Big Screen Peter: J. Edgar

review by Peter Lewis

J. Edgar Hoover was born on New Year’s Day in 1895. When he passed away 77 years later on May 2, 1972, more than 60% of his life had been spent in service to the United States as director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

In that span of almost five decades, Hoover indelibly changed law enforcement. But with that overriding dedication to law and order in America, he also left a varied and mysterious legacy, one that has spun countless rumors (cross-dresser) and theories (closeted homosexual) about his conduct both in and out of office.

In short, J. Edgar Hoover, more than many historical figures from the 20th century, is ripe for a full-scale Hollywood biopic. Enter critical darlings Clint Eastwood and Leonardo DiCaprio as director and titular protagonist.

With the opening narrative by DiCaprio, the film starts strong. Hoover begins dictating an account of his early years to a young FBI agent. We see the young Hoover angered with the bumbling efforts of law enforcement as his conviction hardens into a driven resolve.

By telling his side of the story, he hopes to draw parallels between the “red menace” violently felt in the years following WWI and that of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC). Through these flashbacks we witness the development of the Hoover character. 

As Hoover gets deeper into his narrative, the story becomes more than a parallel to another time.  What started as a useful foil is no more than an excuse to glorify himself, to catalogue the exploits and endeavors of his long career.

Floating back and forth between reality and memory is a useful tool. It puts both the societal and personal change in stark contrast. Just as the innocence of America drifts away, so to do we see the resolve of Hoover thrust deeper into paranoia.

At 137 minutes, “J. Edgar” is a lengthy film by most standards. And it certainly drags. Yet, it still suffers from a level of unexplained and unexplored material. There is so much of J. Edgar’s life and his legacy, both for good and ill, that is untouched or merely hinted at in passing. Thoroughly covering the years is an impossible task, but Eastwood’s effort still seem to be short-shrift at times.

Further, Eastwood makes the decision to cast the main characters as one throughout their years instead of having older and younger actors portray the roles depending on the period. For DiCaprio and Naomi Watts (Hoover’s personal secretary, Helen Gandy), this seems to work. DiCaprio’s handling of the accent and diction of Hoover, his heavy and uncertain movements in the aged scenes are well handled. And, to my untrained eye, both of their aged makeup is well-effected and seems true to their seniority.

The outlier? Armie Hammer as Clyde Tolson, Hoover’s trusted second and reputed lover. While the acting is unremarkable, the aged facial effects look plastered and farcical. For a movie with such serious aspirations, this choice is dubious. In his scenes as the older Tolson, Hammer looks much more like Sloth from “The Goonies” than an actual AARP member.

“J. Edgar” is an interesting movie, offering a unique angle on American history that has long been undervalued. But it’s a mixed bag at best. Go for DiCaprio or the history if you can stomach the rest.

• J. Edgar is playing at the Malco Cinema 16 in Fort Smith. Link here for time and ticket info.

Feedback
Feel free to contact Peter Lewis at [email protected]

You can also track Peter at his website.