MovieChat Forums > J. Edgar (2011) Discussion > Did they really need to make a movie abo...

Did they really need to make a movie about this guy?

posted 12 years ago by jav4927
8 replies | jump to latest

I've just finished watching this and all I got was the sense that Hoover was quirky but uninteresting. He didn't have family, there was just nothing of interest about him that required a movie making about him. You can get a sense of his life by watching other movies and piecing together what he did. Public Enemies, the Michael Mann movie, gave you all you needed to know about him. Maybe watch that four part Kennedy mini-series as well and you'll see all you need to.

Also, watch the Good Shepherd, there's a good spy movie with drama and intrigue. This movie didn't need to be made.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Paula57 12 years ago

Movies don't get made because they "need" to be made. They get made because someone wants to make them, in this case Clint Eastwood, and a studio thinks it will make money. Actors are generally interested in biopics because they win Oscars, plain and simple.

[–] deadbodieseverywhere17 12 years ago

Movies don't get made because they "need" to be made. They get made because someone wants to make them, in this case Clint Eastwood, and a studio thinks it will make money. Actors are generally interested in biopics because they win Oscars, plain and simple.

^Exactly^ No one needs a movie about anyone or anything, but they entertain us and we watch them.

"They're all dead.....they just don't know it yet." - Eric Draven

[–] surf-10 12 years ago

No, but have they ever really needed to make a movie about anyone? Seems Clint Eastwood thought so in this case.

[–] Prismark10 11 years ago

There is an interesting film to be made about Hoover. This was not it.

Its that man again!!

[–] kinsayder 11 years ago

I agree. The great movie on Hoover is yet to be made. This one was too deferential to the Hoover Foundation, too timid to draw the obvious conclusions. We see Hoover getting hot and bothered about Tolson but (the movie insists) they never danced the horizontal tango. We see Hoover abusing his power to gain influence over presidents, but (Eastwood seems to be saying) that's OK because JFK was a letch and Nixon was a crook. We get the obligatory cross-dressing scene, but meh, that was just a one-off thing because Hoover was upset about his mother.

What's needed is a filmmaker who can go at Hoover with a bit more attitude than Eastwood was able to summon up.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jen-963-30749 11 years ago

I have not seen the movie, so it may not really capture what Hoover was to this country, but he was absolutely one of the most powerful men this country has ever seen. Presidents feared him and were powerless against him (many wanted to fire him but could not, because Hoover dedicated much of the FBI's resources to compiling blackmail files on everyone. The information did not have to be true, it just had to be damaging.) Hoover was a dangerous megalomaniac who built the FBI to be the world's envy. If the movie doesn't capture that, it is a shame.