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


0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this board.
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 15 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Eastwood Character Survivor  (Read 75143 times)
philo
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3717


"Slightly advanced"


View Profile Email
« Reply #60 on: May 23, 2003, 01:46:23 PM »

Yes my tongue was slightly towards my cheek with those remarks, however I was amazed that people at least saw what I was trying to say. I don't hold these points really against the film or I would have aired them before now ..... but I have always seen it that way and to me it is a weakness.  

I have seen Paint you wagon (with pardner) many more times than Unforgiven. I think it is bad that AKA (I Think) votes off pardner having only seen a bit of the film.

This is not as clear cut as the other game .


Philo .
« Last Edit: May 23, 2003, 01:47:03 PM by philo » Logged

"I won't be hitting you with my face"
AKA23
Classic Member
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3671



View Profile Email
« Reply #61 on: May 23, 2003, 02:00:48 PM »

You are right. Discount my vote. It isn't fair of me to vote when I haven't seen the film, I'll come back to the game when Pardner is gone. Good point Philo.
Logged
philo
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3717


"Slightly advanced"


View Profile Email
« Reply #62 on: May 23, 2003, 02:54:28 PM »


Hey AKA ,

Please don't go by what I just say see what the others think. I don't not want you to take part.

Just start supporting Pardner !!   ;)



Philo .
Logged

"I won't be hitting you with my face"
Matt
Global Moderator
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14885



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #63 on: May 23, 2003, 03:06:02 PM »

AKA, not everyone that's playing has seen all the movies.  

Philo just doesn't want you voting against Pardner, that's all.  ;)

If the only people allowed to vote were the ones who had seen all the movies, I think we wouldn't have very much participation in this game.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2003, 03:06:17 PM by Matt » Logged
AKA23
Classic Member
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3671



View Profile Email
« Reply #64 on: May 23, 2003, 04:09:43 PM »

Well, okay Philo, but I don't WANT to support Pardner. What was good about that character? Maybe you can convince me.

D'Amb, it's an interesting point that you are making here. I don't have a firm view on this, but generally, I would think that if you felt the movie wasn't that great, then the character can't be that great either. If it isn't executed well, if it doesn't all connect, it's really very difficult to separate the actual "character" from the overall film, and the manner in which that character was portrayed on film. If it's a good character, then the film should be decent, and the character should work to enrich the film as a whole. If that isn't the case, then I don't think its a good character. I understand your separation of performance v. character, but I have a hard time separating the two. In order for it to be a good character in my mind, I have to enjoy the film that the character is in, the acting and the performance has to bring the character to life for me, it all has to come together. That's my opinion at least.

I know what you are saying though. For instance, I'd place Luther Whitney as a very interesting character, I happen to like the film, etc..but I'm sure many of our board members, not having liked the film, may overlook Luther Whitney as being a good character, when in fact, it's in my mind a very interesting, multi-layered Eastwood performance.
Logged
Matt
Global Moderator
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14885



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #65 on: May 23, 2003, 05:54:36 PM »

There's a few characters that I think stand out as being far better than the movie they're in.  One example is Ben Shockley in The Gauntlet.  The film is good but the character is one of the best Eastwood's ever portrayed.  

I actually think Mitchell Gant is a good character, but Firefox is one of my least favorite Eastwood films.  It's a good performance, and he's got some interesting characteristics and flaws that make him better than the film... which seemed very dull, to me.

In this case, I'd also say that Philo Beddoe is a better character than both of the Which Way films.  That's not a knock on the films (don't get on me for that, Philo), it's just that I think his character is really the best part of the film, and if I were to grade the film, it would get maybe a C, but the Beddoe character might get a B.

I can separate great characters from the films they're in, but I do have a little trouble separating great performances from great characters.  If a character is really written poorly, then no matter how great the performance is, there's just not gonna be much to be done with it.  However, for the most part, I think that Eastwood has chosen to play characters that are really interesting and multi-faceted, so then it really comes down to a combination of performance and the depth of the character.

Logged
philo
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3717


"Slightly advanced"


View Profile Email
« Reply #66 on: May 23, 2003, 08:00:17 PM »



Quote
don't get on me for that, Philo


Matt ,

As if I would do anything like that.   ;)


Philo .
Logged

"I won't be hitting you with my face"
AKA23
Classic Member
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3671



View Profile Email
« Reply #67 on: May 23, 2003, 08:04:49 PM »

We're all friends here. Philo's cool. He wouldn't do ANYTHING like that ever. Come on. Give our friend across the pond some more credit here! :)
Logged
philo
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3717


"Slightly advanced"


View Profile Email
« Reply #68 on: May 23, 2003, 08:30:28 PM »


AKA ,

you are forever full of good support and wise thoughts, we are indeed all friends here, and if we all liked the same films, it would not be worth stopping by as often as we do .


Philo .
Logged

"I won't be hitting you with my face"
Matt
Global Moderator
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14885



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #69 on: May 23, 2003, 08:46:28 PM »

I know Philo's cool, AKA.  

He's got a cool av, so he must be cool.  :D
Logged
philo
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3717


"Slightly advanced"


View Profile Email
« Reply #70 on: May 23, 2003, 08:57:50 PM »


Thanks to KC for hosting these great Bob Peak images. I could not want better av's than these.


Philo .
Logged

"I won't be hitting you with my face"
D'Ambrosia
Classic Member
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3838



View Profile Email
« Reply #71 on: May 23, 2003, 09:14:52 PM »

AKA you still owe a vote.... I need it now!   Sorry but you voted pardner so you got to stick with it.  Just like walking out of the booth, once your done your done....  ;)  Philo still owes a vote as well seeing how Pulovski got voted off last round....  Just now leaving work so it's going to take me a few to get home, got to make a few stops...
Logged
D'Ambrosia
Classic Member
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3838



View Profile Email
« Reply #72 on: May 23, 2003, 10:15:44 PM »

Quorum  Call! ;D
Logged
Matt
Global Moderator
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14885



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #73 on: May 23, 2003, 10:17:11 PM »

Come on everyone who hasn't voted yet.  Get over here and throw Pardner to the trees!  ;D
Logged
D'Ambrosia
Classic Member
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3838



View Profile Email
« Reply #74 on: May 23, 2003, 11:04:20 PM »

Last call!!!!

I'm going over to the gun thread to try and fix those silly pic, a will be right back...

As it stand it would be Kincaid and Pardner to go so if you don't want Kincaid to go....Hurry Up.... ;D
Logged
AKA23
Classic Member
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3671



View Profile Email
« Reply #75 on: May 23, 2003, 11:09:12 PM »

Lt. Speer and Pardner then. I don't think that changes the outcome of the game, though. Sorry D'amb. Aren't there more for Mitchell Gant to go then Kincaid? Maybe not.
Logged
D'Ambrosia
Classic Member
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3838



View Profile Email
« Reply #76 on: May 23, 2003, 11:31:21 PM »

I thought KC might jump in to save Kincaid, but What's done is done.... If Philo would use his "missed" vote for Speer that would do it but that's not happening. as it stands:

Pardner is singing to the trees tonight.... GONE!

The run down:
Pardner:3
Kincaid:2
Speer:2
McCaleb:1
Gant:1
Gardner:1
Munny:1
Pulovski: -0  Null and Void vote (Philo)
Logged
D'Ambrosia
Classic Member
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3838



View Profile Email
« Reply #77 on: May 23, 2003, 11:37:31 PM »

I say we call it push between Kincaid and Speer so here's the next one.   Midnight tommorw night is last vote time:

Take your pick:
The Man with No Name
Jed Cooper
Walt Coogan
Lt. Morris Shaffer
Kelly
Hogan
John McBurney
Dave Garver
Harry Callahan
Joe Kidd
The Stranger
Thunderbolt
Jonathan Hemlock
Josey Wales
Ben Shockley
Philo Beddoe
Frank Morris
Bronco Billy
Mitchell Gant
Red Stovall
Lt. Speer
Wes Block
The Preacher
Tom Highway
John Wilson
William Munny
Frank Horrigan
Red Garnett
Robert Kincaid
Luther Whitney
Steve Everett
Frank Corvin
Terrell McCaleb
Logged
Conan
Classic Member
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2943


JP


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #78 on: May 24, 2003, 12:16:07 AM »

Kincaid and McCaleb
Logged

Matt
Global Moderator
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14885



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #79 on: May 24, 2003, 07:36:09 AM »

Good, Pardner's gone so I can change my avatar back.   :)

This round... McCALEB and SPEER
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 15 Go Up Print 
 




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