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 8:30 AM., Saturday, August 30. Latest entries are “A Time Capsule that’s just been sitting there waiting,” “The New Dem Strategy,” and “Poetry Across Scales.” The Instapunk Times is on the racks.. Undernet Black was updated August 30. 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 made my own pi...
Minimalism has been a periodic ideal of modern and post-modern esthetics. Purely arbitrary, of course, though not without possibilities and even infinities of its own. For example, there are those who regard Haiku as a sort of supreme test of the poet, since poetry is commonly defined as the best words in the best order. This leaves the door open for imagining that there is an absolute minimum definable for capturing profound truth in the fewest of the best words in the least of the best order. In Haiku there must be 17 syllables, some reference to a season (ensuring universality I guess), and a prohibition against rhyme to prevent cheating (another guess). What if this definition of the minimum is wrong? What if there’s some way to reach great truths in less than 17 syllables? In less than a single word even? And, gasp, in less than a single letter on the page? Impossible? Well, why the hell not? I propose that the graphic above is a poem, subject to meaningful exploration, inte...
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...
Just got my usual wake-up notification from the standard Instagram donkey expressing disbelief that Trump’s latest press conference didn’t land him in the loony bin. He was particularly outraged that “there is no more national media” to protect us from the President’s insanity. Which is to say that Trump met his objective for the press conference: goading the moribund Democrat Party to keep sawing at the limb of the tree they’re sitting on. I went looking for an animated cartoon that illustrates my point. Unable to find it even with the help of Google’s AI know-it-all, I cobbled one together on my own. Simple and brief as it is, my little animation shows what the lefties are hoping against hope for, that blessed moment when the saw severs the link to the poisoned tree for good and saves them from it. There follows that brief stretched out moment when the limb remains suspended alone in midair while the tree falls. Then the illusion ends and the limb crashes to the ground as the la...
IMPORTANT NOTE 8/4/25 : The ‘Shuteye Nation’ files of which The Glossary is a component are stored under the Wordpress application. Wordpress itself is in corporate limbo, unreachable even by fully paid up customers. I can no longer sign in even though I still own the site. Why there is a block against reaching the files the first time you try. It’s simple to bypass. When you click on one of the frames below, you will see a screen saying it is a private file. Click the option offering More Information. The next screen will give you the option of seeing the files anyway. Click on that. THEN refresh your screen and the file will appear. This is the only time in the current session when you will have to do this. It’s an annoyance. That is all. Click the graphic to go right to The Glossary I know there are those out there in the Facebook Universe who do come to look at the longer thought pieces I generally reserve for IPR and other of my websites. The traffic here, by the way, i...
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...
(1957-1966) You’re going to think this is as bad as being directed to the Hallmark Channel, the Lifetime Movie Network, or reruns of Fantasy Island. It isn’t. Yes, we found it because we’re old and remember when we watched it with grandparents or at home on Blaxk and white TVs. But this is one of those rare cases where the experience of seeing it again is better than the clichéed memory. There’s a lot more to watch than the one true plot of Perry identifying the murderer on the stand against all odds and confounding D.A. Hamilton Burger and Lieutenant Tragg yet again. You realize almost immediately that you’re visiting a skillfully produced presentation of a completely different, bygone world that makes every episode fun to watch. The first two or three years will do. Unbelievably, they made 30 a year from 1957 to 1960. Each episode is 52 minutes long, which means advertising was confined to about 7+ minutes, compared to the 12-14 minutes per hour of ads on network shows no...
Saw a short but evocative post from Michael Smith on Facebook yesterday that struck an immediate chord with me: It struck chords with a lot of people in fact. We’d already been through this once with all the guiltiest talking heads in the media interviewing all the accomplices in the political class about how the fact of Joe Biden’s serious dementia could have been covered up so thoroughly. Nauseating to watch. Now we have a similar but not quite identical phenomenon of the complicit talking heads in the huge set of hoaxes designed to destroy the Trump presidency inviting some of of the prime perpetrators on to deny the truth of Tulsi Gabbard’s charges with a straight face. Nodding all around as more lies are piled on top of the mountain of old lies. Does no one realize they are, if possible, making matters worse for themselves when the investigators bring their charges? Reading Smith’s post and the comments appended to it made me think of a movie I had seen as a kid. It w...
It’s August going on September. Vacation time. Where we’re all supposed to be. Except maybe for mass media news outlets who still haven’t recovered from the late starts and early “lids” of the Biden days. They’re all still phoning it in, repeating the same lies, even the 10-yo ones about the Steele Dossier, the Epstein case, and the impeccably fair system of elections throughout the nation. Also still pleased with the 4-yo lies about poor, virtuously democratic Ukraine besieged by a corrupt authoritarian state outside their own borders, and the treacherous complicity of OrangeManBad in covering, again , for Putin and raining down death and destruction on innocent migrants, corpse-looking federal judges, and everyone else who isn’t a white man with a billion dollars. Yeah. Got it. Here’s an idea. Let them all keep playing amongst themselves with none of us watching until they fall asleep or something. In the meantime I’m having a little get-together here for my e-friends. Got the...
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...
Comments