The Lost History of ‘J. Edgar’

[marmar]

from Consortium News:



The Lost History of ‘J. Edgar’
November 14, 2011

A film about someone as controversial – and mysterious – as FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover forces the filmmakers to make judgments about key historical events, including some still cloaked in secrecy. But the movie J. Edgar ducks those tough choices in Hoover’s career, writes Lisa Pease.

By Lisa Pease


The more you know about history, the less you will enjoy J. Edgar.

I understand the problems with dramatizing history. Characters often need to be combined, events invented to connect known episodes, dialog invented because who knows what was actually said in any given situation. I usually cut filmmakers slack in this area. It’s a film, not a documentary.

I can forgive historical liberties when the resulting product is compelling on either an intellectual or emotional (or even comedic) level. But when the end product isn’t compelling on any level, then the historical issues just glare.

The problem starts with the lead character. Even fictionalized, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, who ran the powerful bureau from its founding in 1935 until his death in 1972, is simply not someone I could find any reason to care about. There’s nothing sympathetic or compelling about him, nothing to give me what the industry calls “rooting interest.” .............(more)

The complete piece is at: http://consortiumnews.com/2011/11/14/the-lost-history-of-j-edgar/

[demosincebirth]

1. I liked the movie and thought it was right on about Hoover. I wonder

why he lasted so long as FBI chief... the prick he was. Form your own conclusions.

[kickysnana]

2. He had absolute power. He was ruthless. He blackmailed kings and popes.

Presidents had to stand for office and had term limits. He did not.

I checked to see your age range to see if you were young or just lived with the official stories in your youth, like my Mom and Dad, and decided not to comment on that