The Federal Bureau of Investigagtion
Not necessarily healthy, mature love or balanced, equitable relationships negotiated between two or more adults. No, instead it was more about obsession, control, immaturity, desperation, loyalty, fidelity, commitment.
Let’s start with LIKE CRAZY. Superbly acted by Felicity Jones and Anton Yelchin, LIKE CRAZY is a love story about two young college students who think they are in love. They probably are in love or at least as they define love. It seemed to have a lot to do with sex, fantasy and a disregard for life as it is with rules and boundaries as only two young people wrapped up in their own world perceive it.
Really it’s about love, that beautiful precious emotional gift, mishandled by two immature kids. Basically that’s the problem here – Jacob and Anna are just too immature to grasp what love and commitment really mean. Patience! That one word engraved on the bracelet given to Anna by Jacob was the key to creating a deep and lasting relationship. They talked the talk, but couldn’t walk the walk. Maturity knows patience, maturity understands that it isn’t necessary to indulge your every desire in order to be happy.
Final thought: Anna’s parents came off as way too liberal psuedo-hippies from another era.
Now here is tale or two of twisted love….a doting mother whose love was controlling, compulsive and suffocating and lavished on a son eager for Mommy’s approval in all things. Dame Judi Dench embodied the role of this overbearing and obsessive mother. Edgar was her favorite, Edgar was destined to be a great man and she was the stage mother in the background, directing and advising on everything from the clothes he wore to commanding him to find the Lindberg baby. Edgar was devoted to his mother, turning to her for counsel, revering her and escorting her to political functions as his date. The only other woman in his life was Miss Gandy, his personal secretary who was not only the gate-keeper, she was also his trusted secret-keeper.
And then Clyde Tolsen is introduced to the Director of the FBI and in a swift series of meaningful glances, we know that Clyde is destined to be in Hoover’s life. Almost laughably transparent in his intent, Hoover arranges for Tolsen to be accepted into the Bureau even though as a candidate, Tolsen has none of the desired qualities. But he is tall and good-looking. In this day and age, homosexuality is understood, acknowledged and acceptable in most circles. NOT in those days. It was apparent that J. Edgar was somewhat conflicted, alternating between assuming an almost asexual ascetic life and craving the companionship that Clyde so eagerly offered. Although there were moments of tenderness between Tolsen and Hoover, their relationship was not consumated, at least not in this depiction. Poor Clyde was ever the faithful puppy dog sidekick, thankful for any random ear-scratching that Edgar rarely bestowed.
We don’t know how much of this movie is based on fact or historical fiction. After all, Hoover appeared to be a very private man and the only two people who could know the intimate side of him (Miss Gandy and Clyde Tolsen) did not talk!
Overall I found the movie interesting because it was a biopic, but I didn’t think it was an exceptionally good movie. I expected more from Clint Eastwood than a laundry list of Hoovers triumphs and failures. Of course it was hard for me to spend 2 hours in the life of a man who I believe was misguided by his obsessiveness and evil in his vindictiveness. Also not for a minute was I not aware that DiCaprio was the actor behind the make-up. I don’t know if that’s because of mis-casting or bad acting – I believe it to be the former.
Related articles
- Dirty Harry does J. Edgar (canada.com)
- Hollywood’s Portrayal of J. Edgar Hoover (gameofroles.wordpress.com)
- Film Review: J. Edgar (2011) (themodernallegory.com)
Bill Ding and his band of clowns are the security patrol for this blog site. He is a favorite toy from the 50*s. By the way sometimes a blog is just an ego-maniacal stream of conscience.
Pbenjay's Blog 
“PHILOMENA” – A Journey of Faith and Forgiveness
Posted in From My Point of View - Personal commentary on Movies and Books, tagged Catholic Church, Daily Mail, Ireland, Judi Dench, Martin, Martin Sixsmith, Philomena, Steve Coogan, United States on January 13, 2014| Leave a Comment »
English: Magdalen Laundry in England, early 20th century. Scanned by Eloquence* from Finnegan, F.: Do Penance or Perish. A Study of Magdalen Asylums in Ireland. Congrave Press, Ireland, Piltown, Co. Kilkenny (2001). (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
With 12 Years A Slave and The Butler sounding the alarm and need for civil rights in America, there was another less-talked about atrocity taking place in Ireland. Across the sea in a convent in the town of Roscrea, Catholic nuns were running a babies-for-sale business.
If you were an unmarried and pregnant young girl in Ireland in the early 1950’s, you would surely be ostracized by your family and sent away to hide the shame you brought down on the family. The pregnancy was the result of a mortal sin, so it was only natural for the family to turn to the Church for guidance and counsel.
Philomena was sent away to the Roscrea Abbey to live and work until the baby was born. The girls were treated as sinners, as evidenced by the denial of any painkillers during a painful breech birth delivery. The girls signed away their rights to the baby and were indentured for years to repay the nuns for taking them in. It is the Magdalene laundries all over again. Childless Catholic American couples bought the babies and took them away to the United States. That’s the back story and the basis for Philomena’s 50 year search for her long lost son, Anthony.
The film is about that search. It was adapted from the book, The Lost Child of Philomena Lee written by Martin Sixsmith. Philomena hooks up with a fallen-from-grace journalist and together they set out to find Anthony who was renamed Michael and adopted by a Dr. Hess and his wife. It’s through Martin’s former Washington DC connections that facts are uncovered, names and whereabouts. The ensuing road trip is hysterical at times. Dame Judi Dench gives us an amazingly hilarious interpretive performance of woman whose mind is as Martin describes to his boss, “I’ve finally seen firsthand what a lifetime’s diet of Reader’s Digest, the Daily Mail and romantic fiction can do to a person’s brain.” Their odd couple odyssey has some of the movie’s best dialogue. As they travel across the big pond and back, Philomena’s unshakable faith and Martin’s (a fallen Catholic) disdain for religion clash. As Lee becomes more serene, more accepting of the situation and all the more forgiving, Martin boils with rage at the injustice, the hypocrisy, the lies and most of all the institutional piety.
To adapt the book to the big screen and to introduce to Michael, the film relied on home movie flashbacks, which was a very effective way to let the audience see Anthony (Michael) grow up, while keeping the focus on Philomena. There has been a decidedly different reaction to the movie. Some see it as another attack on the Catholic Church and others as a heart-wrenching love story of a mother.
I enjoyed the movie even though I had to endure the expected criticism of organized religion by my atheist husband. Being Catholic is not an advantage to viewing the movie, but there are moments that we appreciate all the more for being so.
Steve Coogan is truly wonderful as Martin Sixsmith. Mr. Coogan bought the rights to the book before he even read it and he co-wrote the screen play.
Related articles
Rate this:
Read Full Post »