Good, bad and ugly

Photo: PR, Tulip Media

• culture
• Theater
• Movie review

Clint Eastwood's new film tells the story of a security guard who saved a life in the Atlanta Olympics attack, but instead of winning a medal, became the prime suspect in the act. It has good things, such as game shows, but also ugly and sinister distortion of the facts, intended to defame the journalist involved in the affair

Movie Star Rating - 2 Star (Photo: Image Processing)

Avner Shavit

Clint Eastwood will celebrate her 90th birthday this May, and he continues to act vigorously as a young foal. And so every year comes a new movie halls that he directed. Last winter it was "The Separate," and now it's "Richard Jewell," who came up here this weekend.

Eastwood is energetic and consistent too. Year after year, he continues to express in his films the same worldview - the indignation of the individual and against aversion to large systems, especially the government and other official authorities. In "Sally," released here four years ago, he told the story of the pilot who succeeded against all odds to land his plane in Hudson and saved the lives of hundreds, but had to experience a harassment campaign by the National Road Safety Council, which he swore only to dare to violate some rules Dried. In "Richard Jewell," the story is similar: He is named after his hero, a junior security guard who was alerted to the 1996 Atlanta Olympics and managed to minimize his damage, but instead of receiving medals, he became a disservice to the main suspect in the act and was pursued by the FBI , Who did not apply antics to criminalize him.

Film heroes are often said to be the alter ego of their creators, but Richard Jewell turns out to be the absolute opposite of Eastwood. First of all, the director is remembering a Tamir and Sturdy cowboy. The security guard, played by Paul Walter Hauser, is Schmutz, who lives with his mother and is defined by the company as eccentric. More importantly: Unlike the filmmaker, who in the first place despises the authorities and has no trace of trust in them, the hero here worships them and insists on continuing to do so, even when they do his death. His dream was to be a police officer, and he refuses to see the light even when the police are so admired by the police.

Soon, ninety, and not stopping. Clint Eastwood (Photo: Image Bank)

Clint Eastwood (Photo: GettyImages)

As befits a director so veteran and prolific, Eastwood's body of work moves on a broad spectrum. He has wonderful and canonical films, such as "The Unforgivable," "Mystic River" and "Gran Torino," terribly awful films, such as "Jersey Boys," and also products like "Richard Jewell," the most correct way Describing his artistic level is "just fine." It is a solid drama, with no fake characters and unnecessary fat, but also no brilliance or transcendence.

The director describes here, in a succinct, matter-of-fact and chronological manner, the course of events. First of all, the hero's background story, whose affection and admiration for power complicated him and prevented him from proceeding professionally. Then, the resourcefulness he discovered during the Olympics. And then, of course, the crux of the plot - the wrong done by the federal agency, with no solid evidence, and only because it met the profile of the classic perpetrator at the time: a white man from the fringes of society, with extreme opinions and affection for weapons.

The directing is skilled, the screenplay is eloquent and effervescent, and viewing is enjoyable overall, though there is no suspense, since we know what happened in the end, and the path to it does not include any turns or complexity. If there is an up in the movie, these are the game shows - Paul Walter Hauser, who broke into "I Am Tonya," so convincing in the lead role that one might think that he is Richard Jewell himself. Sam Rockwell, who we have been seeing everywhere lately, embodies his old-time friend, a lawyer whose field of expertise is quite different, but becomes his legal representative, and he does so as he used to. Kathy Bates, the only team to receive an Oscar nomination, is also excellent as a hero to the hero's mother - and even John Hame, who has so far had trouble proving himself outside of "Mad Man," is excellent as the unstoppable FBI agent.

The game views are all great. From "Richard Jewel" (Photo: PR)

Richard Jewell (Photo: Tulip Media, PR)

The problem is that Eastwood presents the film as one thing, when in fact it turns out to be something else. On the face of it, this is the chronicle of the facts. In fact, the director distorts them to fit his agendas, and does so in an offensive and sexist way.

Authorities aren't the only target Eastwood is marking here. In the spirit of the best populist leaders today, he identifies another enemy - the media, defined here as the equally dangerous and dangerous sister of the authorities, and puts together a two-headed monster. According to "Richard Jewel," the Atlanta local press has gone hand in hand with the FBI to defame the poor hero, come down to life and convict him in a field trial. All of this is portrayed in a realistic and compelling way, as if it was an unquestionable truth, only that, by all evidence and evidence, there was no evidence that this had happened.

The media representative for the film is Kathy Scraggs, the local journalist who first revealed that the FBI suspects Jewel. In the play of Olivia Wild, Eastwood describes her as a sexual being. One of the first sentences she says relates to her breast size, and so it goes on. In one of the highlights of the plot, which also became the most controversial moment in the film, she even offers the federal agent her sexual services to get the incriminating information from him.

A film that hates journalists, especially journalists. From "Richard Jewel" (Photo: PR)

Richard Jewell (Photo: Tulip Media, PR)

This sexual bribery is a serious and offensive charge and has no basis. Eastwood and his screenwriter, Billy Ray, allow themselves to do this for a number of reasons: Because Kathy Scraggs has passed away, and she's not here to defend herself; Because they are so despised by the media that they care; And, apparently, because she was a woman.

Eastwood and Ray bother to emphasize the fact that Richard Jewell eventually died prematurely, probably as a result of the precipitation left by him. They have a little less empathy for the journalist, who has also died under previous circumstances, something not mentioned here. Nor do they really bother to elaborate on the final and dramatic act of this story: after a few years, the real perpetrator was discovered, and just as the FBI suspected, he was a white man, full of hatred for anyone different from him. This is a relevant fact, so why is it not mentioned? Maybe because the movie doesn't want us to be confused for a moment in identifying who the real dangers and enemies are.

There is not necessarily a problem with agendas. Every movie, probably a political-social drama, has one, and it deserves to be played even if they are populist and do not like us. The problem is that under the guise of a realistic, non-rapturous piece, Eastwood allows himself to distort the truth to his comfort and hurt anyone who is weak and unable to defend himself. "Richard Jewell" purports to make an outcry against Belial's sons who have done injustice to the helpless innocent, but his director turns out to be a rather insignificant douchebag himself.

The director turns out to be quite a small bag. From "Richard Jewel" (Photo: PR)

Richard Jewell (Photo: Tulip Media, PR)