J Edgar is a film that was always going to appeal to me. I find myself perpetually fascinated by American Politics, and I think that American political history is one of the most interesting subjects around. J Edgar Hoover, I knew, was a controversial figure in American History, as head of the FBI he had breached many privacy laws, was known to be heavily anti-communist (In a way that scares me when looking back at the 1950s) and is often joked about as a cross dresser (something that whilst true, is only ever brought up as a joke). What I wasn't as aware of were the positive attributes he possessed. I did not realise, for example, that J Edgar Hoover was arguably the driving force behind the modernisation of policing in America. But herein lies one issue I went into J Edgar with. After The Iron Lady totally paved over any of the controversial aspects of Margaret Thatchers life, I did worry that J Edgar would give Hoover the same treatment.
In a way it does, as the story is told from Hoover's recollection of events, it shows lots of scenes with Hoover battling out his mission with those above him, constantly winning and moving forward. However, the film doesn't totally shy away from his negative aspects, such as his fear of being his true self (indicated through his relationship with Clyde, who it is clear from the beginning is more than simply his right hand man, the two are obviously in love, a fact that Hoover will never admit. It is through Clyde that we get a confrontation with Hoover about his recollection of events, where we have spent the entire film looking at someone who is basically portrayed as always right and misunderstood, toward the end of the film it is revealed that much of what we have witnessed was either a misrepresentation of the truth, or a fallacy in its whole. This raises another problem I had with the film. To include such a revelation right at the end of the film almost feels like a cheat, why bother leading us one way with the character only to reveal that it wasn't all true at the end, and only briefly brush us up on a few of the truths. It was very unsatisfying.
In terms of structure the film is weak, Clint Eastwood is usually a strong director, though his last few films haven't been his strongest, Hereafter was a complete mess saved only by its central performances. Whilst J Edgar isn't anywhere near as bad as that, it does suffer from similar flaws, sometimes the sequencing in the film can get a little confusing, and some scenes don't really need to exist. However, the central performances again, save this film, as Leonardo DiCaprio proves once again that he is one of the finest actors working in Hollywood today. I used to dismiss him as a pretty boy, however, since he started to work with Scorsese I have seen a huge change in DiCaprio, and he is very talented indeed, this role arguably being one of his strongest. A supporting cast which compliments his performance is also here, with Judi Dench as his mother really standing out.
I feel as though from this film I learned a lot about the man J Edgar Hoover, rather than simply the myth of the man. I don't know just how much of it was accurate, and perhaps the film was a little too sympathetic toward a man who betrayed the very thing he was trying to protect in his quest to save America, a man who persecuted all left wing leaning people with the same brush as those who were violent, a trend you can worryingly see in American right wing groups with their victimisation of Islamic institutions. But I enjoyed this film, despite my misgivings. It's deeply flawed in structure, but the acting is superb, and the story just good enough.
No comments:
Post a Comment