Chris Beaumont
beaumont@ifa.hawaii.edu
2680 Woodlawn Drive
Honolulu, HI 96822
Publication Date: March 2007
Calvin College Uncompressed
Chris Beaumont
Deconstructing (Dirty) Harry
Clint Eastwood’s bleak landscapes
Arguably, the past half decade has not seen a filmmaker who has attracted as much acclaim and criticism as Clint Eastwood. Now in his seventies, the once renegade vigilante figure of Hollywood Westerns has undergone a significant change in tone. Favoring somber, reflective films, Eastwood has directed four pivotal movies in the past four years: the Boston crime saga Mystic River (2003, Best Picture nominee), boxing picture Million Dollar Baby (2004, Best Picture), American Iwo Jima story Flags of Our Fathers (2006), and it’s Japanese-language companion Letters from Iwo Jima (2006, Best Picture nominee). Eastwood also appeared in front of the camera as a supporting actor in one of the films, composed the music for three, and produced all four.
Eastwood rarely receives mild reviews. Speaking of Eastwood’s use of boxing conventions in Million Dollar Baby, New York Times critic AO Scott writes that Eastwood’s technique is “like the chord changes to a familiar song - the kind of standard that can, in the hands of a deft and sensitive musician, be made to yield fresh meanings and unexpected reservoirs of deep and difficult emotion.” Salon.com critic Charles Taylor describes the same film as “a compendium of every cliché from every bad boxing melodrama ever made.” A similar schism is found in prominent reviews of all of the above films. Among Christian audiences, Eastwood has attracted even more controversy for his morally complicated tales involving euthanasia, suicide, and murder as revenge.
If, as the contributors to this magazine believe, popular elements of our culture deserve attention, than we ought to take a serious look at Clint Eastwood’s recent films. We ought to ponder why these films receive such varied responses, what they are trying to say, and to what degree they are justified in saying this. It is with this motivation that I write. As these films tend to polarize audiences, I ought to reveal my own biases. I am very much a fan of the recent Eastwood projects. As much as appropriate, I will present a balanced discussion of these films. While my conclusion is that Eastwood’s recent works border on masterpiece, what I say will be worth consideration even if you don’t share my opinions. This is fitting with the idea that discernment moves beyond labeling art as good or bad and instead focuses broadly on its intent, content, and effect.
Most interesting about reactions to Eastwood’s films is that both his highest praise and fiercest criticism regard a common set of stylistic and thematic elements. First, as alluded to above, Eastwood heavily incorporates mainstream Hollywood conventions in his films. In his WWII movies, for example, the enemy’s face is rarely seen (think of the Germans in the opening scene of Saving Private Ryan). In Million Dollar Baby, the main character is a determined, overage and underdog boxer (think Rocky). The main character in Mystic River is an ex con who takes justice into his own hands (think The Godfather). Eastwood’s use of conventions is almost certainly because the director himself is the product of the Hollywood formula. For two decades, Eastwood played the role of Western hero and recluse vigilante almost exclusively. If Eastwood borrows from Hollywood norms, it’s because he’s been there, and these movies are as much commentaries on Hollywood storytelling as they are Hollywood stories. Supporters of Eastwood’s work applaud his ability to make original, compelling films from these conventions – a way of renewing and invigorating the mainstream.
Second, Eastwood’s recent works take an unusually quiet and unassuming look at topics which are traditionally presented sensationally. Letters from Iwo Jima, for example, while at times a bloody action film, is more often an intimate look into the human aspects of those who have become wartime statistics. Eastwood aesthetically reinforces this restrained ambiance in two main ways. Visually, these films favor muted, washed out greens and grays, and heavily use shadows to obscure faces and scenery. Furthermore, Eastwood’s scores are minimal, often featuring only one or two instruments.
The motivation for and impact of this style lies in the themes of these films. More than anything else, Eastwood’s recent films focus on the way in which humans react to hopeless situations. The main character in Mystic River, for instance, must confront his daughter’s murder and decide how to respond to the man whom he believes is her murderer. The most controversial of his films, Million Dollar Baby follows Frankie, a boxing trainer who grapples with his paraplegic boxer’s request to euthanize her. In this context, the films’ subdued feel draws attention away from the events of the movies and towards the characters forced to make impossible decisions.
There are two main criticisms which are worth consideration. The first is one common to reviews which are misleadingly labeled as “Christian reviews.” Such reviews focus almost exclusively on family friendliness to the exclusion of artistic or intellectual considerations (which are not only compatible with but essential to discernment). These reviews tend to infer from Eastwood’s quiet attitude towards dark topics a sympathy for immoral behavior. Frequently, they note the end of Eastwood’s films, which typically involve a character committing an act which leads to personal or communal destruction.
While it is true that these films are dark and that their characters commit actions which many label immoral, I feel it is inappropriate to label the films or filmmaker similarly. There exists ample evidence to suggest that the films are not meant to convey approval of certain actions but rather to consider their motivation and cost. For example, the plots in these films evolve slowly to give ample time to develop characters and situations. Thus, the climaxes of each movie present nuanced characters in deep personal and spiritual crises (many of Eastwood’s characters are Catholic). These dilemmas are too intentionally complicated to suggest that the filmmakers are supporting any simple moral statement. More accurately, the morally ambiguous content in Eastwood’s films communicates the difficulties inherent in rigidly categorizing events as good or bad. Such a reading is supported by the fact that Eastwood withholds direct criticism of his characters while simultaneously portraying the destruction of their behavior. As a comparison, a forensic photographer documenting a murder scene is not accused of harboring pro-homicidal sympathies; rather, he is credited with accurately capturing the consequences of crime.
A second criticism is that Eastwood’s films, while aspiring to be tragedy, are poorly executed and superficial. Those who take this opinion of Eastwood’s films tend to label his work as melodramatic and as borderline propaganda. Critic Ross Douthat goes as far as to label his movies as a kind of voyeurism that allows “a millionaire director and his Bobo audience to wallow in the miseries of working-class life.”
The evidence that these critics present has some merit. A common objection is these films sacrifice narrative accuracy in an attempt to create drama. The events that follow Maggie’s paralysis and motivate the Million Dollar Baby’s climax, for example, are improbable examples of medical malpractice (one such example involves bedsores which lead to the amputation of Maggie’s leg). The interpretation of these oversights is that, in Eastwood’s eagerness to document horrible situations, he ignores the prerequisite verisimilitude required to make such situations worthy of consideration.
While I concede the shortcomings in the Eastwood narratives, I disagree with the conclusion of critics who dismiss these films on this account. It is inappropriate to assume Eastwood cares more about sensationalizing drama than about exploring issues (the ultimate criticism of those who label art as melodramatic or voyeuristic). Again, Eastwood’s highly restrained aesthetic and slowly unfolding stories suggest a deep interest in narrative and thematic development, and less of an interest in visceral satisfaction. Similarly, it is unfair to accuse Eastwood of creating propaganda pieces. While it is true that these movies portray a take on events that liberal audiences are more likely to share than conservative audiences (a phenomenon not addressed here is how strongly and why Eastwood’s support correlates with political persuasion), to label the films as liberal propaganda implies that these films are more presumptuous than they are. As I argue above, Eastwood’s films ought not to be read as advertisements for particular moral views, but rather as explorations of the complicated moral landscape of the modern world. In other words, Eastwood’s films are examinations of worlds and worldviews, and not promotions of any singular bias.
Ultimately, Clint Eastwood’s recent films have a great deal to offer the discerning viewer. It is rare in modern, commercial cinema to come across films with as much sense of purpose and deliberate consideration as these. Furthermore, while there are faults in these films, they do not outweigh the many elements which make the works worth watching. The viewer who takes time to consider these films will find the degree of aesthetic and mental evocation that marks a great collection of art.
Works Cited
Douthat, Ross. "Film: Saint Clint - Ross Douthat reviews Flags of Our Fathers." The National Review 20 Nov. 2006. 30 Mar. 2007. http://www.nationalreview.com .
Scott, AO. "3 People Seduced by the Bloody Allure of the Ring." The New York Times 15 Dec. 2004.
Taylor, Charles. "Million Dollar Baby." Salon 2004. 30 Mar. 2007 www.salon.com .
Calvin College Uncompressed
Chris Beaumont
Deconstructing (Dirty) Harry
Clint Eastwood’s bleak landscapes
Arguably, the past half decade has not seen a filmmaker who has attracted as much acclaim and criticism as Clint Eastwood. Now in his seventies, the once renegade vigilante figure of Hollywood Westerns has undergone a significant change in tone. Favoring somber, reflective films, Eastwood has directed four pivotal movies in the past four years: the Boston crime saga Mystic River (2003, Best Picture nominee), boxing picture Million Dollar Baby (2004, Best Picture), American Iwo Jima story Flags of Our Fathers (2006), and it’s Japanese-language companion Letters from Iwo Jima (2006, Best Picture nominee). Eastwood also appeared in front of the camera as a supporting actor in one of the films, composed the music for three, and produced all four.
Eastwood rarely receives mild reviews. Speaking of Eastwood’s use of boxing conventions in Million Dollar Baby, New York Times critic AO Scott writes that Eastwood’s technique is “like the chord changes to a familiar song - the kind of standard that can, in the hands of a deft and sensitive musician, be made to yield fresh meanings and unexpected reservoirs of deep and difficult emotion.” Salon.com critic Charles Taylor describes the same film as “a compendium of every cliché from every bad boxing melodrama ever made.” A similar schism is found in prominent reviews of all of the above films. Among Christian audiences, Eastwood has attracted even more controversy for his morally complicated tales involving euthanasia, suicide, and murder as revenge.
If, as the contributors to this magazine believe, popular elements of our culture deserve attention, than we ought to take a serious look at Clint Eastwood’s recent films. We ought to ponder why these films receive such varied responses, what they are trying to say, and to what degree they are justified in saying this. It is with this motivation that I write. As these films tend to polarize audiences, I ought to reveal my own biases. I am very much a fan of the recent Eastwood projects. As much as appropriate, I will present a balanced discussion of these films. While my conclusion is that Eastwood’s recent works border on masterpiece, what I say will be worth consideration even if you don’t share my opinions. This is fitting with the idea that discernment moves beyond labeling art as good or bad and instead focuses broadly on its intent, content, and effect.
Most interesting about reactions to Eastwood’s films is that both his highest praise and fiercest criticism regard a common set of stylistic and thematic elements. First, as alluded to above, Eastwood heavily incorporates mainstream Hollywood conventions in his films. In his WWII movies, for example, the enemy’s face is rarely seen (think of the Germans in the opening scene of Saving Private Ryan). In Million Dollar Baby, the main character is a determined, overage and underdog boxer (think Rocky). The main character in Mystic River is an ex con who takes justice into his own hands (think The Godfather). Eastwood’s use of conventions is almost certainly because the director himself is the product of the Hollywood formula. For two decades, Eastwood played the role of Western hero and recluse vigilante almost exclusively. If Eastwood borrows from Hollywood norms, it’s because he’s been there, and these movies are as much commentaries on Hollywood storytelling as they are Hollywood stories. Supporters of Eastwood’s work applaud his ability to make original, compelling films from these conventions – a way of renewing and invigorating the mainstream.
Second, Eastwood’s recent works take an unusually quiet and unassuming look at topics which are traditionally presented sensationally. Letters from Iwo Jima, for example, while at times a bloody action film, is more often an intimate look into the human aspects of those who have become wartime statistics. Eastwood aesthetically reinforces this restrained ambiance in two main ways. Visually, these films favor muted, washed out greens and grays, and heavily use shadows to obscure faces and scenery. Furthermore, Eastwood’s scores are minimal, often featuring only one or two instruments.
The motivation for and impact of this style lies in the themes of these films. More than anything else, Eastwood’s recent films focus on the way in which humans react to hopeless situations. The main character in Mystic River, for instance, must confront his daughter’s murder and decide how to respond to the man whom he believes is her murderer. The most controversial of his films, Million Dollar Baby follows Frankie, a boxing trainer who grapples with his paraplegic boxer’s request to euthanize her. In this context, the films’ subdued feel draws attention away from the events of the movies and towards the characters forced to make impossible decisions.
There are two main criticisms which are worth consideration. The first is one common to reviews which are misleadingly labeled as “Christian reviews.” Such reviews focus almost exclusively on family friendliness to the exclusion of artistic or intellectual considerations (which are not only compatible with but essential to discernment). These reviews tend to infer from Eastwood’s quiet attitude towards dark topics a sympathy for immoral behavior. Frequently, they note the end of Eastwood’s films, which typically involve a character committing an act which leads to personal or communal destruction.
While it is true that these films are dark and that their characters commit actions which many label immoral, I feel it is inappropriate to label the films or filmmaker similarly. There exists ample evidence to suggest that the films are not meant to convey approval of certain actions but rather to consider their motivation and cost. For example, the plots in these films evolve slowly to give ample time to develop characters and situations. Thus, the climaxes of each movie present nuanced characters in deep personal and spiritual crises (many of Eastwood’s characters are Catholic). These dilemmas are too intentionally complicated to suggest that the filmmakers are supporting any simple moral statement. More accurately, the morally ambiguous content in Eastwood’s films communicates the difficulties inherent in rigidly categorizing events as good or bad. Such a reading is supported by the fact that Eastwood withholds direct criticism of his characters while simultaneously portraying the destruction of their behavior. As a comparison, a forensic photographer documenting a murder scene is not accused of harboring pro-homicidal sympathies; rather, he is credited with accurately capturing the consequences of crime.
A second criticism is that Eastwood’s films, while aspiring to be tragedy, are poorly executed and superficial. Those who take this opinion of Eastwood’s films tend to label his work as melodramatic and as borderline propaganda. Critic Ross Douthat goes as far as to label his movies as a kind of voyeurism that allows “a millionaire director and his Bobo audience to wallow in the miseries of working-class life.”
The evidence that these critics present has some merit. A common objection is these films sacrifice narrative accuracy in an attempt to create drama. The events that follow Maggie’s paralysis and motivate the Million Dollar Baby’s climax, for example, are improbable examples of medical malpractice (one such example involves bedsores which lead to the amputation of Maggie’s leg). The interpretation of these oversights is that, in Eastwood’s eagerness to document horrible situations, he ignores the prerequisite verisimilitude required to make such situations worthy of consideration.
While I concede the shortcomings in the Eastwood narratives, I disagree with the conclusion of critics who dismiss these films on this account. It is inappropriate to assume Eastwood cares more about sensationalizing drama than about exploring issues (the ultimate criticism of those who label art as melodramatic or voyeuristic). Again, Eastwood’s highly restrained aesthetic and slowly unfolding stories suggest a deep interest in narrative and thematic development, and less of an interest in visceral satisfaction. Similarly, it is unfair to accuse Eastwood of creating propaganda pieces. While it is true that these movies portray a take on events that liberal audiences are more likely to share than conservative audiences (a phenomenon not addressed here is how strongly and why Eastwood’s support correlates with political persuasion), to label the films as liberal propaganda implies that these films are more presumptuous than they are. As I argue above, Eastwood’s films ought not to be read as advertisements for particular moral views, but rather as explorations of the complicated moral landscape of the modern world. In other words, Eastwood’s films are examinations of worlds and worldviews, and not promotions of any singular bias.
Ultimately, Clint Eastwood’s recent films have a great deal to offer the discerning viewer. It is rare in modern, commercial cinema to come across films with as much sense of purpose and deliberate consideration as these. Furthermore, while there are faults in these films, they do not outweigh the many elements which make the works worth watching. The viewer who takes time to consider these films will find the degree of aesthetic and mental evocation that marks a great collection of art.
Works Cited
Douthat, Ross. "Film: Saint Clint - Ross Douthat reviews Flags of Our Fathers." The National Review 20 Nov. 2006. 30 Mar. 2007. http://www.nationalreview.com .
Scott, AO. "3 People Seduced by the Bloody Allure of the Ring." The New York Times 15 Dec. 2004.
Taylor, Charles. "Million Dollar Baby." Salon 2004. 30 Mar. 2007 www.salon.com .