhood.

[Mrs. Don-o]

" People forget that Christ ordered his disciples to sell their cloaks and purchase a sword."

Interesting. Here's more context for that, from Luke 22:

He said to them,
"But now if you have a purse, take it,
and also a bag;
and if you don't have a sword,
sell your cloak and buy one.
It is written:
'And he was numbered with the transgressors';
and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me.
Yes, what is written about me
is reaching its fulfillment."
The disciples said,
"See, Lord, here are two swords."
"That is enough," he replied.

Please notice that: (1) He is consciously fulfilling the prophecy that he would be "numbered with transgressors." and (2) He evidently does not mean this for defense via the sword, because if the latter were the case, two swords would not be 'enough.'

Very shortly later, in in the same chapter, the following occurs:

"When Jesus' followers saw what was going to happen,
they said,
"Lord, should we strike with our swords?"
And one of them struck the servant of the high priest,
cutting off his right ear.
But Jesus answered,
"No more of this!"
And he touched the man's ear and healed him.

I am not arguing for total nonresistance here: pacifism is not a requirement of Christian morality, and you can find Scriptures showing the just use of the sword elsewhere in the New Testament (Romans 13).

My point is that this verse from Luke 22 which you cited is evidently not a precept in favor of armed force. St. Peter, understandably, interpreted it that way: but Peter was disarmed by Christ.

[thefrankbaum]

I agree that is the context, however, I must disagree with your point "2" - (2) He evidently does not mean this for defense via the sword, because if the latter were the case, two swords would not be 'enough.'

Earlier - Luke 9:3, 10:4 - Christ commanded that his disciples take nothing. This was during His earthly ministry. However, with the coming of the fulfillment of the prophecy, Christ knew His followers, as missionaries, would need to carry their provisions with them, and they would be faced with adversity. In Luke 22, he changed his commands reflecting this reality. The swords were for self-defense - not defense of Jesus, as that would negate prophecy, but rather defense of the disciples themselves, who would have the world arrayed against them as they spread the Gospel.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"In Luke 22, he changed his commands reflecting this reality. The swords were for self-defense - not defense of Jesus, as that would negate prophecy, but rather defense of the disciples themselves, who would have the world arrayed against them as they spread the Gospel."

This is an interpretation I have never heard before. (Of course, there are a lot of things in this world I have never heard of!)

It seems doubtful to me, though, because though they were under extraordinary pressure from perecution, particularly under Nero, Domitian and Diocletian, the there is no record of any of the early Christians (for the 300 years prior to Constantine) using the sword to defend themselves or their communities.

If I am mistaken about this, please enlighten me.

[thefrankbaum]

This is an interpretation I have never heard before. (Of course, there are a lot of things in this world I have never heard of!)

You can blame those Jesuits for teaching me all this stuff then! :-P I don't time to go dig out some of my documents right now, but I went to the USCCB site to double-check the Scripture after you posted it and footnote 12 comports with my understanding. NAB - Luke 22

[narses]

+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.

Obama Says A Baby Is A Punishment

Obama: “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

[Mrs. Don-o]

Check same page, footnote 13.

[thefrankbaum]

Agreed, but I’ve understood that to refer to the short-term, from the betrayal to the Cruxifiction. The time for carrying arms follows thereafter.

[MaggieCarta]

LOL I lived in Carmel-By-The-Sea, population just over 5,000, some 30 years ago, when Eastward lived there.(I worked a full-time and part-time job to make a living.)

Wow. Did you live there when he was mayor? What about the restaurant or brewery or whatever--I chuckled when I read that he was serving a brewski called "Pale Ale Rider." Well, it was funny to me...

[Mrs. Don-o]

"Agreed, but I’ve understood that to refer to the short-term, from the betrayal to the Cruxifiction. The time for carrying arms follows thereafter."

But they were under direct threat of persecution unto death at many points in the ante-Nicene period. Again I ask (in all sincerity), is there any record of any Apostles or any of Jesus' followers taking up arms to defend themselves or the early Christian communities between the time of the Crucifixion and the time of Constantine?

[thefrankbaum]

I don't have time to go digging right now, but, if I recall correctly, I believe some of Origen's writings may provide a response relative to Christianity and self-defense. If you'd like, I can go searching when I have some more time.

However, with the utmost respect, let me ask you a question - is there a particular reason you are focusing the examinination on the ante-Nicene period? Obviously we have very limited documentation about life during that time period within the Church, and if later interpretation by the Magisterium of Revelation indicates Christians have a moral right to self-defense, why could we not assume that such a right was not understood by the early Church?

Sorry if that is unclear! Mind is starting to get groggy.

[fr_freak]

The ending is definitely a let down for fans of Eastwood stereotype characters. That said it was fitting for the story of the Kolwalski character.

I don't agree that the ending was fitting for the Kowalski character. I just don't see how the route Kowalski chose was any more moral or nearly as effective as the route that Clint fans expected him to go. Also, I didn't like the portrayal that a Korean War vet would feel he had anything to atone for, especially with regards to any particular ethnic groups. Sure, war can get nasty, but failing to go to war can get nasty, also, and I bet most people of North Korea wish that the Americans had fought more, not less. So, why then would Kowalski or any other veteran have anything to atone for, especially to that racial group? It just seemed to have more than a whiff of Hollywood self-loathing.

And, in practical terms, Clint's character chose a course of action that was far less certain in its outcome than the course that we wanted him to take. In other words, just for an ostentatious display of self-sacrifice, Kowalski chose a method that was far less certain to protect his neighbors than the straight-forward method, so how is it more noble?

[Clemenza]

But, it's PC to vilify Asians.

Despite the fact that most Asians, regardless of national origin, are hardcore Dems.

[Melian]

I saw it last night and can’t stop thinking about it. I think it’s a great American film. I don’t want to wreck it for anyone so I won’t say more, but you should definitely see it.

[maine-iac7]

What about the restaurant or brewery or whatever

It was a restaurant/pub called "The Hog's Breath" - with a metal sculpture of a wild boar's head on out front. You entered down a slim alley, coming into a open patio/garden with a brick English Pub on one side and the restaurant on the other. (Lot of Wild boar in Carmel Valley - and good eating.)

And yes, many of the menu items had connections to his movies - like "The Eiger Sandwich" and the "Misty Burger."

It had the best mushroom soup I've ever found in a restaurant. the food was great and I often ate there, particularly when friends came to visit.

One day, as we were having lunch, Clint came in (He had his business/movie office in a bldg behind the pub.) He walks in, wearing the blue and white jacket he wore in the Eiger Sanction, and jeans - and, as I mentioned, well over 6' (I think 6'2")...People were choking on their sandwiches. (Of course, it didn't harm my ego that he'd always give me a nod and a smile with a 'Hi, M..." ;o)

I always suspicioned that he had the restaurant mainly so's he'd have a semiprivate place to eat as well as being able to guarantee good food.

His pub was the first place I ever had a Dos Equis...

He became Mayor after I left. He was well respected and liked - Carmel was only about 5,000. In addition, there was no mail delivery, no street numbers. You went to the p. o. to get your mail - a method that allowed folk to get to know one another. (the p.o. delivered mail to the elderly or infirm via taxi.)

AT one time, a developer was going to buy a famous old nunnery - a large white adobe Spanish structure sitting back on a long acre-worths of lawn and flowers, a landmark from the 1800's.

Developers were preparing to buy it - to tear down for building condos. There was an uproar but, it seemed, nothing to be done, legally, to stop it.

So Clint bought it - to ensure it remained as it was.

He had a little red sports car but his favorite was an old green and white Carmel squad car that he bought on auction. He never pushed for special attention - he'd - well, for example: when the first Star Wars movie hit the theater, he stood in line with the rest of us to get in.

He did a lot of quiet things for people that the general public never knew about.

He lived up in Carmel mainly because he hated the whole Hollywood scene - same with Kim Novak and a few others.

[nickcarraway]

I saw it tonight. I very rarely see or like new movies, but I thought this was fantastic. Surprisingly, it might be the best obe Eastwood was ever in.

[MaggieCarta]

...He did a lot of quiet things for people that the general public never knew about.

Wow! Thank you very much for writing down your wonderful recollections. What great stories!

Thanks, too for affirming the above, that he works quietly, out of the limelight.

Well, he has certainly done his share of supporting the film industry in Michigan. I do hope he will do another in MI, I really want to be an extra...