The film starts off well. In fact, it was the beginning of this movie that made the greatest impression on me. We meet some great characters - all of the important ones - in a boxing club run by Clint Eastwood. The dynamic that develops between the regulars at the club was far more interesting, better acted, and generally done with greater skill and effect than anything in the third and final act. One enjoys the relationships as these characters learn to get along, deal with the past and build a future. The lessons learned and the themes are developped with a modicum of subtlety and a great deal of sympathy is built.
The second act train starts to gather speed, but stays on track. If the first act was a character drama, the second is a boxing fantasy. The backstories begin heading toward resolution and we are curious to know if anyone learns anything.
Of course, my problem is always with the endings of movies. The ending has all of the subtlety and art of a trainwreck. First, everything in the final act is alluded to in the second act, because the third act is so extreme that if these allusions hadn't been made the whole act would have been considered 'unrealistic'.
A lot of attention has been drawn to the relationship between Clint's character and the priest character. Many people believe that film is trying to make a statement. I think the film is really just trying to setup a basis for discussion. That is, the film wants the discussion that takes place between Clint and the priest to continue after people leave the theatre. In that respect, it has been successful. However, the ending belittles the potential of the first and, to a lesser extent, the second act. The third act has all of the subtlety of one of those moral-philosophical thought experiments where everything is setup, then put in motion and one decision is required with great, but innevitable, consequence. Such experiments are designed to eliminate variables and to focus ones thought on the essential question that requires an answer. And so, in the end, we are tricked by a movie that appears multifaceted that is, though interesting, a well constructed one-dimensional conversation piece.
The conflict between the beginning and the end of this movie, obviously, left me feeling as though it had failed to live up to its dramatic beginnings. Maybe the attention that it has been getting is simply a refelction of its success at generating discussion - what I think its goal was. Clearly in one respect it is a good movie, but in the aspect that I have tried to articulate I feel it has a big problem and it is the kind of problem that 5 star movies ought tobe able to sort out.
On the official Chris' Choice scale Million Dollar Baby gets three stars.
***
