Unforgiven’s Jailhouse Sh00tout Makes Clint Eastwood’s Western a Classic
Let’s start with the obvious: Unforgiven is a masterpiece. Clint Eastwood’s gritty deconstruction of the Western genre easily stands as one of the best of its kind. From start to finish, we’re enraptured by this dangerous world populated by men and women who utilized violence as a means to an end.
Starring Eastwood (who also directed), Gene Hackman, Morgan Freeman, and Richard Harris, the epic galloped into theaters in August of 1992 and quickly found acclaim amongst critics and moviegoers. All told, Unforgiven earned a massive $159M against a $14.4M budget and went on to win Academy Awards for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Supporting Actor (Hackman), and Best Film Editing. One could argue that two more awards were due — for Eastwood’s performance (he lost to Scent of a Woman’s “hoo-ah” screaming Al Pacino) and Jack N. Green’s stunning cinematography (the Oscar went to Philippe Rousselot for A River Runs Through It).
No matter. Eastwood has no need for pint-sized Hollywood awards. The iconic director/actor aims for something bolder and grander, which is why I think Unforgiven stands as his masterwork; the pièce de résistance of a storied career that continues to this day. And for an artist with a resume chock-full of classics like The Good, The Bad and the Ugly, The Outlaw Josey Wales, Dirty Harry, High Plains Drifter, Kelly’s Heroes, Mystic River, and Million Dollar Baby … that’s saying something.
I could go on and on about Unforgiven and echo the sentiments of Peter Travers who, in his review in Rolling Stone magazine, called it “the most provocative Western of Eastwood’s career” and noted: “By weighing Munny’s rise to prosperity against his fall from grace, Eastwood gives Unforgiven a tragic stature that puts his own filmmaking past in critical and moral perspective. In three decades of climbing into the saddle, Eastwood has never ridden so tall.”
You’ve likely read this all before.
Instead, I want to focus on my favorite scene from Unforgiven. No, it’s not that scene, but rather a smaller, quieter moment that occurs midway through the film that serves as the turning point in the story.
Unforgiven mostly operates like a traditional Western throughout its first hour. We are thrust into a familiar tale of revenge, meet a colorful cast of characters, and are whisked away on a grand adventure filled with campfires and atypical sweeping country landscapes. That all changes about 50 minutes into the production when Gene Hackman’s Little Bill beats the ever-loving shit out of Richard Harris’ English Bob and hauls him to prison. It’s here that Eastwood unveils the true purpose behind this tale. Here, the director deconstructs the myth of the cowboy, blurs the line between good and bad, and sets the tone for the remaining film whilst laying groundwork for the dark finale.
He also gives us one of the more intense standoffs in modern cinema. Let’s rewind.
English Bob is a notorious gunslinger who rides into the town of Big Whiskey in the hopes of collecting a bounty on a couple of cowboys who cut up a local brothel worker. Bob, we quickly learn, possesses gunslinging skills and a talent for embroidering the truth, but has clearly let fame go to his head, as is evident by the biographical writer (Saul Rubinek) currently attached to his person. The denizens of Big Whiskey treat Bob like some sort of English Elvis; his legend precedes him at every turn. All it takes is a mild game of “shoot the pheasant,” which Bob easily wins, for challengers to holster their sidearms and take a step back; so renowned is the Englishman’s mythos.
Except, in truth, English Bob is just a man who rose to fame thanks in large part to a fortunate moment of happenstance. We learn as much when Little Bill gleefully recounts Bob’s “legendary” tale as it actually happened:
The conversation gives way to “my favorite scene,” or the standoff between Little Bill and English Bob:
I’ve watched this scene a thousand times and each viewing makes my heart race. There’s a lot to unpack here, from the way Bill demystifies the gunfighter legend by demonstrating how difficult it is to draw a weapon, aim and kill a moving target; to the manner in which Mr. Beauchamp attempts to create his own “iconic scene” that he hopes to exploit through his books.
Take note of Eastwood’s use of sound in the clip above. There’s no music. Rain and thunder pervade the soundtrack. Old Westerns often scored gunfights with dramatic orchestrations packed with rousing themes for the good guys and darker melodies for the bad guys. Check out this clip from the classic High Noon in which Gary Cooper takes on some dastardly villains and listen to the way Dimitri Tiomkin’s bombastic score highlights the action:
The difference between High Noon and Unforgiven is that the former features clearly drawn heroes and villains operating on very distinct sides of the law, while Unforgiven dips its toes in murkier waters. During Bill’s standoff with Bob, there’s no need for music because, well, we’re not sure who to root for. Little Bill carries a badge and certainly seems like he has good intentions, but isn’t much better than the murderers he abuses. It’s no coincidence that as tensions mount in the jail, Eastwood posits Bill behind bars in several shots, giving the impression that he deserves to be locked up right alongside the criminals he so despises:
I’ve always seen Bill as a man desperately trying to be the good guy, who too often mistakes violence and abuse for justice. His treatment of English Bob, for example, is a misguided attempt to condemn a man who hasn’t done anything wrong:
After Bill’s mistreatment of Bob, the film escalates into a series of violent standoffs and showdowns.
At one point, Bill comes face-to-face with a feeble and sick William Munny and seizes the opportunity to beat the shit out of the old cowboy. His directive is to scare the bejesus out of bounty hunters who ride into town aiming to kill for a handful of cash. I should point out that Bill’s violent actions make little impact. William and his partner, the Schofield Kid, eventually murder the two wanted cowboys and collect the bounty. Ironically, if Bill had acted as an actual lawman rather than a violent psychopath, he may have saved the two boys’ lives. Instead, his deeds incite more unnecessary violence and eventually lead to his own death.
Ironically, in the jailhouse, Bill calls English Bob a pathetic coward for shooting one of his victims in the back. He’s not wrong. Bob is a phony and a coward. However, Bill spends half the film beating defenseless people to a bloody pulp. He literally murders Ned (Morgan Freeman) — a character who outright refuses to kill — after a violent interrogation goes wrong and later displays his corpse for all to see.
In the end, Bill is more ruthless, cowardly, and cold-blooded than the men he tries to keep from entering his town. No matter, Little Bill eventually gets what he deserves in Unforgiven’s astonishing final scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfOfV7U35PU
What’s great is that Bill’s death is foreshadowed during his extensive conversation with Mr. Beauchamp in the jailhouse: “Look son,” he says, “being a good shot, being quick with a pistol, that don’t do no harm, but it don’t mean much next to being cool-headed. A man who will keep his head and not get rattled under fire, like as not, he’ll kill ya.”
We see two examples of this play out. First, when Bill squares off against English Bob, and second, during his final confrontation with William Munny. In the first, Bill is calm and steady — he even smirks! That’s because Bill knows the truth about Bob. He doesn’t buy into the lies surrounding his person and knows the Englishman will back down from a fair fight or end up dead. Bob represents the faux legend whose mythos quickly unravels when you peel back the layers and peer just below the surface.
In the second example, Bill comes toe-to-toe with an actual gunfighter with a known reputation — Munny has killed women and children, after all — and panics. By contrast, William Munny keeps his cool and manages to take out a half dozen men (including Bill) with relative ease. Munny is the legend we all long to see, but the cold truth is that he’s a miserable old man haunted by his past deeds. Mr. Beauchamp will likely embellish his story and paint Munny as some sort of mythical figure, but we know the truth.
Ultimately, I could’ve picked any number of scenes from Eastwood’s classic to explore. However, the jailhouse shootout has always been the moment where Unforgiven morphed from being a really good Western to perhaps the greatest Western ever made. In the end, this might not be the old-fashioned Hollywood cowboy adventure we all wanted, but it’s the film we deserved.
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
Warner 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.
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 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 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?
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.
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.