Cannes 2008 - Ch-ch-ch-ch-Changes
When Clint Eastwood’s Changeling was first announced, people wondered if it had anything to do with the 1980 George C. Scott movie The Changeling. It did not, but many sources continued referring to the Eastwood film with ‘The’ in the title.
The French, speaking French as people who live in France are inclined to do, called the film L’Echange. Apparently someone liked the sound of it because now suddenly the film is being called The Exchange, an altogether less confusing but more boring title.
Whatever they end up calling it, Clint Eastwood’s latest is getting great reviews out of Cannes.
Based on a true story, the film stars Angelina Jolie as a mother in 1920s Los Angeles whose son disappears. When he is found five months later in Illinois, she doesn’t believe the boy is really her son. Unfortunately, the system believes it knows better than a boy’s own mother.
Variety’s Todd McCarthy sees thematic echoes of Eastwood’s Mystic River though he finds the new film “more complex and far-reaching.” More encouraging to me is his praise for Angelina Jolie. He compares her performance here with that in A Mighty Heart and says it “hits home more directly due to the lack of affectation - no accent, frizzed hair or darkened complexion, and no attempt to consciously rein in emotion.” I thought Jolie did a terrific job in A Mighty Heart, but as McCarthy acknowledges, it was all lost in the controversy over her darkened skin and accent.
The Hollywood Reporter’s Kirk Honeycutt notes that this is only the second time (after Million Dollar Baby) that Eastwood’s “celebration of the loner who bucks the system” centers on a woman and he’s even more effusive in his praise of Jolie than McCarthy: “Jolie completely shuns her movie star image to play a woman whose confidence in everything she thinks she knows is shaken to its very core. She can appear vulnerable and steadfast in the same moment. This woman has a depth she herself has never explored.”
Jolie is grossly underrated in some corners because of her outspoken nature, her occasionally fruity personal life and because she’s obnoxiously beautiful. Her image has been rehabilitated over the last couple of years though and Changeling/The Exchange appears to continue that trend.
I don’t know though. As enthusiastic as I am about the prospect of a great Angelina Jolie performance, there are too many comparisons to the critically over-praised Mystic River for me to lose the skepticism I have for this movie. With the right subject, Eastwood’s simple, direct style can pay off in a big way. Hopefully this is it.
Of course there were other movies playing at Cannes today, but this was “the big one”. I’ll have more about the others later. Also, for the record, Steven Soderbergh’s Che is playing tomorrow and Charlie Kaufman’s Synecdoche, New York is playing Friday. Both films are under the strictest of LiC blackouts so I’ll maybe toss up some links, but otherwise coverage of these will be subdued.
Filed under: Film Festivals
Related Posts: - ‘Changeling’ to Play Cannes
- ‘Che,’ ‘Changeling’ and ‘Wrestler’ join ‘Class’ at NYFF
- Non-Story of the Hour: Jolie vs. Aniston
- The Watercooler: 11/17/08
- Trailer: Changeling
Is it safe to say that Eastwood’s relationship with critics–or, rather, the critics’ relationship with Eastwood–is at a William Wyler, beginning-at-Dodsworth,-ending-with-Ben-Hur level now? He really has become the elder statesman/critical darling of American cinema today.
I wish he’d loosen up. The Iwo Jima movies were so prosaic, even the Japanese-language one in retrospect. (Once you see Fires on the Plain and The Burmese Harp it really hits you how relatively unsuccessful Letters from Iwo Jima was.)
The Exchange as a title is terribly bland. It literally makes the movie sound like it could be about anything whereas Changeling has an actual, meaty meaning by itself while also having a creepy sound to it. (The George C. Scott movie is pretty cool.)
Yeah, this is why I’m taking the Eastwood praise with a bit of skepticism. I hope he nails it, but I’ll believe it when I see for myself. I have to admit there is a lot to be intrigued about.
Synecdoche, New York.
When I see that, my life will be complete.
Er, doesn’t every new Eastwood directorial effort receive some effusive praise early on these days? I remain adamantly skeptical after his last two and comparing this one in any way to Mystic River doesn’t help.
Hope it’s good.
As for Eastwood, he has had one of the most interesting career trajectories in Hollywood, especially when you consider his on-again, off-again relationships with critics and the Academy.
He starts out in TV (pretty much ending any potential for respected work in 95% of all film careers), then goes on to be the action/western star of the 60’s and 70’s. His career takes a major series of stumbles in the 80’s (anyone recall Pink Cadillac or City Heat) and then he stages comebacks as an actor and director with Unforgiven and as a box office powerhouse with In the Line of Fire and Bridges of Madison County. Then he has a string of misses (True Crime, Absolute Power, Space Cowboys) before reestablishing his Oscar and critical power with Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby.
Now he can do no wrong. Amazing. I can’t think of another actor, director, or actor/director who has pulled off such a varied career and relationship with the media and the public. Scorsese has had his ups and downs, but never the critical lows of Eastwood’s career.
Partly this may explain his critical halo, but after all that he seems like a guy you WANT to like.
Are you going to read the reviews, Nick? Or are you going to go the blackout route?
Cahiers du Cinema has a love affair with Eastwood that is rather amazing. For instance, it’s hard to find any Eastwood film that hasn’t made their yearly top ten in a long time, including True Crime.
The French I think have much to do with how seriousy we take him.
It’s always the French!! (I love them)
Space Cowboys was a surprising hit.
I trust Eastwood for, at worst, something pretty decent. Unfortunately, I’m finding it increasingly hard (I think since Beyond Borders) to see Jolie dissolve into a character. She’s so overexposed, for me. I saw almost nothing of Marianne Pearl in A Mighty Heart. Interesting because I felt like I saw Pitt as Jesse James pretty easily.
Yeah, you’re right Christian. Space Cowboys apparently, as dumb as it may be, was something of a hit.
Swap out Space Cowboys for Bloodwork in my comment above.
While Sean Penn’s performance was overrated in my opinion (screaming really loud about a child’s death = Oscar nomination), I thought Mystic River as a whole was fantastic. At first I was pissed at it, then I was confused, then I developed a begrudging respect for it, until finally I came to love it. This took place over about a month and multiple viewings, and I don’t think there is any other film that has gone through so many revisions in my mind.
While his two previous war flicks were not incredible, they weren’t total clunkers either, failing only because they paled in comparison to his other work. If nothing else, they were incredibly ambitious.
Even if they may be praised too much, both Mystic and Million are wonderful films, jewels in a very full crown. I’m on board for this one, full bore.
I didn’t care for Mystic River and I thought Letters was alright, but the further I get from it the more I agree with Alexander’s take. For me, Flags of our Fathers was an absolute mess. I really disliked that film. A lot.
Mystic River was, for me, at times too dark and depressing to fully connect, but it was well made.
Letters was good, but not Best Pic nom worthy.
Million Dollar Baby was great.
And I will blackout on those two Craig, just like you.
I’m just gonna blackout with Synecdoche. The rest, I’m ok knowing something about, but Kaufman, I REALLY want to go in fresh.
I don’t know if I’ll hold out though. I AM terrible curious. And you know what that did to the cat.
BUT all cats have nine lives, Hedwig…
Well, Mr. Eastwood is a more accomplished filmmaker than an actor, is he not? God, he’d HAVE to be.
joel, if you were to ask Clint about why he’s so revered in the industry after his enormous ups and downs, I think he’d likely attribute it to longevity.
Truthfully, I haven’t seen the majority of his work. It bores me and I really can’t connect to it. But he does have a way with actors.
I thought PLAY MISTY FOR ME was a very good thriller. Can’t really fault it on any level and I found it far more realistic and less glamourized than something like FATAL ATTRACTION. I also liked MILLION DOLLAR BABY and, from the bits and pieces I’ve viewed, MIDNIGHT IN THE GARDEN OF GOOD & EVIL.
Otherwise, NADA.
I loathed Unforgiven, Flags Of Our Fathers (with the exception of ADAM BEACH), Letters From Iowa Jima (though the cinematography was decent and KEN WATANABE was extraordinary) and Mystic River (though SEAN PENN and LAURA LINNEY were fabulous).
The Bridges Of Madison County was a mediocre sobfest. In spite of all that, MERYL STREEP was as powerful and compelling as ever.
I just don’t happen to be an Eastwood aficionado. But that’s me…
Word up on the Adam Beach mention, Miranda. I thought he was fantastic…and…I liked Flags better than Iwo, technical aspects aside. I just thought Flags was a more interesting story, whereas Iwo seemed to be something I’d seen before in different forms.
Danny, I totally agree. I wouldn’t want to sit through either of them again. But if I HAD to, I’d much rather watch Flags again than Iwo.
Though I definitely had more issues with the film than just these specific ones, the killing of the dog and the horse in the latter really made me white hot. Mainly because I felt neither incident advanced the plot in any way and they were totally unnecessary.
I’m an animal lover. That’s my perspective and I’m sticking to it…
Longevity, sure, and probably the fact that Clint is known for respecting his actors plus his crew very deeply. And he seems to be a very nice guy, not some nutty celebrity. Plus he’s Clint Eastwood, quite possibly one of the only actors in Hollywood nearly as tough and cool as some of the characters he has played.
I’m sure all of that factors into it. I’m just surprised how much leeway he’s been given over his long career.
I found Flags and Bridges to be uber-boing.
I find his work to be sincere and bloodless. But he’s Clint fuckin’ Eastwood. He gets more respect now than Woody Allen.
I really wanted to like Flags but the structure, pacing, and characterizations misfired for me. Adam Beach did a fine job, but the decision to go with less well known faces in general and an underwhelming lead in Ryan Phillippe robbed the film of the possible saving grace of enough notable performances. By my reckoning it was an earnest but poorly conceived and executed film. In contrast I found Iwo a well made and touching one which featured several excellent performances. I think there remains a place for films that explore the cultural dynamics and underlying humanity of the Japanese in WWII. Hollywood has a great deal to make up for on that front after decades of depictions showing them as inexplicably brutal and fanatical automatons.
These days, he deserves more respect than Woody Allen, who I’d say is in the biggest trough of his career.
I thoroughly enjoyed Million Dollar Baby, crazy stereotyped hick family and all; I thought Letters was respectable (still need to see those Kon Ichikawa films for comparison), Flags was respectable but severely flawed, and Mystic River was pretty over-rated for me.
I’ll take the worst Woody over the best Apatow. And MATCH POINT, although minor, had vitality and made 90 million bucks. He seems to go in cycles of three. One good film followed by two bad ones.
I would have liked Match Point better if (a) it wasn’t half of Crimes and Misdemeanors bloated into full-movie length, and (b) it didn’t hate women so much.
I liked Mystic River more than some others here. The acting was excellent all round (particularly Tim Robbins), and the story compelling. I found plenty of interest in it. How a character’s fate was sealed by covering up his murderous behavior in a way that fed into the mistaken belief he committed another one. And how all this was in part a consequence of childhood abuse, both for the direct victim and indirect ones. Where the film failed for me, was the lack of more underscored denouncement of Penn’s character. It stuck in my craw and sadly detracted from the whole experience.
you can do it Hedwig. We’ll start a Synecdoche support group.
Chuck has some interesting thoughts on Woody’s career trajectory that I’d hesitate to sum up without him here to correct me, but I’ll do it anyway because that’s how I roll.
You have to admire the guy for continuing to make movies because he likes making movies. For better and sometimes for worse he’s just following his muse and doesn’t appear to be out to please anyone. Though it’s been awhile since he’s made a ‘classic’, I have faith that the drive is still there and that one day the planets will align and he’ll do it again.
VCB doesn’t necessarily sound like one for the ages, but its reception has been solid.
Clint gets a lot of mileage for who freakin cool he was in front of the camera. There were lots of things I liked about Mystic, even much maligned Tim Robbins, but there was enough that sent it off the rails for me…all of which I’ve commented on dozens of times.
I’ll admit that I skipped Million Dollar Baby, which may have been a mistake. I kept putting it off and putting it off and putting it off and then a certain LA Weekly columnist who writes about the business end of Hollywood who will remain nameless (though the name rhymes with Shmicky Shmink) totally spoiled the ending to the movie, suddenly and irrationally in a column that wasn’t even a review of the movie.
It’s funny, everybody I know personally from my non-online, real life, likes The Curse of the Jade Scorpion. I like it fairly well, too. Do any of you good folks?
runs and hides
slithers back
To me, it was the last Woody Allen movie that felt like the older (or younger?) Woody Allen (aside from Match Point’s rehashing of Crimes and Misdemeanors, as pointed out earlier). The hypnotism angle threatens to be a one-joke premise (which is what the blindness gimmick in Hollywood Ending really was) but Woody squeezes some neat scenarios out of it. I thought it was a fairly sweet and innocent riff on late ’30s, early ’40s screwball comedies.
I like the last stretch of Small Time Crooks, with the safe and everything, which plays like a great silent film ala Buster Keaton or Charles Chaplin, but of his films since Sweet and Lowdown the one I’ve actually seen more than once is The Curse of the Jade Scorpion.
I hope V.C.B. is a comeback. If nothing else, there will be Penelope Cruz to ogle and actually appreciate. The general impression seems to be that she steals the show.
Alexander, for what it’s worth, in a recent interview book, Allen himself called “Curse of the Jade Scorpion” his worst movie. He basically said that he ruined the film by casting himself in it. Don’t mean to discourage your opinion, and lord knows Allen has always judged his films in a very particular matter.
I disagree with Woody: for me, Anything Else is running just ahead of Cassandra’s Dream for that title.
Thanks for that bit of information, alynch. Now I know I’m right to like it, considering how off-the-mark Allen’s taste is with regards to his own work. (I’m just partly kidding.)
I agree, Jeff, Anything Else and Cassandra’s Dream–and I’d add Scoop–are competing for the title of Allen’s worst. Hollywood Ending isn’t very far, either.
Going back to Eastwood, I certainly respect him and like him quite a bit. I might even consider myself a fan of his, and I’ve always thought he was a little underrated as an actor, and certainly a screen presence. But he does seem to be considered next to sacrosanct these days, as Joel points out, and it’s kind of interesting in the context of his entire, somewhat circuitous, career.
I have trouble hating Anything Else. Sure the primary Biggs/Ricci plotline doesn’t work at all, but I just get such a kick out of Allen’s supporting turn as the paranoid gun nut. I honestly think that it represents a high point for Allen so far as straight acting goes.