MovieChat Forums > Bonnie & Clyde (2013) Discussion > Godawful abomination. The final nail in...

Godawful abomination. The final nail in Emile Hirsch's career coffin.

posted 10 years ago by angeles_st_ides
13 replies | jump to latest

Really just bad. Not "good bad" just bad. If I could have rated it less than one star, I would have.

Bonnie as a fame-seeking movie star wanna be goading Clyde into more and more harrowing feats so she can get famous? Pulling the strings like a puppet master? Clyde the "second-sighted" man who can see the future. A sensitive guy who could rock Bonnie's world in bed? A cop on their tails who is a spurned suitor to Bonnie? Clyde setting up their ambush and deaths to stop Bonnie's escalating descent into cruelty in pursuit of fame. I don't think so.

This version barely gets a single historical detail right. For one thing, it's most likely Clyde Barrow was gay. Even the 1967 version of the movie had the nerve to hint at that, but in 2013, we get a virile hetero lover boy?

But that's not even the biggest problem. I wouldn't care about any of that if this were good, compelling drama. But it's not. Terrible writing, terrible direction, terrible acting. Except for possibly the costumes, there is not one redeeming thing about this production.

[–] SCsurfguy 10 years ago

I kind of liked it when the lead dude took his shirt off. Hot dude.

[–] jdmasters-295-704162 10 years ago

Godawful abomination is an understatement. They got absolutely everything wrong in this mess and wasted the talents of many fine actors . What a shame, I was hoping for a miniseries that went deeper than the 67 movie, but what I got was shallow dreck that John Grisham would be ashamed of.

[–] kristen1165 10 years ago

That's funny, I thought "god-awful abomination" was severely overdramatic.

[–] oscarunger 10 years ago

This version barely gets a single historical detail right. For one thing, it's most likely Clyde Barrow was gay. Even the 1967 version of the movie had the nerve to hint at that, but in 2013, we get a virile hetero lover boy?

lol, that's something they made up for the 1967 Arthur Penn version, there's no actual proof Clyde was gay or bi, you might want to revise your post (-:

[–] cinles 10 years ago

The movie was the worst. The 1967 movie was better. They both had historical missteps. Clyde Barrow was not gay.

[–] AntwoinD 10 years ago

I have yet to read a source, credible source, that said Clyde was gay.

[–] ktbythesea 10 years ago

There's no historical evidence that Clyde was gay. But I pretty much agree with everything else you said. I do feel bad for some of the actors, though. I think they COULD have been great under different circumstances, but it would be hard for even the best actors to elevate this mess to something meaningful.

[–] oscarunger 10 years ago

I didn't think it was that bad, but I wasn't expecting citizen kane, it is an a&e tv movie after all

[–] ween-3 10 years ago

This 2013 version doesn't have anywhere near the same impact that the original Beatty-Dunaway movie had. But, on the upside, they opted NOT to attempt a note-for-note rehash of the original. There's a different story line and theme here, and I'll give 'em credit for that. Getting bogged down in the historical accuracy of either movie, though, is a big mistake. It's a morality tale. Take it at face value.

[–] Falconeer 10 years ago

What an idiotic statement. Emile Hirsch has made some excellent films, such as "Into the Wild," and most recently "Motel Life." He is a fine actor who has made some brilliant career choices. i respect a guy who isn't afraid to do indie films and movies that he knows won't be boxoffice smashes. I guess you must LOVE Tom Cruise, huh?

"IMdB; where 14 year olds can act like jaded 40 year old critics...'

[–] angeles_st_ides 10 years ago

Pinku, Not particularly, and I very much like Emile Hirsch. He has done some excellent work, but he also chose to do "Speed Racer" which I think did a lot of damage to his career. This film added another blow. In my opinion, he may not recover from the damage done by his poor choices, despite his good ones. And to to me "good choices" don't have to mean box office smashes, but they do have to mean quality work: good writing, good, tight, well-paced plotting, good direction. A&E/History's "Bonnie and Clyde" had none of those things. It is one of the worst movies I've ever seen, even for a tv movie.

You need to learn to read between the lines and read for context, Pinku. And be very careful of calling people "idiots". Saying a film dealt a death blow to a career is NOT the same thing as saying you don't like an actor. Or that they shouldn't make unusual choices or do smaller films (they should however always do good films). Perhaps the person making the statement that a role damaged an actor's career is saddened by that fact because they like the actor and know they can do better because they've seen them do better? Your leap from what I said to presuming I "must" love Tom Cruise is a fantastic leap of logic, that is to say, it's very poor logic, indeed.

And I see most people posting agree with me that this movie was really awful, and also thanks to those pointing out that the story that Barrow was gay is most likely inaccurate. However, that aside, it doesn't take away from all the other liberties they took with the story. A movie doesn't have to be 100% historically accurate of course, but to play this fast and loose is criminal (no pun intended). They make Clyde look like a chump, Bonnie look like a fame-whore "puppet master", and give both of the characters far too many conceited affectations. I can overlook a lot of historical inaccuracy in a movie that is very good. But, this movie was painful to watch.

[–] Falconeer 10 years ago

I really don't believe that a bad film can "ruin" an actor's career. Look at James Franco; the guy is in everything, from great indie films, to high profile flops like "Oz The Great and Powerful." A few months ago he was even guest starring in a soap opera! his career is fine. "Speed Racer?" Nobody cares, nobody even saw that film. And most people don't even know that Emile Hirsch was involved in that film. Have you seen "Motel Life" yet? It's a new film, starring Hirsch and Stephen Dorff; and it's one of the best films of the year, IMO. and speaking of "Bonnie and clyde," what was so awful about it? The period costumes, the music, the cinematography, were all top notch. Emile Hirsch gave a performance that was solid, and in no way an embarresment. He is probably more suited to low key roles, but he was fine in this one. and of course this film took liberties with the real story of Bonnie and clyde; that is almost always the case. The goal of the movie was to entertain, and it succeeded at that. Unless one is an expert on these people, the changes will hardly be noticed. Whenever a film is made about real-life people or events, there is usually a disclaimer stating that facts have been changed for entertainment purposes. And a lot of people tuned in to watch Bonnie and Clyde, which can actually help the career of an actor like Emile hirsch, who's name is hardly a household word. It's becoming the trend now for A-list actors to do television work. Next month Ellen Burston will be starring in a made for cable movie, and she has done tv work before. Is HER career in the toilet? I think not. Perhaps you didn't like this film; that doesn't mean it was a "bad" film. And i didn't mean to suggest that you were "stupid;" but i think that was a knee-jerk reaction when i heard someone criticize an actor who i think has more integrity and talent than most pretty, plastic-looking movie stars working today. The title of your post, "the final nail in Hirsch's career??" Sorry if i offended you. But that statement is very extreme, and not accurate. And "godawful abomination??" I'm sorry, but while this film is no masterpiece, it is hardly a "godawful abomination." If you want to see an 'abomination' check out some crap playing in theaters right now, such as "Thor 2." Because next to crap like that "Bonnie and Clyde" is like "Citizen Kane."

"IMdB; where 14 year olds can act like jaded 40 year old critics...'

[–] jim-85613 7 years ago

Bull *beep* Clyde was not gay you homo.