Cast:
Clint Eastwood (Inspector Harry Callahan), Tyne Daly (Inspector Kate Moore), Harry Guardino (Lt. Al J. Bressler), Bradford Dillman (Captain Jerome McKay), John Mitchum (Inspector Frank DiGiorgio), Bill Ackridge (Andy), DeVeren Bookwalter (Bobby Maxwell), Albert Popwell (Big Ed Mustapha), John Crawford (The Mayor), and Robert Hoy (Buchinski) Directed by James Fargo.
Review:
Did you know that this was supposed to be the last Dirty Harry film? I thought the most surprising thing about the series of Dirty Harry films would be the fact that Clint Eastwood ended up directing only one of them, although he certainly had his level of control (at least in terms of re-takes) with how they ended up with his production company in Malpaso. Why don't we just recap how we got to a third film, shall we: Harry Julian Fink and Rita Fink were the folks that came up with the original script for what would become Dirty Harry (1971), one that showed the blurred lines between criminal and cop with the hunt for a serial killer (in this case inspired by the Zodiac killer) that showed a lesson on the ends justifying the means. Further contributions came through Dean Riesner (a writer who had contributed scripts to a number of Eastwood films starting with Coogan's Bluff in 1968) alongside un-credited writers such as John Milius and Terence Malick. Don Siegel's efforts in wrangling the script to something Eastwood liked made for one of the most memorable cop films of the era, albeit one that certainly proved a shock to certain audiences. Magnum Force (1973) was done as a reaction against complete vigilantism, complete with Milius as story writer and Michael Cimino as co-writer. It was an okay film, one that might have run a bit too long to wander in all the directions it wanted. Originally, Eastwood was slated to direct this film (after having disputes with Ted Post with the last one), but troubles with The Outlaw Josey Wales (1976) meant that he had to focus his attention elsewhere (he took over directing for that film and had to supervise the editing). James Fargo was a familiar presence for Eastwood, since he served as his assistant director on numerous movies, and the Washington native would be brought in by Eastwood to direct his first feature film. The script came out of a hodgepodge of four writers in Stirling Silliphant and Dean Riesner (screenplay) to go with Gail Morgan Hickman and S.W. Schurr (story). Hickman and Schurr made a script that had Eastwood's character going up against a violent group that harkened to real-lie events of the day (such as the Symbionese Liberation Army and the Black Panther Party - the former was a domestic terrorist group comprised of left-wing thugs that committed two murders alongside robbery and kidnapping (most notably Patty Hearst), and as for the latter group...search and interpret for yourself). Meanwhile, Silliphant had come up with a script that paired the lead character with a female partner, but Eastwood wanted more action from it (rather than the emphasis on character); at any rate, Riesner would be brought in to re-write the script after Silliphant had done re-writes to both his original script and Hickman/Schurr's script.
So how is the overall movie? For something that proved such a popular hit with audiences (at least in terms of being the biggest hit of the series until the next film seven years later), it certainly is a weird one to think about. On the one hand, having a shorter run-time (96 minutes) helps, but really one can't help but wonder what exactly has changed from the previous features. It almost delves into ham-fisted amusement with its attempts at balancing action with light moments that can range from crashing a car to foil a robbery/hostage situation after giving a remark about giving a car to a quite long foot-chase that is equivalent to a jog around your house to a final encounter at Alcatraz Island that I suppose made sense somewhere on the line. On a cheesy level, it is firmly in the middle of what you would consider in that department, wracked with a bleak tone that may or may not be overkill in action (one count in the body-count suggests one of nineteen, for example) that contrasts with moments of disjointed narrative movement. In other words: it is a decent movie in terms of not wasting my time, but it sure is an average way to do so with a cast that could have done better. I feel like if someone really wanted to make fun of the ham-fisted nature of these films, all one would need to do is to just trim a little bit from here and just add in a few more points of furor over hippie-I mean criminals doing actions against Callahan; he already loses more partners than pairs of keys, to begin with. Eastwood grits through a role that he certainly supervised to not speak as much as he didn't want to, complete with meeting the need for action to keep up with the fans. It isn't a bad performance, but it is exactly the kind of thing you have seen before that makes one see the logic in this being thought of as the last intended one - where else could he go with this character of smart remarks and vigilance? Daly had rejected the role a few times before being convinced to do it on one key change: omitting a relationship beyond professional between her and Eastwood's character. The interesting thing about Daly is that she would wind up playing a police officer again a few years later with the noted hit Cagney & Lacey in 1982. She does pretty well here in terms of wedging in clear-cut professional chemistry with Eastwood that never feels phoned in - she stands her ground in respect that seems a bit more memorable than the usual partner with Eastwood. Guardino is here and there when it comes to having the shoulder presence of authority, serving more for exposition more than anything; Dillman however is used as a foil to the usual beat against the main character that feels quite hollow. I had forgotten that Mitchum was making his third and last appearance in the series, but I'm sure he had a decent time with what is there for shock in setting up the obvious. Bookwalter makes for a fair stock performance in deranged nature that honestly needed more from the script (again, it's hard to top the first film and its choirboy faced killer). If the sequels to Dirty Harry are this distinctive in oddness, one almost wonders how sequels to other movies involving vigilance or cop action end up being, particularly for a feature like The Enforcer that is diverting if not just an excuse to rack up a few thrills with a somewhat game script and cast that result in a cheesy but likely serviceable effort. It kept the attention for what was needed as a continued reflection of 1970s action that has its moments for an overall mixed bag of curiosity.
Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.
No comments:
Post a Comment