I went to see the new Clint Eastwood film “Gran Torino” and it was fantastic. At the end, as I sat there and watched the credits roll, I wondered if this was Clint’s response to Spike Lee and the controversy last year over the lack of African-American characters in his last two films on WWII: “Flags of Our Fathers” and “Letters From Iwo Jima”. Was this Eastwood’s version of “Do the Right Thing”!?
Eastwood plays a hard-nosed, grumpy, disgruntled, bigot who has disdain for everyone and a edgy indifference to everything… except the growing multi-cultural society that is surrounding him. He hates it. He sees the world around him changing and to his regret and alarm, the changes have invaded his doorstep in the form of immigrant neighbours from Laos. Eastwood’s character, Walt Kowalksi, is a volatile racist. His racism has been conceived and nurtured by American society, both past and present. His racism has been nourished by war, both past and present. His racism is national and international in it’s scope. It is personal and impersonal in its reach.
Blended with his racist impulses are two other pillars of American society: violence and materialism. This blend is seen in the accepted use of violence to protect one’s property against “those others”. This blend is seen in the expected use of violence in the international arena to protect American self-interests against “those others”… even if it’s in their own lands. “Those others” don’t look, speak, dress, eat the same foods or even smell like those of the dominant culture in American and by extension, European and Israeli society. Therefore they are considered to be less than human, if not openly… certainly on a subconscious level. Hence the invasion of Iraq. Hence the slaughter in Gaza. Hence Guantanamo. Hence Abu Graib. Hence the murder of another “Oscar Grant”… and another “Adolph Grimes”… and the shooting of another “Robbie Tolan” to start the new year.
Walt Kowalski embodies all of these traits. They guide all his actions, reactions and impulses. He says things that make you cringe and shake your head… however here is the scary part… it also makes you laugh. He comes off as a “gruff” Archie Bunker type. I have met people like him. The type of guy you are told not to take what he says personally, because he doesn’t hate you specifically. “Oh Walt, don’t mind him, he hates everyone!” The type of guy who you are told really“likes” you because his racist taunts and jokes are openly directed at… and therefore “shared”… with you. However, and this is where Eastwood takes his character, it all comes at a price. The hate, violence and worship of material things, exacts a terrible price. It’s not just a physical cost. It exacts a terrible cost on one’s psyche… on one’s soul. It pollutes you… and all that you come in contact with. This is seen in the life of Kowalski and within American society in general… as seen through the lives of the other characters, both local and immigrant.
Violence has been an underlying theme in most of Eastwood’s films. In his “spaghetti westerns” and “Dirty Harry” eras, it was primarily about vengeance… a hero or anti-hero… cleansing society of the despicable and undesirables. “Unforgiven” explored the physical and psychological costs of using violence to exact revenge and cleanse a violent society. “Flag of Our Fathers” and “Letters from Iwo Jima” looked at the personal cost of violence… and the glorification of violence in the national interests… on the individual’s psyche and soul. In “Gran Torino”, Eastwood now moves violence from a vehicle of revenge to a means of redemption… as a way to cleanse the soul. As Walt Kowalski lays in a Christ-like pose at the end of the film, I am reminded of Martin Luther King and Gandhi. The ultimate sacrifice for the greater good. The ultimate sacrifice to point to a better way.
“Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.” John 15:13
Advertisement
I’m gonna have to check this out TODAY!
Thanks for the review, bruh:)
I’m definitely going to see this. Changeling was one of the first films that Eastwood has done where it wasn’t overbearing so I’m intrigued to see how GT is like.
Once you both have seen it, I would be interested to know what you thought of it.
Blessings!
It was one of his best movies to date in my opinion. Well crafted characters, humor, drama and tons of emotion. It’s a shame the movie was snubbed by all of the awards.
Okay, saw this last night. Liked it. A lot. Complex and deeply flawed, but as you said, you end up liking him. The fact that he calls it likes he sees it – straight up – is refreshing. The problem is that racism and racists don’t work that way – they are anything but straight. They are slippery, do there dirt in the dark, speak with forked tongue.
Another problem: this racist man is the “actor” in the film. He alone metes out the punishment, he makes shit happen, he protects the Hmong family, he triggers a reaction from the one-dimensional gangbangers who have absolutely NO redeeming qualities. The Hmong family remains powerless, floating in a current that they have no control over. What is the lesson? That good, repentant white man will save you? Or that you have to save yourself?
Still, it was a very good film, far better than Crash for example.
Lubangakene,
I agree that there are some deep flaws in the plot and the characters are somewhat one dimensional. But that’s hollywood for you. The theme of a “white” saviour, who goes from villian to anti-hero to hero, in his cause to protect and save “little brown people”, who don’t know any better and can’t do for themselves, is not a unique or new storyline. That is why my review didn’t focus on the plot or storyline or the caricatures roles.
What I found most interesting about the film was how the “blend” of racism, violence and materialism, was the foundation upon which Eastwood’s character based his concept of America… and this is what he ends up teaching his “new” protege about what being an “American” means… and furthermore that it’s synonymous with being a real man! True, in real life this interplay is not as overt or as straight-forward as in the film, it is more subtle and systemic… but the heightened sense of reality is what movie-making is all about. In this film, Eastwood strips away the bullshit and gets to the core and does it rather well.
Plus, I am a Clint Eastwood fan and I have seen most of his movies and as I state above, the theme of violence in his later films have “changed”.
In regards to Crash, I just didn’t feel it at all. There were some good moments for sure… but overall it was sappy, white-liberal, preachy: “I identify with your pain”, tim wise wanna-be crap.
I won’t do a review here but an excellent film I just saw was “Slumdog Millionaire”. A MUST SEE!!!
Yeah, Asa, he did strip shit down fo’ so’. The good thing is that this is the kind of film worthy of analysis. What does the Grand Torino symbolize? Why do people want it? How is power distributed/what is real power? What does it mean when the brothers talk game on the corner but Eastwood finishes it?
Will check out Slumdog next.
Damn!!!
You’re an amazing writer!!!!
I’m going to add Gran Torino to my Netflix queue!!!!!
Thanks for the compliment Abdul. We are fortunate that all the contributors here are “amazing writers”, however I must say that your powers of perception are indeed astute. [;o)
Excellent review, its good change to see something has found the true message in this film. I’ve read review after review in american and australian papers of this movie and all they seem to be able to comment on is, very superficial.
Things like “Dirty Harry makes a return” and only Clint can make an old guy so menancing. No talk about what this movie really means. And quite simply its showing how his racial sentiments are little more than a nervous knee jerk reaction, what he really judges people on are their actions and sentiment. He is angered in one scene that he relates more with the “Gook” family next door than his own flesh and blood. He resents “the brothers talking game” (thanks thefreeslave for that one) because they acting cowardly, but more so he resents the weak white boy for not condoning their actions because of his own fear and need for acceptance.
Asabagna, i get what you are trying to say about materalism, but the scene where Tao is in the garage questioning walt about his tools and he came to have so many, is something i have experienced. I had a mate who was raised by his mother only (his dad abandone the family), one day we went to fix up an old bike we found and my mate didn’t have any tools or no what they called. His father never taught him and his mother couldn’t aquire tools like a man does over time. His not simply trying to “help the little bown people” (although i’d say his yellow, so you can’t clutch at straws) he is adressing what he sees as an inequality, he realises to have nieghbours that look after their property (which is in walts interest and something he holds against his neighbours) then they need to have the oportunity to do so.
Some of you are going a bit nuts on the white thing. The guy is a korean war vet, with spoilt rotten kids who resents imigrants. If walt was black would your opinion of this movie be differant? (the free slave)
and what is “talking game?” cause in australia, i’ve seen plenty of guys (don’t matter wether they aussie, leb, gook or abo) that can’t organise a root in a brothel, prey on girls in groups, that don’t change no matter where you are.
what is “talking game?”
ok, that last post i submitted, i realise why i will come out looking like the ramblings of some idiot. Its because when i was reading your review, you transgressed into a bunch of stuff about the genocide in israel and why the u.s invaded iraq.
Ok, fuck you can’t keep saying white people and jews are linked. South Africa the most rasict white people on earth run that country and they HATE jews. Due to the recent actions of israel all south african ports have stopped unloading israeli goods and won’t trade with israel. There have been large demonstrations organised in Australia, by a collection of Australians, white muslim Australians, palestinian refugee population and the muslim lebenese community. Some times you talk crap, you writing doesn’t flow unto. You say “hence” to much. Hence what? when you hance you are talking about a percieved collective understanding. I closes to doors to discussion, because in saying Hence you are saying there is link so profound that it does not need to be explained.
“Therefore they are considered to be less than human, if not openly… certainly on a subconscious level. Hence the invasion of Iraq.” So the invasion of iraq, hands down is explained because the majority culutre and collective will of the U.S which made up of white european and israeli people believe that arabs are less than human? I’m not going to challenge this because the statement has some claim to truth. but you need to think about your use of the word HENCE. Cause there are more reasons why iraq was invaded and why abu ghab happened.
Seriously before you write me of some white idiot, who can’t possible understand these things because my ancestors chained you to the bottom of ship in a pile of shit. You should know that i’m Irish Australian. This means at some point an English man chained one of my convict decendants to the bottom of ship most likely for stealing some bread. and sailed him for 7 months rotting in his own shit to australia, and when he got there he was forced to live with english lords who went about murdered every aboriginal they came across, so the convicts they forced to live there could build the english a society there children could exploit.
The troubles in Ireland saw northern ireland annexxed by the U.K, zionism in Palestine saw the establishment of Israel on Palenstinian soil.
It was the U.S that gave rise to the I.R.A in Ireland. and it is little known that the I.R.A helped the P.L.O aquire weapons in the middle east and establish themselves as a bonafide resistance. HENCE the U.S started the palestinian resistance. You see why HENCE is so dumb now!