Jolie has had her fair share of WTF moments before this.

of the wineville chicken coop murders is really pretty interesting. It sounds like they took the most outrageous, curvalinear true story and made it duller than dishwater. I would like to see what Charlie Kaufman could do with a story like this.

"...she's more vamp than grieving mom."

Agreed--she looks more ready for a new version of CHICAGO, especially with that fire-red lipstick. :) IIRC, women's makeup was growing more subdued and pastel towards the end of the 20's.

The more I see her

The more she seems assholey

Thank you Ms.Zacharek! Jolie, her puppet face and those ridiculously pumped up lips have been making watching movies with her in them almost unbearable. She has become a marionette version of herself. Won't she please just go away for a while?! Maybe take care of her bizarre family?

She's no George C. Scott, that's for sure. Those are some mighty big shoes she's trying to fill.

This review is a hilarious, fun read. It seems that what could have been a decent film get turned into what sounds like practically self-parody.

When Hollywood gets its hands onto something that has a potentially strong dose of subtlety, it often goes for an overly stark sense of "drama" that then ironically verges on being the opposite.

makes me wonder just how bad it "really" is ...

I think (in addition to Oscar bait) this movie was supposed to be a "moving back to quality theatre" vehicle for Ms. Jolie whose notoriety and Laura Croft success derailed her "serious" career ... years ago ... (though, as mentioned, it's not like Alexander did much for Jolie's rep in the "serious actor" department, no matter how universal her appeal may be. yes, beauty and sensuality and/or physical prowess do make an actor "easy to watch" and create a positive "impression", they aren't a substitute for acting chops.)

This "I'm going back to real drama" was disastrous for Julia Roberts ... and suddenly the vision of a half-dozen of other actors seduced by cheap thrill projects who NEVER made it back come to mind.

Some reviewers have seemed to want to blame Eastwood ... politically amazing in and of itself... I'm doubtful his spat with Spike Lee left enough of a bad taste in anyone's mouth to be responsible ... maybe they got weary of Eastwood's self-conscious dark pretentiousness and realize there were other ways to handle "heavy material" after seeing "No Country for Old Men" and "There Will be Blood" which breathed a bit more ... I have no idea.

Let's see how it does at the box office.

Was a ghost story to behold

True terror unbridled

Jolie

Go back to fish mouthy antics

I share not a facination

Not one 'o your frantic fanboy/girl romantics

Sorry for broken semantics

I can't believe Eastwood is taken seriously as a director. His movies are slogs. They seep. I hope he retires soon.

It seems reflexive to hold up Clint and Mel like a sheaf of garlic in the face of accusations about West Coast liberalism ...

I grew up there ... the old guard California conservative fat cats control the pursestrings ... but EVERYONE clings to any creative "signs of life" ... look what Hollywood has done to Broadway ... oh yeah ... hold the pickles, hold the lettuce ...

Susan, they take Mel Gibson seriously because he's a good director. As much as I hate the guy, Apocalypto was a fantastic piece of work.

"a radio celebrity-slash-preacher" ? what about good ol "/"?

i think the problem is more that there is no "real" angelina jolie. i cant believe someone does not think she's devoid of acting skills.

then the Passion of Christ and that last movie ...

Yes, Birth of a Nation had its significance and its importance, as did the work of Leni Reisenthal ... or Lena Werthmuller or Pedro Almodovar ....

my point being NOT do demean any of this work but to stress that it is usually, too often, virtually IMPOSSIBLE TO SEPARATE the achievement from the hype ... and/or the "zeigeist" ...

The rise and fall of, say, Jude Law (new Michael Caine?) or even Lindsay Lohan (as a gen-next Elizabeth Taylor?? she's got the visage) or any number of other "failed to reach their potential" this generatation's fill-in-the-blank hot-new up-and-coming, flavor of the month ... See also the tut-tuting of the life and times of Charles Kaufman ...

Angela Jolie shot to fame by outshining another actress whose popularity I never understood -- Winona Ryder ... Fwiw, Winona has been on a "come back" path, but no one has noticed or cared about her or her apparent failure at a come back ... buh-bye.

One must be grateful to those who retired with dignity ... like Doris Day ...

In all my years of reading Salon, I have not once agreed with this critic on a film. Not once!

Ms. Zacharek: why don't you check out how somebody who actually knows something about cinema perceived this same movie:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/24/DDEC13MFBM.DTL

Contemporary cinema people follow formulas:

Simon slick de mon-ee sez*

Overwrought and overproduced

Pixilated with Swiss chocolate computerized and deodorized

moose

There no longer exists a good excuse

I declare audience abuse!

... Eastwood's movies are generally overrated, so the criticism (if only for that reason) is interesting. I'll defend "the Unforgiven". Thought it was one of the best movies Hollywood has produced the last 25 years and it's miles better than the usual best picture award winners ("Gladiator", "Titanic", "Crash", anyone?).

That said, never got the hype about "Mystic River" -- from its wince-inducing "That's my Daughtah!" scene to Laura Linney's sudden transformation into Lady MacBeth, or for that matter its ridiculous solving of the crime -- "Did you listen to the 911 tape?"/"No, I thought you listened ot the 911 tape!" -- it seemed overwrought and specious. Likewise, though the first half "Million Dollar Baby" was fine, Eastwood lost his grip once it reached tragic mode. To paraphrase what someone said earlier, tragedy is one thing; a slog is another.

Can't comment on the Iwo Jima pics. Didn't see them.