Mjeteconer Just perfect...

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Ella-May O'Brien Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Haven Kaycee It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

zkonedog In recent years, after directing films like Million Dollar Baby, Gran Torino, and Invictus, Clint Eastwood has established himself as not only a classic actor, but also director/producer. This little documentary sits down with Clint to talk to him about some of his films.Though not getting into any of Clint's personal life, this documentary spans his Dirty Harry, loner western, comedy/romance, and high-drama career turns over the past 30 years. Not all his films are covered, but the most iconic ones are. Clips of the films themselves interspersed with Eastwood's comments and recollections make for a highly engrossing format that will hook you in the first five minutes.Basically, if you are a fan of any of Eastwood's varied body of on-screen work, this is a DVD that needs to be in your collection pronto!

MovieHoliks I have been after this documentary about the directing career of Clint Eastwood for some time, and finally got to see if off HULU here recently!- and it does not disappoint."The Eastwood Factor" does delve into Clint's overall life and acting career a little bit, but mostly focuses on his career as a filmmaker- beginning with "Play Misty For Me", which came out in the early 1970s- all the way through to "Invictus", which I believe he was working on around the time this documentary got made-?? It focuses on not only where he sorta learned his craft from- especially filmmakers like Don Siegel and Sergio Leone- but also how he sorta begot other actor- directors- like Mel Gibson, for instance.It was interesting how he said his directing career kinda came about- as he was working on the set of film after film as an actor- he was like, okay, they're doing it wrong- they're taking too long, etc.. Then he was like, you know, why don't I just direct the movies I star in-??? LOL And it's been a match-made-in-heaven ever since. I can't think of any other actor who has had the consistent long-range and versatile success as a filmmaker as Eastwood has had in his 40-plus years as a director. Redford, Beatty, Gibson, Costner, etc.. all have had minimal-to-mediocre success in varied forms throughout their directing careers (and many actors have never directed anything), but like film critic Roger Ebert said- Eastwood would've been known as a filmmaker, even if his John Wayne-esque iconic screen stardom had never happened...

Neil Doyle And who's to blame for this? Why, CLINT EASTWOOD himself. And the script.He comes across as a man who strains to be vaguely articulate, one who's had enormous success at the box office with a string of violent films for decades now but has little to say about them except that he makes the kind of film he likes to watch. A simple philosophy. It's like a writer saying he writes the kind of stuff he himself would like to read. Okay. But that's the only perspective we get.Clint's off screen persona is strikingly similar to that of the equally soft-spoken and elusive Henry Fonda. He's a mild-mannered man who looks today as harmless as the guy behind the counter at the local pharmacy, totally unlike the sort of action-oriented figures he plays on the screen with such authority and presence. It's as though all those action years have sucked the energy right out of him.Fortunately, he grew up watching a lot of the old James Cagney/Humphrey Bogart films at Warner Brothrs, a studio where he himself has spent a lot of time over the past few decades churning out one macho action flick after another with little pause between. Occasionally he delved into deeper stuff with films like MILLION DOLLAR BABY, but his fans are really loyal because he gives them the kind of mindless action features they can all fantasize about. Good guys bring the bad guys down.But don't expect anything deep from either Richard Schickel's script or Morgan Freeman's narration if you want insight into what makes the man tick. No mention of his turbulent personal life except that he lives in Carmel, California and likes to walk along the sand and beach-front areas in casual attire while pondering how much violence he can wreck in his next film to ensure it hits box office gold.A simple-minded narration for a man whose life has got to be further explored to really give anyone a fair assessment of him, both as a filmmaker and a man. He's got to be more complex than he's presented here. The documentary is only remotely interesting when it concentrates on highlights from some of his most famous films. Even here, it fails to select the most impressive clips.Summing up: An unremarkable view of a remarkable man.

Vagabear Just caught the premiere of this on TCM. There have easily been better overviews of Eastwood's career (the 2000 American Masters documentary 'Out Of The Shadows' is an excellent example) and it's easy to tear apart Richard Schickel's often sloppy style. But just to focus on a technical/aesthetic aspect of this production - who the hell was in charge of actually assembling the clips from the films? Eastwood's filmography includes films produced in just about every aspect ratio from full-frame to scope - and it's a TOTAL crap-shoot here whether a scene from a film will be properly letter-boxed or miserably pan-and scanned - or something in-between! (sometimes in a montage using scenes from the same film!) There were scenes from DIRTY HARRY that were pan-and-scanned, slightly letter-boxed and in full letterbox (it's a scope film) while others like A PERFECT WORLD (also scope) were in total, horrendous pan-and-scan - ruining not only the composition of the shots - but the beauty and impact of the scenes shown. These are just two of numerous examples throughout this production. This kind of oversight was simply inexcusable - especially from a man (Schickel) who is entrusted with how contemporary audiences see Clint's cinematic legacy. Next time hire somebody (like me!) who knows and cares that the examples shown are presented and represented correctly! Amateurish hack work beyond belief!