Million Dollar Baby

[John Hudson]

Someone asks about Arnold doing films and the place goes into lockdown?

Can we talk about Clint Eastwood or is he off limits as well?

Happy Friday Chris! : )

[Chris Hurd]

Yeah, leave it to Hudson... heh...

Actually though Eastwood is fair game, because he's no longer mayor.

Now if you're going to bring up those old Reagan classics like "Santa Fe" and "Operation Tokyo," then I'll have to throw in the towel.

[Mike Teutsch]

Eastwood is always a pleasure, bring it on. Loved Blood Work!

Mike

[John Hudson]

I had to bust your chops just a little Chris. It aint easy being a MOD/Admin.

Can't please them all

:/ :P :)

[Matt Brabender]

eastwood is very cool

I just watched Million Dollar Baby - there were some great shots in there
excellent lighting - it created that hardcore boxing enviroment but still managed to show softness in the characters

[Bill Porter]

I just saw it too, the other night. Great flick. I can suspend disbelief and overlook stuff in movies because films are about expressing a story more than being real, but, it was horribly inaccurate medically. You can't speak at all, not one bit, period, on a ventilator. Also the pressure sores were in all the wrong places. It's always hips, heels, and butt, never behind the legs. And don't even get me started about how no alerts went off when the ventilator was removed!, or when she coded for that matter! He'd have been popped in seconds flat, either by the nurses or by the cameras and guards. But I played along, and it didn't change how I felt about the movie.

Hilary Swank is a terrific actress. Morgan Freeman is always extremely enjoyable to watch work. Clint was ok. Guy who played "Danger" was just godawful, though, and not because his character was a dork.

[Yi Fong Yu]

i thought the movie was too long!

while it was good, there just wasn't enough substance to sustain like unforgiven or even mystic river. i still haven't a clue why it won the oscars... but then again there wasn't a lot of choices.

[John C. Chu]

Finally saw this the other night...

I had avoided it in the theaters because it looked a lot like "Girl Fight" which is another story about female boxing that I liked a lot.

Good film---too bad the surprise/twist was given away by film critics--which ruined it a bit for me as I was expecting it.

Eastwood is the original Terminator---I love the first Dirty Harry and his spaghetti westerns are classics. He is fun to watch and Morgan Freeman was great as usual. [This is coming from someone that didn't much care for Unforgiven]

The film is all about cliches'...the young apprentice seeking knowledge and guidance from the master....it is like a "Rocky" for the 21st Century.[I'm not saying that in a bad way]

Do I like the ending? Probably not...this is could have been a crowd pleaser with a really feel good ending...but instead...this is what it is.

Still, with this film--and "A Perfect World"....Clint just gets better and better.

[Krystian Ramlogan]

I think Million Dollar Baby was a good, but not great, film.

While I agree suspending belief is a part of the movie experience, having a movie that purports to take place in the real world have so many obviously glaring inaccuracies just takes a lot away from the overall impact of the story. After all a huge part of the appeal of the movie is based on empathy towards a "realistic" situation people can relate to.

The acting was solid, though there are many cliches within the movie. I'm not sure it really deserved Best Picture, since it certainly does not hold up to winners of years gone by. I did find some of the shots to be really good, and the lighting definitely created that gritty, boxing, blood and guts feeling they were going for.

But, it was engaging and if you are willing to forgive the mistakes, not a bad way to spend an evening.

Clint definitely seems to be getting better, though my own opinion is that he has tapped into a part of the artform that everyone gets something from. Sure there are things that could be improved, but the integrity of his movies are what really makes them work.

[Keith Loh]

I think Clint is the ultimate amateur filmmaker. I mean this in a good and bad way. Good because he seems to invent his own way of telling a story and has the integrity to stick to his method. Bad because I'm watching this as a literate filmgoer and the language of it seems all wrong. The scenes are longer than they should be. The sentiment is cloying and characters so earnest they seem like cliches. The use of the voiceover. I don't know how I would feel if I didn't know the director was Clint Eastwood and I hadn't already seen his films, knowing how deliberate his style is.

The Japanese equivalent to Clint is Takeshi Kitano. Kitano has no training but he has made enough of his own films that he has developed his own style. To someone who doesn't know Kitano, his style can infuriate. Length, composition, oblique narrative, sparse dialogue. I think Clint and Kitano should work together, but only if it involves gunfire.

I walked away from Million Dollar Baby shaking my head. Maybe I am too cynical but I couldn't believe people were crying in their seats. To me, I was being obviously manipulated. The evil characters are SO EVIL. The situation is SO HORRIBLE. But then my manipulation is Clint's earnestness. I wouldn't have the nerve to ask Clint about how manipulative his movie is because I'm sure, meeting him, I would see that he actually means it.

[Marco Leavitt]

I liked "Million Dollar Baby" when I first saw it, but the more I think back on the movie the more I feel used. I agree with Keith -- it's manipulative to the point of being condescending. Alexander Payne was robbed. The portrayal of Maggie's family was downright offensive too. I'm reading the book now by the way, and highly recommend it. Those two stories are not even the best in the collection. You could get five movies out of that book.

[Yi Fong Yu]

but film by definition is based on manipulation =). film itself is one big visual fx (24 still pix a second on playback). so if the auteur (if we still hold to that theory) wants to tinker with you, that's the point!

having said that, i felt nothing for the film. clint's just not good at directing emotional films. none of his films are as emotional as say... a Miyazaki film or some of Spielberg's earlier films.

[Keith Loh]

No no. The point is that the audience shouldn't feel manipulated. The point is not to "get caught".

[Yi Fong Yu]

lol =). if that's what you think =). take a look at the top 100 films on imdb.com. you don't think any of those were 'manipulating/cathing" the audience?

[Keith Loh]

The filmmakers can manipulate. But the viewer mustn't feel like that they have been manipulated, only that they were swept up by the characters or stories in a way that feels natural. When I first said 'manipulation' what I should have said is 'unfair' manipulation.

You could make anyone cry if you suddenly shot a dog on stage. But if that action has no meaning in the context of the film or if it is another misery piled upon misery, then it is nothing more than someone prodding at you over and over again. Someone is pulling the audience's emotions like a puppet. When you feel this overtly, then you don't like feeling used.

Of the top films, I'm sure if I saw many of them today, they would feel naive or manipulative because older films were more raw - the way the stories feel is more direct.