J. Edgar

Wow - what an intentionally deceptive portrayal of one of the most important subjects of our time - the US Government's not-so-secret police force - the FBI. I'm talking to you - DiCaprio & Eastwood. Is there an ounce of courage between the two of you?? There is SOOOOO much more important information to tell and you went for the homo bit?! Pathetic! The only thing this movie goes to prove is that Hollywood continues to support the entrenched power structure with it's BS portrayals. We've all been deceived for a VERY LONG TIME and it's important for Free Americans to finally know the truth about US history - including the history of the FBI, the CIA and the megalomaniacs who seek to rule us. Read "Enemies" a History of the FBI by Tim Weiner a former FBI agent. It will give you a REAL wake up call. Especially if you're prone to turn over all your power and security to the Federal Government.

Leonardo DiCaprio has evolved as an actor beyond any expectation. His portrayal of J. Edgar Hoover was convincing in both his youth and old age. The film explores the private life of J.Edgar and controversially shows him in a rather sympathetic light. Although he is flawed and comes across as an awkward technocrat with delusions of granduear, he still manages to excel in his career and maintain personal relationships with the ones he cares for. The supporting cast does a great job playing their characters in both their younger and older versions, also the costumes and sets look beautiful without distracting. Unfortunately the make-up isn't always brilliant when a younger actor is made to look older, particularly the character Clyde suffers from a severe case of cake-face when he's shown as an older man. A beautiful film directed by Clint Eastwood, yet many will feel uncomfortable seeing a hate figure like J.Edgar Hoover portrayed so favourably.

This film is a historical biopic of J. Edgar Hoover (Leonardo DiCaprio) who headed the FBI for almost four decades. The film is well directed by the dependable Clint Eastwood. The skill shows in the various shades of lighting and style to emphasize the different time periods. The depiction of some events in US history beginning in 1919 also makes for a riveting storyline as does the implication of a mutual love affair between Hoover and his right-hand man, Clyde Tolson. While there are good elements in this film, there is something that felt incomplete. It's difficult to say exactly what that is but considering the vast history and such a controversial figure, this film could have been grander. One of the weaker elements was a brief but unconvincing portrayal of Bobby Kennedy. Other performances are fine, though, especially that of DiCaprio. - dbamateurcritic

A friend and I saw this movie tonight. When it was over I apologized to him for suggesting it. There was ONE good part of it: it did have an ending! Oh, it did have actors & sets, & there was a story in there........somewhere; I think. We were the only ones that stayed to the closing credits. (I can't remember ever seeing a movie that I liked less than this movie. Especially 1 that I have paid to see. I have started several movies on cable/broadcast channels that I have quickly changed channels on, but none that I have paid for have been so disappointing.) Don't waste your money on this movie! If you want to throw away $10 give it to a panhandler, at least that way someone will get some good out of it. Sorry Mr. Eastwood! I like a lot of your movies, just not this one.

I enjoyed this film, thought it was well documented and gave me historical references I didn't know about. Well done Clint Eastwood! The acting was fabulous too. Gave me new respect for DiCaprio...... I found it amazing his secretary would have stayed with him for so long; maybe he did have some charisma? I wasn't expecting to enjoy the film but did. The costumes were good and the sets were nice to look at too. It was just about the right length of film also, maybe verging on the edge of being a bit too long but it was OK. I am eager to see any Clint Eastwood film as I think he puts a lot of thought and energy in his films.

The previews certainly don't match the movie. I went to the theater thinking I was going to see an interesting conspiracy thriller about a corrupt man in power, but I came out regretting sitting through such a disappointment. I got two things out of that movie: He was homosexual and he was a wimp (pretty sure he wasn't a wimp in real life). In fact, the whole movie centered around Hoover's relationship with his right hand man Tolson. Not to mention the movie has the cheesiest ending. If you want to see kissing foreheads, holding hands, and only accepting a position if "we have lunch together every day" (a condition Tolson requests to except his job) then by all means go ahead. (If you want to see a real movie go rent Untouchables.)

Whatever you may think about J. Edgar Hoover, he brought science into criminal investigations; establishing the first national fingerprint registry, and creating a forensics laboratory at the FBI. I was hoping this film reveals the the motivations behind the real-life J. Edgar Hoover's ruthless and Machiavellian methods. Hoping it could explain how he could justify subverting the law he was pledged to protect. He created an "us versus them" atmosphere in public life that persists to this day. He has a domineering mother, and is constantly trying to prove himself to her. He represses his sexuality, and like many politicians today that are guilty of the same behavior, he constantly seeks deviance in others. And, like most public figures, he suffers from insecurity that causes him to constantly seek public attention. He was not a nice person, but he did bring professionalism to the FBI. It was an interesting biopic, but it left you wanting to know more.

You may wanna nail this down to makeup and say that it's not more than that. But I beg to differ. While I wasn't Di Caprios biggest fan (still not really digging Avatar and other movies), the guy can act. I have to admit, that I am not that familiar with the biography of Mr. Hoover, but I the movie really sparked my interest to dig deeper and find more stuff about him than is commonly known. Of course some of the things depicted in the movie were not in tune and weren't taken lightly by quite a few people in the states. Sort of like when Oliver Stone made Alexander and some people took offense to the way he portrayed the myth/man himself. It's not as provocative of course, but it does show a flawed person that might only had good intentions on his mind, but went ahead to (possibly?) pursue them in a very wrong way