News: Having trouble registering?  Please feel free to contact us at help[at]  We will help you get an account set up.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - The Man With No Aim

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 28
I was joking.  :)

I acknowledge you as being a joker.


General Discussion / Re: All the prostitutes in Eastwoodland
« on: February 12, 2016, 11:29:03 PM »
In her case, isn't it said that she was stood up by someone, so that's why she's there alone at the hotel? So if she's a prostitute, the hotel worker must be in on it.

That sure does remind me of my next door neighbor when me and my bride moved into our first apartment. Same come hither look.

Thanks for the memories.


Being rich would suit me well.

And being able to go to Eastwood-Land would be pretty great too. ;)

Matt, I wasn't writing about you becoming rich. I am the inventor who could make the grade and become rich.

If I were to become able, and stay willing, to build something like "Eastwoodland" to commemorate Clint Eastwood and his contribution to our culture and civilization, there will be guns and images of guns there.



Coogan Bluff is a great film because of the great motorcycles and the great riding by Clint doing his own stunts, proving that he is really an expert rider. In one moment, in a sharp turn, his bike is sliding out from under him but he instinctively and swiftly extends his leg to prop up the bike. Aces!


Money has changed in value by a big factor since 1862. More than 100X. Which explains a lot of things. Tuco's half, $100,000, is equal to $10,000,000 (or more) in 2016 money.

Every time Blondie turned Tuco in for the reward, Blondie made $100,000 in 2016 money. Blondie and Tuco were both filthy rich before the Army gold flap. So there is no question about Blondie being able to hire a gunsmith to manufacture cartridges and a properly modified Navy Colt to shoot them in. All of my previous quibbles about gun anachronisms have turned into smoke and dust.

So the movie plot has just got turned on its head. If YOU were filthy rich already, would you plot and scheme and murder to get your hands on $200,000 (equal to $20,000,000, 20 million, of today's money) or just relax and enjoy your secure and comfortable financial condition?


General Discussion / Re: What was the last Eastwood film you watched?
« on: February 11, 2016, 12:57:28 AM »
GBU. Just an hour ago.

This film gets better each time I watch it.

And it was damn good the first time I ever watched it. A true epic film not only about the Western genre, but about the human condition.


GBU is a better film each time I watch it. After uttering confusion about the guns in it, I want to now clear the air.

Just not an hour ago I first watched the end sequence, the three way shootout, repeated times, and there is no confusion, Angeleye's gun is a Remington model 1858. You all have my apology for all the confusion caused by my earlier silly and confused statements. Without doubt, the Angeleyes gun in the final shootout is a 1858 Remington.

My earlier point was the gun anachronisms in this otherwise remarkable and indeed glorious film.

In the final portion of the film, the battle of the bridge, there are scenes showing rapid fire weapons which never were used officially in the Civil War, and the official records are all we have to go on. And there are rapid fire weapons shown which are , to me, unknown and which seem to defy laws of physics.

However, each time I watch this film, I am more impressed by how intensely it explores human emotions and the need for more sympathy and empathy that every human should have for every other human. This is a truly epic Western film, and really a truly epic film in general.

The Man

So if the board has any millionaire/billionaire readers with ties to Clint that might want to invest in this project, contact me. I gots ideas, lots of 'em.  ;D

Some of them mine.

As an inventor in my retirement, I have more than one invention idea that could turn me into a billionaire in 30 days time. I know for certainty which ideas are mine and which ideas are not mine and which are yours. When I begin to plan my Eastwood Commemorative Plaza, Matt, I will for sure remember you and your ideas.

I promise, I will remember which ideas are yours and which are mine.


Thank you for digging up all that pertinent information and posting it!

I had either never known about the 38 Short Colt cartridge (most likely) or forgotten about it (entirely possible) and have been easily amusing myself thinking that those conversions in the Civil War era were based on the Henry 44 rim fire cartridge. I gots to look it up but the cartridges in the Van Cleef gunbelt look too long to be a SHORT Colt.

Again just a minute ago I closely examined my Navy Colt comparing it against the screen image and everything is in the right place to be a Colt Navy or Army. But don't have a Remi hanging around, maybe all the stuff is by coincidence in the same places.

Anyway, endless thanks to you for the interesting information.


With a "muzzle loader", a cheap and easy to fire a blank is to put in a little black powder gunpowder but NO ball or, bullet, just a little wad of paper or scrap cloth. Perhaps the director used the percussion gun to stand in as a cheap and easy blank. At this moment I don't remember if Angeleyes fired a shot in the shootout.   

I watched both For a Few Dollars More and The Good, the Bad and the Ugly with Christopher Frayling's commentary on. In general, it is excellent, informative, intelligent and very illuminating both about the production history of the films and about details we might have overlooked. However, he does make a few mistakes. As I mentioned in the Week One thread, in For a Few Dollars More, he places Tucumcari in Mexico, instead of in New Mexico. More startling, in The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, during the "triello" at the end, when we have a closeup of Angel Eyes' hand creeping closer to his gun ...

... Frayling points out the missing fingertip, and adds "In real life, Lee Van Cleef did not have a piece of his finger missing. So the hand they're using is a prop hand, as it were, a body double, to show that this man, even he has been damaged by his life as a gunfighter."

It's a nice thought. But in real life, Van Cleef DID have a piece of his finger missing! It's quite well known and is mentioned in all his biographies. and besides ... it's evident in quite a few other scenes of the film, and it's obviously not a body double!

Over on the Lee Van Cleef discussion board, someone posted a picture that shows Van Cleef in a TV show with a bandage on his finger. The show aired in December 1962, so they conclude the accident (he was building a doll house for his daughter, according to some sources) probably happened sometime the previous summer.

Frayling is right about one thing ... Leone wanted to exploit this physical disability. Eli Wallach recalls, in his memoir The Good, the Bad, and Me (page 252):

Deja vu all over again.

In the screen shot of Van Cleef's finger and pistol, we notice that the cylinder exhibits unmistakably a couple of percussion caps, which is puzzling because the gun has a top strap which identifies it as a 1873 model Colt or later, only manufactured as a cartridge gun, not as a "muzzle loader".   And of course in the same frame we see the cartridges in his gun belt.

Did Colt make the 1873 Peacemaker with its cylinder having external features exactly matching the earlier 1851 Navy and 1860 Army cylinders so that they were interchangeable? And why did the director choose to use a prop gun that was a cobbled together Frankengun instead of simply using a genuine 1873 Peacemaker?   


Doesn't anybody screen these props for continuity??

PS...Well I just held my Colt Navy up close to the computer screen and probably answered my own question. The Van Cleef gun top strap looks like a bogus piece of plastic or scrap metal glued onto a Colt Navy or Army gun. The Van Cleef gun does not have a loading gate indigenous to a cartridge revolver. So evidently, Watson, the director saved a hundred dollars (1960s money) by not buying a genuine Peacemaker, but rather recycling a prop already at hand gun and improvising. However, this is an aggravation of a previously discovered discontent: there were NO large caliber handguns manufactured during the Civil War which used CARTRIDGES. The first large caliber cartridge handguns were manufactured starting in 1873. The Civil War was already over by several years by then.

I know: "It's just a movie!" 

With those bonus points, you can get a free coffee refill from Loretta. With a lot of sugar. 

And then do I get to shoot a bad guy too? Or was it two bad guys all the excitement I lost count myself.

No Name

Several mini-museums.

A car museum displaying Clint Cars, examples of cars such as used in his films. Such as the adorable Jaguar in Misty.

A gun museum displaying all the type of guns used by Clint in his films, such as the iconic Smith Wesson model 29.

A clothing museum displaying all the unique sartorial equipage adorning his most notable roles, such as the serape (or a replica) which draped No Name.

And, homage to Bass Pro, a gun shop, exclusively offering every one of the type of guns handled by a Clint character in a film. Even the extinct Auto Mag. And no other gun type. (I have already designed a Josey Wales Walker Colt which will fire standard 44 Magnums )

A clothing store which will make available iconic clothing from Clint films, such as the Preacher hat from Pale Rider.

Enough for now. Soon to sleep, and perchance to dream.


Of course, lest we forget the MOVIES. Enough screens to make it easy for anyone to watch any Eastwood film in a luxurious wide screen setting with only a short wait for the rotation of viewing schedules to bring any favorite film around on a set schedule.

I'd like to see my favorite, Paint Your Wagon, have a few extra viewing dates.


As a zealous Eastwood fan, the idea of a theme park is really piquing my interest. Just a few details to get worked out.


There could be an old fashioned shooting gallery where the light from the end of the gun barrel  if hit properly on the red dots of the objects they move! It could be called The Josey Wales Challenge.

The Walker Colts carried by Mr. Wales weighed just under 5 pounds (each).

The Smith Wesson model 29 packed by Harry weighed less but is still hefty. His Auto Mag is about the same weight as the model 29.

The Colt Peacemakers used by Men With No Names weighed less still.

Almost the lightest is the 1851 Navy Colt which was Blondies gun of choice. It weighs very roughly half as much as the Walker.

Joe Kidd's Mauser or whatever was even lighter.

The lightest gun, I think, was one of the little dinky guns used by Hemlock in Eiger Sanction.

It would be great fun for me, to hold replicas of Clints Guns with accurate weights, but most park patrons would likely need much lighter ones. A replica of every type of handgun used by Clint in a film could be available, and would be a sort of museum as well as an amusement. I would leave out the harpoon gun he shot in Dead Pool.

A noise maker could be linked by radio to the light gun to make a realistic shot sound when the light flash is triggered. And it might be possible to make a spritzer spew a whiff of artificial eau de gunsmoke.

And I just thought of a way to make them have a realistic recoil without firing any kind of a cartridge, not even a blank. I think I will patent it.


And a zero gravity room would be amazingly cool in the Space Cowboys section. know, Boss, there aint really no zero gravity. Except in a vomit comet or actually in orbit or otherwise high in space.

If you are free-falling, like when you fall of the top of your tall building, you have no sensation of gravity. But you WILL have the unpleasant sensation of the abrupt stop when your fall is over.


I want a Hang 'em High picnic grounds. With young-Clint-Eastwood-lookalikes to go picnicking with the ladies. If the gents don't want Inger Stevens lookalikes, they can take along someone else for their picnics. Lots of hard boiled eggs. And salt.

I thought Inger was quite delightful in Hang Em. I vote for Inger look alikes to thrill me and the rest of the guys.


There is a scene having a river and Clint is crossing the river or riding along beside the river, the wind is rustling tree leaves, the sun is shining brightly, and it all was immediately noticeable to my eye as being definitely softer in definition and not as sharp focus as I am accustomed to seeing in most of the scenes in most of the films I have ever seen. I don;t remember noticing soft focus in the scene in which he is caught and accused of rustling.

In Coogan I saw the same lack of definition in the closing scene in which Clint left in a helicopter from a rooftop heliport. Outdoors, bright sunlight, soft focus.

Years back I read that it was normal practice in Europe to shoot a movie on 16mm for outdoor scenes and shoot 35mm for indoors and when the stars were in the scene. Only saw a few foreign films back then, in the 70s, and had always noticed a soft focus in outdoor scenes.


Trying to get a few peaceful hours to drink my whisky and watch GBU again to give a fresh comment, but have delayed by this and that, and I want to watch it straight thru so will try again next day. Then I will comment on GBU.

Hang Em High is a very well done production, with a number of high high points and few low points.

The only low was a fairly jarring one, in the first few minutes, when Clint is caught and accused of rustling. The outdoors scene was in fuzzy focus, definitely not high definition, I very strongly suspect it was shot on 16 mm film for whatever reason. I noticed this same irritating flaw in a scene in Coogans Bluff too.

Otherwise I thought Hang Em was a really good production in every way.

It was especially interesting to see Clint being so brutally treated in the Paddy Wagon and the jail in early scenes. Man's inhumanity to man. The film was like being transported in a time machine back to where human life was given short change. OK, its happening right now in so many places, but, this film really brings attention to it. A very starkly realistic film.

Enough for me for now.

The Man   

Josey Wales. I know from sad personal experience how a person can try hard to do what he knows to be right but be misunderstood and be considered a miscreant and indeed an outlaw.

Josey unceasingly gave kindness and generosity to people who acted decently toward him. As Chief discovered when he tried to murder Josey but was thwarted by another indian doing what only an indian could do. Josey was generous and did not avenge the threat because he had seen other righteous behavior in Chief.

Hanging out with Josey Wales would be hanging out with somebody willing to be my best friend at the drop of a hat providing I would show him that I was willing and able to behave righteously the best I could. And be his best friend at the drop of a hat. Been there, done that. 

I'll give a second choice, too, for the same reasons. Will Munny was a devoted friend to his long time friend Ned. For apparently the same kind of reasons. And was a friend to his NEW friend of a short time. As he said to Schofield Kid, "I aint gonna kill you, right now you're the only friend I got!".

My best friend since grade school died a few short months ago. I know how much to value a good friend.

The Man

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 28

C L I N T E A S T W O O D . N E T