clint eastwood is a shitty director and always has been

Everything Eastwood has directed post that movie where he yells at Filipino kids has been treated with kid gloves, because he's been 100 years old for ages and every expects all his releases to be his last. So when he releases an absolute stinker critics will sort of acknowledge that the movie is poorly directed but still give it a charity thumbs up.

But he's never been a good director, even when he was a spry 60 year old back in the 80s. He's gotten worse, for sure, and he basically stopped 'directing' actively now that's he old enough to get a letter from the Queen (he apparently has a bunch of assistants that do everything for him on set, it's not clear what his input is aside from choosing a script) but he's ALWAYS been incredibly lazy. Every movie he's made that has been passable has been so on the basis of a strong script and performances (Million Dollar Baby, some of his westerns) from actors that don't need direction. But when he's put out to sea without either of those things you can see that his 'directorial style' amounts to pointing the camera at whichever actor is moving the most and making the most noise, giving them one take and if they don't get it right frick it, cut and print. Lighting or sound fricked up? Who cares, no one pays attention to that.

it's sad because he's always been kind of based, and it's funny that he keeps casting relatively young women to frick him for the movies in which he acts. nothing funnier than a full-blown decrepit 90 year old being blown by a Hollywood-faced 45 year old woman pretending she's a similar age as him

like every year some retatd studio executive has 20 million to burn and decides to give it to clint eastwood to barely direct some movie about a horse rider who gets sad about mexico or sum shit