Sergio Leone Web Board
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
January 21, 2022, 12:48:17 PM
:


+  Sergio Leone Web Board
|-+  General Information
| |-+  General Discussion (Moderators: cigar joe, moviesceleton, Dust Devil)
| | |-+  Clint Eastwood's 2003 Interview on Inside the Actors Studio
0 and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
: [1] 2
: Clint Eastwood's 2003 Interview on Inside the Actors Studio  ( 6683 )
drinkanddestroy
Global Moderator
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9711

trust a man who wears both a belt and suspenders?


« : July 03, 2012, 03:45:23 PM »

I was just watching on YouTube the video of Clint Eastwood's appearance on Inside the Actors Studio, from 2003

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtmZSUbCma8&feature=relmfu

The discussion of the Dollars films begins at 17:45


One of many interesting anecdotes: Eastwood says that when Don Siegel was doing The Shootist with John Wayne, at one point Siegel told Wayne that he'd be shooting a guy in the back; Wayne said I DON'T SHOOT PEOPLE IN THE BACK! And then Siegel makes the terrible mistake of saying "Well Clint Eastwood would have shot him the back!" Wayne got blue with rage, " I DON'T CARE WHAT THAT KID WOULD HAVE DONE; I DON'T SHOOT HIM IN THE BACK!"

Also, I was under the impression, from Frayling's works, that Eastwood was given the Italian cigars to smoke. But Eastwood says in this interview that he actually bought them in Beverly Hills! I know there was a long-running debate between Eastwood and Leone over who was responsible for TMWNN's costume, but I didn't know that that debate extended to the cigars! I'm surprised to hear this cuz Eastwood actually didn't want to smoke them anymore after FOD, he didn't like smoking,  but Leone insisted that he do so cuz the cigars were "playing the lead." So Eastwood brought the cigars to Spain from Beverly Hills, and then decided that he didn't like them anymore?!

« : July 03, 2012, 04:37:29 PM drinkanddestroy »

There are three types of people in the world, my friend: those who can add, and those who can't.
Cusser
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1934


Remember, I always see the job through !


« #1 : July 03, 2012, 07:48:16 PM »

Saw on PBS last night a show about early TV westerns, clips were  shown for the shows for which actors gave interviews.  No Eastwood, my guess is that he declined to participate about his Rawhide days...

stanton
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3441



« #2 : July 04, 2012, 04:10:31 AM »

I was just watching on YouTube the video of Clint Eastwood's appearance on Inside the Actors Studio, from 2003

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtmZSUbCma8&feature=relmfu

The discussion of the Dollars films begins at 17:45


One of many interesting anecdotes: Eastwood says that when Don Siegel was doing The Shootist with John Wayne, at one point Siegel told Wayne that he'd be shooting a guy in the back; Wayne said I DON'T SHOOT PEOPLE IN THE BACK! And then Siegel makes the terrible mistake of saying "Well Clint Eastwood would have shot him the back!" Wayne got blue with rage, " I DON'T CARE WHAT THAT KID WOULD HAVE DONE; I DON'T SHOOT HIM IN THE BACK!"



He should have remembered that he already shot people in the back in earlier films. At least in Rio Bravo.


emmo26
Gunslinger
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 305


« #3 : July 04, 2012, 05:45:23 AM »

Eastwood smoked cigars in White Hunter Black Heart back in the 90´s


**************** ZZ TOP´s 1st Gig **************
drinkanddestroy
Global Moderator
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9711

trust a man who wears both a belt and suspenders?


« #4 : July 04, 2012, 09:38:55 AM »

He should have remembered that he already shot people in the back in earlier films. At least in Rio Bravo.

shooting someone who is trying to flee on horseback from a long ways off is I guess is different than coming right behind him in the same room


There are three types of people in the world, my friend: those who can add, and those who can't.
stanton
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3441



« #5 : July 04, 2012, 11:40:14 AM »

Is it? There was no real reason to shoot him. This fleeing guy had not even shot a single bulle as he wasn't part of the actual gunfight.

It was cold blooded murder imo.


Groggy
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 11454


This post gets Agnew's stamp of approval!


« #6 : July 04, 2012, 11:40:56 AM »

I don't remember it happening in Rio Bravo. Wayne definitely shot a guy in the back in The Searchers.



Saturday nights with Groggy
drinkanddestroy
Global Moderator
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9711

trust a man who wears both a belt and suspenders?


« #7 : July 04, 2012, 12:13:34 PM »

In Rio Bravo, the scene is where 4 of the baddies kidnap Dean Martin and tie him up in the corral; one of the bad guys stays at the corral with Dean, while the other 3 walk up to Wayne outside the hotel (which is pretty far down the street from the corral), pulls guns on him, and tell him they have Dean hostage so he better release the prisoner. Ricky Nelson then devises a scheme: he walks out of the hotel, Angie Dickinson smashes a window to distract the baddies, and in that moment Nelson and wayne are able to pull guns and kill those 3 baddies.... When the one baddie who is at the corral sees that his 3 buddies have been killed in the gunfight down the street, he jumps on a horse and tries fleeing out of town; Wayne pulls his rifle and kills him.

As far as the "language/morals of the Western" are concerned, I don't know if that's the same as being in a saloon with someone and killing him from behind. The issue isn't whether it's considered murder in the real world; the issue is whether, in the language/morals of the Western, that is considered "shooting a guy in the back." I don't see it as being the same as plugging a guy in the back in a saloon, but I do agree that it is surprising that John Wayne would do that. This does seem to conflict with the strict "Western honor code" that Wayne characters would have.

I can certainly understand the argument that this is hypocritical. On the other hand, I guess you could argue that once your gang engages in a gunfight, you are a part of it too, by association. And once you are part of a gunfight, you are fair game; you can't back out just cuz the going gets tough. (I am plying devil's advocate somewhat; I can certainly understand someone who thinks that this is a violation of the Western Honor Code)

« : July 04, 2012, 01:27:32 PM drinkanddestroy »

There are three types of people in the world, my friend: those who can add, and those who can't.
stanton
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3441



« #8 : July 04, 2012, 01:15:24 PM »

Fact is he shoots one in the back who isn't a treat for him.

This western honor code hasn't a great importance for films. There was a strict censorship in the 50s which made it tricky to film such scenes, but some directors always tried to push the boundaries.

If you know a little bit about it you notice all the scenes in pre-60s films where directors dared to taste the forbidden fruits.

Wayne shooting of Liberty Valance is also murder and not self defence, and his Rooster Cogburn had a reputation for killing without necessity. Both Rio Bravo and El Dorado contain a scene in which the Wayne character can't control his violence. And the ending of El Dorado is an intended violation of the rules. There are surely more examples.


drinkanddestroy
Global Moderator
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9711

trust a man who wears both a belt and suspenders?


« #9 : July 04, 2012, 01:43:26 PM »


This western honor code hasn't a great importance for films. There was a strict censorship in the 50s which made it tricky to film such scenes, but some directors always tried to push the boundaries.



When I discuss the western honor code I am not talking about censorship, and I am sure that's not what concerned Wayne wither. It's the honor of his character, that there is a certain "code" that western gunslingers live by, that you don't shoot someone in the back. It's not an issue of censorship, but of a personal code.

It's apparent that Wayne took his movie characters very seriously. I remember an interesting anecdote related by Kirk Douglas, in an interview he did that's on the bonus features of the Ace in the Hole dvd. (As I can best remember it) Douglas says that he was once with Wayne at a party, after Douglas had played some big part in a movie,  but Wayne gave him this look and called him over to the side, and said something like WHY DO YOU PLAY WEAK CHARACTERS??!! I guess Wayne took his characters very, very seriously and would not play one that he deemed to be weak or whatever. Maybe Joh Wayne the person couldn't separate himself from  "the John Wayne character," but they were one and the same. Especially with Wayne since he'd been a career out of playing a specific sort of character in the Western, he didn't watt to deviate from that code.

Whatever you think of that in general, I will say one thing about that anecdote from The Shootist in particular: The Shootist was the goodbye not only to John Wayne, but "the John Wayne character." It's a brilliant sendoff to one of the most iconic Western characters ever. And this is done in a self-conscious way, as evidenced  by the fact that the opening montage uses clips from his old westerns. This is a conscious goodbye. So it makes sense that whatever code the Wayne characters had lived by through all these years, should be kept for the movie.

BY THE WAY, at the time they made The Shootist it wasn't intended to be Wayne's last movie. Apparently he's intended to make more Westerns with Ron Howard, but, as it must come to all men, death came to John Wayne (borrowing a phrase from Citizen Kane). I think that if Wayne had made more movies after The Shootist, it would have lost its effect. As it is, it is such an awesome goodbye to this great Western character of the past 40 years.

With Eastwood, he said all along that GRAN TORINO would be the final film he'd ever act in, so it made sense to have it happen the way it did; it was a greta sendoof as well, and  I am sure he was thinking of THE SHOOTIST when he made GRAN TORINO. Only difference is that while the Wayne character in THE SHOOTIST is the same character that he'd playing all his life, the Eastwood character in GRAN TORINO was not the same character that Eastwood had been playing all his life; he was a lifelong auto worker. I think it would have been a bit more fitting if it would have been his action hero sort of MWNN kind of guy



There are three types of people in the world, my friend: those who can add, and those who can't.
stanton
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3441



« #10 : July 04, 2012, 01:51:20 PM »

When I discuss the western honor code I am not talking about censorship, and I am sure that's not what concerned Wayne wither. It's the honor of his character, that there is a certain "code" that western gunslingers live by, that you don't shoot someone in the back. It's not an issue of censorship, but of a personal code.





I know what you mean, and I think this strict code has only an importance for Roy Rogers westerns and their kind.

Wayne made his career with films which violate that code, not nearly as extreme as SWs did this, but the code wasn't what made old westerns tamer than 60s westerns. It was only the rigid censorship.

E.g. Stagecoach was a morally dubious film for 1939.


emmo26
Gunslinger
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 305


« #11 : July 04, 2012, 04:32:01 PM »

John Wayne would definitely put the name of the grave under that rock.


**************** ZZ TOP´s 1st Gig **************
stanton
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3441



« #12 : July 05, 2012, 01:58:59 AM »

John Wayne would definitely put the name of the grave under that rock.

Yes ,he would.

But frankly said it doesn't make much sense to compare the typical Wayne character with the typical Eastwood character. I like both.


drinkanddestroy
Global Moderator
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9711

trust a man who wears both a belt and suspenders?


« #13 : July 05, 2012, 03:59:21 AM »

Yes ,he would.

But frankly said it doesn't make much sense to compare the typical Wayne character with the typical Eastwood character. I like both.

yes, both definitely have a place in Western history.

Ford/Wayne et al. created the rules, and then Leone/Eastwood et al. broke them. Breaking rules is only fun once the rules have been firmly established!


There are three types of people in the world, my friend: those who can add, and those who can't.
Cusser
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1934


Remember, I always see the job through !


« #14 : July 05, 2012, 11:43:02 AM »

C'mon - no name on the rock, and no name on the grave, so Blondie didn't "lie".

I always found it rare that Blondie would have a pencil in his shirt pocket.  Or was it the first Sharpie ?

: [1] 2  
« previous next »
:  



Visit FISTFUL-OF-LEONE.COM

SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
0.032152