I find it hard to critique this movie. There isn't really anything wrong with it, except that is has no real point to make. Actually, it has a point, but somehow Clint Eastwood, as masterful a director as he is, was not able to effectively communicate it. Or perhaps this is the script's weakness... I cannot make up my mind so we'll leave it as this - a very well written but ambiguous script that Clint perfectly recorded on film, without fully comprehending its subtext. I originally saw this in the theatres and was disappointed. But I know that my disappointment was a result of anticipation, because CLint had made Unforgiven and Costner Dances with Wolves. So when I saw the previews, I thought "this is gonna be a masterpiece, more Oscars for everyone!!". But it wasn't. What I saw instead was a very restrained and quite touching film that barely starred Clint. So now, 12 years later, I rented it on DVD, ready to now enjoy the film, without the misguided anticipation, as I should have in 93. Yet somehow, I had the same disappointed feelings. I enjoyed the film - first rate cinematography, excellent use of locations, wonderful depiction of Texas in the 60's, great cast, fine dialogue, precise editing etc... BUT NO POINT. Clint Eastwood has turned out to be one of the great American film directors. He shows amazing restraint and astounding sensitivity, with a keen eye for composition, and tasteful aesthetics. This is no exception. Costners gives one of his best performances, going against type and actually anchors the whole film (I have a feeling CLint's role shoulda been way smaller than it was). The boy, Buzz, is wonderful. I hate most child actors and performances, but this one is excellent, simply because the kid is real and believable, not because of any inherent talent (like Dakota Fanning for example). Laura Dern is also great in an under-emphasized role. The main problem here is that this skillfully filmed story only touches the surface of its themes - morality, justice, professional and human relations. The characters were created in order to deal with these issues, but they cannot, given that half of them (Clint and Dern) do not get enough screen time to delve into the themes. The father-son relationship between Costner and the boy is touching, but not enough to give the movie its point and weight. I kept waiting for something a little more philosophical and cerebral. For instance the theme of modernization, embodied in the new high tech trailer and the discussions of policing methods, goes nowhere, fast. When it is mentioned that their tools will be used to protect Pres Kennedy when he arrives for his infamous Dallas parade, I thought, OK here comes some political-historical subtext - but it never came... The theme of moral ambiguity, remains, well, ambiguous. But this is not like the euthanasia in Million Dollar Baby, where CLint lets the viewer make the moral judgment. Because of the sweet relationship between Costner and the boy, our judgment becomes muddled, because we are cheering for them. Then what about CLint, Dern, and the cops? Their roles remain so underdeveloped, it is impossible to use the characters as our cinematic moral measuring stick. So, in conclusion, this is a fine and quite watchable movie, that might leave you feeling unsatisfied because it doesn't quite stimulate the mind as it should, but rather effectively stimulates the emotions, which I feel should be secondary in this film, with this story.
Review of A Perfect World
