News: Watch Clint Eastwood's RICHARD JEWELL, now available streaming and on Blu-ray and DVD!


0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this board.
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Movie Clint dies in?  (Read 2240 times)
Raz
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


I think not there for I am not


View Profile Email
« on: January 11, 2004, 12:08:54 PM »


 ??? ??? ??? ???

I am sure I watched a film one time in which good old Clint dies!  I can't remember much about it but I know he spent a lot of his time with a bunch of women & I seem to think that they went about poisoning him with mushrooms!

Could I be right or do I simply have an over-active imagination?
« Last Edit: January 11, 2004, 02:04:12 PM by mgk » Logged
Brendan
Classic Member
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6028



View Profile Email
« Reply #1 on: January 11, 2004, 12:55:59 PM »

The movie was The Beguiled where Clint's character, Cpl. John McBurney, did die at the end.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2004, 02:04:37 PM by mgk » Logged
mgk
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2113


View Profile Email
« Reply #2 on: January 11, 2004, 02:06:32 PM »

Raz - I changed the title of this thread to Movie Clint dies in?  Having the title of Clint dies? might scare some people into thinking something has happened to Mr. Eastwood when it hasn't.

Hope you understand.
Logged
KC
Administrator
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 32340


Control ...


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #3 on: January 11, 2004, 02:07:08 PM »

Eastwood's character also expires (of natural causes) at the end of Honkytonk Man, and in The Bridges of Madison County, his character dies somewhere between the time of the main action of the film and that of the present-day "frame" of the story.

Also, in High Plains Drifter and Pale Rider, some spectators might conclude that the character has died before the action of the film commences. ;)
« Last Edit: January 11, 2004, 02:07:59 PM by KC » Logged
John Omohundro
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


I'm a llama!


View Profile Email
« Reply #4 on: January 15, 2004, 10:49:53 AM »

KC:

I'm not certain if this is true, but I seem to recall reading that THE GAUNTLET[/i] (1977) was originally supposed to be the FOURTH and FINAL film in the DIRTY HARRY series, and that the main character was supposed to die at the end.

However, somebody made a last-minute script change, probably because Warner Brothers didn't want to kill off one of their longest-running film series just yet, and the lead character's name was changed to "Ben Shockley", with the location being changed to the Phoenix, AZ area.
 
A further revision was made just before the final scene was filmed. Somebody evidently remembered that the films in which Clint's characters "die" on-screen aren't very popular with his core audience, so they changed the final confrontation with Police Commissioner Blakelock (the late William Prince) so that Shockley would be badly wounded (multiple gunshot wounds), but would survive.

--John Omohundro
« Last Edit: January 15, 2004, 08:04:50 PM by John Omohundro » Logged
Agent
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1738



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #5 on: January 15, 2004, 11:16:29 AM »

That is quite interesting. I may get stoned for this, but I think it would have been better for Harry to have died in one of his 70s DH films, rather than dragging him into an ongoing "purgatory" of lame sequels - at least the last two in my opinion- where it lessens the value of the character. I think if he had died in one of his first 3 films (or 4th assuming Gauntlet really was a DH film), it would have capped off the legendary Inspector Harry Callahan legacy with more dignity.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2004, 11:17:18 AM by Agent » Logged

"I tried being reasonable, I didn't like it." - Clint Eastwood
KC
Administrator
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 32340


Control ...


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #6 on: January 15, 2004, 07:10:13 PM »

John, if you can recall where you read that, I'd like to know. The script as we have it doesn't fit the Harry Callahan character at all ... Shockley is kind of an anti-Callahan, an alcoholic, a failure, a screw-up. He's handed the job of bringing Malley back to Phoenix for the trial because "they don't want the job done." No one would EVER give Harry Callahan an assignment in the expectation that he would fail to accomplish it because of incompetence.

The picture is also basically a comedy, or an adventure-comedy-romance, if you will, so I can't imagine that there was ever an intention of killing Shockley off at the end.
Logged
John Omohundro
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


I'm a llama!


View Profile Email
« Reply #7 on: January 15, 2004, 08:07:03 PM »

I wish that I COULD remember, KC!

I'm reasonably certain that it's true, but I can't prove it because I haven't any supporting information.

Good thing I'm not a lawyer and this isn't a court case, isn't it? :)

--John
Logged
KC
Administrator
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 32340


Control ...


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #8 on: January 15, 2004, 09:13:33 PM »

Well, I don't mean to doubt your word! It's just that I don't ever recall reading such a story, and it doesn't seem to accord very well with the structure of the film as we have it.

The little bit I could find out about the origins of this film suggest that the screenwriters, Michael Butler and Dennis Shryack, sold the script to Warner Bros. who at the time thought of it as a potential vehicle for Barbra Streisand (as Mally, of course ... not Shockley! ;) ) Doesn't sound like a potential "Dirty Harry" sequel to me ... ;)
Logged
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
 




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