[ChinaGotTheGoodsOnClinton]

Well, I've been waiting for someone else to post, but since no one else is going to allow me.

I know FREEPERS are willing to give Mr. Eastwood a pass because he once voted republican or because he is an economic conservative.

But to me issue of life trumps politics any day, and I'll never forgive "Dirty Harry" for doing a number on the Catholic Church and a bait and switch for his pro-euphanasia film Million Dollar Baby.

I've had FREEPERS tell me, well all the catholic details were simply there because it is based on a anti-Catholic story. To which I say Micheal Moore's movie was only Bush bashing because it was based on his screenplay.

[Irish Rose]

"Sometimes you can tell in seconds that a performer has no talent -- think Sean Combs, Jennifer Lopez, Ben Affleck."

Ouch. So what, are these people incredibly attractive? I've never seen a movie with any of them in it, but I believe that Lopez and Affleck are big-name actors. They're so famous that I, culturally disconnected citizen, recognize their names.

[Names Ash Housewares]

I like his old stuff, Josy Wales, Man with no name films, some of the Dirty Harrys. Thats about it.

[madprof98]

It isn't just the Catholic Church that has a problem with this film. In fact, the Church doesn't have ENOUGH of a problem with it, as far as I'm concerned. A very favorable review of the film appeared in the Catholic paper here in Atlanta a couple weeks back. Last week, they printed my response to that review:

Having failed to convince the public that killing babies in the womb is courageous and compassionate, American devotees of the Culture of Death  have now trained their propaganda guns on the elderly and the disabled.  What Jane Wilson called an "unsettling turn" in Clint Eastwood's "Million Dollar Baby" is in fact a cinematic endorsement of euthanasia. 

Last month the National Spinal Cord Injury Association accused Eastwood of a "disability vendetta," describing the last scene of his film as a "brilliantly executed attack on life after a spinal cord injury." The group's chief executive said Eastwood was using the "power of fame and film to perpetuate his view that the lives of people with disabilities are not worth living."  The disability-rights group Not Yet Dead has picketed "Million Dollar Baby"  because, as one of its reviewers argued,  the film "plays out killing as a romantic fantasy and gives emotional life to the `better dead than disabled' mindset."

As the USCCB review of the film indicates, because of the artistic power of the film "our sympathies and humane inclinations may argue in favor of such misguided compassion, but our Catholic faith prohibits us from getting around the fact that, in this case, the best-intended ends cannot justify the chosen means: the taking of a life."

It hardly seems coincidental that such a film is coming out at the same time self-styled progressives are demanding that the state of California lift its ban on doctor-assisted suicide.  As the Terri Schiavo case so sadly illustrates, the Catholic Church is one of the few institutions in this country willing to take a stand for those whose lives depend entirely on the care of others.

Jane Wilson noted with approval that the Hollywood elite loved "Million Dollar Baby."  She did not mention that this is the same elite that rejected "The Passion of the Christ" as overly violent and propagandistic.  Not did she point out that our bishops have given "Million Dollar Baby" a rating of O - Morally Offensive.  I think Catholic readers have a right to expect greater moral clarity in the archdiocesan paper, even in the film reviews.

[satchmodog9]

we need some Hillary Swank pictures. Please, no Crusty pics of the other Hillary.

[Darkwolf377]

It's a movie. It's not an actual murder (which I believe euthanasia is, for all the FReeper busybodies). Saying one's against this movie for that is like the libs who think "feeling" something about an issue is equivalent to actually doing something about it. Same thing here.

See it, don't see it, no one else cares. But judge it as a movie, not as a pro-euthanasia screed, because if it were that there would be no drama in the decision--if he's doing something the movie's point of view says is a good, right thing, why is it shown as a dramatic decision?

"My dear, it's only a movie. Don't take it too seriously."--Alfred Hitchcock

[stevem]

(That Oscar may have been a payoff for Robbins' years of leftwing political agitation.) Mystic River, a murder mystery set in Boston, was good, but not as good as its press. Its script, by the usually top-notch Brian Helgeland, was full of red herrings, and contained a scene involving the suspect (Tim Robbins) that, taken in isolation was great, but which contradicted everything else we were shown about the character. Typical for Eastwood's movies, however, the acting was uniformly excellent.

I have seen many of the movies cited in this review. Beyond Million Dollar Baby let me mention one. Mystic River was, I thought, interminable. I thought Robbins did a decent job in it. Sean Penn proved for the latest of a long line of parts that he doesn't know the first thing about acting, but he is quite the emoter. He also proved he can inhale fiercely through his nasal pasages. That's about it.

I thought Million Dollar Baby was well worth the time and money. It didn't make me cry. I didn't walk away feeling any better about euthanasia or anything close to it.

I went to it because my wife and daughtter wanted to see it. I normally don't care for boxing movies and never made it past about Rocky XXII or something like that. Female boxers do even less for me. I thoroughly planned to hate the movie.

Morgan Freeman was superb, as always. Clint Eastwood was also superb as a multi demensional character. I even liked the Hilary Swank character. I went to the movie planning to hate it and came away recommending it.

[thegreatbeast]

I agree with Stix far more than I disagree with him but he digresses quite a bit from Million Dollar Baby. How can an actor be a life force as he would have you think of DeNiro? It is a silly appellation to hang on an actor.
Clint Eastwood is an amazingly complex guy; I really admire him and his work but what people are saying about him and his latest film dismays me. It reminds me of what is simultaneously happening to Tom Wolfe. Too many people, against all they have ever seen, expect to see an artists' career as forever ascendent. Recently I saw a symposium on Wolfe's Charlotte Simmons on C-SPAN where some of the participants criticized him for conjuring up a fictitious take on modern college life. Perhaps Charlotte Simmons isn't the priceless gem that The Right Stuff was, or Million Dollar Baby isn't the work of art that Unforgiven was but why let that disturb your appreciation of what these two genuine auteurs are offering us? Yes, these two elderly men may have lost a few miles off their fastballs but they still possess enough finesse to get the batters out.

The Oscars can't be taken seriously. My only interest in them is to ogle the comely young actresses doing the red carpet bit.

[Kirkwood]

Some FReepers seem to confuse the quality and skills of acting, directing, writing, etc with the message of the film itself. I can be impressed with the quality of a film and recommend it even if the message is one that I totally disagree with. Films that make someone think about their own convictions are usually good films to see no matter what the message might be. So I have no problem with a film like MDB, because in my mind it validates my position that these characters made morally wrong decisions. On the other hand, a film like F911 was pure crap because it was based on lies and distortions of historical facts rather than opinion. While I can tolerate liberal opinions on the screen, I can't stomach deliberate lying.

[afraidfortherepublic]

I didn't know anything about the pro-euthanasia message in this film but made the conscious decision NOT to see it because any picture about women getting socked in the face for a living (even if it is willingly) does nothing for me.

Zip, zilch, nada!

Everyone should go see "Beyond the Sea". Now THAT is a good movie.

[Question_Assumptions]

Frankie: Oh, it's the same old, "one God-three God" thing.

Father Horvak: Frankie, most people figure out by kindergarten that it's about faith.

Frankie: Is it sort of like snap, crackle, and pop, all rolled into one big box?

Gotta love those straw man debates in movies. Ever see a shamrock, Clint? Next St. Patrick's day, ponder how he explained the Trinity to the Irish.

[Cicero]

Nicholas Stix is clearly a moral idiot. Clint Eastwood has made a great many movies that are terrific, and profitable as well. "Bridges of Madison County," which he thinks should have won numerous awards, certainly wasn't one of them. It was a commercial success but a moral failure, a piece of dimestore trash.

"Million Dollar Baby" is also trash. It may very well make a lot of money, but morally speaking Clint Eastwood might as well have played the part of an abortionist or a Nazi euthanasia freak.

[paleocon patriarch]

I've seen all five "best Picture" nominees and Million Dollar Baby is, hands down, the best picture. Not as good as Passion of the Christ though.

Passion of the Christ will still be viewed as a classic in 100 years. Million Dollar Baby will be just another good old movie.

[Zack Nguyen]

That quote from the movie about the Trinity is so trite. Why is it in these movies that no one ever defends the faith effectively? Because that's the point of the movie.

No, I'll not be seeing "Million Dollar Baby."

[andysandmikesmom]

Well, for myself, I dont rely on anyone elses idea of how good or bad, a movie may be....I might watch a few reviews of it on the TV...may read a few reviews of it in the newspaper...may talk to a few people who have actually seen the movie...but in the end, I make up my own mind, as to whether or not I wish to see a movie...

Those folks who come on here, and give us their own biased opinion of the movie(often it seems, they have not even seen the movie) and rag on what the movie purports to push forth as an agenda, are frankly a waste of time to me(and then of course, some of them try to say they are trying to save us from wasting our money on that movie)....

Because to me, reviews of the movie, other peoples opinion of the movie(I only consider the views of people who have actually seen the movie) are basically just loose guidelines...Perhaps I am saying this badly, but what I mean, is that reviews and other peoples opinions about a movie are given a modicum of consideration...then I decide for myself...I would never let someone else try to decide for me, whether or not I would like to see a movie, or whether or not I am wasting my money to see a movie...I will make my own decisions, and never based on someone elses opinion...

I have to agree with those here, who are saying, that a movie, is just a movie after all...and those movies which may have issues, and themes which are considered to be hot button issues, can and do and should provoke conversation, can and do and should make us examine and re-examine our own biases on the position taken in the movie...

And often I can watch a movie, whose conclusion or ending I may find directly in contradiction to my own beliefs, and yet if the acting and directing and such are well done, I can still appreciate the movie...and Clint Eastwood, Hillary Swank, and especially Morgan Freeman, are three fine actors...

I am definitely against euthanasia...but because Clint Eastwood in his character role, actually commits euthanasia, that is not a reason to keep me from seeing this movie...I am able, as are most adults, to appreciate a fine film, while perhaps disagreeing with the outcome of the film...

[YaYa123]

I'm happy to read a movie review of Million Dollar Baby, but I have 1 strict rule about movies.

Avoid Boxing Movies

[jordan8]

Wymyn boxers are creepy, who'd want to watch a film about one?

[Sir_Ed]

What a touching review...of course, he forgets to mention that this so-called "Catholic" ends up murdering his protoge because she becomes paralyzed, and I guess is then transformed into a "useless eater."

Thank God Joni Eriksen Tada and Chris Reeves didn't have that wonderful "Catholic" guy as their best friend, else they'd have been murdered, too, right?

Ed

[Rummyfan]

Baby is a boxing picture, only the fighter is a girl. With "Maggie McNamara," Hilary Swank paints the most intense portrait of a fighter since Robert DeNiro's Jake LaMotta in Raging Bull (1980).

A minor point but the character's name is Maggie Fitzgerald.

You will cry all right (I sure did) but I had problems with the ending. Too many irrationalities..... first and foremost why would such a character as Maggie, so full of life and fight, ask her manager and surrogate father to 'put her down'?