The star ofClint Eastwood’s 2019 drama defends his Letterboxd rating for the film after being taken to task on social media. Eastwood’s long and storied directorial career began way back in 1971 when the star took the helm on the thrillerPlay Misty For Me. Over 50 years later, the 94-year-old Hollywood legend is back with his 40th film as a director, the courtroom dramaJuror #2.
In a filmography as rich and varied as the one Eastwood produced in the years betweenPlay Misty for MeandJuror #2, there are bound to be a few stinkers alongside the masterpieces. Eastwood-directed films receiving the most critical pans (via Rotten Tomatoes) includeThe 5:17 to Paris,The Rookie,Firefox,J. EdgarandHereafter. On the opposite end of the spectrum, Eastwood’s triumphs includeUnforgiven,High Plains Drifter,Honky Tonk Man, the aforementionedJuror #2andPale Rider.
Richard Jewell Star Paul Walter Hauser Defends Giving Eastwood’s Movie 3.5 Stars
Hauser Has Received Pushback On Social Media After “Underrating” The Movie
Critical consensus as reflected by Rotten Tomatoes has Eastwood’s dramaRichard Jewellin the middle of the pack among the director’s films, the aggregator giving the movie a respectable 77% fresh rating. Released in 2019, the fact-based film tells the story of a security guard hailed as a hero during the 1996 Atlanta Olympics bombing, whom the FBI later suspects of planting the device himself. The man who played the titular Jewell, Paul Walter Hauser, received acclaim for his sensitive performance as the wrongly-accused man.
Richard Jewellgrossed $44 milion on a reported budget of $45 million
Five years after playing a man who came under fire from the authorities and media inRichard Jewell, Hauser himself sparked minor controversy for underrating his own movie on Letterboxd, and recently went on the defensive onX, explaining his decision to giveRichard Jewell3.5 stars.
If I think The Shawshank Redemption and Schindler’s List are 5/5, and Richard Jewell is not a perfect movie/bonafide classic, what’s wrong with giving an honest rating? It’s a good film that is definitely worth watching. A 3.5 out of 5 is not a slight. It’s reality.
Our Take On Paul Walter Hauser’s Honest Richard Jewell Rating
Hauser Put His Bias Aside In Grading Eastwood’s Movie
Hauser easily could have givenRichard Jewella five-star rating on Letterboxd, hyping up his own movie, but instead he chose to be objective and provide his honest assessment of the film. This move seemingly angered some people, who apparently believe that Hauser is being ungrateful, or perhaps disloyal, for not heaping praise on a movie he was in. Others have defended the film as being better than Hauser’s rating, though critical consensus, as suggested by the movie’s 77% fresh rating on RT, suggests Hauser is right-on in calling the movie good-but-not-great.
5 stars
90%
91%
1917
88%
99%
4 stars
89%
97%
3 1/2 stars
77%
The reasoning behind Hauser’s 3.5-star rating forEastwood’sRichard Jewellis sound enough, and difficult to argue with given the films he holds up as 5-star movies. While it would be understandable for Hauser to lie and give all of his own movies 5 stars, it’s refreshing that he put aside his bias and gave his honest opinion aboutRichard Jewell. It would be fun indeed if more stars and filmmakers followed Hauser’s lead by starting Letterboxd accounts, and giving truthful ratings of their own movies.
Richard Jewell
Cast
Richard Jewell, directed by Clint Eastwood, tells the true story of the security guard who discovered a bomb at the 1996 Atlanta Olympics. Initially hailed as a hero, Jewell’s life is turned upside down when he becomes the prime suspect in the FBI’s investigation. Starring Paul Walter Hauser, Sam Rockwell, and Kathy Bates, the film explores themes of media frenzy and justice.
