Cry Doomsda...I mean, Cry Macho - Review Thread
Sept 18, 2021 13:35:56 GMT -5
SnoBorderZero likes this
Post by Doomsday on Sept 18, 2021 13:35:56 GMT -5
Cry Macho
There's an old saying, a year with a new Clint Eastwood movie is better than a year without a new Clint Eastwood movie (I just made that up). Sometimes that's harder to say some years than others and Cry Macho is a movie that makes it one of those harder years. Eastwood has long been just as highly regarded a filmmaker as actor and it's always fun to see him tackle different subjects. Say what you will about the quality of his output the last decade, at least the guy has tried to branch out. With Cry Macho he goes back to his western roots, sort of, while once again treading the old ground of trying to instill some old man wisdom in a dummy youth. It's not that original but if done right there's always something new that can be said to a contemporary audience. Unfortunately though, Cry Macho seems to hold back by and large and in doing so it finds itself as a rather mediocre movie even by 2010s Eastwood movie standards.
Eastwood plays Mike Milo, a washed up rodeo star who's approached by his old boss to track down his son Rafo in Mexico City and bring him back to his ranch in Texas. Mike heads to Mexico and finds Rafo with incredible ease and together they along with Rafo's rooster Macho make their way back to the US, but that's after Mike finds Rafo's mother and asks her questions before she very strangely tries to seduce him. She then sends some extremely incapable henchmen to bring Rafo home despite the fact that she hates him but hey, we need to have some conflict. Along the journey Mike and Rafo have conversations about life, growing up, growing old and how a man has to make decisions in life as to which direction he'll go. Eventually their car is stolen and they find a village with a cantina owned by a woman who takes a quick liking to Mike and they decide to stay there for a few weeks breaking horses for a few bucks for no real reason. When that story point is exhausted they make their way to the border again where each one has to make the choice of which direction they want to go in life. Eastwood apparently had the rights to Cry Macho for a while after it was kicked around in Hollywood for decades. I think I heard even Schwarzenegger was attached at some point. It's clearly a movie meant for an older actor but he probably would have been better off making this 20 years ago, maybe even 30 years ago. He's clearly too old for the subject matter if only because someone would have to be insane to hire a 91 year old man to brave the streets of Mexico City by himself. Maybe the character himself isn't meant to be 91 and Eastwood is still surprisingly capable given his age but his age is still extremely apparent. You can grow older and hide the age to an extent but there comes a point where it's almost impossible to do, a lesson we very well may learn again once Indiana Jones 5 lands. But Eastwood is still Eastwood, grizzled and craggly when he needs to be, soft and sympathetic when necessary and it's the latter Eastwood that I find more convincing and sympathetic. If he were to make a movie where he just plays himself instead of the old man caricature that he's portrayed for almost 20 years I think people would really appreciate it that much more.
People have known for a long time that Eastwood is a director who's infamously a one or two take director, something that makes him seem efficient but is also clearly a detriment when dealing with actors who don't know how to act. Case in point, Gran Torino. Also case in point, Cry Macho. In the case of Cry Macho though not only does it feel like most of these were take-ones, it feels like they're shooting the first draft of the script. Lots of things in the movie are forced, dialogue is expository and on the nose to the point where you feel like you're being hit with a shovel, decisions are made that are only there to move the plot along even though they don't make sense, ideas are introduced and then dropped (like Mike knowing sign language for some reason), you get the idea. It's easy to Monday morning quarterback Clint Eastwood movies these days and a lot of people probably assume the decline in quality has to do with his age. That may be the case as it's clear that his movies have issues that would be evident to even moderate film fans but it's frustrating because once again this still could have been a good movie had a little more time and effort had gone into the script. The screenwriter is Nick Schenk whose credits also include Gran Torino and The Mule. I still enjoy Grant Torino warts and all, The Mule is fine for what it is but they're both movies that suffer from all those things listed above. It's another case of a movie that could have been so much better had some basic filmmaking concepts been applied or tweaked which is the real tragedy. That isn't to say it's a completely bad movie, there are some good scenes in there that help make an otherwise dull movie roll forward but those are unfortunately bogged down by the other pitfalls that most filmmakers would easily avoid. It makes you wonder what you would say to a guy like Eastwood if given the chance. He's 91 years old as of writing this and what kind of creative liberties or risks would a guy his age really want to take? Any project that he produces is likely to be his last one and he probably knows as well as anyone that he's on borrowed time. As much as I would like to see him crank out another Million Dollar Baby or Letters from Iwo Jima I think those days might be over. Hope springs eternal though. And holy lord get a new screenwriter.
But looking at the credits let's give it up to the following people who helped make this film possible (these are real):
-The Covid Manager, Covid Compliance Officer, Covid Monitors and Covid Coordinator. I have no idea what the difference is between any of these positions but at least they get to add an item to their IMDbs. Thanks for keeping Eastwood alive to live another day.
-Snake Removal Technician. Considering how there are no snakes in the movie I can only imagine that this guy just went on set and...removed snakes. Hey, it's an honest day's work. Welcome to Hollywood!
C+ so says Doomsday and that might even be a little generous. At the end of the day though it's nice to see Eastwood still moving forward even if it isn't much.
There's an old saying, a year with a new Clint Eastwood movie is better than a year without a new Clint Eastwood movie (I just made that up). Sometimes that's harder to say some years than others and Cry Macho is a movie that makes it one of those harder years. Eastwood has long been just as highly regarded a filmmaker as actor and it's always fun to see him tackle different subjects. Say what you will about the quality of his output the last decade, at least the guy has tried to branch out. With Cry Macho he goes back to his western roots, sort of, while once again treading the old ground of trying to instill some old man wisdom in a dummy youth. It's not that original but if done right there's always something new that can be said to a contemporary audience. Unfortunately though, Cry Macho seems to hold back by and large and in doing so it finds itself as a rather mediocre movie even by 2010s Eastwood movie standards.
Eastwood plays Mike Milo, a washed up rodeo star who's approached by his old boss to track down his son Rafo in Mexico City and bring him back to his ranch in Texas. Mike heads to Mexico and finds Rafo with incredible ease and together they along with Rafo's rooster Macho make their way back to the US, but that's after Mike finds Rafo's mother and asks her questions before she very strangely tries to seduce him. She then sends some extremely incapable henchmen to bring Rafo home despite the fact that she hates him but hey, we need to have some conflict. Along the journey Mike and Rafo have conversations about life, growing up, growing old and how a man has to make decisions in life as to which direction he'll go. Eventually their car is stolen and they find a village with a cantina owned by a woman who takes a quick liking to Mike and they decide to stay there for a few weeks breaking horses for a few bucks for no real reason. When that story point is exhausted they make their way to the border again where each one has to make the choice of which direction they want to go in life. Eastwood apparently had the rights to Cry Macho for a while after it was kicked around in Hollywood for decades. I think I heard even Schwarzenegger was attached at some point. It's clearly a movie meant for an older actor but he probably would have been better off making this 20 years ago, maybe even 30 years ago. He's clearly too old for the subject matter if only because someone would have to be insane to hire a 91 year old man to brave the streets of Mexico City by himself. Maybe the character himself isn't meant to be 91 and Eastwood is still surprisingly capable given his age but his age is still extremely apparent. You can grow older and hide the age to an extent but there comes a point where it's almost impossible to do, a lesson we very well may learn again once Indiana Jones 5 lands. But Eastwood is still Eastwood, grizzled and craggly when he needs to be, soft and sympathetic when necessary and it's the latter Eastwood that I find more convincing and sympathetic. If he were to make a movie where he just plays himself instead of the old man caricature that he's portrayed for almost 20 years I think people would really appreciate it that much more.
People have known for a long time that Eastwood is a director who's infamously a one or two take director, something that makes him seem efficient but is also clearly a detriment when dealing with actors who don't know how to act. Case in point, Gran Torino. Also case in point, Cry Macho. In the case of Cry Macho though not only does it feel like most of these were take-ones, it feels like they're shooting the first draft of the script. Lots of things in the movie are forced, dialogue is expository and on the nose to the point where you feel like you're being hit with a shovel, decisions are made that are only there to move the plot along even though they don't make sense, ideas are introduced and then dropped (like Mike knowing sign language for some reason), you get the idea. It's easy to Monday morning quarterback Clint Eastwood movies these days and a lot of people probably assume the decline in quality has to do with his age. That may be the case as it's clear that his movies have issues that would be evident to even moderate film fans but it's frustrating because once again this still could have been a good movie had a little more time and effort had gone into the script. The screenwriter is Nick Schenk whose credits also include Gran Torino and The Mule. I still enjoy Grant Torino warts and all, The Mule is fine for what it is but they're both movies that suffer from all those things listed above. It's another case of a movie that could have been so much better had some basic filmmaking concepts been applied or tweaked which is the real tragedy. That isn't to say it's a completely bad movie, there are some good scenes in there that help make an otherwise dull movie roll forward but those are unfortunately bogged down by the other pitfalls that most filmmakers would easily avoid. It makes you wonder what you would say to a guy like Eastwood if given the chance. He's 91 years old as of writing this and what kind of creative liberties or risks would a guy his age really want to take? Any project that he produces is likely to be his last one and he probably knows as well as anyone that he's on borrowed time. As much as I would like to see him crank out another Million Dollar Baby or Letters from Iwo Jima I think those days might be over. Hope springs eternal though. And holy lord get a new screenwriter.
But looking at the credits let's give it up to the following people who helped make this film possible (these are real):
-The Covid Manager, Covid Compliance Officer, Covid Monitors and Covid Coordinator. I have no idea what the difference is between any of these positions but at least they get to add an item to their IMDbs. Thanks for keeping Eastwood alive to live another day.
-Snake Removal Technician. Considering how there are no snakes in the movie I can only imagine that this guy just went on set and...removed snakes. Hey, it's an honest day's work. Welcome to Hollywood!
C+ so says Doomsday and that might even be a little generous. At the end of the day though it's nice to see Eastwood still moving forward even if it isn't much.
