J.Edgar
One of the films I'm increasingly looking forward to and curious about is J. Edgar, the Hoover biopic scriped by Dustin Lance Black (who wrote the script for Milk), directed by Clint Eastwood, and starring Leonardo di Caprio (which is only surprising if you don't consider di Caprio went out of his way NOT to become a matinee idol by specializing in character roles instead post Titanic, and actually pre-Titanic as well if you consider he first came to attention as Johnny Depp's autistic brother in What's eating Gilbert Grape).
This review was one of the articles that sparked my interest, emphasizing that
certainly a case for outing Hoover, especially, can be made, both because he was a public figure who, to some, was a monster and destroyer of lives, and because he was a possibly gay man who hounded homosexuals (and banned them from the F.B.I.). But this film doesn’t drag Hoover from the closet for salacious kicks or political payback: it shows the tragic personal and political fallout of the closet, and declares that the tenderness of the love story -between Hoover and life long companion Clyde Tolson, that is - comes as a shock. In an Eastwood picture, the reviewer means, though I don't see why, given that Clint directed "Bridges of Madison County". I can also see what attracted Black in the subject. In many ways, Hoover was the anti-Harvey Milk. Not just a man of the system, but the system itself, an anti radical, not just conservative but bigoted, with with few friends but a lot of people in fear of him through the decades, and, as the review mentions, in the closet while hounding other homosexuals. Writing Hoover not as a boo-hiss antagonist but as what sounds like his version of Charles Foster Kane had to be a juicy writerly challenge.
For the audience, too. With fictional characters this is less of a problem, but can you, do you want to care, to see the humanity in someone who used his power to actively oppose civil rights? Achieving this without letting the audience ignore what Hoover did ought to be a tightrope balance act.
I was also intrigued by this conversation between Black and Armie Hammer, who plays Clyde Tolson and who sees the Hoover/Tolson relationship somewhat differently than the reviewer did. Choice quote:
Armie Hammer: Clyde didn't make sense to me. This guy treats J. Edgar like a human -- and he's the only person in the world that does. Clyde takes nothing but abuse through the course of their relationship. There were little bits of payoff, like the kiss on the forehead, like, "I need you." Those things were there, but they didn’t seem enough to me to make him stay. Then I went to dinner with a buddy of mine who's gay, and I was like, "Dude, can I run this by you? I'm curious." And he was like, "Yes, Hammer. Sometimes you just fall for a person who might not even be of your orientation at all, and there's nothing you can do about it. Sometimes you get little glimmers, like he cares about me as much as I care about him, and that's enough to keep you going." In the way he broke it down, I was like, "Wow, I get it."
Black: Edgar would be incredibly abusive and then he'd send these almost-love letters to Clyde.
Hammer: I hired a researcher. I thought, What the hell is he doing here? Go find someone else. But you can't. And it made sense, and it was so tragically beautiful. I tried to learn everything I could -- I worked my ass off to figure both of them out.
There is also this observation, which reminds me that back when Milk was in the theatres it was James Franco who was subjected to these kind of questions (how come nobody asks the respectice leading men?): It's always the first question that people ask: "How's kissing Leo? How is it doing the gay scene?" What the fuck? It's the same thing! If I do a scene with an actress, that's not the first thing that anybody asks me about, because it's kind of inappropriate. I had to shoot a machine gun in the movie, too. I don’t know how to shoot a machine gun, but they hand it to you and they go, "Shoot it," and you go, "OK."
In conclusion: consider me hooked. And expect a review once they release the film in Germany.
This review was one of the articles that sparked my interest, emphasizing that
certainly a case for outing Hoover, especially, can be made, both because he was a public figure who, to some, was a monster and destroyer of lives, and because he was a possibly gay man who hounded homosexuals (and banned them from the F.B.I.). But this film doesn’t drag Hoover from the closet for salacious kicks or political payback: it shows the tragic personal and political fallout of the closet, and declares that the tenderness of the love story -between Hoover and life long companion Clyde Tolson, that is - comes as a shock. In an Eastwood picture, the reviewer means, though I don't see why, given that Clint directed "Bridges of Madison County". I can also see what attracted Black in the subject. In many ways, Hoover was the anti-Harvey Milk. Not just a man of the system, but the system itself, an anti radical, not just conservative but bigoted, with with few friends but a lot of people in fear of him through the decades, and, as the review mentions, in the closet while hounding other homosexuals. Writing Hoover not as a boo-hiss antagonist but as what sounds like his version of Charles Foster Kane had to be a juicy writerly challenge.
For the audience, too. With fictional characters this is less of a problem, but can you, do you want to care, to see the humanity in someone who used his power to actively oppose civil rights? Achieving this without letting the audience ignore what Hoover did ought to be a tightrope balance act.
I was also intrigued by this conversation between Black and Armie Hammer, who plays Clyde Tolson and who sees the Hoover/Tolson relationship somewhat differently than the reviewer did. Choice quote:
Armie Hammer: Clyde didn't make sense to me. This guy treats J. Edgar like a human -- and he's the only person in the world that does. Clyde takes nothing but abuse through the course of their relationship. There were little bits of payoff, like the kiss on the forehead, like, "I need you." Those things were there, but they didn’t seem enough to me to make him stay. Then I went to dinner with a buddy of mine who's gay, and I was like, "Dude, can I run this by you? I'm curious." And he was like, "Yes, Hammer. Sometimes you just fall for a person who might not even be of your orientation at all, and there's nothing you can do about it. Sometimes you get little glimmers, like he cares about me as much as I care about him, and that's enough to keep you going." In the way he broke it down, I was like, "Wow, I get it."
Black: Edgar would be incredibly abusive and then he'd send these almost-love letters to Clyde.
Hammer: I hired a researcher. I thought, What the hell is he doing here? Go find someone else. But you can't. And it made sense, and it was so tragically beautiful. I tried to learn everything I could -- I worked my ass off to figure both of them out.
There is also this observation, which reminds me that back when Milk was in the theatres it was James Franco who was subjected to these kind of questions (how come nobody asks the respectice leading men?): It's always the first question that people ask: "How's kissing Leo? How is it doing the gay scene?" What the fuck? It's the same thing! If I do a scene with an actress, that's not the first thing that anybody asks me about, because it's kind of inappropriate. I had to shoot a machine gun in the movie, too. I don’t know how to shoot a machine gun, but they hand it to you and they go, "Shoot it," and you go, "OK."
In conclusion: consider me hooked. And expect a review once they release the film in Germany.