Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Entertainment › Movies (Theatrical) › *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

*** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread - Page 4

post #91 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Elliott
I think the majority of his early stuff was "good" but could have been a lot better with a better director who knew how to cut stuff.
I picked up the Dirty Harry Blu-ray set last year and I was surprised by how much more I enjoyed the Eastwood-directed Sudden Impact. I probably haven't seen that movie all the way through since I had the DH laserdisc set and while it's not a great movie, it was much better than I remembered.
post #92 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Foss
Your distinction is a false one. There's no purist distinction to be made between an audience discovering a film for themselves & one where the mindless masses have been allegedly driven to it by a blizzard of hype - at least not in the examples you give. There's always a crossover.
It's not a "false distinction", as confirmed by the fact that you yourself continue to make it, but under different headings ("platforming" vs. general release). And that's fine; it just reflects a different context from the one in which my remarks were initially made.

One of the essentials of the platforming strategy is that the film strike a chord with the small group of critics and viewers to which it's initially shown. If it doesn't, it never makes it beyond the platform release. There are plenty of examples of platform releases that stalled that way, even from the mighty Miramax of old (remember The Shipping News?).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Foss
That you don't perceive any hype or marketing to have been responsible for their success only goes to show just how well those people did their job.
I never said I don't perceive any marketing angle. Nor have I missed the difference between platform strategies today and the pre-internet age. It's not as if platform openings are a new thing. You're making way too much out of a passing reference to Unforgiven.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Foss
Flags was well received critically, so was Changeling, the latter even more so outside the US. Blood Work aside I don't know what your sources are for a statement like '[those] .. are not especially well-regarded films in the Eastwood canon' but the critical & even box office response strongly suggests otherwise. Changeling is well on the way to a $100 million worldwide gross & Flags/Letters were highly placed on almost all Top 10/Films of the Year lists from the major reviewers.
I listed some of my sources previously. What are yours?

I note, BTW, that you conflated Flags with Letters from Iwo Jima, which I didn't mention. The latter did indeed make many critics' top 10 lists. I do not believe the same can be said of Flags, but if someone can point me to a compilation of major critics' top 10 lists from prior years, I'm happy to review it.

As for Changeling, it should ultimately do good business, but your phrasing is pretty strained. It's "well on the way to a $100 million worldwide gross"? Great; Gran Torino is well over that domestically, with foreign just beginning and domestic continuing. Million Dollar Baby did twice that. Mystic River did over $152 million worldwide. Meanwhile Changeling has stalled at less than $36 million domestic after 11 weeks in release ($82 million worldwide), which is still better than the $33.6 million domestic for Flags.

I am not trying to suggest that the caliber of these films equates with their box office, domestic or otherwise, but I didn't pick them at random.
post #93 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Reuben
Like Crawdaddy, I think "most" is an overstatement. Maybe I need to see the film again, but I don't get the complaints about the supporting cast. It's not something I even noticed while watching the film.

Maybe most isn't the best representation of this thread.
Only two or three I guess voiced negative opinions or pointed out negative parts for them in the movie.
Honestly, I thought the part when Thao is yelling at Walt through the screen door was down right awful.
post #94 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

The acting wasn't bad enough to hurt the film too much, just a flesh wound perhaps . It was mostly Thoa. Check the scene where Walt locks him up at the end. I thought the female was mostly good.

Ocassionally the slurs didn't feel natural. Felt over-the-top/forced. If I remember right the construction foreman is an example where it just felt like bs.

Look foreward to watching the Blu-ray because there were many lines missed due to extended laughter.

Liked it quite a bit but I prefer the Unforgiven ending.
post #95 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrettB
Liked it quite a bit but I prefer the Unforgiven ending.

See the ending of GT is one of the few kudos I do give the movie. The Unforgiven ending is too obvious, GT's ending is a sacrifice from a hard man rather than the typical Hollywood ending where everyone good is alive and all the baddies meet their maker.
post #96 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff_Standley
See the ending of GT is one of the few kudos I do give the movie. The Unforgiven ending is too obvious, GT's ending is a sacrifice from a hard man rather than the typical Hollywood ending where everyone good is alive and all the baddies meet their maker.

I've already made my feelings on this movie known much farther upthread (and believe me, I could go on), but as to the ending:

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Maybe it works as a dramatic device for some people, but my lawyer friend thought Clint's idea of going over to the gang's house (and on THEIR lawn) and pretending to pull a gun is a good way to give them a semi-plausible claim of self-defense.
post #97 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian.L
I've already made my feelings on this movie known much farther upthread (and believe me, I could go on), but as to the ending:

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Maybe it works as a dramatic device for some people, but my lawyer friend thought Clint's idea of going over to the gang's house (and on THEIR lawn) and pretending to pull a gun is a good way to give them a semi-plausible claim of self-defense.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I doubt that a gang (all of whom probably have rap sheets that must have some violent crimes on them) is going to be able to justify shooting a 70 year old man 30 times when he had no weapon.
post #98 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

I agree with Travis. Ask your lawyer friend this question from another lawyer of your acquaintance (me):

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
How are the gang members going to prove that Walt pretended to draw a gun? Assuming anyone else saw it (and Walt positioned himself pretty carefully), why would anyone come forward to help them?

So now they have to testify on their own behalf, and given their history, they'd make lousy witnesses on their own behalf. Most defense attorneys wouldn't even put guys like this on the stand, because you can bet that every one of them has one or more prior convictions, all of which gets into evidence if they testify.
post #99 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I am gonna go out on a limb and guess that those guns are not only unregistered, ownership of the bigger ones is downright prohibited. To say nothing of connecting them to house they sprayed earlier in the movie.

And who knows what else is in the gang's house.


--
H
post #100 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Gang members get away with crap all the time but I doubt they'd have a chance here. I think part of the "message" was Eastwood telling people they should speak out against them. I believe there's discussion at the end with the "scared" neighbors standing up, thanks to Walt, and giving their statements turning the members over to police.
post #101 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

What's with the spoiler tags? Did I miss the memo?

In the meantime... Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I have a hard time believing the thugs would see the inside of a prison also. They would get lawyered up with ACLU types, half of Hollywood would be championing their cause and there would be all sorts of witness testimony re: Walt's half a century of racist behavior and most importantly his actions in the final hours before the shooting.
post #102 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

That's just a deeply asinine thing to say. I hope you're happy with your political mudslinging.

--
H
post #103 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

At trial, what would his history as a racist have to do with him being gunned downed in the street while unarmed? A defense lawyer who tried to use Walt's past racist behaviour as a defense for shooting him would be a laughingstock. In fact, the only real racist behaviour he showed was the use of racial epithets. You never ever see Walt perform any racist act beyond the use of a few nasty words. I could just picture a a defense lawyer trying to convince a judge and jury that his clients were justified in shooting Walt because he had a history of using bad words about other races.

Also, regarding his final actions. Who would come forward to testify, on behalf of a gang of murderous thugs, that Walt was planning anything in his last hours?
post #104 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Us white people here might not have a problem with the racist Walt but if you visit other boards there are those who have an issue with it. Many people see the supporting characters as nothing more than stereotypes with the Asian characters needing to be rescued by the "strong white guy". Some have called it cliched or, as Spike Lee said about Eastwood, an old man with an old fashioned mind. The two black guys hanging out in their white beaters in front of the store drinking liquor is one suck scene that is being attacked. I still think the film being overlooked at the Oscar is due to the racist character.

The racial slurs might not hit home with some because a lot of them were done in a comical fashion.
post #105 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Elliott
I still think the film being overlooked at the Oscar is due to the racist character.

But Crash was filled with racist characters.


This is starting to go down an ugly path, here's something to get it back on track.

I may be dead wrong, but didn't the movie tell us that the Hmong keep to themselves and do not go to the police in any type of situation?
If this is the case how did Walt know that the people watching all around would actually go to the police this time and not keep to themselves out of fear of the gangs retaliation?
post #106 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

CRASH was also fake whereas this one isn't. The "hero" of CRASH wasn't someone like Walt throwing out racial slurs left and right. This film is so anti-Hollywood that (I believe) in this thread and others people knew it wasn't going to go anywhere Awards-wise.

I don't see this thread taking an ugly turn because it's the film dealing with these ugly terms. I think we have the right to praise this film to Heaven but others have the right to see things differently. A lot of people aren't happy with the racial slurs, stereotypes and other issues brought up in this film.

As for your question, Walt showing up and standing up to the gangs inspired those around him to do the same. By teaching them to stand up he knew they could help the police.
post #107 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Elliott
CRASH was also fake whereas this one isn't.

?!?!?!?! What? Are you kidding me, how was crash fake? You do realize there are racist people in the world don't you?
I think it's amazing how many people think that crash doesn't represent a real group of individuals, not just you, but a friend of mine said the same thing to me, "Crash isn't real, there aren't really people like that".
And I told him the same thing that I'm going to tell you, I have met every single one of those people in my lifetime, that is absolutely real.
Of course all their lives intersecting may not be real but that's what makes the story interesting.

Also can you link me to an "real" article that talks about an old racist white man who sacrificed his own life in s storm of gun fire so that his new Hmong friend could live his life in peace?

If you meant something different by "Crash was fake, GT was real" I apologize.
post #108 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

I don't want to turn this into a CRASH thread so you can find my full comments and review in its official thread or the Oscar thread from that year. But in short term, I found the film to be so fake that Pamela Anderson would have been embarrassed by it.

That part of the discussion could go back to the silent era or especially the Kramer era of the late 50's and 60's when these issues were a lot stronger. You had "fake" message movies just wanting to preach and then you had "real" message movies wanting to have a real message on something real and not just a made up piece of junk to tide over Hollywood folks. Opinions are going to vary on which films are which but to me GT hit a damn fine nerve with people.

I've read arguments that GT is "fake" because Walt wouldn't have done what he did. I'm not totally convinced he wasn't racist at the end of the movie but I think the laying down of his life was given good reasons as to why he would do it.
post #109 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Elliott
But in short term, I found the film to be so fake that Pamela Anderson would have been embarrassed by it.

LOL.

I'll look for the thread and read your review.
post #110 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrettB
In the meantime... Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I have a hard time believing the thugs would see the inside of a prison also. They would get lawyered up with ACLU types, half of Hollywood would be championing their cause and there would be all sorts of witness testimony re: Walt's half a century of racist behavior and most importantly his actions in the final hours before the shooting.
Yeah, right.
post #111 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff_Standley
If this is the case how did Walt know that the people watching all around would actually go to the police this time and not keep to themselves out of fear of the gangs retaliation?
It's the police who are going to them, because they're investigating a very public shooting. The difference is that this time they're answering the cops' questions. My guess is that's out of respect for what Walt did for Sue and Thao. And the scenes when Walt's in their home show Walt being "adopted" by the family.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrettB
In the meantime... Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I have a hard time believing the thugs would see the inside of a prison also. They would get lawyered up with ACLU types, half of Hollywood would be championing their cause and there would be all sorts of witness testimony re: Walt's half a century of racist behavior and most importantly his actions in the final hours before the shooting.
Just out of curiosity, where did you learn about the criminal justice system?
post #112 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Reuben
I agree with Travis. Ask your lawyer friend this question from another lawyer of your acquaintance (me):

How are the gang members going to prove that Walt pretended to draw a gun? Assuming anyone else saw it (and Walt positioned himself pretty carefully), why would anyone come forward to help them?

So now they have to testify on their own behalf, and given their history, they'd make lousy witnesses on their own behalf. Most defense attorneys wouldn't even put guys like this on the stand, because you can bet that every one of them has one or more prior convictions, all of which gets into evidence if they testify.
I'm the "lawyer friend."

Deadly force is justifiable if you reasonably believe it necessary to protect against death or serious injury. There is no duty to retreat if the assailant is on your property.

Was it reasonable for the gang members to believe Walt might seriously injure or kill them?

We know these things:
-Walt went on to the property a week prior to the shooting and seriously injured one of the residents.
-Walt had been driving around town pointing his hand like a gun and then waiving around a real gun.
-Walt reached into his pocket as if he was going to pull out a gun right before he was shot.

There were, or should have been, many witnesses to Walt reaching into his coat, Walt's assault on one of the gang members (in broad daylight), and his antics with the gun. The defense can subpoena these witnesses to testify under oath.
post #113 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by schmidtt
The defense can subpoena these witnesses to testify under oath.
Admittedly, it's been some years since I worked on the defense of a criminal case. But when I did, we never subpoenaed witnesses to testify under oath unless we were sure they would testify favorably for us, in which case the subpoena was usually just a formality because the witness was cooperative. The people most likely to have witnessed the events you've listed -- particularly the act that might be interpreted as reaching for a gun -- are the least likely to be cooperative and the most likely to say, "I didn't see anything; it was too dark". They are also the most likely to blurt out something about the defendants that a defense attorney would not want the jury to hear.

So while your analysis may be sound in theory (the issue of deadly force and the duty to retreat vary state by state), my point is a practical one.
post #114 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

I'm certainly not a lawyer but I can't see how any attempt to say that a lone, unarmed man in his 70's that was shot probably 30 times by half a dozen (or however many there were) thugs (who probably have previous violent crimes on their rap sheets and may have unregistered guns) was percieved as a threat to them would work as a defense.

I'm not doubting that it's true but no lawyer could get those guys off on that defense.
post #115 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

I'm pretty sure Uzis are illegal anyways so the rap would be more than just unregistered firearms. They'd also mostly be convicted of assault and rape since I'm sure Thao's sister would testify against them and not be afraid of repurcussions since they're already in prison.

So even if you take Clint's fate out of it, they're still going to prison for a long time.

And would there be reliable witnesses who would testify to Clint's previous behavior - beating one of them up, pointing his finger a certain people and pretending to fire, pulling his gun on the street thugs? The defense would have their work cut out for them presenting reliable testimony from reliable witnesses.
post #116 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by schmidtt
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

I'm the "lawyer friend."

Deadly force is justifiable if you reasonably believe it necessary to protect against death or serious injury. There is no duty to retreat if the assailant is on your property.

Was it reasonable for the gang members to believe Walt might seriously injure or kill them?

We know these things:
-Walt went on to the property a week prior to the shooting and seriously injured one of the residents.
-Walt had been driving around town pointing his hand like a gun and then waiving around a real gun.
-Walt reached into his pocket as if he was going to pull out a gun right before he was shot.

There were, or should have been, many witnesses to Walt reaching into his coat, Walt's assault on one of the gang members (in broad daylight), and his antics with the gun. The defense can subpoena these witnesses to testify under oath.


I'm no lawyer, but even I know that is bullsh*t and wouldn't hold up at all.
-Walt pointing his hand was seen by the gang members once, and no one else that would make any difference to a case. You really think the two black youths would be found and questioned?
-The gang members thought Walt was reaching for a gun, that would be an assumption at best and wouldn't be accepted.
-Walt did go to their house and beat up someone, but they had no reason to suspect he would of had a gun with him.
And let's not forget most people do not protect themselves with illegal automatic weapons.
Also The residents watching the situation saw him reach for a lighter, then reach back into his pocket, they would not have guessed it was a gun. You can't guess in court?
post #117 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Hawley
I'm pretty sure Uzis are illegal anyways so the rap would be more than just unregistered firearms.
You've raised an important point. I got curious enough to look up the precise language of the applicable law in Michigan, where Gran Torino is set. Here's the relevant portion, with some key language in bold:

Quote:
(1) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses deadly force may use deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if either of the following applies:

(a) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another individual.
So gang members' use of illegal firearms would not be just a side issue.

As I mentioned before, this varies from state to state. The Model Penal Code, which was supposed to help bring uniformity to state law (and was only partially successful), would limit this sort of "no duty to retreat" to an attack inside the dwelling. Many states don't accept that limitation, and Michigan appears to be one of them.
post #118 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Reuben
You've raised an important point.
Hey! That's what *I* said but no one cared! WTF?

--
H
post #119 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holadem
Hey! That's what *I* said but no one cared! WTF?
My apologies. I forgot that you'd mentioned it earlier, before someone raised the "duty to retreat" issue.

We always end up in these hypertechnical discussions, but the fact is that you can't know for sure everything that happens after "The End". To me, the true conclusion of Gran Torino happens at the funeral, and for that I don't need a law book.
post #120 of 125

Re: *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread

Sorry about hijacking your point Holadem.

Good point about linking their earlier attack on the house. I'm sure they'd be able to match one of the about a thousand bullets found on the scene with the uzis they used on Clint.

I'm pretty sure showering a person's house, especially knowing there's people in there, constitutes attempted murder. It would also be property damage.

So rape, assault and battery, property damage, possession of illegal firearms, attempted murder - even if the defense could convince the jury they acted in self-defense, they'd still go to prison for a long, long time.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Movies (Theatrical)
Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Entertainment › Movies (Theatrical) › *** Official GRAN TORINO Discussion Thread