Being the continuation of InstaPunk and InstaPunk Rules
Giving Gene Hackman his props
Get link
Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps
1930-2025
I don’t do this very often. Obituaries are a form of fiction I try to avoid. If I do them at all, it’s usually after the initial burst of well intended hagiography has worn off and I feel like I have a unique perspective to offer. This time I’m going to make an exception for several reasons. The circumstances of Gene Hackman’s death are dominating the coverage, and human curiosity aside, what happened in New Mexico seems like none of our business. He was 95 years old, retired for many years, and for many movie fans under the age of 50, he may be a distant memory or a blank. That’s not right. His story shouldn’t be the death story. It should be the work story. Why I feel entitled to chime in where I wouldn’t normally. Never knew anything about his private life, which is the way it probably should be even for the biggest stars. I’m pretty sure he was a private person who wanted to be known for what of himself he had put on film. As a lifelong fan of the cinema, I’ve seen a lot of his movies and think this is a good time to send my fellow fans in search of Hackman performances that should be remembered years from now.
I’m going to show you four or five trailers, including my own favorite and my wife’s, which happen to be quite different. He had extraordinary range, which is something to appreciate in an era where all the praise seems to be lavished on one-note stars like Robert DeNiro, Tom Cruise, and Harrison Ford, or gimmick specialists like Al Pacino, Tom Hanks, and Johnny Depp. Hackman could play any role with seeming effortless naturalism.
Here we go.
I Never Sang for My Father
It can be hard to watch. Especially for men who grew up when fathers were in the business of making their sons into men and heartily disapproved of what their efforts produced in this, that, and the other aspect of adult life. But Hackman leaves the scenery chewing to Melvyn Douglas and all of us aging sons out here can perceive what he’s feeling because he knows what we are feeling too. When you’re in the mood to think about manhood inside the constraints of family, give this classic a try.
The French Connection
Popeye Doyle. You want proof of range? This would be it. Lines that live past the recollection of where you first heard them (“Did you ever pick your toes in Poughkeepsie?”) and a character you can’t really like but who fascinates you anyway. Most people of my generation focused more on the chase scene as the star of the film, regarded by many as superior to the iconic San Francisco joyride in Bullitt. I wasn’t distracted because I preferred McQueen’s masterful driving more than the Cinema Verité slam-bang-crashing under the el in Connection, though I agree it was probably more believable and purposeful in context than the set piece of its predecessor. Lots of good reasons to see this one again in time present. Cops like Hackman’s Doyle are few and far between now.
Did someone say “bullet”? Talk about your smooth transitions… I’m dissolving to another great acrion movie that happens to contain my favorite Gene Hackman scene of all.
Bite the Bullet
A marathon horse race inspired by an actual historic event. With co-stars like James Coburn and Candace Bergen, not to mention some fine horses filmed under extremely difficult conditions. You just have to see it for yourselves. The title is a literal reference to a case of extreme toothache at the worst possible time, when the only available help was a bullet to bite. A great scene but not the best one. That’s Hackman’s character, a former Rough-Rider with Theodore Roosevelt, recounting the truth of the charge up San Juan Hill with TR leading the way as the only mounted rider and number one target of the enemy. As Hackman tells it, you can feel the dirty under your own fingernails and the heroism of the Americans on that day. The ending is not the dream victory of Hoosiers (which I know will figure in many favorite lists), but a more satisfying demonstration of the attained wisdom of a retired civilian soldier. It should leave you feeling glad to have seen it.
Maybe not so much with the next one, which is my wife’s favorite. It’s complex, nerve-wracking, and at the same time subtle in the intricate responses the Hackman character has to the situation he finds himself in, his colleagues in a world steeped in deception, and his own toxic dilemma.
The Conversation
He’s a high-tech eavesdropper, the best of the best in a small but brilliant coterie of rivals in the same trade. His reflexive reaction to challenge or confrontation is not to react at all. Impassivity is his armor. We are the ones who have to figure out what is going on inside his silence and lack of affect. We too have to figure out what is the right thing to do and even if there is a right thing to do. A quiet masterpiece,of a movie withstand remains ambiguous even after the fact of watching it. Is he a villain caught unawares by himself? Can he, could he, be forgiven if he resolves his dilemma cleverly enough?
No such questions about the final movie on our list, clearly labeled…
Unforgiven
Alone of the movie clips shown here, this one isn’t a trailer but the climactic moment the entire film has been aiming for, where an uncharacteristically disreputable Clint Eastwood character announces his intention to murder a famous lawman played by Gene Hackman. Eastwood, who was also the director, drew praise for reinventing the western for the modern idiom, but I don’t believe that’s what he was doing. Far from starting over in the western genre, Unforgiven is a response and therefore an homage to The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, a classic movie by John Ford (asked to name the three best American directors, Orson Welles famously replied, “John Ford, John Ford… and John Ford”). Unforgiven was hardly the first dirty, grungy western with a deeply flawed protagonist, and it’s nothing new for Eastwood to make movies that embody a different perspective than that offered by the acknowledged classics. Indeed, it’s a pattern. High Plains Drifter (High Noon), Pale Rider (Shane), and The Outlaw Josey Wales (The Searchers) are all distinct variations on the greatest westerns of their day.
What does all this have to do with Hackman? He doesn’t have that much time onscreen, similar to the atypically minimal screen time of John Wayne in Ford’s Valance, but like Wayne, Hackman’s character is the commanding figure who outweighs Eastwood’s own presence in the movie up until the final bloody confrontation that completes the drama. That was my own objection to the movie when I first saw it; too much time wasted watching Clint prove what a bouncer he was before until simple vengeance rose up with him and turned him into Clint Eastwood. Until Hackman showed up to create the incentive, the movie was just a bunch of waiting for something big to happen. It’s Hackman who makes that moment big. We detest him, of course, and yet he is legally and perhaps even morally in the right. Killing him is murder. Cold-blooded murder. And in wanting that murder to occur, we in the audience are being confronted ourselves. We prefer the story to any real world truth.
Just as he waited and waited to bring Clint the gunfighter onto the stage, the director has also waited to show his hand regarding how the question being asked in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance is being reframed in Unforgiven. In Valance, the protagonist Jimmy Stewart has enjoyed a long and presumably virtuous career based on the legend that against all odds he slew the evil killer Liberty Valance (Lee Marvin) when in reality, that, um, murder was the act of John Wayne, who lies dead in a coffin throughout the screen time of the movie. The tagline of the Ford movie is “when people prefer the legend, print the legend.” In a sense this forgives the entire fabric of mythology that has been created and maintained about the Wild West. Of course we prefer the heroes the way they have been rewritten for us because the end was a good thing; law and order overcame violence and rapine and chaos to result in the prosperous and virtuous western states of the union. That’s a happy story when all is said and done.
Unforgiven overturns this perspective. The two men who matter here, like Stewart and Wayne in Valance, are essential opposites, in this case a brave but necessarily rough and tumble bringer of order vs a free spirit whose experience has made him cold-blooded and quick to use bullets instead of law to get what he wants, including what he perceives as justice.
Which should be printed here? The truth or the colorfully bloody revenge against a man who might be wearing a badge but still not be sympathetic?
The movie’s answer seems to be more cynical than Ford’s pat nostrum. You can pretend you’re choosing between truth and legend, but its’s the people who choose, who always choose. Why it’s important that Hackman and Eastwood have, ultimately, the same specific gravity as characters. Sinners both, again like all of us, the old immovable object vs irresistible force that creates imponderable ambiguity with respect to the truth.
Unforgiven is as much Hackman’s movie as it is Eastwood’s in performance terms. They are equally matched. Who else could have played Hackman’s role and created the complexities of a key character who seems to have been written rather simply?
Why he was a great actor. He may not seem like a legend but he will live on in the history of his profession longer than almost anyone you can name.
For now, may he rest in peace…
P.S. In the interest of full disclosure, I was not originally a fan of Unforgiven. Back in Shuteye Town 1999, I had it in the Blockbuster category of movies at Toot CD/Video. Not admiringly:
Click on the pic for other not so beloved Blockbusters
This post was last updated at 10:45 AM., Sunday, September 21. Latest entries are “A Comparison Not made,“ “An American Turning Point,” “A Mission from Gahd,” and “For Those in Hell,” The Instapunk Times is hot off the presses. .. Undernet Black was updated September 21. This will be a pinned post in perpetuity, but it will be updated continuously, just like all of our lives. The title — “My World and Welcome to It” — is stolen happily from James Thurber, who is known as a humorist, unabashedly untrained cartoonist, and dog lover. He was also subject to melancholy, a drinker of note, and something of an outsider (in his own damaged eyes at least) as an Ohioan, born and educated, who became a fixture in the glamorous Algonquin Roundtable of Manhattan writers and playwrights. I can relate to all of that but the fame and the lifelong journey to blindness. I believe he was likely the best writer of the gang that gathered in the Algonquin Hotel in the 1930s, and I m...
Yes, I’m writing this because of the assassination of Charlie Kirk. He was a good and brave man and I admired him. He was 31. Now he’s eternal. Since I am Christian and do believe in an afterlife, I am confident Charlie’s life has entered a new realm with new opportunities awaiting him. It is this to which I subscribe, as I believe many faithful do, not as susceptible as children to a constant heaven made of clouds and angels and long trumpets and hosannas to the One who cannot really be seen. If this makes me a blasphemer to some, I don’t care. Heaven as a gated community with a good view seems a limited and boring retirement from the excitements of life. To me anyway. Most of the problems people have with the concept of divinity are similarly small-minded and short-sighted. It’s human to keep trying to cut God and his domain down to size in ways that make him open to dealmaking or derision if that’s your preference. Imagine that Heaven might be a roll your own kind of tr...
This is not a subject we’ll be talking about every day. That’s why this post today. It’s a marker. You can come back here later to remember where things stood before Charlie Kirk was laid to rest. Everything will be different from now on, and this moment will be part of the subtext of what happens in other arenas where it’s not mentioned or regarded as relevant. As needed there will be Parts 2, 3, etc, but we’ll go on doing what we’ve always done here, talk about whatever we feel like talking about, by turns seriously and satirically, and when this particular subtext is relevant it will be noted by hyperlink, not renewed sermonizing. Yesterday, I posted the following at Facebook: The one big question that matters now... where exactly is the faultline in American conscience? How many to the left of the crack in our national soul and how many to the right? It was never going to be the case that the assassination of a major conservative political figure would meet with universal c...
Most of the TDS we see and react to originates in the figurative space we call Inside-the-Beltway. Politicians, mass media opinion-shapers, deeply entrenched bureaucracies in the federal government, including the judiciary, the intelligence services, the innumerable money-dispensing and regulatory agencies, and the bicoastal social elites generally, who are bound to DC by ties of family, friends, and financial affiliations. We know that this sizeable group of powerful people hates Trump for very personal reasons, mostly fear and envy. He is a direct threat to them in every part of their lives, from career security to potential scandals involving corruption and/or sex. But what about all the people from outside the Beltway? The otherwise ordinary 75 million people who voted for an utterly unqualified candidate in the 2024 election. A woman who rose to the top the old-fashioned pre-feminist way, on her back, and proceeded to fail or phone in every position or responsibility she ha...
The normal term of gestation is almost done. Apologies to Kubrick. What have we got to go on so far? What kind of President is 2.0 going to be? The 1.0 version was naïve about the extent of corruption and poison in Washington, DC. He got stabbed in the back a lot. Like most of us, he was not nearly suspicious enough of the massive healthcare/pharmaceutical complex and learned the hard way that their “science” is just as fraudulent and mercenary as the Climate Change Mafia. He got a lot done in the first term, but they were successful in removing him from power. What can we expect now. How different is 2.0? Here’s an assessment of who Trump has been since January 20. He is boldly but carefully revolutionary. I say carefully because he is playing the long game and when he drops a big rock in the water he lets the system absorb the shock and respond. People stung by his second term tweets overlook the fact that tweets these days are a frequent substitute for ignoring the law and for...
People say the left has no heart. This is very far from the truth. They are full of love and empathy for everybody but the evil ones among us, and they are very Old Testament in their conceptions of Justice. They believe absolutely in the Death Penalty and Hell forever after, except for the ones who get oppressed by the evil ones for their color, ethnicity, gender choices, sexual promiscuity and perversity, body odors, excretory preferences, criminal propensities and other mental illnesses, and every form of weakness except being too small to live anywhere but inside a woman’s body, to which they have no right at all. With the exceptions noted, they love absolutely everybody equally, especially people who work for the government and famous rich people who agree with them about all of the above. Everybody acts like this is so hard to understand. It isn’t. It’s simple. You just have to have an eye for it. Know how to look for their heart and when they’re wearing it prominently on t...
This is only a thought starter, because there are still a lot of balls in the air on this thing, but time’s a’wasting. The funeral is today, but the Memorial Event yesterday at Arizona U. Stadium is simply not something the out-of-power party can ignore or pretend never happened. This is what it looked like: This wasn’t a Trump campaign rally at some basketball arena. This was a double decker football stadium, every seat filled, plus an arena across the street watching the proceedings on a Jumbotron, with still others lined up outside. Many speakers and one brand new star in the firmament, Charlie Kirk’s widow, who is no retiring house mouse. Except that she brought down the house in Phoenix and promised to keep going from here on forever. No two ways about it. She stole the show, and the thunder, from everyone, including Donald Trump. Which makes people believe, maybe for the first time, that MAGA won’t end with him. That should scare Dems from here to Ireland ...
If you were to wake me at 3 am and ask, Who’s the star of the Blues Brothers movie?, I’d say “It’s the Bluesmobile.” It’s 3 am in the morning now. Years ago I made up a list of the best American movies about America and ran it as a series on the original Instapunk website. I subsequently published it in 2018 as a Kindle book under an assumed name, because I didn’t want people to pass it up on the basis of their prejudices against me and my abrasive approach to things. It’s still available at Amazon. Illustrated and with a provocative concluding essay about Stephen Spielberg. It’s a good book and I recommend it. At about a hundred pages covering 35+ great movies for five bucks, it’s a cost-effective antidote for the dreck that’s being made and shown on the streaming services these days. One problem that’s been bothering me the past few days, though, is that it’s missing one very important milestone in American cinema. One that’s grown steadily in relevance as we have stumbl...
This is the follow-on to Monday’s post about the dire straits the Democrat Party now finds itself in. We were at pains to point out that the only hands capable of seizing the horns of the bull charging at the Progressive movement belong to Rachel Maddow. That bull is wearing the mantle of what used to be called “that old-time religion,” now revitalized with a heroic cape of youthful energy. Some facts that should be very concerning about the impact of the Kirk Memorial Service. Why somebody needed to take the reins and assert some visionary leadership over a Democrat Party that has been scoring nothing but fouls and foul-mouthed tantrums at the referees. Unlike most of her lefty colleagues, she was a star athlete in high school (and could have been in college if she hadn’t been outed as a Lesbian by the Stanford newspaper when she was a freshman). She knows about playing with pain. One of many reasons why Rachel Maddow was the best choice for assuming a strong, defining position o...
It’s time for me to do something I really dislike having to do. I need to write a book that will be printed on paper and will also consist as entirely of words as I can manage. It has been many years since I have regarded that as my preferred medium of expression. I find it confining, technologically and artistically retrograde, and I would avoid doing it if I could. Not that I can’t do it. I have done a huge chunk of work that way. But that aspect of my writing was supposed to be over nearly 30 years ago. The author of every creative project is a unique persona. He is the state of his consciousness during the period of producing it. What medium or genre he is working in. What his original intention was. What in personal life and in the world around him was drawing his attention at the time. And what was changing in him as he moved from intention to completed work. Instapunk is a persona, an artificially created one who started as a performative voice and became an alternative mo...
Comments