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
How did we get here from here ? Don’t forget the question. We’ll be answering it by the end of the post, in our usual roundabout way. Today is the last day of May, finally, and therefore the Last Day of May Madness. I don’t pretend to know what June will bring and what epithet it will earn, but this second part of yesterday’s ramble is about showing you that madness takes different people differently, and mine is not so much random infantilism as obsessive curiosity derived from my relationship with the universe. The universe speaks to me in ways both overt and intimational, which is my own word and also the tacit permission I give you to interpret my references to the universe as free-association play with my particular universe, of which I have documented abundant bits and pieces and bigger parts too. I wouldn’t do that if I didn’t think there was some value to it. Yesterday we started with RINOs in the news and the funny curse they seem to have brought upon themselves, and we ended...
RAV’s Frank Gaffney discussing existential crisis of AI with statecraft guru Sam Faddish. What could go wrong? This, for one thing: He has his own gaggle of Chicken Little AI experts. And, inevitably, this: Me, when I’m not hiding my true self behind a photograph They’re all worried about AI. Terrified in fact. For different reasons. Bannon has some apocalyptic seer who’s worried about meta-humans replacing Homo sapiens. Gaffney and Faddis are fixated on the latest AI hot topic, “The Singularity,” that magic moment when a supercomputer becomes self aware and decides to exterminate mankind. How did we get here? The usual way. The movies. First, there was HAL: Then, just a quarter century later, after a decades-long detour through a dead-end time paradox called The Terminator , there came the monstrous harpy HAL, a transgendered terminator in a box, like we’d been brought up to believe in, including Gaffney and Faddis: Worried yet? Here’s her resumé and mission statement. C...
They don’t let me out much anymore. I feel like Uncle Fred . Back on the first of April I rechristened the next 30 days April Fools Month. Turns out I was right to do that, as the Democrat downward spiral into an unhinged opposite of what it once prided itself for became more laughable by the day. Now we are on the 30th day of what I am hopefully about to bury as “May Madness,” a cringe-inducing period of violent Dem fantasies and true-life violence they deplore without seeming able to connect their own rhetoric with mass shootings and assassination attempts. They’re actually proud of themselves. A lot like their Republican counterpart, the RINOs, whose only sign of backbone in many years has been their willingness to defy Trump and conspire openly against the legislative priorities he was elected to implement. And, like the Dems, they're proud of themselves. It’s not a small group. Let me count the stiff-necked feeders at the Wall St/Pharma/Amnesty/Pork/Antisemite trough who have ...
…and a weird dose of nostalgia, as for something half remembered. What did you do for your Memorial Day remembrances? We watched the laying off the wreath at the Tomb of the Unknowns and the President’s speech. The audience was large, and the people there looked amazingly normal. Attentive and respectful. The way our parents taught us to be at solemn events. We heard the fireworks begin after dark and out the Thundershirt on our terrier Tommy, who isn’t entirely sure that fireworks aren’t an approaching thunderstorm. All we needed of that timeless ritual, since we’ve both been to May such occasions, including the field a mile away where the Salem even is always held. It was only at bedtime that I tried something new. In my constant search for background sounds that facilitate the hours of sleep I get before the inevitable wee hours summons to the keyboard, I try different things, usually intended to be monotonous and therefore soporific. British crime documentary series are ...
Lewis Hamilton wins Seventh World Championship at Formula 1 Grand Prix in Turkey: A stunning drive from Mercedes’ Lewis Hamilton in the Turkish Grand Prix gave him his 10th victory of the season – and, more crucially, saw him claim the seventh drivers’ title of his career, to equal the record of Michael Schumacher, as Racing Point’s Sergio Perez and Ferrari’s Sebastian Vettel completed the podium after a thrilling race in Istanbul. Hamilton had started the race in sixth, risen to third midway through the first lap and then dropped back to sixth by the end of Lap 1 after an error at Turn 9. But a decision to change his intermediate tyres just once saw Hamilton drive a masterful race to claim victory by over 25 seconds from Perez. The win alone was enough to claim championship #7, but it was even more assured after a disastrous race for Valtteri Bottas - the only man who could have stopped Hamilton winning the title today - who spun six times en route to a P14 finish.
Stupid stupid stupid girl… She doesn’t know anything but what’s on the teleprompter. We were talking about history in a previous post today. Here’s an irony so total that the ones who built this moral trap for themselves probably still won’t understand it. Today’s definition of being Progressive, I mean truly Progressive not with exceptions, are fully in favor of gender affirmation surgeries as early as late prepubescence. They are so certain of the righteousness of their position in the absolute sanctity of individual choice regarding gender decisions that they argue their opponents’ position is un-Christian. Where history has them by the short and curlies, so to speak. In actual as opposed to made-up history the decision to remove reproductive organs at prepubescence was born not of woke social engineering but of a Christian religious ideal in the 16th Century. Singers called Castrati were created surgically and became famous performers for Christian audiences. Yes, the ...
The post referenced in the title is about an IPR National Insurrection analysis that is presently underway. Putting it together is a real slog, and I don’t like slogs, which is why I’m putting pressure on myself by publishing this in advance. It’s really just data, but it’s data that show you just how deceptive the presentation and supposed analysis of data can be. Part of the Insurrection post is examining differentials between various troubled regions of the United States. For many kinds of behavioral variables, there are nicely produced maps compiled by this and that federal or public interest organization. Examples I’ve collected so far in researching my post. [Note: Per 100,000 numbers are less messy for the social scientists to soil their hands with than collectively shocking totals.] Of course, it’s very difficult to amass data that won’t be disputed about deaths per 100,000 sexually active females of fertile age. None of the data collectors really like using total deaths as a s...
Sunny Hostin, our favorite blonde-ish Black Pantheress, is wrong on a couple counts here. First, like the rest of The View panel, she fails to realize that most of us ‘right-wingers’ aren’t at all outraged by Christopher Nolan’s casting in his Odyssey movie. Talented as he may be, he’s also a Brit, and they’re a nation that has gone so far down the Woke hole that actuaries are predicting a majority Muslim population in the U.K. by 2030. Nolan will also have been intensely aware that the Brit film industry has crippled itself by insisting on 30 percent nonwhite casting in BBC productions, regardless of the bizarre casting anomalies that such a rule makes inevitable. In remaking Greek mythology he knows he has license to curry critical favor while boosting the free PR of a project that is, in the cold light of day, an old and cinematically familiar story not likely to sound like a must-see pic to most. His cheerful acceptance of this and his calm defense of an absurd unconfirmed po...
That’s it ? No toilet, no breasts, no smoking. What a ripoff!!! I can’t even get any sound file with it. No panting, no dirty words, no dirty old woman vibe at all. What’s a dirty old man to do? Well, it’s not as if she hasn’t already done everything, and I mean everything to death in previous wastes of film. Here’s one you may not remember. Most people who have seen it don’t remember it. That’s how eternal the legacy of Madonna is… Had enough? Me too. File Copy: For posterity’s sake .
Comments