A cool idea, a decent performance from Clint Eastwood, a smart and not so stupid plot, and a poorly written script with some horrible and annoying supporting actors, and an extremely obvious ending make up "Blood Work." It is your typical cop thriller with a twist, where the famous cop is searching for the serial killer whose victim gave him his heart. It is interesting in hindsight to see that this film was immediately followed by the often referred to "Clint Classic," "Mystic River." This film is considered a masterpiece and a popular favorite among Eastwood fans. It is crazy to think how a director could go from this and immediately to something great. Immediately following "Blood Work" Clint really got on a role dishing out fantastic films which make him among one of the most respected directors in the industry and a favorite filmmaker of mine. He can really be hot and cold at times. After "Blood Work" came "Mystic River," "Million Dollar Baby," "Flags Of Our Fathers," "Letters From Iwo Jima," "Changeling," "Gran Torino," and "Invictus." All of these films received critical acclaim, nominations along with awards and "Million Dollar Baby" received the prestigious Best Picture at The Academy Awards. Now that I have established what a good director Clint is let me talk about how bad "Blood Work" is. It starts out okay. The script is sort of cheesy but has like I said an interesting premise and seems like it would be fun to watch. It falls largely into the trap of having these terrible cardboard cut out characters that say and do exactly what you would expect of them. They do their little thing on the screen and then leave. Eastwood has no cool signature camerawork or any noticeable directorial style that comes across that is in so many of his other films. I am more critical on the film because Clint can do so much better. Paul Rodriguez should have gotten a razzie for his awfully annoying character, terrible acting, and ugly fat body. He was supposed to make the viewer laugh and I literally wanted to go into the screen and choke him. He is the first actor to speak in the whole film so it immediately started out bad. Why couldn't the serial killer murder him? At first I thought he would be a small role in one scene but he appears very frequently and seems to have more lines then Eastwood himself. As an actor Clint does fine amongst his terribly casted cast-mates but, he does what you would expect. The same kind of thing he does in "Gran Torino" and many others this just is not as good. What is cool about the movie is how you are trying to figure out how and why the killer is doing this, (sort of spoiler ahead) what exactly is his method, but almost all of this is forgotten because they take a small character and give it to an A-list actor who you know would never take such a small role in a movie unless there was more to his character. He is also way too typically nice. I knew he was the murderer from his very first scene. Clint drops the ball on this one. Is it the worst movie I have ever seen? No, not even the worst Clint film thanks to "Hereafter," but this film could have certainly been better.
2 out of 5 Stars
The Clint Eastwood Summary, as a director. I have not seen all of his films as there are 35 of them but I will list the ones I have seen and review them and will update this list as I see more.
Unforgiven-----------------------------------5 Stars (Top 100 List)
The Bridges Of Madison County-----5 Stars
Space Cowboys-----------------------------2 Stars
Blood Work-----------------------------------2 Stars
Mystic River----------------------------------5 Stars
Million Dollar Baby-------------------------5 Stars
Flags Of Our Fathers---------------------5 Stars
Letters From Iwo Jima-------------------5 Stars
Changeling------------------------------------5 Stars (Top 100 List)
Gran Torino-----------------------------------4.5 Stars
Invictus-----------------------------------------2.5 Stars
Hereafter----------------------------------------1 Star
No comments:
Post a Comment