November 9, 2021

Sudden Impact.

Review #1757: Sudden Impact.

Cast: 
Clint Eastwood (Inspector Harry Callahan), Sondra Locke (Jennifer Spencer), Pat Hingle (Chief Lester Jannings), Bradford Dillman (Captain Briggs), Paul Drake (Mick), Michael Maurer (George Wilburn), Albert Popwell (Horace King), Audrie J. Neenan (Ray Parkins), and Jack Thibeau (Kruger) Produced and Directed by Clint Eastwood (#1252 - Space Cowboys, #1310 - Million Dollar Baby, #1476 - Pale Rider, #1501 - Unforgiven, #1550 - Gran Torino, and #1638 - Bird)

Review: 
Remember the ham-fisted nature of the Dirty Harry series? Well, at least some of the time, anyway. True, having the first feature being the undisputed best of a five film series is not exactly a new thing, but one really can't forget just how engaging the original 1971 film was when it came to police procedural dramas. Of course, it did not go without controversy, at least from folks that have quibbles with its moral positioning (real or imagined, depending on the source). Magnum Force (1973) was not a bad follow-up film, although it certainly had a diminished quality when it came to the adversarial contrast to Eastwood (who doesn't have to do much to make the lead role his own with a few key lines); the punch for its climax was fine, but it was what it was. The Enforcer (1976) harkened to pulling from the headlines for its main confrontation that saw plenty of action and folks sprayed around; the smart remarks and vigilance continued, albeit with stock adversaries and a tone that almost could have been lampooned. This would be the first and only Dirty Harry film that Eastwood would direct; incidentally, he felt the success of the series was because people felt frustrated with the criminal justice system. Earl E. Smith and Charles B. Pierce wrote the initial script that was meant to be a starring vehicle for just Locke, but it was later turned into a film fit for both Locke and Eastwood with the help of Joseph Stinson. This would happen to be the last major feature role for Locke, who had decided to venture into directing (she had starred with Eastwood in five previous films) before personal disputes with Eastwood led to what she would call being blacklisted from the film industry.

If you were wondering just where the series would go here, well, here you go. It has a weird blend of coarse procedural clichés that go hand in hand with parts that go with moments that seem destined for curious chuckles that teeter on self-parody. A hack writer who wanted to make a parody of loose cannon cops like the one Eastwood plays wouldn't have to search hard for stuff to lampoon, what with the capacity for the lead hero to have bodies turn up dead around him (criminal or not). Justice is a tough thing to enforce when folks keep turning up, it seems. Of course the parody wouldn't be as cynical about the nature of society and criminal justice as this film does, although at least one can say there is a fairly decent movie within semi-plausible standards. Technically speaking, it is a bit better than the last film, in that it manages to have a more interesting contrast to its lead character, although it certainly does have a bit more baggage within building 117 minutes of cop drama. Of course, you could see where the series may or may not have started to run a bit on its own self-righteous steam; the fifth and final film would be released in 1988. Eastwood always seems unflappable with making movies his way with a particular view involving crime and the near-mythic hero that doesn't have to say much to get his shot clear, so one can take it or leave the actor at who he is (I say that word rather than just "the man", interpret that how you like); even an average Eastwood movie is still a useful time to be had for those who seek it, at least. Locke seems to represent the other side of the coin of driven determination in the idea of justice, and one might be amused that they don't interact with each other until nearly an hour in; they don't exactly share broad chemistry with each other, but they seem to connect the quiet wires to where they need to (it should be pointed out that in the "parody", you wouldn't even have to change the fact that she is the most effective "adversarial counterpart" to the hero) - if you believe the climax, you might just believe almost anything with Eastwood, I guess. Hingle is the straight-laced counterpart to situations that could almost require more bluster to blush oneself (what with the whole big city vs town thing), but he makes the most of it with useful candor. Drake makes an okay goon, although it is strange to note that this was his most noted role as an actor. Popwell plays the partner-surrogate to fit the detached chemistry one sees coming from interactions with Eastwood in these films (insert phrase here). As a whole, one can reasonably be engaged with the film with its casual handling of action and stance on justice (namely have more of it?) while recognizing that it likely only works as much as one wants to put into it with the usual suspects; folks that are not too big on Eastwood or his rigidity won't be swayed too much, but others will roll with the punches fine (one wonders just how the last film will go with an actor pushing near 60 though). If it is thought of as one of Eastwood's more mediocre works, one can at least state that it manages to be a fair mediocre work one would still want to think about. It may be a bit off-kilter with its overall execution, but it still manages to provide a fine time for those who seek the waning days of the Dirty Harry series with curiosity.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

No comments:

Post a Comment