Clint Eastwood Movie:

				Salesrank:
		MPAA Rating: R (Restricted) Media: DVD

Editorial Review:
Whether or not you can sympathize with its fascistic/vigilante approach to law enforcement, Dirty Harry (directed by star Clint Eastwood's longtime friend and directorial mentor, Don Siegel) is one hell of a cop thriller. The movie makes evocative use of its San Francisco locations as cop Harry Callahan (Eastwood) tracks the elusive "Scorpio killer" who has been terrorizing the city by the Bay. As the psychopath's trail grows hotter, Harry becomes increasingly impatient and intolerant of the frustrating obstacles (departmental red tape, individuals' civil rights) that he feels are keeping him from doing his job. A characteristically taut and tense piece of filmmaking from Siegel (Invasion of the Body Snatchers, The Shootist, Escape from Alcatraz), it also remains a fascinating slice of American pop culture. It was a big hit (followed by four sequels) that obviously reflected--or exploited--the almost obsessive or paranoid fears and frustrations many Americans felt about crime in the streets. At a time when "law and order" was a familiar slogan for political candidates, Harry Callahan may have represented neither, but from his point of view his job was simple: stop criminals. To him that end justified any means he deemed necessary. --Jim Emerson

Dirty Harry [Region 2] Reviews:
I finally saw the whole thing, and was blown away.
2009-11-10 - 'Dirty Harry' has become a casualty of American political stupidity, with idiocy about its meaning emanating from both the right and left (and what, besides idiocy, emanates from either, anymore?). Like any good thriller, it capitalizes on the ideas and insecurities that were current at the time, and Americans were already prone to reading too much in in '71 (even the brilliant Pauline Kael, who at least still wrote wonderfully even when she lost her head a bit). Now that we have become a nation of simple-minded, extremist red and blue ninnies who can't see ANYTHING just for what it is, Harry is either a standard bearer for fascism or justice - depending on which direction your hysteric paranoia blows. In reality, he's neither.

Beautifully (and surprisingly stylishly) shot, and directed with electrifying economy by Don Siegel, who had been efficiently locating and hammering on nerves the audience didn't know it had since the 50's. This just might be San Francisco's best star turn since 'Vertigo.' It's a beautiful, threatening nightmare version of a city that's frequently too familiar in films (every time I see gratuitous, generic shots of the bridge I want to fine the studio responsible). This is San Francisco I recognize very well (the sense of geographic continuity is fantastic in this film), but haven't quite seen before. Seeing parts of 'Harry' on TV over the years, I wasn't prepared for the crisp, jaw-droppingly handsome and seductively kinetic widescreen camerawork. The movie looks fantastic and works fantastically, bringing something out of the locations that's unique to itself - no small feat.

The storytelling is solid - crude, but in an absolutely appropriate way. The filmmakers don't hesitate to push buttons, manipulate, and score points off our fears. 'Harry' grabs the audience by the short-hairs and drags, and that's exactly what it's supposed to do.

When the plot rudely crossed a really nasty psychopath with a school bus full of kids, I knew we were in the golden days before test-audiences. Oh, for the days of movies that weren't afraid to handle the us with the gloves off! Even the current, impotent trends in ultra-violence seem oddly wary of giving offense, even as they pat themselves on the back for shattering comfort zones. Rarely do we feel anything is at stake, rarely do we feel any real discomfort. (Granted, this could be less a matter of timidity, and more one of the decline in story craftsmanship that has blighted 21st century movies generally.)

Eastwood is, of course, perfect, and he is given a Zodiac inspired villain here so odious and nasty that when Harry disregards the rule of law in bringing him to justice, even an audience of committed pacifists could only say, "Put one in him from me!"

Which is fine - IN A MOVIE. Anyone who thinks that this is offering a road map for our troubled times has the mind of a child. Fantastical interpretations of this movie as a call-to-arms for American fascism are equally boneheaded. It seems pretty obvious that neither reading was intended. Harry's world is painted in the bold, general splashes appropriate to a genre entertainment. It isn't the movie's fault that many Americans now see the world in bold, general splashes - blind to the complexities that constitute reality. Sociopolitical retardation in the US should not spoil your enjoyment of this terrific film, though. 'Dirty Harry' is NOT aimed at intellectual degenerates, even though they may find it easy to love or hate.

There is nothing really complex here - and that's a virtue. I do, however, credit the film with a few grades more ambiguity and subtlety than a lot of people might. Harry's central issue (the law preventing its own enforcement) is bound to create feelings of conflict in thinking viewers, which is, I think, deliberate, and a good choice - but it's to the same end as everything else in the movie: the creation of tension. (Resolving it is something to do on your own time.) A lot of the sentiments people attribute to the film are ones they filled in themselves while Harry scowls silently into the camera. Any possible political positions are no more than implied by the action - they certainly aren't stated in the dialogue.

The action itself follows simple patterns. We see what Harry sees, and the people he wastes are people we would want to see wasted. Themes of justice, vendetta, etc. are older than the western, and are handled in pretty much the same terms - as fictional wish fulfillment. Like any number of other movies, the story borrows from contemporary reality in a bid to bring older elements up to date - but without even pretending to be realistic. It's all over the top, exaggerated, stacked, manipulative - everything a great action picture should be. The form is old as the hills, but the emotions are jacked up to panic levels that make this remain infinitely fresher than any current equivalent. That and the technical virtuosity on display make everything sing. It's absolutely riveting, but anyone who finds some kind of statement here watches way too many movies.

That said, 'Harry' needed context then, and it needs it now even more. I am writing this at a time when American culture has abandoned all sense of reality for an hysterical, cartoonish, stridently extremist and depressingly shallow sense of life and the issues governing it. Now a nation of lard-assed simpletons babbling received inanities as we wander through the fog of our own hyperbole and emotionalism - history clearly teaches that we won't grow up until we've gone too far. We are polarized to the point that neither side can do much better than scream, "stupid," at the other - oblivious to the fact that they're BOTH equally correct in that assessment (and equally wrong about everything else). Common sense, balance and perspective are extinct, and the available options all involve becoming some kind of deluded ass. It's like Americans have been peeing in the gene pool for the last thirty years. So, I'm glad 'Dirty Harry' doesn't really have anything to say, because, at this point, I am sick, sick, sick unto puking of hearing any of it. If 'Harry' were made now, the script would have him justifying himself for the benefit of an audience of idiots. (Witness the pathetic and interminable moaning over justice vs. vigilantism in 'Batman Begins' - clearly audience motivated, as opposed to dramatically motivated.)

If anyone thinks the way Harry cleans up America is bad, they should just be glad it's not ME, because I think MOST OF YOU are punks.


Classic
2009-10-27 - When this came out in 1971, America was so polorized, people either loved or hated Dirty Harry. Doves Vs. Hawks. No need to go into who was on what side and why. We all know.

This cultural split has gone the way of rotery phones. When you look at the film now, it poses quetions more ambiguous than anyone might have seen through the dove v. hawk smoke of 1971

How do we, as a rational society, deal with serious social pathology? The question goes back to Moses, and we have not yet answered it.

Now, Harry Callahan is one dangerous dude. He actually means well, such as when he breaks up a robbery, or runs from pay phone to pay phone to try to save the life of a kid abducted by a sniper/ kiddie rapist, Scorpio.

But he also shoots first and then asks questions. He sure does like that gun. He tortures Scorpio to get the location of the adolesent rape victim. Harry knows you can't reason with evil. Yet, you see in the film that the girl dies anyway, so his torture did not do any good.


Let's look at this both ways. I am a card carrying member of the ACLU and a proud lefty. I relaize that these tactics don't work, and usually are used on the wrong guy.

But i am a person, too, and if it were my little girl in that hole, you bet I'd want Harry dancing on Scorpio's wounded leg until the SOB sang. Any mom or dad would, I don't care how liberal they are.

Either way, these are not cut and dry questions, and this is the point I think Seigal and Eastwood were trying to make. When everyone was taking sides in 1971, both the actor and the director were smart enough to see the ambiguities and leave them unanswered. Harry may have become a action hero in sequals, but for this film, he is not a Hollywood commodity as much as a channel for issues America was, and still is, grappling with.

One more point: in 1971, Miranda had only been law five years. There was little forensic psychology, no use of DNA. Police did not have many of the techniques we see on Law and Order or NCIS today. Police who could have strongarmed suspects before Miranda were at a loss of how to handle all this, which brings us back to my initial question: What DO you do when a madman has a child?

Oh yeah. I LOVE Harry's suits.


Offensive to space Jesus and Anti-Bacon
2009-10-14 - Clint Eastwood has, over the years, quite cleverly hidden a speech impediment that hampered his early forays into acting. His technique is based on an old French teaching about the linguistic problems experienced by some people, such as Jonathan Ross. Both Clint and Jonathan have difficulty pronouncing the letter 'w'.

Whereas Rossy just dives on in and has made it a feature of his persona, Clint has used the Fleuron approach where the letter is pretty much negated and often not pronounced at all. In 'Dirty Harry', his line about feeling lucky, to the punk, he says, '...to tell you the tooth...', note 'tooth', not 'truth'. To most ears this sounds acceptable and normal but in all of Clints films, use of 'w' words is kept to a strict minimum.

The music in this film is also quite grating, possibly to cover for the woeful dialogue. A chap called Lilo Shafter did the music, and from scant listening it sounds like music from a skin flick from the same era. All in all I cannot see one good thing to recommend this excellent film to others to miss it.

The story is entertaining, the acting is bad, the special effects are terrible, editing and lighting is adequate given the equipment used but unforgivable in this day and age of DVD's and MP3's. All in all, I would give this film 3 stars, minus two for the reasons above, plus 3 for Clints acting, minus 2 for the title, add three for the music, take one for the bloke out of Hellraiser being in it and finally minus 2 for the use of the Fleuron approach to the 23rd, and sacred, letter.

Ramsey Tupper - (c) 2006 - Re-hashed by Mr Bus

Wild ride.
2009-06-05 - Dirty Harry is the ultimate guy flick but as a woman in her mid-twenties -I have to say this movie rocks! Clint Eastwood is awesome in this crime drama, the dude who plays the killer is one horrific actor but otherwise than that Dirty Harry is pure fun. Buy it now!

The classic 1971 original on Blu Ray!
2009-04-20 - The classic original 1971 Dirty Harry on Blu Ray,great PQ,sound and extras!!! FYI,this is also included as part of The Dirty Harry Blu Ray box set! Classic Clint Eastwood!!! A+