J. Edgar, the Man, Was as Pissy as J. Edgar, the Film, Is Passionless and Plot-Starved

You might be better off spying on neighbors than Clint Eastwood’s unforgivable squandering of a great opportunity

jed 09358 J. Edgar, the Man, Was as Pissy as J. Edgar, the Film, Is Passionless and Plot Starved

DiCaprio as Hoover.

In spite of a fusillade of P.R. overkill about what a brave, risk-taking actor he is, and how he spent five hours a day in a makeup chair squirming, Leonardo DiCaprio’s portrait of a balding, sweaty, gristle-chewing, half-mad J. Edgar Hoover is gimmicky play acting. J. Edgar, Clint Eastwood’s exhausting chronicle of power obsession about the enigmatic, self-serving egomaniac who, as director of the F.B.I., kept America trembling with terror for half a century under the phony guise of patriotism, is a long, tedious and hollow disappointment.

Mr. Eastwood is too old to tackle a personality so complex; he knows nothing about what it takes to turn the character flaws of a cross-dressing mama’s boy into an attention-craving closet queen like Hoover. And how many prosthetics do we have to endure to watch Leonardo DiCaprio fake his way through roles like Howard Hughes and the forthcoming Frank Sinatra and Jay Gatsby—roles for which he is totally unsuited and therefore miscast. For now, we have another miscalculation in a bloodless film about a monster more pathetic than dangerous, with an odd, rambling screenplay by Oscar-winning writer Dustin Lance Black (Milk) that meanders all over the place unable to tell a story with any kind of narrative coherence. It’s not that J. Edgar is such a bad movie. (It’s not Melancholia.) But it is boring and ineffectual. There’s no passion behind it.

From his early days in the Justice Department to his death in 1972 at age 77, the movie leans heavily on the Max Factor jar to show boyish, cherubic Mr. DiCaprio in every phase of a controversial life. Some of the facts are a matter of public record. Named by Calvin Coolidge as the sixth director of what was then called the Bureau of Investigation, J. Edgar rose to glory and in 1935 was appointed by U. S. Attorney General Harlan Fiske Stone (Ken Howard) as the first director of the newly organized F.B.I.—a position he assumed was “for life.” For the next 36 years he made all the rules, sodomized the Constitution, declared war on everything he disliked from “Bolshevik radicals” to Martin Luther King, set back the progress of the civil rights movement, used force to root out every suspected communist, and arrested 4,000 people by the time he was only 24 years old. Yes, he initiated a lot of crime-fighting technology, including fingerprints, wire-tapping and forensics labs. But he also used the F.B.I. to intimidate celebrities and public figures, harass political activists, and illegally collect secret files of alleged evidence and hearsay against everyone from mob bosses to Marilyn Monroe. Insanely jealous, he fired staff members with poor educations and cheap wardrobes and ruined the careers of special law-enforcement agents who became heroes in the tabloids, such as Chicago’s Melvin Purvis, the man who actually tracked down and killed John Dillinger while Hoover took all the credit and drove him to suicide in 1960. Soft-soaping his corruption, the movie barely touches on these facts and refuses to take a stand on the many ways he proved himself a major hypocrite. While ranting homophobic prejudices against gays, he was a closet homosexual who carried on a private love affair with assistant deputy F.B.I. director Clyde Tolson (played softly by Armie Hammer, who appeared as Mark Zuckerberg’s handsome twin adversaries in The Social Network). Inseparable, the two men are shown kissing only one time in their 40-year relationship, following a fist fight on the floor when Hoover announced he was going to marry Dorothy Lamour. Despite documented eyewitness accounts of Hoover’s secret passion for cross-dressing, fueled by his strong, dominating mother (Judi Dench, flawless again), he is revealed posing with his mother’s necklace and silk dress against his chest only once, following her death. (F.B.I. employees behind his back called him “J. Edna Hoover”.)


  1. johndog says:

    “Mr. DiCaprio’s King of the G-Men is no new-age, old-school rough guy like Elliot Ness. He’s something of a sawed-off pipsqueak with a mean-spirited and ruthless pursuit of personal glory at everyone else’s expense.”  
    so, the movie got it exactly right? and this is bad because?

  2. Ruth says:

    Don,t listen to Rex Reed. Go and see the movie and make up your own mind. Clint Eastwood makes good movies, but he is a conservative, so no one in Liberal Hollywood will give him a good review, but we all know that Clint makes wonderful movies.

  3. nemov says:

    I guess Reed doesn’t know that there’s no evidence Hoover was a cross dresser, but willful ignorance is the norm these days.

    1. Jason says:

      “Mr. Eastwood is too old to tackle a personality so complex; he knows
      nothing about what it takes to turn the character flaws of a
      cross-dressing mama’s boy into an attention-craving closet queen like

      What the hell does that mean? Is Rex telling us that HE (from personal
      experience?) is more suited to the task? Or maybe some 25 year old with
      no life experience?  Sorry Rex, but you’re coming off as a bitchy little
      queen.  What’s the matter, did Clint (or J. Edgar Hoover?) not return your calls?

      1. DaPower says:

        Rex Reed is too old to tackle a review of a movie of a personality so complex!

    2. Jeff says:

      He doesn’t know or care. Just like Hoover, whom he reviles, Reed believes his worldview is more important than the truth. What Reed hates about Hoover isn’t is his methods – he’s just jealous that Hoover used them more successfully.

    3. Teasleyj says:

      After the USSR dissolved it was found in their files that the whole ‘cross dressing’ thing was made up by them and circulated in their disinformation campaign against the U.S..  It is common knowledge by anyone who is interested in the truth.  Obviously the state run media is not interested in the truth.

      1. Bob says:

        Well neither is Eastwood. I won’t see the movie based on the obvious flaws in the script and I don’t see DeCRAPrio movies.

      2. skippy says:

        bob is that you

  4. I would like to see it, Love Clint Eastwood, I would see anything he was in or directed. I would like to see J. Edgar Hoovers Life story right from the beginning and from Clints view of it. , Do you mind Rex?

  5. jamesb says:

    It’s worth noting that Nixon made the FBI subordinate to the Justice Department, and had as his reward Deepthroat, the would-be director of the FBI who lost out because of Nixon’s actions.

  6. Chris Marrou says:

    Sounds like Rex is unhappy that Clint didn’t grind every axe he wanted ground in this movie.
    By the way, Rex, if it’s a bad thing that J Edgar was gay….

    1. Duke says:

      … then Rex is a hypocritical old queen??   …….SCORE!! 

  7. Anonymous says:

    Sounds like a good flick. I’m in.

  8. Fearless Bystander says:

    I knew Hoover, and you, Mr. DiCaprio, are no J. Edgar Hoover. What in the world was Eastwood thinking?

  9. Wayne says:

    Rex Reed is too old to still be writing this bitchy crap.

  10. Hoser Man says:

    I’m confused. Is the purpose of the movie to tell the life of  J Edgar in some coherent way or spend four hours in describing his abhorrent  behavior. Not having seen the movie, obviously, I’m seeing it with open eyes and brain, since I already know of his frailties, hoping to understand his reasons. History does speak volumes of J Edgar’s proclivities, methods of administrating the FBI and his cross-dressing. If the movie doesn’t show the true J Edgar then Clint has done a disservice to his audience. 

  11. vixapphire says:

    So, is the problem that the film details Hoover’s exploits and achievements as chief investigator of the federal government over 50 years but doesn’t try to color viewers’ appreciation of those achievements (however dubious; I’m not trying to editorialize them as good or bad) with opprobrium for Hoover’s personal life?  

    The reviewer seems disappointed that it’s not a film mostly about what J. Edgar liked to do with his pee-pee.  Now, *that* would’ve been a wasted opportunity.

  12. Gsnarks says:

    Jedgar Hoover was a bigger smirch on America’s character than Nixon ever thought of being, and as such deserves excoriation from here through eternity.  Whitewashing the damage he did to our nation’s integrity is a crime unto itself, and Mr. Reed, who personally suffered through the man’s predation, is absolutely justified in calling out this waste of a film. 

    Also, DiCaprio looks like a ninny.

  13. Robert B says:

    The person who should retire is Rex Reed, not Clint Eastwood. This hate-filled diatribe is not a review–it is a hate filled diatribe. The fact is that no one has ever shown that Hoover was a crossdresser or a homosexual, though they have tried mightily. Reed says Hoover held America in terror for 50 yrs. Funny, I’m 62 and I don’t remember being in fear of him. Of course, I wasn’t a gangster, in the mafia, a communist, or Ku Klux Klansman, or a Hollywood elitist. It’s sad, but Rex Reed is way to old to be reviewing movies. From these ramblings it’s obvious he’s losing it.

    1. cattyfan says:

      I was intending to write something similar as to what you, Robert B, have already said so well.  Let me just add a little…

      From what I can tell, the movie is not grounded in any kind of reality…it’s just another of  Hollywood’s attempt to stain a respected American.  But Rex Reed’s verbose, vitriolic screed is just as offensive.

      1. “attempt to stain a respected American”????????   Respected by who?  A man such as J Edgar Hoover does not deserve the respect of anyone.  His actions to impede the civil rights movement and besmirch the reputation of Dr Martin Luther King who’s only goal was to win equality for African-Americans, should be enough to convince anyone that this despicable man and his life is nothing more than a cautionary tale of how power can be misused to the detriment of an entire country in the hands of a soulless miscreant like J Edgar Hoover.  In my opinion he does not deserve a movie documenting his life, even if said movie paints him as the monster we all know him to be.  And what bothers me even more are the buildings and roads named after him.  What does that say about our country?  We try and teach our children the importance of character and integrity, but when we honor men like Hoover it sends a very troubled and mixed message.  I’m sure Adolph Hitler accomplished some good and maybe even helped some of his people, but any good he might have done means absolutely nothing when weighed against his attempted extermination of all Jews and the hundreds of thousands of men women and children he slaughtered in Jewish death camps.  I’m not saying that Hoover and Hitler are the same, I’m just pointing out how ridiculous it is to attach anything noble to the life of a very evil and troubled man (Hoover).  

        ……………and that’s how I feel about it.

      2. MichaelBael says:

        I’m disconcerted that Mr Reed’s review and Mr
        Spencer’s comment provoked so much vitriol.  Almost invariably, these
        critiques forego extolling Mr Hoover’s strengths and accomplishments (e.g.,
        developing fingerprinting as a cornerstone of forensics, being a proponent of
        “information technology” before that term would even have meant
        anything, having the bureaucratic savvy to build the FBI into a major
        institution, and possessing the loyalty to his male companion to maintain a
        loving relationship for nearly 50 years in the face of a brutally homophobic
        culture– whether they were gay or not).  


        Instead, Mr Reed’s and Mr Spencer’s critics
        employ the same slanders they accuse mssrs Reed and Spencer of misusing by hurling
        invectives like “bitchy little queen,” “too old,” and “deCRAPrio movies.”


        I admit that I’m not much of a fan of either J
        Edgar Hoover or J Edgar the
        movie.  But both deserve serious debate
        without name-calling or grandstanding.


    2. Mike Harlow says:

      My sentiments exactly.  There certainly were communists in our country, in government and media, and there still are.  The like to take shots at J. for finding them out, while they slither around undermining American society. 

    3. Imsancho42 says:

      well said, Rex is guilty of exactly the type of fear-mongering and lying he accuses Hoover of.  This is a hack job

    4. Roadmaster says:

      Couldn’t have said it any better, Robert.  I’m no fan of Leo, but this is far over the top!  And don’t even mess with my man, Clint…

  14. Robert B says:

    Oh! By the way, Reed says Hoover drove Melvin Purvis, who brought down John Dillinger, to suicide by taking credit for Dillinger’s demise. Okay. Dillinger died somewhere around 1935 and Purvis in 1960. Reed thinks he still acting in Myra Breckenridge. 

  15. Mister_Indifferent1 says:

    I’m baffled as to how people seem to shrug off how Helen Gandy spent weeks destroying files.  She was a simple, blind power-worshipper, a glorified secretary who worked for a glorified hypocrite.  She was given a godly level of power and access, and why?  Because of her diploma from the University of “Yes Mista Hoovah.” 

    Politics aside, think of the information that was lost.  Why destroy it?

  16. Mr Sugarland says:

    Rex Reed is still alive? No way!

  17. Stuart (Austin, TX) says:

    “Kept America trembling with terror”?!?  Give me a break, Rex.  J. Edgar Hoover was an effective FBI director, unlike most of his successors.  9-11 would NEVER have happened on his watch.

  18. Corey says:

    Who gives a shit what some a-hole on the internet says about a movie?  See it for yourself, if you like it – great, if not, oh well, there’s always some other cheese-fest being produced for next week.

  19. Anonymous says:

    I could have told you that it was going to suck when I knew who the main character was.  The Hollywood left hated Hoover.  Plus the fact that the only actor worse than Decprio is……well I can’t think of one right now.

  20. amplitude jones says:

    s k a n k  anti-American vermin pig democrats hate the USA, hate those who protect the USA and clint said nice things about Herman Cain- so of course the vile nasty vulgar greedy CREEP will give a bad review~!!

  21. Anonymous says:

    Actually I thought of a worse actor than Decaprio.  Ben Affleck is the absolute worst.

  22. Giacomo Geist says:

    Why all the bitter partisanship over this?
    Rex is passionate about some things. He’s earned the right to spout a bit.
    I take it in stride, even if I disagree with his opinions outside of the subject of cinema.
    Rex is not too old to be writing reviews, anymore than Eastwood is too old to be directing them.
    It’s good to have seasoned professionals on both sides of the screen.
    I enjoy both. I hope they continue.

  23. Chae_thomas says:

    Perhaps the reviewer is gay and didn’t get satisfied that Eastwood didn’t crucify the character

  24. Dave says:

    Do not give credibility to Rex Reed!  I don’t know if j. edgar is any good or not but I do know that Mr. Reed can’t judge a movie!  I learned that many years ago.  I spent good money to see two movie Mr. Reed raved over.  Last Tango in Paris and Siddartha.  Both movies are awful. 

  25. Anonymous says:

     I don’t think there’s too much info on Hoover. He had few friends, there sure as hell is no FBI dossier on him, he was never arrested or put on trial. Everyone was scared of the guy. I don’t see how you could come up with a script, unless you just make it all up.

  26. Heartsparkdollar says:

    I went to this movie tonight, at an advanced screening. It was not a good movie. It made no sense. There was really no story. He (Hoover) was supposed to be telling his FBI history to an agent, that was it. Four or five different chapters in his career. His “love affair” affair with Tolson was alluded to, but not really shown. Hogging the spotlight at every opportunity, and black-mailing Presidents to keep himself in power. Eastwoods worst movie.

    The rumors and innuendoes that have made Hoover a closeted homosexual, and all that goes with it, are clearly highlighted.

    People that will like this movie? Everyone on the left of the political spectrum. Clintwood may be center-right politically, but he made a movie that will strongly appeal to those on the left. People on the right will not like this movie.

    Hoover died when I was a child so I have no horse in this race. But the people who enjoy seeing great people brought down from pedestals will walk out of the theater with smiles.

    This movie is also too long. The make-up is shoddy. The acting is forced. The only decent acting in this movie is by Naomi Watts, who plays Hoovers secretary.

  27. Tsicby says:

    What Rex Reed said.

  28. Richard says:

    Apparently Mr. Reed’s experience as a “Queen” makes him better suited than Mr. Eastwood to understand the complexity of being high profile, while hiding your sexual preference. Pleeeeease, Hoover was an evil man who violated the Constitution and entertained Presidents, like Johnson who loved to know who the real sissies were in Hollywood and the Media. It is important that we see Hoover for what he was, so that we never again allow such a vile man to dominate our country. For decades because of what he knew, Hoover was in fact the most powerful man in D.C.. The FBI Headquarters needs to be named after someone else!

  29. William says:

     Right Nemov.  Too bad somebody who ought to know better didn’t do his homework. Rex is an idiot and I got what I expected, but Clint should have known better. FDR is now a hero even if HE wanted to intern the Japanese Americans and did it over Hoover’s head.

  30. swhiplash says:

    Bravo Mr. Reed!!

  31. Anonymous says:

    Wow..  If I didn’t know Rex Reed, I would swear this was written by an adolescent closeted gay homophobic.

    Lots and lots of errors in this review.  Its like he went on the internet and stole every trite rumor and strung it together as a movie review. 

    He should not have been paid for this review.  Its AWFUL.

  32. maxfactor says:

    when summing up the life of this rat, just can the lurid scatological details of his life and simply focus on his role as chief agent of one of the most repressive, bloodthirsty police-states in the history of mankind.

    From the Jim Crow south to COINTELPRO, this sob was there for it all using the full arsenal available to the cops and courts:  murder, espionage, mayhem, racist cop riots, anti-union busting, illegal search & seizure etc. etc. etc.

    the only good news about Hoover is that he is dead.  I’m glad that any attempt to lionize him on the big screen has fallen flat on its face.  hopefully it will go direct to the dvd can.

  33. Peter Conlon says:

    ******* Rex Reed being Gay  ccannot be objective here either. It’s that simple. He assumes too much and while he is correct in DiCaprio taking on roiles he’s not suited for this critique is Political. Deep down he wanted a more ripping expose of Hoover. Also the Watergate analogy is possibly inaccurate(?) If those files still existed and in Nixon’s hands – well who knows – interest in those tapes might have evaporated overnite.

  34. Anonymous says:

    Reed is a caricature not a film critic.

  35. schema says:

    Reed has his thumb up his ass again.  You are historically perverse, ideologically adrift, and thin upstairs.  Retire, Rex and do something productive, like growing a small garden & playing bingo on weekends. 

  36. Lou12 says:

    Rex in full blown hate.  But how was the movie?

  37. Jab says:

    J.Edgar needs to be remembered for the hero he was.  Commie’s are the enemy.
    We need J.Edgar and Joe McCarthy now more than ever.

  38. It looks like Reed got his “facts” from Hoover’s bio on Wikipedia. Hoover turned 24 in 1919. How did
    he managed to arrest over 4,000 people by the age of 24 if the Bureau wasn’t started until the mid-1920s? John Dillinger was killed in 1934. Reed wants us to believe that Hoover drove Melvin Purvis
    to commit suicide over a quarter of a century later.  I have read and heard that Rex Reed was a gifted and skilled film critic. There is nothing in this mess to support those assertions.   

  39. T4rsr5 says:

    Worst movie review I ever read! Are you reviewing the film, or just giving your opinion of Hoover? Obviously the latter.  Boo! Rotten Tomatoes Rex Reed!
    Now one thing I can agree with (at least to the extent that I have not seent he film yet) DiCaprio is probably miscast, as you say, but I will not say that for sure till I see it.

  40. Anonymous says:

    Hollywood stable of pretty ” actors and actresses” bore me to tears.   I understand that the name DiCaprio can bring in investors’ dollars. but the boy is no  actor-he is an utter bore. 

  41. Dconn_7 says:

    Ridiculous libkooks were in too much of a hurry to discredit the FBI and it’s founder to worry about an actual plot.  Happens.  Get RID of the libkooks so we can repair and rebuild our nation.

  42. Aunt Bee says:

     Hoover denied for years that organized crime even existed. He was
    blackmailed by the mob that had evidence of his ‘alternative’ lifestyle.
    He was a compromised degenerate that sold out the country and the
    people. He was the poster boy for decrepitude and decay. 

    click on my name for more about compromised government

  43. Anonymous says:

    Aw, come on people! Mr. Reed certainly knows something about cross dressing. It seems I remember a movie role he played one time, let me see Myra Breckenridge, that was one of his major accomplishments. To be criticizing Clint when Rexy boy is now seventy three seems…odd.

  44. 98109klc says:

    I thought Rex Reed was dead, hum.

  45. Blee0744 says:

    This review is just another example of an old queen like Reed viewing everything through the lens of his own perversions.  The deviate community tries relentlessly to create this “cross dressing” image in order to perpetuate the Hoover was a Homo myth.  They think that if they convince others that great historical figures were deviates also, then their homosexuality will gain acceptance as a normal lifestyle.

  46. Patrick Kelly says:

    Speaking of long, tedious, and hollow, this review is a distorted cartoon of an FBI that never was under J. Edgar Hoover.  Whatever Hoover’s personal eccentric failures might have been, he neverthless somehow assembled a very professional team of to[ law enforcement investigators at a time in American history from the 1930s to the 1970s when such a project had never been attempted before anwhere in the free world.   There were thousands of people in the FBI who were dedicated to the rule of law within the Consttution and their patrtiotism was by no means fake.  Many of them gave their lives for the law and were heroes but Hoover himself was not in that category.

  47. Joel says:

    How funny to be pissed at a bunch of liberals doing a piss poor job of making a film about a non liberal.  DiCrapio is a leftist marxist no talent shit who is loved by the media for his aggressive anti american attitude.  The stupid american people richly reward him.  And Rex Reed is the exact same excrement.

  48. Rleaton2 says:

    Holy cow…is Rex Reed certifiably insane?  His rant is just crazy!

  49. Jmacs1 says:

    Is Reed gay?  Oh I guess he has an axe to grind

  50. Anonymous says:

    Let me guess — Rex Reed is a liberal?

  51. robin cradles says:

    I thought you were dead.

  52. Anybody that helped to deconstruct the Democrat power base… Including the Mafia, Reds, and Klansmem is villified by liberal’s.  Was he perfect no.  Nobody is.  I for one salute him for the good that he did. 

  53. Indy says:

    Gee, another movie out of hollywierd not worth seeing.

  54. One of those 911 truthers huh?  No thanks.  Alot of people didn’t know the mob existed.  If you didn’t live in Any of the big blue cities back then (all controlled by democrat pols who helped support them with there control of city contracts and the police btw).  What do you expect him to be all-knowing or something?  So he missed the Mobs.  He got the Reds though.  Or does that anger you as well?

  55. greenmtnpunter says:

    Nothing about Hoover’s cover up following JFK’s assassination? Hoover and Richard Helms feared that their intel failures may have been exposed and their careers ended. Still millions of sealed files in connection with the JFK assassination. Why?!

  56. Been says:

    Isn’t this cute. We are still dredging up political caricatures of anti-communists long gone.

    How about some attack movies about chavez or the castro brothers, or the hammer and sickle guys butchering Tibetans TODAY ? Or even ho chi minh whose political groupies killed some 6 million in vietnam, laos and cambodia.

  57. Sampson says:

    This article contains a lot of hearsay: first, that J. Edgar was a cross-dresser. There are a lot of rumors of public cross-dressing, but none substantiated; odd considering the same people claim he did so at mob parties that just so happened to be devoid of any photography. Furthermore, the claim that he was nick-named ‘J. Edna’ is taken from a WIKIPEDIA article, which took the name from a Rotten dot com article, the authors of which acknowledged in a later NNDB article that the cross-dressing rumors are not backed up by any solid evidence.Also, the outright claim that Eleanor Roosevelt was a lesbian is, again, hearsay, backed up only by affectionate letters of hers that contain no more sentimentality than was acceptable for one to write to a dear friend or relative. Though Hoover certainly thought so and collected the aforementioned letters as potential blackmail, claiming outright that she WAS a lesbian is a bit too presumptuous for a columnist, even one paid to write opinions.
    It is indeed strange that they would depict so little of the actual romance between Hoover and Tolson. But bear in mind that so much is based on outside observation, hearsay, and presumption (albeit with very few other logical conclusions). It would therefore be difficult to depict their relationship without resorting to fantasy and much creative license, which they had hoped to avoid (whether or not they actually did so is a debate for another day.)

  58. Anonymous says:

    I am sure that Rex would have loved the film had it pressed the lie that Hoover was GAY

  59. rsjoberg says:

    I’ll make sure I see this movie. Thanks, Rex!

  60. Bob says:

    Rex Reed missed the point.  This movie isn’t supposed to be good, it’s all about hollywood liberals slamming Hoover through the fabrication of lies, innuendo and half truths.

  61. Sir you are a bigot.  You said Mr. Eastwood is “too old” to take on the story of J Edgar.  Regardless of the movie, its actors or the portrayal of the time in history to call one “too Old” is plain bigotry.  I stopped reading the article immediately when I read that.  Why?  Because ALL Credibility you had was lost in that instant.  A true journalist or movie reviewer should hold themselves to a standard of decency that is, sadly to say, not found in modern journalism. 

    The movie may not be what you want to see but to call a man no good just because of his age is sick.  Eastwood’s skills and focus may be questionable (for example his fascination with suicide) but I would venture to say that his age has nothing to do with it. 

  62. Anonymous says:

    When you are NOT the focal  point of media attention ANYMORE, the LIBERAL PLAYBOOK is to say something outrageous.

    Just another frustrated has-was that is looking for attention. 

  63. What an ass…I went to the screening and everyone there loved it, as did my hubs and I…I would actually pay to see it again

  64. Evildoc says:

    Who wrote and who edited this awful column?

    “J. Edgar, the Man, Was as Pissy as J. Edgar, the Film, Is Passionless and Plot-Starved”, is not a sentence.

    “Mr. Eastwood is too old to tackle a personality so complex”. This is bigotry.

    I gave up on the article after that.

    I week for the education of today’s columnists.

    1. Evildoc says:

      “weep” not “week”. Sorry for the typo

  65. Goeastwood says:

    “Mr. Eastwood is too old to tackle a personality so complex”…..what kind of moron writes this kind of ad hominem? Jealous, Mr. Reed?

  66. Anonymous says:

    I haven’t seen the movie so don’t know if it’s any good but from reading the review, it sounds like the reviewer devotes most of his space to attack the real J. Edgar. When you dislike a historical figure that much only your own production reflecting your own views will suffice.

  67. Holger says:

    Given Rex Reed’s record as a movie critic, Clint Eastwood can look forward to another Oscar.

  68. LelandR says:

    This isn’t a review, it’s a blathering hissy-fit.   Rex Reed, this is just another example of why you absolutely do not matter at all outside of your own small circle.   You, and they, stopped being relevant ages ago.

  69. Cmhollins2000 says:

    Rex, How did you get to be such an asshole?

  70. Schumach says:

    Ah, Rex…Communists are very bad people. They kill, degrade, mame, destroy, plot, murder, lie, hate God, make religion illegal, manipulate, threaten, destroy liberty, no freedom….just to name a few. I certainly want an FBI director to keep an eye on these evil people. Why wouldn’t you?

  71. Keika says:

    A magnificent review!  A history lesson for us all.  Bravo, Mr. Reed!  

  72. Joe says:

    What is really wrong with you?

  73. eugen says:

    Reed idiotically calls Emma Goldman a liberal. She was a self-proclaimed communist anarchist.

  74. titebuttrexy says:

    If Rex Reed rips a movie, you can BOOK IT – that it will be a financial smash.
    The old coot(Reed) is so jealous – you can just about see his veins busting
    in his trivial rant.

  75. Anonymous says:

    Wow, Rex Reed is still alive?

  76. jack slap says:

    God this reviewer sound like HES IN THE CLOSET.  Relax buddy, you’ll live longer.. LOL ROFLMAO you dolt

  77. jack slap says:

    And by the way.. MR FAKE NAME.  Rex Reed!  What is that your secret fantasy porn name! PLEASE

  78. Bill M says:

    Reed is just mad because Eastwood didn’t spend ninety five percent of the movie PLAYING up the ,,,,unproven,,,, fact that Hoover was  a FLAMING FAG (gay person)… It would have been HIGH DRAMA,,,, Oscar material,,,,, if Hoover danced and pranced around in a pink chiffon night-ie, instead of acting like the head of the FBI…..

  79. Darknyytt says:

    heh..didn’t like Milk, doesn’t like Hoover…color me surprised. Note to Mr. Reed-you are as qualified to be  a movie critic as Obama is to be President. Quit now, while you still can. Saying Mr. Eastwood is “too old”…REALLY?

  80. Anonymous says:

    Im wondering, aside from rumor and hearsay what facts are established about his sexuality one way or the other. Everything ive read points to it being simply rumors that were created by hollywood in order to get revenge for his blackmail and other shoddy treatment they recieved from him.

  81. Bob says:

    Hoover was not a homosexual. Reed is an  old queen and needs to retire.

  82. Sparxx says:

    Too bad Hoover is not the Director now.  Political correctness is killing this once great agency.

  83. This has convinced me…to see it!

  84. Ramonzmania says:

    Calling Emma goldman a “liberal activist” is like calling fidel Castro a retired lawyer…..In the genius of hindsight it’s easy to criticize the deportation of foreign reds who were advocating armed rebellion worldwide and in many cases, preparing for it right here. We can’t calculate the harm prevented by ousting foreign reds and later ,Nazis from our country, we can only record the often shaky legal methods used to accomplish it.

  85. Jon7564 says:

    Obviously, this guy is still pissed about the way Hollywood was hounded over the communist thing. Really, who would imagine that those good, wholesome citizens in Hollywood would be anything other than patriotic Americans…
    Hey…. wait a minute….

  86. Frank Zapalac says:

    This review highlights the Hollywood Left’s distain for all things patriotic.  As a former FBI agent, I can tell you that within the ranks, no one could keep a secret for more than thirty minutes.  With all of the agents who surrounded Mr. Hoover every day of his life, not one ever suggested that there was anything out of the ordinary in his relationship with Mr. Tolson.  The plain truth is that both men were married to the Bureau.  People like Mr. Reed, who look at the world through a Leftist prism, do a disservice to all exposed to their lunatic rantings.

  87. Bbracco says:

    didn’t know Rex Reed was still alive, Thought he buried himself alive after he saw his dailies in
    Myra Breckenricge

  88. Anonymous says:

    I still need to read a couple of more reviews on this before deciding to see it. But if older FBI agents like it that’s a hell of a lot better opinion than some old Hollywood fag critic.

  89. MBADave says:

    Not to mention the lead Actor is a twink. Hoover was more of a Capone type. 

  90. Al Wingate says:

    It appears to me that Rex is more interested in pointing out that Mr. Eastwood has dropped the ball in taking the opportunity to hammer and bash Hoover for his alleged shortcomings as Rex would obviously prefer to do. Rex, your essay reads more like a critique of Hoovers career than a review of a movie. It makes me want to ask “It’s clear you don’t like Hoover, now tell us what you think of Clint Eastwood’s latest movie.” Your review gets a thumbs down.,

  91. Anonymous says:

    If Mr. Eastwood is (for reasons I suspect only Reed could explain) too old to make this movie; is it possible that Reed is too old to review it?

  92. Chip says:

    Thanks Rex!  If you think it’s awful I’m sure it’s pretty good.  It’s always funny when I heard a bed-wetter like you run down someone that you’d have to climb a ladder to kiss his back side. Thanks again, I’ll be sure and see now!

  93. Anonymous says:

    I didn’t even know Reed was still alive yet alone reviewing anything. I followed a link on the Drudge Report. Well, good for her, the old queen seems to have lost none of her mindless venom,

  94. AbeMartin says:

    You have really jumped the shark, here, Rex.  Sounds as if you still resent the fact you were never invited over to his and Clyde’s place for one of the boys’ special costume parties.

  95. Chevy9393 says:

    I remember Rex Reed from years ago.  I came to the conclusion, that if he “bashed” a movie, it was a “must see”.  If he liked it, don’t even think about going to see it!!  I also remember Myra Breckinridge in which he co-starred.  That’s when i made up my mind–what a bomb that was!!

  96. mark douglas says:

    If I had not seen this on Drudge, I would never even know that Rex Reed was still alive
    He has been around for 60 yrs ?, I remember him as being a bitchy queen, and sad to say he still is a bitchy queen, only now, senile as well

    1. Oona says:

      Based on your comment, Reed can only be considered an expert on  J. Edna.   Thanks, Rex, for telling it like it is.

  97. Peter Egan says:

    Without having seen the movie, I cannot vouch for the author’s take that it was a grave disappointment. That being said, this was a masterpiece of a review.

  98. J. says:

    “kept America trembling with terror” others would say he kept America safe. Mr. Reed, the historical record shows Hoover was mostly, if not totally correct. Your hatchet job of a “review” tells me that this might a good film after all.  And as Robert says, “The fact is that no one has ever shown that Hoover was a crossdresser or a homosexual,” shows that you are precisely the kind of Stalinist that Mr. Hoover would have gone after.

  99. Resipsapen says:

    Funny thing…. it turns out Hoover was pretty much right about our government being infiltrated by communist spies …. including the Manhatten Project in Los Alamos during WWII

    1. Oona says:

      And after WWII, our government was hijacked by Nazi sympathizers (like the Dulles brothers who were lawyers for IG Farben) who imported lots of  Nazi experts in rocketry, aviation, espionage, biowarfare, in  Operation Paperclip.  And what was the eventual result? The unPatriot act and GPS surveillance at the whim of Big Brother  for every American via cellphone.

  100. Joshua says:

    Rex Reed’s hatred brings up the obvious: methinks thou doth protest too much.

    If DiCaprio spent the film in drag engaging in homosexual acts that would qualify him for the Penn State coaching team, then Mr. Reed might say director Eastwood was “brave and edgy, an honest interpretation…”

    An absolutely pathetic column by the long time film critic  . . .

  101. GJ says:

    Eastwood sucks and always has.  He got his gig in Hollywood cuz he was cute…about 2 centuries ago now.   As a director his films are visually ugly (bleary browns, crap greens – color work generally like sewage) and his scripts are pompous, PC social studies lectures for slow 3rd graders. That drag alone at great length as wel on the basis of italicized performances of no distinction.   Couldn’t he work his black pal – Hollywood’s official saint – into this one somewhere?     Eastwood made a career fakely sucking up to the American red neck audience while actually sneering down at it.   He’s a dirt bag.
    Reed is a bitch, but he’s spot on if he knocks Eastwood for being a dumb ass, because he is and has always been one.  I’ve never seen a movie of his I could sit through.    And this actor – who went from being Hollywood’s very first hermaphrodite in Titanic, has become a fat faced, boring dud, who may no longer be ‘as pretty as a girl’ but who is certainly as lacking in male equipment of any kind. 

  102. Gosh!  Do you think the fact Eastwood likes Herman Cain could have had something to do with review?  Rex is just upset he didn’t get to see more man on man action.  Hang out much at Barney Frank’s place, Rex?

  103. Anonymous says:

    I will take a cross dressing FBI director who knows who the real enemy is vs some of the wussy’s we have in govt today.

    1. DaPower says:

      …or some of the one’s posing as relevant movie reviewers!

  104. Anonymous says:

    Rex, did any of your journalism or literature professors ever discuss run-on sentences with you?

  105. Oona says:

    And J. Edna, to curry favor with LBJ and keep his job “for life,” helped cover up JFK’s murder. Reed’s  so called “hate-filled” diatribe falls short of the diatribe that ought to be directed at one of the world’s foremost villains.

  106. josh says:

    haters gonna hate

  107. Pastordroberts says:

    To get noticed at all anymore, Reed must print outrageous remarks.  He’s like bad comedy that relies on gutter talk to get a laugh.

  108. Oona says:

     Whoa,  Reed’s eloquent article certainly has brought out the hounds — the government-paid disinfo cybertrollers.  Poor Leonard.  Poor Clint. They have dared to portray the  criminality of one of the formerly untouchable Barons of our Shadow Government.  It won’t  be long before DiCaprio and Eastwood experience the persecution — the IRS investigations, the total audio and video surveillance, the financial difficulties, the slander,  inflicted  on Randy Quaid.  (The extrajudicial punishment system of the Surveillance State.)

  109. David Archer says:

    “Yes, he initiated a lot of crime-fighting technology, including fingerprints, wire-tapping and forensics labs.”   “His phony bravura did, to be truthful, result in the eventual passing of the “Lindbergh law,” making kidnapping a federal offense punishable by death. ”    The fact that you made these two statements as some weak attempt at balance to your previous attacks says it all. Liberals like yourself are never going to give him credit, and you’re certainly not going to give an artist credit, when they don’t flat out make a movie that portrays him as Satan. Oh, I’m sorry Rex, you’re a liberal, Satan is not real. Umm,  portrays him as BushRacistSocks and Sandals wearer, or whatever your ultimate evil is. If we count the lives saved since he implemented these practices, it would probably be in the hundreds of thousands. If not more. Was he perfect, no, was he a hypocrite, probably. If he was gay and hiding it, it was very much do to with the fact that, that was where the country was. Like most liberals, you vilify the effect and not the cause. He wasn’t the reason the country was bigoted, he was bigoted and scared because the country made him that way. You make it sound as if only he had come out of the closet in 1950, there would have been a homosexual renaissance. Right. He didn’t create the Communist scare in this country either, it made him. There were Communists trying to infiltrate this country, history bore this out. Now I’m certainly not trying to excuse his actions, or say that homophobia is ok, I’m  just making the point that he didnt’ invent these concepts, he was a victim of them himself. But I digress. Clint Eastwood has been making great movies for years, and now suddenly when he makes a balanced movie about a liberal boogeyman he sucks? When the man that wrote Milk got his hands on J Edgar, he suddenly turned into a hack? Not quite Rex. Let’s contrast your love for Milk, with your disdain for this movie. I would guess they are proportional. So what’s the difference? Not the writer, or the quality of director. Nope, just subject matter. You should leave your politics at the ticket counter and out of your reviews Rex.

    1. DaPower says:

      Bravo!! Let’s face it…Rex Reed is a hack, pure and simple. His so-called “talent” doesn’t hold a candle to Clint Eastwood, much less a great American like J. Edgar Hoover. 

      By the way…how many Americans will remember Rex Reed when he’s gone? 

      Funny thing is…most thought he was dead along time ago!

  110. g says:

    This has been/never was isn’t dead yet?

  111. PeterS says:

    J Edgar Hoover was a great American. If he were alive today and head of the FBI, Obama would be in Jail as would Chris Dodd and Bunny Frank and allthe Board of Directors of Goldman Sachs..

  112. Rex you old fart-go take a nap and get the wrinkles out of your forehead!  You have been a joke for over 20 years. I’m sure Clint is all upset that you don’t like it that he didn’t make his movie into another lying queer diatribe. Who has all those Oscars?  Ain’t you little boy.

  113. R Cress says:

    I don’t put much stock in Reed on anything.  As far as the cross dressing, it’s interesting that the only one ever to “witness” this cross dressing homosexual behavior was a woman known to bear a grudge against Hoover.  Also interesting is that she claimed the behavior took place at crowded hotel parties… funny that no one else recognized J. Edgar in drag.  While he may have had some ego problems, much like McCarthy he was vilified for an acceptable amount of collateral damage in recognizing and dealing with a real threat.  I do fault Hoover though, for claiming that the communist problem in our government was taken care of.  I think he failed to recognize the repackaging iterations of communism as it evolved, ultimately into the current progressive movement.

  114. chuckwalla says:

    “Thus avoiding a bigger scandal than Watergate…”  Thats quite a claim over shredded files that no one on earth knows the contents of.

  115. Sam says:

    Hey Rex, your tight granny panties are cutting off the blood flow to your brain.  It smells like a hit piece written by a pissed off queen who didn’t get the right seat at the screening.  Rex, you truly are a sour vinegar in judgement of a winemaker.  

  116. Anonymous says:

    It might have been nice to read a review of the actual movie that Eastwood made, instead of a rant about what kind of movie Rex Reed wanted  to see.  It sounds like he just wanted to see a gay movie and it  wasn’t.  One can be gay and do other things besides, too.  Well, maybe Rex can’t.

  117. Colinkillian says:

    What a BS review. You’ve allow your personal political views to affect your professionalism. Eastwood presents a balanced approach to Hoover, and you wanted nothing less than an Oliver Stone-like piece of fiction based on little more than your political biases. Cross dressing? There is not credible evidence that ever happened, at least not in the context that’s become accepted as fact.

    Time to retire, Rex. You are truly pathetic.

  118. Anonymous says:

    The best fiction in this piece is Reed’s butchering of history. 

    For example he describes Emma Goldman as a “liberal Jewish political dissident”, instead of the premier self-proclaimed anarchist in the US, who went to prison for a botched assassination attempt on industrialist Henry Clay Frick , incitement of Czolgosz to assassinate President McKinley, and outspoken co-founder of the International Anarchist Congress.  Goldman would sputter in indignation to be labelled as a milktoast liberal.

    If Reed is so pathetically misinformed about this infamous historical figure, how can anyone trust accuracy any of his alleged  “facts” about Hoover. Such flawed analysis and judgement calls into question his ability to provide a reliable movie review.

    Which means I am compelled now to go see the movie.

  119. Arkady N. says:

    People believe what they want to believe, including Rex Reed. But I always enjoy reading his prose because the man can put together a well crafted review. However, I won’t waste my time or money on this film because A) Di Caprio as J Edgar? c’mon man…and B) well, there really doesn’t need to be a B) at this juncture.

  120. warbaby says:

    Rex Reed you are passionless and without plot.

  121. Frank says:

    I wouldn’t take this review at dollar value as a reflection of the general consensus. DiCaprio is notorious for his acting talent and many of the movies he’s been in have been at least worthwhile if not intriguing to see. Not to mention if the movie is directed by Clint Eastwood, a man who needs no introduction as a Hollywood legend and someone that lived during J. Edgar’s time period and able to reflect the ideal tone in the movie is even more credibility that this movie is likely to be fairly decent. 

  122. Rexy:  Time to retire.  Try reading Ebert’s glowing review of this film and get a grip on your own sexuality.

  123. Rex Reed has written a clear and dispassionate analysis of what is genuinely one terrible piece of writing and acting. DiCaprio is a pretty boy, never could act, had the jobs he did only because girls and certain classes of males wanted to see his face. Eastwood is a strange and bitter old man who at the age of 83 should be tending to matters more in line with where he is going after death rather than putting out movies that lack what working with Hackman and Freeman provided so long ago. I have never understood the Scorcese thing with DiCaprio, by the way. It always seemed odd, esp. having DiCaprio play Howard Hughes. Odd to say the least, suspicious to go beyond what is saying the least. For my money, DiCaprio will fail in Gatsby also because he does not portray what Fitzgerald had in mind, and I am sure Mr. Reed will help us all out there when the time comes to adjudicate another pathetic DiCaprio performance, not to mention what happens when he is called on to play the inimitably talented, but very cruel, Francis Albert Sinatra.

    1. JOe Dutra says:

      Rex simply plagiarizes his old pieces and then replaces a few words.  It is predictable and boring. 

  124. And Rex Reed is a  fudge packer.  Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised if Rexie wet his pants after coming up with the line “sodomized the Constitution”.

  125. Arrow says:

    Rex Reed is a jerk. This hate-filled screed is worst than the hate-filled movie put out by turncoat Eastwood.  DeCrapio is just another leftist from Commiewood.

  126. Looks like Rex Reed has a real axe to grind regarding Hoover, which makes this review really more about him than the movie.

  127. G Man says:

    Reed’s homophobic self-loathing makes his critical thinking skills atrophic.  The only noteworthy thing he ever did was masturbate on screen in Myra Breckenridge.

  128. Mike Harlow says:

    I’m 63, and can’t remember a single moment in my life when I was in fear of J. Edgar Hoover.  In fact, as  I can recall, I was pleased to have a law and order guy doing his job, in contrast to Eric Holder.  If Hoover had been around, there would NOT have been a 9-11.

  129. Frank E says:

    I am 68 years old and I don’t remember TREMBLING at all when J.Edgar Hoover was FBI director.  I DO remember many politicians TREMBLING. As far as homophobic is concerned that is a modern day code word for give the homosexuals a blank check.  J.Edgar Hoover was many things good and bad, but the facts are he damn sure kept America safe.  If Clint Eastwood wants to write about someone why doesn’t he tackle someone worth making a movie about — such as Barack Obama.  I don’t think he has what it takes as a man to do that.

  130. Ecominer says:

    I’m sorry, but for those of you to young to know J. Edgar’s history, your TV history is sorely lacking. Rex Reed, who I know nothing about, is about as accurate about J. Edgar Hoover as anyone who I have read about in such a short two pages. Maybe you should do some historical research about this guy who has been made up to be such a hero, when he was one of the most insolent human beings who has walked the earth. He did keep files on everyone, and he used them to stay in power until the day he died. Yiou can degrade anyone you want, but unless you know your history, the only thing you are showing is your ignorance!

    1. WingedVictory says:

      Yes, yes, we know all about his files on “everyone”, they sure made the bad guys squirm didn’t they.  There was plenty for him to be insolent about back in the day.  I suggest you do some research on the history of the era before showing your ignorance.  He had his weaknesses just like every other man, but he kept the US safe during his tenure, something you can’t say about the wishy washy boobs running the FBI of late.

  131. Wolf says:

    I’ve always been under the impression that Rex Reed is a ‘closet queen’.It takes one to know one.

  132. Shawn Martin says:

    Hey Rex, you’re a MOVIE CRITIC!  You seem to think you have some God-given genius that us mere mortals don’t possess.  In reality, you watch movies and are paid to tell people what you think of it, period.  You have no special insight.  Unfortunately your ego makes you think you’re an expert on filmmaking.  Honestly, you aren’t an expert on anything!

  133. yabecoo says:

    This clown actually still gets paid for his opinion? Passionless and plot starved, kinda like Rex Reed’s life.

  134. WingedVictory says:

    OMG!  Is this senile old fool still reviewing movies, I thought he died years ago.

  135. So it’s sounds like Rex Reed is an agist by saying, “Mr. Eastwood is too old to tackle a personality so complex…”  Does anyone listen to movie critics anyway? I don’t care for Leo DiCaprio and his liberal ideology, but Clint has my respect and loyalty.

  136. Skep41 says:

    Clint Eastwood has turned into a crashing, crashing BORE! Anybody who could make Iwo Jima into a total snoozer should hang up his director’s hat. Now he’s descended into George Clooney-like cliche biopic potboiler attacks on the usual left-wing targets. Yawn. Time for Eastwood to join fellow bore Oliver Stone in the doghouse of overblown, money-losing propagandists. ‘Unforgiven’ was Eastwood’s last great film.

  137. Anonymous says:

    Geez, I thought Reed was dead too…

  138. werbaz neutron says:

    We must not forget all those FBI files acquired by Hillary Clinton,  as well as what happened to Vince Foster when she tried to add the Phoenix Program members to her collection.  

  139. DSicario505 says:

    Rex Reed ?
    he still alive ?

  140. Thomas Zahay says:

    Mr. Reed is a perfect example that mediocrity has it’s place in our society.

  141. Leroy says:

    Rex Reed is the sick f*ck ..Not Hoover!
    Hoover was a great American Patriot who rooted out Anti-American communists and Organized crime members.
    He was NOT a homosexual cross dresser..Thats a lie from the filth in Hollywood.

  142. Anonymous says:

    Reed is a typical left wing Hollywood liberal POS. He’s not fit to lick Eastwood’s boots, or Hoover either. He should b fired for writing crap like this. It’s not  a review, but hate-spewing vitriol. Much like Krugman’s piece of crap posted on 9-11, to which the coward allowed no comments.

  143. RESPONDING TO “cattyfan” – Attempt to stain a respected American????????   Respected by who?  A man such as J Edgar Hoover does not deserve the respect of anyone.  His actions  to impede the civil rights movement and besmirch the reputation of Dr Martin Luther King who’s only goal was to win equality for African-Americans, should be enough to convince anyone that this despicable man and his life is nothing more than a cautionary tale of how power can be misused to the detriment of an entire country in the hands of a soulless miscreant like J Edgar Hoover.  In my opinion he does not deserve a movie documenting his life, even if said movie paints him as the monster we all know him to be.  And what bothers me even more are the buildings and roads named after him.  What does that say about our country?  We try and teach our children the importance of character and integrity, but when we honor men like Hoover it sends a very troubled and mixed message.  I’m sure Adolph Hitler accomplished some good and maybe even helped some of his people, but any good he might have done means absolutely  nothing when weighed against his attempted extermination of all Jews and the hundreds of thousands of men women and children he slaughtered in Nazi death camps.  I’m not saying that Hoover and Hitler are the same, I’m just pointing out how ridiculous it is to attach anything noble to the life of a very evil and troubled man (Hoover).  

    ……………and that’s how I feel about it.

  144. RESPONDING TO “cattyfan” – Attempt to stain a respected American????????   Respected by who?  A man such as J Edgar Hoover does not deserve the respect of anyone.  His actions  to impede the civil rights movement and besmirch the reputation of Dr Martin Luther King who’s only goal was to win equality for African-Americans, should be enough to convince anyone that this despicable man and his life is nothing more than a cautionary tale of how power can be misused to the detriment of an entire country in the hands of a soulless miscreant like J Edgar Hoover.  In my opinion he does not deserve a movie documenting his life, even if said movie paints him as the monster we all know him to be.  And what bothers me even more are the buildings and roads named after him.  What does that say about our country?  We try and teach our children the importance of character and integrity, but when we honor men like Hoover it sends a very troubled and mixed message.  I’m sure Adolph Hitler accomplished some good and maybe even helped some of his people, but any good he might have done means absolutely  nothing when weighed against his attempted extermination of all Jews and the hundreds of thousands of men women and children he slaughtered in Nazi death camps.  I’m not saying that Hoover and Hitler are the same, I’m just pointing out how ridiculous it is to attach anything noble to the life of a very evil and troubled man (Hoover).  

    ……………and that’s how I feel about it.

  145. Mypolar628 says:

    Rex is right! His review is spot on. This movie was worse than going to the denist- I just wanted it to end! It was one of the most boring I have ever seen. Maybe Clint Eastwood can’t really direct after-all, maybe he just had great scripts. Shame Leo wasted his time on this.

  146. Nanfitzs says:

    love Decaprio & Eastwood ,but found this move BORING!!! The plot,what their was,was disconnected.
    He spent a minute on his haterd of the KENNEDYS.And everyone laughted out loud at the “make-up

  147. Michael O'Farrell says:

    I have yet to see the movie but I’m flabbergasted by the vitriolic comments of some of the readers here. Mr. Reed has seen the movie and is giving a critique. That is his job as a critic, and though I don’t always agree with him I find him to be an outstanding film critic, really, in this day and age the genuine article amid billions of film critic blogs written by people who have nowhere near his talent. And yes, he too is very vitriolic in his review of this new Eastwood film, but he is a Film Critic, giving his opinion. I miss the days when a person could read a review by Mr. Reed, Vincent Canby, John Simon, Pauline Kael, etc., without having to endure the brickbats of critics of film critics!

  148. Poohpark says:

    The first three minutes of this piece of crap, I had already came up with the same conclusion that Reed did. DiCaprio needs to stop pretending he’s a real actor, and go back to being a retard climbing a water tower. This movie sucks!

  149. Brettrojo says:

    eliminate illiteracy por favor
    u must not no dirty harry tha way i no dirty harry