chaswe-28402
A couple of memorable lines. Iconic. But it doesn't make me feel lucky, and I've watched it more than once. It doesn't get better with repeated viewing. I'd have thought it was financed by the LA Police Department, if it wasn't for the ending, which seems to be based on High Noon, the conclusion of which reportedly angered John Wayne so much.The recent reviews of this film seem to have got it just about right. There is something dissatisfying about its plot and narrative account. Although there is a basic theme involving the pursuit of a maniac killer, it is also structured round a disconnected series of episodes designed to portray a cop who is stressed and driven beyond endurance by the rules and regulations of the society in which he operates. There appears to be no solution to this conflict. The viewer is left at a loss. Siegel's next film, Charley Varrick is more entertaining.
Shawn Watson
It's somewhat ironic that Clint Eastwood would become a household name by playing "the man with no name" before transitioning away from Westerns into contemporary movies, and then the movie that made him a superstar for the second time was a larger than life character than be identified first as a classic archetype and cinema icon and as a Eastwood role second.Everybody knows Dirty Harry. The attitude, the scowl, and the one-liners have been mimicked and parodied so many times, and the original movie, and it's sequels, have spawned countless new generations of similar hardcore heroes. Without Harry Callaghan there would be no John Matrix, no Cobra, no John McClane, no Martin Riggs, etc. Is the original film itself any good? Well, it's certainly controversial, even in the present day. Though much of the film's politics seem to be projected into the movie by its audience than actually part of film itself. In reality it's a very straight-forward, laid-back affair with minimalist dialogue, editing, and a subdued style.There's not much in the way of plot, and there's very little detective work or puzzle solving on Harry's part. He's just a blunt tool used for a dirty job, hence the name. For a movie that barely nudges past the 100-minute mark it does feel a lot long, with lingering shots, huge chunks of purely visual storytelling, and a few detours that feel like padding. The central story of a crazed sniper offing random civilians in San Francisco, inspired by the real life Zodiac murder case, isn't strong enough to last the already thin running time.It is a movie that is about style over substance, and for its day it was very slick and high key with gorgeous anamorphic Panavision photography. Does it hold up? Just about. It's not a movie that I watch for the entertainment value, but merely to study how certain classics were made.
Richie-67-485852
It was ahead of its time and the viewers lapped it up! They still do even though it is dated with landlines and dress codes as well as clichés but it still holds for story-telling purposes. Andy Robinson makes an excellent guy to hate and between him and the supposed good guys it makes you want to watch this over and over. Clint not only had fun making this movie buy made money and his reputation. How fortunate for him and for us too. Right now they are offering 4-5 of his DVDs for $10 at the name brand stores. How can you say no? Good snack movie and also enjoy the music which is unique.
Fluke_Skywalker
Plot; San Francisco detective Harry Callahan gets caught in a game of cat and mouse with a deranged serial sniper.The zeitgeist of the era certainly informs this first entry in Eastwood's Dirty Harry saga, but far less so than its reputation. The cultural clutter is certainly there on the margins, but at it its core Dirty Harry is a reasonably well made thriller anchored by Eastwood's steely turn as the titular character and Andy Robinson's deranged Scorpio killer. I think the movie might've worked a bit better had the latter had a clearer ideology and objective, but Robinson sells it with his unhinged performance.
AD
