Connect with us

Clint Eastwood

High Plains Drifter: Clint Eastwood reinvents his iconic ‘Man with no Name’ as a quasi-supernatural avenger in this eerie western

High Plains Drifter(1973) is the first Western that Clint Eastwood directed. It’s a little different from the rest of the westerns he made, as an actor or as a director, as it plays out more as a supernatural thriller.

“That isn’t what the West was all about. That isn’t the American people who settled this country.” – John Wayne on High Plains Drifter

It might appear a little ominous to start talking about a western with a quote bashing the movie and that too from legendary western Icon John Wayne. But we are discussing a rather strange movie that polarizes the audiences, and Wayne’s reaction is a pointer towards that. To put Wayne’s quote in context : John ‘Duke’ Wayne and Clint Eastwood have a lot in common. They are ‘the‘ two biggest movie stars of all time. Both extremely prolific and long lasting. Both became icons through their perfect embodiment of the Archetypal American male in the most popular American film genre of the ‘Western‘ . They are both blessed with ruggedly handsome looks and a towering personality that makes them perfect for these films that unfold against the grand vistas of American frontier wilderness. Both of them had a couple of great directors helping them in shaping their iconography at various stages of their career. For Wayne, it was John Ford and Howard Hawks ; For Clint, it was Sergio Leone and Don Siegel. Above all, both are politically conservative. So, with so much in common, one would obviously assume that Duke had a great deal of admiration for Clint, who could be considered his heir apparent. Not so i am afraid, professionally at least as it is obvious from Wayne’s feelings about Clint’s 1973 film High Plains Drifter quoted above. The main reason for this was: American west that was presented in Duke’s films was very different from the ones that we got to see in Clint’s films. Duke came of age as a star in the triumphant years of 1940’s and 50’s . His films were concerned with the glories of the white man who settled the west. They are portrayed as pioneers who brought modernity and prosperity to the resplendent landscape that was under the savagery of the Native American tribes. On the other hand, Clint attained stardom in the counter-cultural, swinging 60’s which was a period of revisionism . His Westerns were more about the schism, the violence and the savagery that existed within the, so called , modern society that replaced the primitive tribal society. Duke, like the characters he portrayed, wholeheartedly believed in the nobility and the adventurous spirit of the white settlers who went west and brought with them the benefits of modern civilization and established modern towns and cities. But, by the time Clint came long , the concept of the ‘savage injun as the bad guy‘ was passé. Even great western auteurs like John Ford were making their own ‘mea culpas’ like Cheyenne Autumn during this period. In Clint’s films, the settlers are portrayed as mean, morally corrupt, violent and no more civilized than the natives. So it’s natural for Duke to have a certain extend of disdain for Clint’s movies. Also, Duke’s characters (with some exceptions) never lost their moral center. They operated within the strict parameters of what is universally perceived as right and wrong. He never shot anybody in the back. He was also adamant that when he shot someone, the action has to be cut in such a way that we never see the gun being fired and the recipient of the bullet being killed in a single shot. Clint, on the other hand, would go on to break every one of these rules. Sergio Leone’s A Fistful of Dollars, the film that made Clint a star, would be the first film where we saw the gun being fired and people being shot down in the very same frame. And Clint had no scruples about shooting people in the back either. His characters are only concerned with their own survival . There’s an interesting story that happened on the set of Duke’s last film The Shootist , which was directed by Clint Favorite Don Siegel. Siegel suggested that Duke shoot the villain in the back. When Duke balked at the suggestion, Siegel, rather un-diplomatically, let go that Clint would have shot the guy in the back . This comment enraged Duke and he fired back: “John Wayne never shoots anybody in the back, he is not like that new kid Clint Eastwood“. It was Clint’s big dream to do a film with Duke and he sent a letter to Duke expressing his desire to work with him. But Duke turned it down, responding with an angry letter, in which he denounced his films, particularly High Plains Drifter, for its violence and revisionist portrayal of the Old West. Eastwood did not bother to answer his criticisms, and consequently, the dream team-up never happened.

John Wayne’s criticism notwithstanding, High Plains Drifter is one of the most stylized, moody, bizarre and out of the box westerns ever made. Clint Eastwood’s first western as a director – He had already made his directorial debut with 1971 romantic thriller Play Misty for me – takes his ‘Man with no name’ Character, that he originated in Sergio Leone’s spaghetti westerns, to it’s logical extreme; which is to make it less a character and more an abstract supernatural force . A sort of the God from the old testament: the God of vengeance violently punishing the wicked and the immoral. Clint’s mysterious stranger– we never find out who he is or his name- emerges out of the morning heat haze from the high Plains and rides into the lakefront town of Lago. He is looked on with suspicion by the townsfolk and as we will come to realize soon, the town has a lot of dirty secrets to hide and it’s natural for them to be suspicious of strangers. On his arrival, Clint takes a ride through the entire town observing every nook and corner . His dispassionate self is suddenly awakened when he hears the sound of a carriage-driver whipping his horse. It appears that the moment has awakened some bad memories in him . Finally, when he reaches the end of the town- interestingly, where the undertaker seems to keep the coffins- he gets down, tie his horse and goes into the saloon for a drink. He gets a rather hostile reception inside the saloon, especially from three guys who appears to be gunfighters. After some tense conversation with the three, Clint walks out and goes into the barbershop for a shave. The three guys follow him there and try to rattle him, but he surprises them with a fast draw. He shoots down all three of them; the first one gets it between his eyes, the other two are shot through their heart. The Barbershop is partially demolished in all this action. Clint, nonchalantly, wipes the soap of his face, picks up his hat and walks out. On his way out, Clint is hit on by town tart Callie Travers(Mariana Hill). When he refuse to respond to her overtures, she slaps him. An angry Clint drags her into the nearby livery stable and rapes her. He then coldly walks out and rents a room in the town hotel, owned by Lewis Belding(Ted Hartley) . Once in his room, he beds down, and as he is sleeping, he has a nightmare about a man being brutally whipped to death by three men.

So, within the first twenty minutes of this 105 minute movie, we already have murders, rape, destruction and horrifying nightmares. High Plains drifter was released the same year as the Dirty Harry sequel Magnum Force and it goes without saying that the Mysterious drifter of this film makes Dirty Harry look like a pacifist. As it is obvious from the opening , the film is heavily influenced by Clint’s ‘Dollar‘ films with Sergio Leone . The revisionism , the amorality and the mystique of the man with no name seems to have been borrowed from Leone’s westerns. But as the film progresses, Leone’s influence wane and Don Siegel’s -Clint’s other mentor – influence takes over. Clint retains Leone’s grittiness, dark humor and the iconography of the lead character, but, cuts down on the operatic exuberance and flamboyance, choosing to make a more leaner, minimalist and dark gothic western. The plot of the film could be broadly summarized as ‘High Noon on steroids’, after the iconic 1952 Gary Cooper western High Noon, where we had the Sheriff played by Cooper being abandoned by the townsfolk as three cutthroats, (whom the sheriff has send to the prison) return to take revenge. By the way, High Noon was another film that Duke despised. So it’s no surprise that he was pissed at High Plains Drifter. Duke and Director, Howard Hawks, had made Rio Bravo(1959) as a retort to High Noon, which was a more heroic and optimistic version of the High Noon story.

High Plains Drifter follows a plot similar to that of High Noon, except here, the town Marshall, Jim Duncan, is whipped to death by three cutthroats – Stacey Bridges and The 2 Carlin brothers- with the tacit approval of the townsfolk to cover-up a secret that would seriously damage the economic prosperity of the town. It seems that the coalmine that feeds the town is on federal land and the Marshall had plans to spill this truth to the authorities. Now the Marshall taken care of , the town betrays the murderous threesome, and have them imprisoned for some petty charge of stealing gold from the coal mining company. But now that the threesome has finished their sentence, the townsfolk knows that they would be coming directly to Lago to take revenge. To counter this, they hire another threesome to defend them; unfortunately, the same threesome that Clint kills in the opening. Now the town begs Clint to become their protector. Clint initially declines. But the town is desperate and they promises him anything he wants, unlimited credit in every shop and saloon in town.

Though the film never makes it clear, it drops some hints as to who this mysterious stranger could be. One of them is that he is the ghost of the murdered Marshall, whose corpse is lying in the cemetery in an unmarked grave. The ghost has now come back to take revenge. The frequent nightmares that the stranger is having , about a guy being whipped to death, resembles the death of Marshall Duncan. Marshal Duncan, from whatever we could make out of him, resembles the stranger a lot (the role was played by Clint’s stunt double to accentuate this resemblance). The original script concept was that the stranger is the brother of the Marshall, but Clint decided not to reveal anything explicitly, and let the audience draw their own conclusions about the character. He wanted to keep it as a sort of biblical morality tale, where people who does bad things have to pay for their actions. Clint amps up the spooky nature of the film wherever he can, making the audience feel that they are watching a supernatural\thriller western rather than a traditional one. And the stranger comes across as supernatural too. He appears impervious to bullets and is devoid of any form of human emotions. Additionally, he seems to be holding some fierce grudge against the town. He becomes the town’s protector mainly to torment the townsfolk.. He puts the ‘unlimited credit ‘ offer to good use; He grabs himself a bunch of cigars, and proceeds to inflict detailed pain and embarrassment to the cowardly folks of the town. He gives blankets away to Indians, hires Mexican workers to throw the coming outlaws a big picnic welcome, evicts everyone from the town’s hotel so that he would be the lone occupant, makes the town midget, Mordecai, both Mayor and Sheriff, and then sees to it that the town is painted blood red and re-dubbed Hell. It soon begins to dawn on some of the townsfolk that the person from whom they need protection is the stranger and not the oncoming threesome. So, under Lewis Belding’s leadership, a few of them concoct a plan to kill the stranger. But the plan backfires and ends up destroying Belding’s hotel and killing a whole lot of them . Now the only place left for stranger to sleep is Belding’s bedroom . After ordering Belding and the others to bury the dead, the stranger grabs Belding’s wife, Sarah(Verna Bloom), and drags her into the bedroom. But he doesn’t rape her, as she feared, or show any interest in her , but still , Sarah succumbs to his charms and ends up sleeping with him.

Next day is the day of the showdown. We have seen in the interim the murderous threesome killing and stealing horses on their way to the town. Sarah, who by now have warmed to the stranger, and believes that he has some personal connection to the dead Marshall, tells him the truth about what really happened to the late Marshall. She’s had enough of living with her weak and cowardly husband and decides to leave Lago for good. Meanwhile, the stranger goes out into the wilderness and scares the hell out of the murderous threesome- who are camped just out of town- with dynamite and gunfire. He returns to the town , asks everyone to be ready and rides away. It appears that he is deserting them and leaving the town at the mercy of the killers. Stacey Bridges and Carlin brothers ride in and take the town without much effort. They kill and burn down half the town and take the rest hostage in the saloon. And as they are mocking and torturing them, the stranger suddenly appears, as if out of thin air, and starts killing the threesome one by one. The first Carlin is whipped to death – exactly in the same fashion as the late Marshall , the other Carlin is hung and finally, Stacey Bridges is cold-bloodedly shot dead by the stranger. The entire action takes place at night, in pitch darkness, illuminated only by the inferno that has engulfed the town giving the whole scene an apocalyptic feel. The next morning, the stranger packs up to leave and as he passes through the cemetery, he comes across Mordecai hard at work. Mordecai asks him the same question that he has been asking throughout the film :”I never did know your name“, and the stranger replies: “yes, you do“, and as he rides away, the headstone on the grave comes into the frame, obscuring the stranger, and we see ,Marshal Jim Duncan – Rest in Peace, written on it. It’s also interesting to note that the stranger rides back in the same direction he came from, disappearing into the heat haze from which he emerged, meaning that he wasn’t drifting or passing through, as was the case with a lot of these ‘man with no name‘ movies, where we see the protagonist come in to the town from one direction and goes out at the end through the opposite direction. It appears that The stranger specifically came to this town on a mission , and now that the mission is accomplished, he is going back to where he came from. This is another interesting twist provided to the oft-repeated formula.

Clint shot the entire film at Mono Lake, California , in a tight schedule of just six weeks. Clint is renowned for such efficient productions. He doesn’t like to waste money or too much time on making his pictures and he always brings the film under-budget and under-schedule. A full set of the town was erected , so that both exteriors and interiors could be shot on location, which allowed Clint to have some lengthy shots and maintain their continuity; like the ones where Clint walks out of the hotel and into the street, still carrying on a conversation with Sheriff Sam Shaw. Clint’s films are not noted for their stylistic flourishes. He has always been a minimalist, who likes to shoot his films simple and straight. But perhaps it’s due to its subject matter, High Plains Drifter is one of his more baroque and stylized movies. He uses strange camera angles and lighting schemes to heighten the eerie quotient in the film. The climax is very reminiscent of his classic film Unforgiven(1992), that he made almost 20 years later, though that was a very different western from this one. Clint would revisit this sort of a biblical character in Pale Rider(1985), which has a lot of similarities with this film. By the way, Clint paid homage to his mentors in the final scene of the film. The two gravestones next to Marshall Duncan’s is marked Sergio Leone and Don Siegel. Another grave is marked with the name of director Brian G Hutton, who directed Clint in Where Eagles Dare. It’s like he buried all his directors before he embarked on his own directorial career. No wonder he once quipped “I buried my directors“.

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