Obviously every Oscar award can have its naysayers, but at the very least this was a Best Picture Nominee and Best Actor (Eastwood) nominee. It's easily one of if not the best movies I saw of that year.
share[deleted]
I agree. Gran Torino was easily the worst movie I saw that year. My first reaction to all the praise was "hmm.. maybe this was a student film.. I guess it's kinda decent if that's the case.." But nope, no mitiating circumstances at all with this movie. Gran Torino make Charles Bronson movies feel like delicate sutble art. Gran Torino is the most ham fisted attempt at edgy retro style revenge flick I've seen EVER. Super awkward acting, a script written by a 5th grader and cinematography reminiscent of the late 70s. And not the good kind of late 70s, I'm talking european erotic comedy levels of artistry.
share"Retro style revenge flick?" Did you see the actual movie?
shareHey, what the BEEP are you talking about? I don't think even a child would have comprehended Gran Torino like you've just ridiculously described here!
shareAgreed - it was garbage. Eastwood 'growling and snarling' every 5 minutes turned it into a bit of a joke movie. But more importantly, this type of film needs to be convincing. An 80yr old man playing a tough guy is an insult to the intelligence of most people. I had high hopes for this film but came away feeling very disappointed.
shareHe wasn't playing. He was a tough guy.
shareI believe the feeling was that Torino's robust blue collar sentiments rubbed voters the wrong way. The extremely late (by Oscar standards) release date also didn't help. Ignoring Eastwood for an acting nomination was startling though Whatever you think of the film it was a helluva performance - one of the stars very best - and deserved a nomination at the very least. Mai Yamane! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-sYFirfywY&feature=related
share[deleted]
[deleted]
I agree....... this wasn't anywhere near Oscar-worthy, and Eastwood does not know how to direct a movie well. I enjoyed it, no doubt. The ending was heart-breaking, there was virtually no character-development... I was left with more ?'s than answers. Sorry, but Eastwood overdoes it by playing his cool self. He's good in hands of someone else.
shareJesus, if you don't think Clint Eastwood can direct, you have no business critiquing movies.
The knack to flying lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
its funny how many such extra-smart people you come across on Forums like these. I wonder how they became such lame posters if they knew so much!!! Gran Torino does NOT deserve any of the kind of bashing you guys are doing. Don't want to even talk about the joke you made about Eastwood's directing.
I seriously feel like stop commenting on these forums because of these worms but I can't help it too!
Agree with you, Sammy is just BS-ing like he's born to do.
then whos yr fav director michael bay?
sharePlease. Please. Stop this. It's always "oh I bet your favorite movie is Transformers." "Who's your favorite director? Michael Bay?".
Just stop. Please. Stop. It's dumb. It makes you sound dumb. I'm seriously getting driven crazy by IMDB posters and this *beep*
Eastwood sucks as a director and i dont like michale bay either, michael bay is 100 times worse than eastwood. Just because I don't like Eastwood doesn't mean I like a *beep* director like Michael Bay.
It's impossible to pick one director as the best, but I enjoy Wes Anderson, Paul Thomas Anderson a few of his films, and I like Spielberg (well some of his films like schindler's list are good others are a miss). QT has his moments. Sam Mendes is okay, besides Spectre.
Spielberg, Les Anderson, and Paul Thomas Suck-a-Dick? Please. Suck-a-Dick is a master of taking material which has great potential and ruining it with pretentious camerawork and other wannabe artistic antics. I can hardly think of a director who's better at undermining interesting subject matter because, let's face it, he's a jerkoff.
share[deleted]
Plus he's a great director.
shareThe Oscars are a joke anyway, but usually the Academy does recognize these types of films, so the snub did sort of surprise me.
Not everyone should be entitled to express an opinion.
I think the Academy Awards felt that they've given Clint Eastwood enough attention lately. Especially in the last decade. First all the attention he got from "Mystic River", and then you have "Million Dollar Baby" which he won the directing and Best Picture. And then he came with "Flags of Our Fathers" and "Letters from Iwo Jima", which the second one got a lot of praise. So maybe they gave him some rest? We saw that with "J. Edgar" which the Academy didn't recognise.
(But I've heard mixed reviews about it. I liked "Gran Torino", but haven't seen "J. Edgar" yet)
I think the Academy Awards felt that they've given Clint Eastwood enough attention lately.Although I think Gran Torino's Oscar chances were mainly hurt by its subject matter and late release date I also think there's some truth to what you say. I get the impression a section of the Academy does feel they've given him enough. It's got nothing to do with the quality of the work, it's just 'Not Clint, again! Which frankly is understandable. He has gotten a lot of attention lately and it just looks ridiculous if they keep giving him Oscars every year no matter how deserving. Anyway the recent work is of such a high standard that it'll endure no matter what awards they do or don't win. That said if he does give another Million Dollar Baby level performance I really hope he gets nominated and this time actually wins. He's a great screen actor, one of those guys on the same level as Robert Mitchum, Cary Grant and John Wayne. Actors whose technique was invisible - the complete opposite of someone like, say, Dustin Hoffman, an actor of whom one is always aware you're watching A Performance - and because of that never got the critical recognition they deserved. It would be quite something to see Eastwood accept a Best Actor Oscar - likely one of the great moments in Oscar history if it ever happened. Well, here's hoping.
[deleted]
It was not a good enough movie for fulsome Oscar praise and really i find its big box office rather inexplicable.
Its that man again!!
This, The Dark Knight, and The Wrestler were the the three best films of 2008. The Dark Knight was snubbed from the major awards except Heath Ledger's Oscar. The Wrestler was snubbed as well. Gran Torino was absolutely the worst of the snubs Eastwood deserved a nomination for his great performance and for his direction as well this deserved a Best Picture nomination because it was ten times better than any other movie nominated that year.
shareWatched this on cable and saw it back in 2008. The years didn't make any difference, it was terrible. The acting and direction was horrid. No one and I mean NO ONE in this film was credible in their acting (except maybe for the gang members), it was like watching a high school play.
"That Barney Rubble, what an actor!!" -Night Shift
This was a great film, notice all the awards and nominations worldwide. I believe Clint Eastwood had the courage to take on the issue of race in an honest and bold manner. This film was obviously worthy of Oscar nominations, but I believe it was snubbed for political reasons. Making films that are so centered on race issues are always going to be controversial, and its a certainly a thankless job. I believe this film deals with the delicate issues of race in a brave yet even handed way.
The transformation of Walt in this film is a beautiful yet tragic story. He is a abbrasive, old bigot who find no real sense of belonging and community in his own family after his wife passes. His family is portrayed as lazy, materialistic, white suburbanists with a sense of entitlement. The great irony is that Walt finds family and community with second generation Vietnamese refugees. In the end Tao is like the son he never had.
Eastwood's vision of and solution to inner-city poverty/gang violence surely is offensive to the politically correct liberals, but for the rest of us, it makes quite a bit of sense.
Not surprised at all. I'm really surprised this is still in the top 250 though. I think the script and acting need lots of work.
I'm the grim reaper, lardass, and you're my next customer.
I guess video games and Michael Bay movies are more your speed?
shareMovies with actual good acting and a good script are ''more my speed''. And I don't see what video games have anything to do with this. You obviously know nothing about them.
I'm the grim reaper, lardass, and you're my next customer.
Simple answer to a simple question. The reason this movie didn't get nominated is due to "The Dark Knight" hogging the 2008 movie spotlight
shareThose of you that do not think much of this movie, Eastwood's acting or his direction should click on the awards section of imdb. This movie and Eastwood were honored by the National board of review, N Y Film critics and academies & organizations in Spain, France, Japan, Italy, Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay. NOT BAD!
share