Connect with us

Clint Eastwood

Unforgiven’s Jailhouse Standoff 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.”
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 jail. 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 standoff 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.

Related Topics:

Clint Eastwood

Caped Clint Eastwood? Raquel Welsh? These famous actors were almost Superman and Lois Lane

It’s a bird . . . It’s a plane . . . It’s Dirty Harry?
Forty-five years after dashing newcomer Christopher Reeve’s caped flight to stardom in 1978’s “Superman” movie, a NYC auction house is listing rare documents revealing the other leading men the studio cleared to be cast in the iconic role, including Clint Eastwood, Jack Nicholson, Robert Wagner and then-closeted Richard Chamberlain.
Auction house Metropolis Collectibles revealed the names of 24 leading men and 23 actresses DC Comics officially approved to be Superman/Clark Kent and Lois Lane, characters ultimately played by the relatively unknown 26-year-old Juilliard alum Reeve, and established 30-year-old Margot Kidder.
“This has been a well-loved topic over the years and for the first time we have confirmation” about the approved list of actors “DC was comfortable with, as far as their public image,” said J.R. Taylor, a researcher for Metropolis. “The casting has always been the most talked about thing and this list has names no one ever knew before.”

Margot Kidder and Christopher Reeve, seen here in costume as Superman flies the reporter through the air, ultimately won the roles of Lois Lane and Superman.

10Margot Kidder and Christopher Reeve ultimately won the roles of Lois Lane and Superman.©Warner Bros/Courtesy Everett Collection
The celebs who coulda been contenders were:
CLINT EASTWOOD:

Clint Eastwood in the 1966 film "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly."10Clint Eastwood in the 1966 film “The Good, The Bad and The Ugly.”Courtesy Everett Collection
The caped crusader with a deadly squint?
“A lot of actors probably weren’t thrilled at the idea of playing Superman. This was a time when starring in a comic book movie certainly sounded like a risky proposition,” said Taylor.
ROBERT WAGNER:

Robert Wagner headshot10Robert Wagner was known more for his roles in television.Courtesy Everett Collection
The veteran actor and husband of Natalie Wood (whose name was on the list for Lois Lane) would have been 48 when the movie premiered on Dec. 15,1978.
“At that point he was a television actor,” said Taylor.
JACK NICHOLSON:

Jack Nicholson in "Chinatown."10Jack Nicholson as Jake Gittes in the 1974 film “Chinatown.”Courtesy Everett Collection
The “Chinatown” actor and “Cuckoo’s Nest” Oscar winner with the unnerving grin would ultimately go on to play the Joker in 1989’s “Batman.”
But he was no obvious Superman, said Taylor.
“You can see DC probably was considering nothing more than people who they considered to be bankable” stars, but he would have brought “baggage” from his previous eccentric roles.
MARLON BRANDO:

Marlon Brando in "The Godfather."10Marlon Brando in “The Godfather.”Courtesy Everett Collection
The brooding bad boy ended up playing Superman’s father Jor-El, despite Brando famously trying to convince producers that the role should be portrayed by a green suitcase.
“His logic being that if they were aliens, there’s no way of knowing what Superman’s father really looked like, perhaps hoping to be paid for voiceover work,” said Taylor.
RICHARD CHAMBERLAIN:

Richard Chamberlain in 1974's "The Towering Inferno."10Richard Chamberlain in 1974’s “The Towering Inferno.”©20thCentFox/Courtesy Everett Collection
“He’s the only actor on the list, besides Rock Hudson, who’d have been a closeted gay actor in the part,” said Taylor.
RAQUEL WELCH:

raquel welch in a orange bra and underwear in 196710Sex symbol Raquel Welch wouldn’t have been believable as Lois Lane.©20thCentFox/Courtesy Everett Collection
Not in “one million years” could people see the international sex symbol as the Pulitzer Prize-winning “Daily Planet” reporter.
Though the sexy starlet went on to star as vampy villain Diana Pride in the TV series “Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman” in 1995.
SUE LYON:

Sue Lyon in 1962's "Lolita."10Sue Lyon in 1962’s “Lolita.”Courtesy Everett Collection
“This is probably the biggest surprise here,” said Taylor of the starlet who found overnight fame in the title role of 1962’s “Lolita,” but who “relied on drive-in movies and small TV turns by the time of Superman’s production.”
JANE SEYMOUR:

Jane Seymour in 2005's "Wedding Crashers."10Jane Seymour in 2005’s “Wedding Crashers.”©New Line Cinema/Courtesy Everett Collection
The former “Live and Let Die” Bond girl later turned up in the Superman series “Smallville” on The CW and named one of her children after her close friend Christopher Reeve, said Taylor.

NATALIE WOOD AND SISTER LANA WOOD:

Natalie Wood, left, and her sister, Lana Wood, in the 1960s.10Natalie Wood, left, and her sister, Lana Wood, in the 1960s.Courtesy Everett Collection

“Natalie’s name has come up, but no one’s ever mentioned her sister Lana, primarily known as a ‘Bond girl,’ being approved for the role,” said Taylor.

Continue Reading

Clint Eastwood

“Bobby suffers, Clint yawns”: Clint Eastwood Was Decimated After Being Called Inferior To Robert De Niro

Clint Eastwood was once a veteran actor who later entered the field of directing. Starring alongside other notable actors, Eastwood has had his fair share of enemies and jealousies with other actors and directors throughout the years.
Working alongside director Sergio Leone in the 1966 film The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly, Clint Eastwood had grown to resent the director by the end of the filming. In his later years, Leone would go on to compare Eastwood with a block of marble while hailing Robert De Niro as an actor!
Clint Eastwood in The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Clint Eastwood in The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
When Sergio Leone Compared Clint Eastwood To A Block of Marble!
Arguably becoming famous for starring in Western spaghetti movies, Clint Eastwood essentially became famous for portraying the role of Man with No Name in Sergio Leone’s Dollars trilogy. The actor, however, was fed up with working with Leone by the end of the 1966 film.
robert de niro in the irishmanRobert De Niro in The Irishman
Being very tight around his films, Eastwood learned his sense of perfectionism from Leone himself. However, the trait became heavy for the actor when the director behaved very strictly in his movies. After starring in 1966’s The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly, Clint Eastwood never worked with Sergio Leone again. In a 1984 interview with American Film, Leone went on to compare Eastwood to a block of marble!
“Robert De Niro throws him­self into this or that role, putting on a personality the way someone else might put on his coat, naturally and with ele­gance, while Clint Eastwood throws himself into a suit of armor and lowers the visor with a rusty clang.”
The director further continued,
“East­wood moves like a sleepwalker between explosions and hails of bullets, and he is always the same — a block of marble. Bobby, first of all, is an actor. Clint, first of all, is a star. Bobby suffers, Clint yawns.”
Although his character of Man with No Name became iconically famous, the mysterious persona around the character wasn’t always so. It was actually Clint Eastwood who came up with that idea but had to argue with Sergio Leone in the process!
Clint Eastwood Had To Argue With Sergio Leone
Clint Eastwood in Cry Macho'Clint Eastwood in Cry Macho
Before the iconic character of Man with No Name was created, Italian director Sergio Leone had a different idea in mind. Giving the character dialogues and a backstory to explain his motives, it was Eastwood who advised the director to go the other way. Eastwood revealed in an interview with Ric Gentry (via Slash Film) how the iconic character finally came to be.
“Sergio argued with me, though he did agree in a way, but it was just much harder for the Italian mentality to accept. They’re just used to so much more exposition and I was throwing that out.”
Well, it seems that Eastwood eventually won over and the Man with No Name came to be. As for the strained relationship between the actor and Sergio Leone, the duo never worked together after 1966.

Continue Reading

Clint Eastwood

‘High Plains Drifter’: The movie that began the feud between John Wayne and Clint Eastwood

It’s well-known that John Wayne seemed to hate almost every actor other than himself, but there were a few figures within the film industry with whom The Duke had serious and bitter feuds. Most notably, Wayne held a particular distaste for Clint Eastwood, the western movie icon who looked to take Wayne’s position as the most prominent performer to spread their wings in the genre.
While Wayne could seemingly find a bone to pick with any of his contemporaries or successors, the feud with Eastwood arose from his second movie as a director, the 1973 western High Plains Drift, written by Ernest Tidyman. Following on from his debut feature in the boss’ chair, Eastwood’s second effort saw him play a mysterious stranger who looks to deliver justice when he arrives in a frontier mining town rife with corruption.
The film arrived not too long after Eastwood had completed his work with Sergio Leone and his Dollars Trilogy movies and was greatly inspired by the legendary Italian director, as well as by Don Siegel. The likes of Verna Bloom, Mariana Hill, Jack Ging, Stefan Gierasch and Mitchell Ryan are all featured in the movie, which was shot on location at Mono Lake in California.
Eastwood once noted the issues that Wayne had with the movie, writing in the book John Wayne: The Life and Legend, “John Wayne once wrote me a letter saying he didn’t like High Plains Drifter. He said it wasn’t really about the people who pioneered the West. I realised that there’s two different generations, and he wouldn’t understand what I was doing.”
The actor went on to add his justification for his movie and provided an explanation of how Wayne had got his intentions all wrong. “High Plains Drifter was meant to be a fable,” Eastwood added, “It wasn’t meant to show the hours of pioneering drudgery. It wasn’t supposed to be anything about settling the West.”
High Plains Drifter was well-received by critics upon its release. It sees Eastwood’s character come to a small town’s rescue when he is persuaded to protect them from a deadly gang of outlaws. The unnamed stranger is a golden-gilded gun-slinger, so his arrival is initially met with fear by the townsfolk, but when they witness his skill with a pistol, it’s not long before they turn to him for help.
The screenplay by Ernest Tidyman was loosely inspired by a real-life murder in Queens in 1964, during which several eyewitnesses were said to have stood by without action. There’s an element of black humour within the movie, too, which comes primarily from the way that Sergio Leone used the device to fill in plot holes in his own works.
Eastwood’s second effort as a director (and the first in which he both starred and directed) remains a classic of the western genre, although it was not well-met by John Wayne. After all, Wayne’s films tended to rely on a well-trodden trope of good vs. evil, whereas Eastwood’s were more ambiguous in their morality. Throw in the kind of violence that Wayne was not welcoming of, and it’s easy to see why The Duke found a distaste for Eastwood and his cementing of his position as the new outlaw in town.
Check out the trailer for High Plains Drifter below.

Continue Reading

Trending