J. Edgar Hoover’s long career in the FBI spanned a number of significant historical events, and the new film about the man, J. Edgar (2011), captures some of the scope of that history while trying to understand a very complicated person. In the film, we see terrorist activity from the early twentieth century through the gangster era into the Depression through the Lindbergh baby kidnapping and the Civil Rights movement through Kennedy’s assassination, until finally Hoover’s paranoia is passed onto the incoming president Richard M. Nixon. It is a big span for a movie, but Director Clint Eastwood never loses sight of its goal of telling the story of the main character.
When I first heard Leonardo DiCaprio was going to play Hoover, my initial reaction was to think he was miscast. While some critics may still believe that (and also criticize the makeup on the aging characters), DiCaprio does a surprisingly excellent job filling the shoes of the larger-than-life Hoover. DiCaprio is one of the few actors who could convincingly play Hoover at a young age and at old age.
Judi Dench plays Hoover’s domineering mother, and Naomi Watts plays Hoover’s long-time secretary. But much of the movie focuses on the relationship between Hoover and his longtime assistant, Clyde Tolson, played well by Armie Hammer. Many speculate that Hoover and Tolson had a romantic relationship, and the film focuses on Hoover as a repressed man. Whether or not they had a physical relationship, their close bond, among Hoover’s other repressions, is one of the devices used to try to understand Hoover’s secretive nature and interest in the sexual lives of others.
While not perfect, the movie was fascinating, thoughtful, entertaining, and informative. Although the movie jumps back and forth through time, Eastwood was masterful in doing it in a way that never seemed confusing. But while I was never bored, watching the film is not necessarily a pleasurable experience. If there is a weakness in J. Edgar, it is that you have to spend two plus hours with someone who is not very likeable. Even when Hoover was doing some things that benefited the country and busting criminals, he seems less like a hero and more like a troubled person who happened to do some heroic things as a side effect.
Conclusion? J. Edgar is a very entertaining film that is epic in scope but personal in focus. If you do not mind spending time in the company of an unlikeable character as long as the character is interesting, and if you are curious about American history, you will like this movie.
Check out some other reviews because why should you listen to me? The Rotten Tomatoes website currently indicates a low critic rating of 40% with a higher audience approval of 66%. Mike Giuliano of ExploreHoward.com calls the movie “a worthwhile character study that’s able to transcend its various flaws.” On Flick Filosopher, Maryann Johanson, by contrast, concludes that the film “is too staid and static, and too unfocused, to make us feel much of anything at all.”
(Some Related Chimesfreedom Posts)
(1886) and 
(1883).
