Richard Jewell (2019) (1 Viewer)

[TravisR]

Far too many people don't bother, either because they want to watch movies to "turn off their brains", or because they're so eager to embrace the Hollywood narrative that they don't want knowledge of anything that contradicts it.

But those people aren't going to remember the movie beat for beat. At best, they'll remember the broad strokes of the story and not a detail that a screenwriter dreamed up. In the case of this movie, this reporter sex story has garnered far more attention than anything I've seen about the movie so the audience is way more aware that that is fake than, say, when Bohemian Rhapsody depicted Queen reuniting for Live Aid.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Golly, everyone knows Hollywood NEVER engages in polemics or promotes a particular narrative, and of course it NEVER distorts historical reality to fit said narrative.

For sure, it's not a new problem. But I would argue that a movie built around the importance of the truth, the human cost of jumping to conclusions, and the dangers of a compelling but unsubstantiated narrative has a special responsibility in this area that, say, Rocketman does not.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I think this is the 38th movie he has directed. He'll be 90 in May and he just keeps on keeping on. Not every movie is great, but he has definitely been involved with what I think are some of the best movies of all time. He seems to just want to tell a certain side of the story in this one. I will definitely rent it.

TBH, I never thought Eastwood would be this great of a director and it would happen during his senior years.

 

[RobertR]

For sure, it's not a new problem. But I would argue that a movie built around the importance of the truth, the human cost of jumping to conclusions, and the dangers of a compelling but unsubstantiated narrative has a special responsibility in this area that, say, Rocketman does not.

There are a number of other movies that do have "a compelling but unsubstantiated narrative", and do not adhere to the importance of truth, yet many admire them for the aforementioned reasons.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

There are a number of other movies that do have "a compelling but unsubstantiated narrative", and do not adhere to the importance of truth, yet many admire them for the aforementioned reasons.

Once again, though, those movies aren't "built around the importance of the truth, the human cost of jumping to conclusions, and the dangers of a compelling but unsubstantiated narrative".

 

[RobertR]

Once again, though, those movies aren't "built around the importance of the truth, the human cost of jumping to conclusions, and the dangers of a compelling but unsubstantiated narrative".

Those movies claim to BE the truth, while simultaneously ignoring it.

 

[Jeff Adkins]

Once again, no Thursday night showings for an Eastwood film. It doesn't affect me because I can't go tonight anyway, but I'd love to know the reasoning behind this (and the same for The Mule). Maybe it's because Clint is old-school and thinks all movies should open on Friday?

 

[Patrick Sun]

Once again, no Thursday night showings for an Eastwood film. It doesn't affect me because I can't go tonight anyway, but I'd love to know the reasoning behind this (and the same for The Mule). Maybe it's because Clint is old-school and thinks all movies should open on Friday?

That is interesting, though I just went ahead and saw the next level of Jumanji instead last night. May see this tonight, looking at the reserved seating, only 4 tickets reserved so far for the 7pm showing.

 

[Malcolm R]

That is interesting, though I just went ahead and saw the next level of Jumanji instead last night. May see this tonight, looking at the reserved seating, only 4 tickets reserved so far for the 7pm showing.

Well, as you said, since this happened in the Atlanta area most people there are probably sick of it.

I felt the same about Escape From Dannemora. The non-stop press coverage in my area canceled any interest I had in ever seeing a film about it.

 

[Patrick Sun]

I lived through this story since I live in the ATL, but I wonder who is dying to go see this movie? I'd be surprised if it took in more than $20 million on opening weekend.

Evidently, only $5 million in tickets were sold on opening weakend. Damn...

 

[Patrick Sun]

The movie needed a villain or two, so they went with the FBI and the press, both were drawn so broadly and over the top. In the movie, Jewell is his own worst enemy, never taking good advice to heart. But people are like that.

 

[SamT]

The biographical drama marks a near-worst career opening for the prolific director.

 

[Johnny Angell]

Even at 89, Clint Eastwood is still probably the fastest working director in Hollywood.

It's a combination of things. He got his start on television, shooting seven seasons of "Rawhide", so he got used to working at a really fast pace. Directors that moved slow frustrated him his entire career as an actor. He's also been directing films for half a century now. He prepares extensively beforehand, so when he's actually shooting he knows exactly what he wants and exactly how to get it. He doesn't waste time with additional takes once he's got one he's happy with.

OMG, Rowdy Yates is 89? Just put me in the box and shovel the dirt on me.

Blow my post out if I am violating anything. But, I was born and raised in Atlanta, (and still live in the metropolitan area), and the "AJC", formerly known as the "Atlanta Journal-Constitution", is still affectionately called the "Atlanta Urinal-Constipation".
They are currently raising sand about the very thing they did at the time. Even if the movie or book it is based-on, is taking some "artistic license", or embellishment, about the reporter, they supposedly have put a disclaimer in.
It would be another sad day in our great country if a newspaper prevented the release or success of a movie. Wouldn't it?

Is the paper trying to do that? I’ve not read that. If they are trying to clarify what they did, is that wrong to do?

I lived through this story since I live in the ATL, but I wonder who is dying to go see this movie? I'd be surprised if it took in more than $20 million on opening weekend.

I’ve never lived in Atlanta, visits were long ago and brief. I was very interested in this movie till I started reading that it may egregiously inaccurate.

But those people aren't going to remember the movie beat for beat. At best, they'll remember the broad strokes of the story and not a detail that a screenwriter dreamed up. In the case of this movie, this reporter sex story has garnered far more attention than anything I've seen about the movie so the audience is way more aware that that is fake than, say, when Bohemian Rhapsody depicted Queen reuniting for Live Aid.

Yes, today’s audience is aware to some extent. But how about 10 or 20 or 30 years from now and someone watches the movie and takes it for gospel?

 

[TravisR]

Yes, today’s audience is aware to some extent. But how about 10 or 20 or 30 years from now and someone watches the movie and takes it for gospel?

My comment wasn't about the future (though it still applies there), I was talking about audiences of today. When people watch a movie, they remember the broad strokes of the movie and not the specifics. All but the dumbest members of the audience know that a movie based on a true story isn't a documentary.

 

[Johnny Angell]

My comment wasn't about the future (though it still applies there), I was talking about audiences of today. When people watch a movie, they remember the broad strokes of the movie and not the specifics. All but the dumbest members of the audience know that a movie based on a true story isn't a documentary.

My point is that 10 years from now many of those that watch the movie will take for gospel that the reporter slept her way to a story. I believe there are many more people who don’t question the premise of a movie than you think.

 

[steve jaros]

Saw RJ today and enjoyed it. Another good Eastwood film. He's made a lot of them.

 

[Tino]

He's made a lot of them.

Ya think?

 

[steve jaros]

My point is that 10 years from now many of those that watch the movie will take for gospel that the reporter slept her way to a story. I believe there are many more people who don’t question the premise of a movie than you think.

I'm not sure the movie is actually saying she slept her way to the story. IIRC, Jon Hamm tells Wilde that the FBI is investigating RJ before they go off to have sex. You would think in that kind of quid pro quo, the sex would come first.

Plus, we don't actually see them go off and have sex so we don't know, from the movie, if they did or not. In real life, lots of times people say "let's go have sex" and then it doesn't actually happen

 

[David Weicker]

I saw this today and liked it a lot. Some terrific performances.

The opening was slow (but necessary), but once it reached the Park scenes it was good, very good.

However it should probably win an Oscar for the greatest achievement for a 2019 film - getting a large group of millennials to learn and perform The Macarena

 

[Johnny Angell]

In real life, lots of times people say "let's go have sex" and then it doesn't actually happen

Yes, I know this from experience.