Another illogical Eastwood ending

Rating: Null/10 (16 December 2008)

This is yet again a pretty typical Clint Eastwood film. I'd say the only redeeming points were: some of the humour which poked fun at Eastwood's age and the acting of Ashney Her as the young Korean neighbour. Eastwood himself was fine but nothing special as an old angry curmudgeon (it's really not much of a stretch is it?). The problem I have with his films is that they lack any logical conclusion based in reality (particularly true of Million Dollar Baby). Same thing is true here. In the end of course Eastwood sacrifices himself for his new friends. It's completely illogical and is only used as a method for the audience to feel some sympathy for this "hero" who lets himself get killed to save his friends. Was this the only real solution besides using violence and killing a bunch of people? Yes, the point is that he suffered for the violence he committed years earlier (that point was not lost on me) but it felt heavy-handed and manipulative for Eastwood to have to die in the end.
The movie had a very mixed message about race as well. It seems that the message is that the only way an Asian family in America can thrive and survive in modern America is with the assistance and sacrifice of an old white male war veteran. There's so self-empowerment message here. It's all about relying on 'whitey' to survive in America.
Eastwood's Libertarian/conservative views are obvious here. I really can't say much more about what a bad movie this is. One of the most overrated movies of 2008. Very badly acted. Very bad script. How many times must we see a white patriarch sacrifice himself at the end for the benefit of everyone. How utterly crass.