Connect with us

Clint Eastwood

Gran Torino Ending Explained: Clint Eastwood Confronts Dirty Harry

When we first meet Walt Kowalski (Clint Eastwood) at the beginning of “Gran Torino,” he isn’t a very nice man. We might forgive his crankiness a little because he is mourning the recent loss of his wife of 50 years, but then we also get the sense that the worst aspects of his personality aren’t just to do with grief. He hates everybody, and the only bright spots in his life are his dog and beloved vintage Ford Torino. He doesn’t get along with his grown up kids, and he takes grim satisfaction from insulting people who try to help him out.

Walt is also a total bigot, and has no hesitation voicing his prejudices with a stream of ethnic slurs every opportunity he gets. In his neighborhood, he gets plenty; it was once mainly populated by blue-collar white people like himself, but has changed a lot since he first moved in. It’s now very multi-ethnic and has a problem with gang violence, which directly effects his Asian neighbors, the Vang Lor family. The boy, Thao (Bee Vang), is under pressure to join the Hmong gang run by his villainous cousin, Spider. Thao’s unwilling initiation is to steal Walt’s pride and joy, which doesn’t go down very well with Walt.

To apologize, Thao’s mum makes him do chores for Walt. Walt isn’t keen on the idea but eventually develops paternal feelings towards the kid, helping him find a job and giving him dating tips. He is also befriended by Thao’s sister, Sue (Ahney Her), and by extension the whole family. With Spider’s gang still threatening the Vang Lors, must Walt resort to violence to protect his new friends?

Clint Eastwood has helmed around 40 films since his directorial debut with “Play Misty For Me” and starred in many of them. Many of his characters are variations on his distinct persona that he developed in two genres in particular: the western and the crime thriller. His Oscar-winning “Unforgiven” addressed the violence of his laconic western characters, while “Gran Torino” is a conversation with his cop with a very big gun, “Dirty Harry.”

So what happens at the end of Gran Torino?

On the face of it, the ending to “Gran Torino” is fairly straightforward. Thao comes under increasing pressure to join the gang, and they attack him one day on his way home from work. Walt gets involved and beats up a gang member in retaliation. This escalates the situation even further, with the gang shooting up the Vang Lor’s house in a drive-by and beating and sexually assaulting Sue. The family chose not to report either incident to the police, and Walt is furious.

Thao wants to get revenge and asks Walt to help him. As we’ve seen earlier, Walt has no qualms about waving guns around. Walt really cares for the boy now and is dying anyway, and doesn’t want Thao to become a killer. He locks him in the basement and heads out to confront the gang alone on their turf. He draws them out of their house with a lot of yelling and accusations, making sure he also attracts the attention of the neighbors. Calling back to a moment earlier in the film when Walt draws a finger gun on them, he reaches slowly inside his jacket. This time, expecting him to pull out a piece, the gang gun him down. As he dies, it is revealed that he was just taking out his lighter. 

Instead of resorting to violence, Walt has tricked them, laying his life down for his friends so the gang will get sent away for a very long time. It’s a profoundly satisfying ending to the movie, far more so because it inverts what we have come to expect from Eastwood’s screen characters. “Gran Torino” is perhaps Eastwood’s most outright entertaining movie of the 21st century and it works even if you haven’t seen any of his previous films. Where this ending really takes off is when considered in relation to Harry Callahan in the “Dirty Harry” movies.

If you or anyone you know has been a victim of sexual assault, help is available. Visit the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network website or contact RAINN’s National Helpline at 1-800-656-HOPE (4673).

What is the connection with Dirty Harry?

After Eastwood’s steely-eyed performances in Sergio Leone’s “Dollars Trilogy” catapulted him from TV actor to international fame, the role that cemented his status as a Hollywood superstar came in Don Siegel’s seminal action thriller, “Dirty Harry.”

Eastwood played Harry Callahan, a maverick San Francisco police detective on the trail of a killer. He’s a character we’ve seen dozens of times since: a ruthless cop who plays by his own rules, treats his superiors with disdain, and prefers to work alone because his partners have a nasty habit of getting shot. He’s also the kind of guy who shoots first and asks questions later, as in the famous “Do I feel lucky?” scene where he thwarts a bank hold-up by killing one robber and seriously injuring another.

His unconventional methods are pushed to the limit when the city is held to ransom by a giggling hippie maniac calling himself Scorpio (Andy Robinson). Scorpio has already murdered one woman, and promises to kill more people unless the mayor coughs up $100,000. Callahan goes into full-on loose-cannon mode, rampaging across the city after the psycho with little regard for the suspect’s rights.

“Dirty Harry” is a great film — although some critics, including Pauline Kael and Roger Ebert, were quick to write it off its ideas as fascist. It’s far more ambivalent than that, with a screenplay that provokes discussion about the effectiveness of the law, and whether it is fit-for-purpose in extreme situations. In one of its more harrowing scenes, it asks if a murder suspect’s rights should count for anything while their latest victim is hidden away dying in a hole somewhere. Harry Callahan certainly doesn’t think so, skipping due process to torture information out of Scorpio about the missing girl, literally trampling his rights underfoot. It is mean, ugly, and far from a celebration of a fascistic worldview.

One thing we can say about Harry is that he’s a violent bigot who uses detective work as an opportunity for a little peeping tom action on the side. As another cop explains to his new Hispanic partner:

“That’s one thing about our Harry, doesn’t play any favorites! Harry hates everybody: [various ethnic slurs], you name it.”

Despite some critics denouncing it for glorifying police brutality, “Dirty Harry” was a big hit and Eastwood reprised the character in four increasingly tired sequels.

Is Gran Torino Eastwood’s apology for Dirty Harry?

Many have taken “Gran Torino” as Eastwood’s apology for Harry Callahan, much like his revisionist take on his vengeful western persona in “Unforgiven.” At the beginning of the film, Walt is unapologetically racist, takes the law in his own hands, and threatens people’s lives with guns. He is explicitly a different character from Harry, but for the purposes of the message Eastwood wants to make, may as well be Callahan in retirement. John Patterson of The Guardian compared Walt to John Wayne’s character in his final film, “The Shootist,” also directed by Don Siegel:

“Wayne takes all consequences upon himself and refuses to let a boy who idolises him … kill the bad guys. In the age to come, he suggests, young men must find a way to achieve manhood without the shedding of blood. In like manner, Eastwood in “Gran Torino” disavows the violent, racist core of his movie persona — and violence itself — while simultaneously honoring both his on-screen predecessor and his foremost directorial teacher. That’s a neat trick indeed, and a damn fine way to ride into the sunset.”

“Gran Torino” is better at addressing the violence issue than the racist one, and it generated controversy for its non-political correctness and use of ethnic slurs. More recently, Bee Vang (who played Thao) denounced the film for mainstreaming Anti-Asian racism (via USA Today). Watching it back, it’s easy to see where he is coming from. While one of the movie’s goals is to set up Walt as a racist so that outlook can be knocked down, there is an uncomfortable sense that many of his slurs are delivered in a way that seeks laughter. Maybe we’re supposed to be laughing at Walt’s out-of-touch bigotry, but it’s a questionable approach. After all, he isn’t the target of the unacceptable language.

While Eastwood is heavy-handed with the material, it’s clear that he intends his film to reject racist views and redeem himself for one of his most famous and problematic characters. It’s a thorny way to apologize for Dirty Harry, but “Gran Torino” isn’t the same story without depicting Walt’s racism in the first place.

Clint Eastwood

Mystic River: Why Clint Eastwood’s Best Movie Still Holds Up Today

A filmmaker of Clint Eastwood‘s caliber is going to have a filmography full of gems. Primarily known for his work in Westerns, biopics, and military dramas, every so often, Eastwood steps outside his comfort zone and delivers in a genre that would seem completely unexpected on paper. That happened in 2003 with Mystic River, a neo-noir murder mystery drama that seems a bit forgotten or overlooked, even though it was a financial success and earned six Academy Award nominations. It represents Eastwood at his very best, breathing vivid life into complex characters as he examines a plethora of themes that range from loyalty, friendship, revenge, and, ultimately, forgiveness.

Mystic River is based on the 2001 novel of the same name by Dennis Lehane, and it follows the lives of three childhood friends, Jimmy Markum (Sean Penn), Sean Devine (Kevin Bacon), and Dave Boyle (Tim Robbins), living in Charlestown, Boston in 1975. Dave is kidnapped by two men claiming to be police officers, and he’s sexually abused by them over a four-day period until he escapes. The traumatic event shapes the three friends, and they ultimately lead very different lives twenty-five years later.

Jimmy is an ex-con that now owns a convenience store in the neighborhood, Sean works for the Massachusetts State Police as a detective, and Dave is your everyday blue-collar worker that still lives with the trauma of being abducted and raped. Their lives are forced together once again through tragedy when Jimmy’s daughter Katie (Emmy Rossum) is found murdered, and friendship is tested when all signs point to Dave being the murderer.
Mystic River Is a Departure From Clint Eastwood’s Other Work

Sean Penn held back by cops in Mystic RiverWarner Bros.

Eastwood tackles the material in Mystic River with a sure and confident hand. It also represents a unique departure from some of his other films. Much of the action takes place under the cover of darkness, and Eastwood is able to find beauty in that darkness. The filmmaker focuses on a character’s eyes or the gleam of a weapon, for instance, as darkness permeates most of the scene.

For the scenes that take place during the day, the filmmaker opts for tight close-ups that linger over the emotions of his impressive cast. There is something uncomfortably intimate about Mystic River, and that has much to do with the subject matter. None of this story is particularly easy to digest, and Eastwood adds to that discomfort with his choices to frame scenes in such a way that’s almost intrusive. The audience feels a growing sense of dread and tension as more of the story unfolds.
Using Lehane’s novel and Brian Helgeland’s screenplay as a blueprint, Eastwood profoundly explores generational trauma and how the sins of the past can leave a permanent mark on our present. Even though the abuse only happened to Dave, the effects of the event leave a mark on all three friends, with Dave being the primary victim and the others feeling a sense of survivor’s guilt for not being subjected to it themselves.
The ordeal forever changes their union because they’re never quite able to look at each other the same way again, as each friend deals with the trauma differently. Jimmy is stunned by the act of abuse but can’t give Dave the support he needs, which then bleeds into their present when Jimmy begins to suspect that Dave had something to do with his daughter’s murder. He doesn’t want to consider that his friend would do something like this because of the trauma he endured as a child, but as evidence mounts against him, Jimmy has to decide if friendship and loyalty overshadow his need for vigilante justice. The story is rich with so many complexities that make it some of Eastwood’s most compelling work as a filmmaker.

Eastwood also takes his time with the story and lets it unfold as it should. Mystic River is very nuanced, and he knows he’s dealing with heartbreaking subject matter that requires patience and respect. The story is grounded in so much reality that Eastwood seems keenly aware that a viewer might be an actual victim of this kind of abuse themselves, so he delicately approaches the topic and gives it the emotional weight it deserves.
He also shows the uncomfortable side of abuse where the victim, unfortunately, can be shamed because of the event. Dave becomes an outsider later in his life, even with his close friends, something that sadly comes along with this kind of trauma. Eastwood approaches all of this responsibly and provides a very balanced outlook to all the events transpiring on screen.
Mystic River has become known for its powerhouse performances, and Eastwood pulls the very best from his ensemble cast. While the scenes with the young actors are brief in the beginning, they set the tone of who these people will be twenty-five years later. Dave becomes the outcast because of the event; Jimmy lacks empathy and doesn’t trust authority, while Sean becomes the grounded one of the bunch and a police officer in an attempt to prevent a tragedy like this from ever happening again.

Clint Eastwood Pulls Powerhouse Performances From His Cast

Tim Robbins, Sean Penn, and Kevin Bacon do a great job conveying the unspoken tension between all three of these characters. There is a sense of loyalty, but so much has taken place over the years that it has forced them all to lead very different lives. As a group, they are uniformly excellent. You feel the history between the characters and the bonds that were broken, only to be reopened by a new traumatic event.
On their own, Penn gives the performance of a lifetime as Jimmy, and it’s not a shock that this turn finally earned him his first Academy Award for Best Actor. Penn is a dominant presence in all of his scenes, and there is a sense of uncertainty whenever he’s around because you don’t know exactly what move he will make.

That’s not to say he doesn’t display layers. All of that bravado is broken once he finds out his daughter is murdered. It’s hard to pinpoint a director’s best scene on film, but what Eastwood pulls out of Penn during the “Is that my daughter?” sequence represents some of his very best work as a filmmaker.
Robbins also received an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor for his work here, representing a much-deserved win. As Dave, Robbins is the tragic and emotional heart of the story. The viewer feels instant empathy for Dave due to what he went through as a child, but you’re also left questioning everything when it seems like Dave could be the one who murdered Katie.
Robbins keeps you on your toes throughout, making you question his innocence while also seeing the tenderness in him as he interacts with his own child, who is just about the age he was when he was abused. As for Bacon, of the three male leads, he gives the most subdued performance, but it suits the character. He’s trying to make everything right and keep it all together. It’s a subtle performance that carries its own emotional weight.

Eastwood also makes the supporting roles worthy of attention. Marcia Gay Harding, as Dave’s wife Celeste, puts in powerful work here that earned her a Best Supporting Actress Oscar nomination, while Laura Linney more than holds her own with Penn as his second wife, Annabeth. In addition, Laurence Fishburne also fills in as Sgt. Whitey Powers in another excellent part.
Mystic River is a haunting and poetic motion picture that showcases a director laying it all out on the table. Eastwood gives the audience everything he has as a director and pours it out across the screen in a film that is just as powerful twenty years after its initial release.

Continue Reading

Clint Eastwood

Clint Eastwood’s Most Iconic Non-Western Role Was Only Possible Because Of This Actor

SUMMARY

 Clint Eastwood’s role in Dirty Harry is considered one of his most iconic, and the film is a classic in the crime genre.
 Paul Newman initially turned down the role of Harry Callahan in Dirty Harry but recommended Clint Eastwood for the part.
 Newman declined the role due to his liberal beliefs, and Eastwood’s portrayal of Callahan differed from Newman’s perspective, but both respected each other.

SCREENRANT VIDEO OF THE DAY

Although Clint Eastwood first built his impressive career on Western movies like The Man with No Name franchise and The Outlaw Josey Wales, the actor’s biggest non-Western role in Dirty Harry is one of his most iconic, and it might have never happened without this one actor. Clint Eastwood began acting in the 1950s, and over several decades, became a staple in the Western genre. What makes Eastwood stand out is the fact that he has not only appeared in countless films, but has also directed them himself. Films like Unforgiven and Gran Torino have defined his career. However, Dirty Harry is by far one of Clint Eastwood’s best films.

In 1971, Clint Eastwood starred in the neo-noir action film Dirty Harry. The film, and its adjoining sequels, follow Inspector “Dirty” Harry Callahan, a rugged detective that is on a hunt for a psychopathic serial killer named Scorpio. The Dirty Harry franchise lasted from 1971 to 1988, and has since been considered a classic. In fact, Dirty Harry was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress because of its cultural significance. However, this film might have been vastly different if Clint Eastwood had never been in it, and scarily enough, this definitely could have happened back in 1971.
Paul Newman Rejected Dirty Harry Before Suggesting Clint Eastwood For The Role

Dirty Harry 2

Dirty Harry went through many production challenges before it was actually made, and one of those included casting the iconic detective. In the film’s early stages, the role was offered to actors such as John Wayne, Robert Mitchum, Steve McQueen, and Burt Lancaster. However, for various reasons, including the violence that permeates the film, these actors all declined. For a time, Frank Sinatra was attached to the project, but he also eventually left the production. In reality, Clint Eastwood wasn’t even in the cards for portraying Dirty Harry, but his big break came when Paul Newman was offered and declined the role.

Paul Newman, like many amazing actors before him, was offered the role of Harry Callahan, but ultimately said no. However, what makes his refusal stand out among the rest is that he recommended another actor that could be perfect for the role: Clint Eastwood. At this time, Eastwood was in post-production for his first film Play Misty for Me, meaning his career was taking something of a turn. Also, unlike his predecessors, Eastwood joined up with Dirty Harry, just as Newman thought he would. Because of his Western roots, the violence and aggression that made up Dirty Harry didn’t bother Eastwood at all.

Why Paul Newman Turned Down Dirty Harry

Paul Newman holding a gun.

Paul Newman turning down the leading role in Dirty Harry may not seem too surprising considering the host of other actors that also declined the movie, but Newman definitely had his reasons. While previous actors had condemned the movie for its incredible violence and themes of “the ends justify the means,” Newman refused to take the role because of his political beliefs. Since Harry Callahan was a renegade cop, intent on catching a serial killer no matter the cost or the rules that would be broken, Newman saw this character as too right-wing for his own liberal beliefs.

Paul Newman was an outspoken liberal during his life. He was open about his beliefs, so much so that he even made it onto Richard Nixon’s enemies list due to his opposition of the Vietnam War. Other issues that Newman spoke out for included gay rights and same-sex marriage, the decrease in production and use of nuclear weapons, and global warming. As a result of his politics, Newman quickly denied the role of Harry Callahan. In an interview with Entertainment Weekly as reported by Far Out Magazine, Clint Eastwood commented that he didn’t view Callahan in the way Newman did, but still respected him as an actor and a man.

Would Dirty Harry Have Been So Successful Without Clint Eastwood?

Clint Eastwood as Dirty Harry Callahan

Ultimately, it’s hard to say whether Dirty Harry would have been successful without Clint Eastwood. Arguably, any big-time actor could have made the film succeed solely based on their fame. However, one aspect of Dirty Harry and its carousel of actors is that the movie had various scripts, all with different plots. So, if Dirty Harry had been in a different location with a different serial killer and a different lead actor, there’s a chance it wouldn’t have been nearly as successful. In the end, Dirty Harry is a signature for Clint Eastwood, and most likely, audiences are lucky that it was made the way it was.

Continue Reading

Clint Eastwood

The story of how Clint Eastwood prevented Ron Howard from embarrassment

A star of American cinema both in front of and behind the camera, Ron Howard is often forgotten when recalling the greatest directors of modern cinema, yet his contributions to the art form remain unmatched. Working with the likes of Tom Hanks, Chris Hemsworth, Russell Crowe and John Wayne, Howard has brought such classics as Apollo 13, A Beautiful Mind and Rush to the big screen.
Entering the industry in the late 1950s and 1960s, Howard started his career as an actor, making a name for himself in shows like Just Dennis and The Andy Griffith Show before his role in 1970s Happy Days would catapult him to national acclaim. His directorial debut would come at a similar time, helming 1977’s Grand Theft Auto, the ropey first movie in a filmography that would later become known for its abundance of quality.
Known for his acting talents, Howard wouldn’t become a fully-fledged director in the eyes of the general public until the 1980s, when he worked with Tom Hanks on 1984’s Splash and George Lucas for the 1988 cult favourite Willow.
With hopes of becoming the new Star Wars, Willow was instead a peculiar fantasy tale that told the story of a young farmer who is chosen to undertake the challenge to protect a magical baby from an evil queen. Starring the likes of Warwick Davis, Val Kilmer and Joanne Whalley, the film failed to make a considerable dent in pop culture at the time, largely being ridiculed by critics and audiences alike.
Screened at the Cannes Film Festival, the movie was spared humiliation by none other than Clint Eastwood, who saw the craftsmanship behind the picture, as described by Ron’s daughter, Bryce Dallas Howard.
Speaking to Daily Mail, the actor recalled: “My dad made a film called Willow when he was a young filmmaker, which screened at the Cannes Film Festival and people were booing afterwards. It was obviously so painful for him, and Clint, who he didn’t know at that time, stood up and gave him a standing ovation and then everyone else stood up because Clint did”.
Dallas Howard, who worked with Eastwood on the 2010 movie Hereafter, became very fond of Eastwood as a result, looking up to him as an exemplary Hollywood talent. “Clint puts himself out there for people,” she added, “As a director he is very cool, very relaxed, there’s no yelling ‘action’ or ‘cut’. He just says: ‘You know when you’re ready.’ I told my dad he should do that!”.
Take a look at the trailer for Howard’s 1988 fantasy flick below.

Continue Reading

Trending