Category Archives: Pat Hingle

Sudden Impact-1983

Sudden Impact-1983

Director Clint Eastwood

Starring Clint Eastwood, Sondra Locke

Scott’s Review #1,388

Reviewed August 12, 2023

Grade: B+

The groundbreaking and highly influential Dirty Harry, released in 1971 spawned four sequels. Sudden Impact (1983) is the third. It is directed, produced by, and stars Clint Eastwood (making it the only Dirty Harry film to be directed by Eastwood himself) and co-starring Sondra Locke, the star’s longtime girlfriend.

On the surface, the film is standard fare and relatively conventional featuring slick cinematography, a predictable story, shoot ’em-ups, and cartoon villains.

It’s also quite bloody and violent with a theme of justice being served.

Exactly what you’d expect from any action/thriller to come out in the two decades following the original.

The cliches and story setups had by 1983 been seen in so many crime thriller genre films that they feel tired and stale and can be predicted at length.

The expected Dirty Harry catchphrase in Sudden Impact is, “Go ahead, make my day” which is probably what the film is best remembered for though some assume the famous line appears in Dirty Harry.

This isn’t a glowing testament for Sudden Impact.

United States President Ronald Reagan embarrassingly used the “make my day” line in a March 1985 speech threatening to veto legislation raising taxes.

The secret weapon of Sudden Impact though is the inclusion of Locke who is a tour de force in acting and raises the film quite a bit. Her romance with Eastwood (on and off the silver screen) simmers with chemistry making Sudden Impact feel like a much better film than it is.

Jennifer Spencer (Sondra Locke) is a thirty-something blonde bombshell who along with her much younger sister was gang raped, but the crime went unpunished. She now hunts down those responsible one by one and gruesomely shoots them in the testicles before killing them.

She’s not a gal to be messed with.

The murders attract the attention of Harry Callahan (Eastwood), who is on a forced vacation due to his violent approach to police work.

The case gets complicated when Harry develops a relationship with Jennifer, and it’s up to Harry to make the right decision when Jennifer’s life is threatened for a second time.

Locke and Eastwood always do well with marginal material- think Bronco Billy (1980) or Every Which Way But Loose (1978). Both of those films are more comical so it’s riveting to see them co-star in a violence-based thriller.

Not to dwell on Locke (okay, I must), but she’s the best part of Sudden Impact. The first scene involves one of her vigilante murders and her cold, calm, steadiness is magnificent. Through icy eyes, she is filled with rage though is wise and calculating.

When she is not blowing balls to bits, Jennifer leads a successful life as an author and escapes to a whimsical carnival town outside San Francisco to focus on her work. She also finds time to finish killing the remaining members of the gang of rapists.

Locke mesmerizes in every scene she appears in.

Eastwood is good too but his character is the same grizzled, sick of criminal, guy with a gun he’s been since the beginning. Harry’s arguments with the suits in the top office are tired and the actors cast are handily stock types.

The win is Eastwood’s scenes with Locke. As they share dinner there is a romantic tenderness that perfectly offsets the rest of the story. We ask, will he send her to prison or let her go when he inevitably finds out she’s the killer?

Is she justified?

The rapists are cartoon-like and poorly cast and there is no character development. The main villain, Mick (Paul Drake) shrieks and wails and delivers his dialogue in over-the-top fashion. He’s a poor man’s ‘Scorpio’ who he tries to emulate.

A female villain, an assumed lesbian named Ray Parkins, in a purely politically incorrect fashion, has every lesbian stereotype imaginable.

I liken Sudden Impact (1983) to a McDonald’s meal. A greasy Big Mac, fries, and a shake. It’s not fine dining but it’s satisfying and one knows exactly what to expect. Only in this case, Locke is the special sauce.

Splendor in the Grass-1961

Splendor in the Grass-1961

Director Elia Kazan

Starring Natalie Wood, Warren Beatty, Pat Hingle

Scott’s Review #1,231

Reviewed February 20, 2022

Grade: A-

Splendor in the Grass (1961) is mainly a film about teenage angst but the angst spills over to the adults as pressures are heaved on many characters.

Fortunes are gained and lost following the Wall Street Crash of 1929 which handicapped some characters obsessed with money while the teenage characters battle emotions.

It offers poetic relics and references from English poet, William Wordsworth about life and longing for love that can be thought about.

The film is written by William Inge, who also wrote 1955’s Picnic, and is directed by Elia Kazan, famous for A Streetcar Named Desire (1951) and On The Waterfront (1954).

Splendor in the Grass is an uneasy watch but provides slices of those other films’ brilliance. Isn’t the point of the superior film to make us think and ponder?

At the risk of feeling a tad dated some sixty years later how powerful a film it must have been in 1961 and sending inevitable shock waves to those audiences expecting a more wholesome show.

It’s also legendary Hollywood actor Warren Beatty’s debut, showcasing an emotionally superb performance by Natalie Wood.

Bud Stamper (Warren Beatty) and his high school sweetheart, Deanie Loomis (Natalie Wood) have an innocently blossoming relationship if only they could be left alone.

It is weighed down by their parents’ mutual oppressiveness.

Bud’s father, Ace (a terrific Pat Hingle), is hell-bent on Bud attending Yale University in the fall and is afraid of Deanie becoming pregnant and ruining the bright future expected from the affluent young man.

Deanie’s mother (Audrey Christie) cautions her daughter from engaging in sexual relations and remaining a ‘good girl’ because she is frightened of Bud not marrying a girl with questionable morals.

The meddling by both parents causes the teens emotional pressure and threatens not just to ruin their relationship but perhaps ruin their futures. Bud’s mother is complacent and Deanie’s father offers proper support to his daughter.

There is a lot of story going on in Splendor in the Grass and all of it is juicy and relevant from whomever’s perspective the viewer takes. This is part of the beauty of the film- told through the eyes of Bud and Deanie and the fragile feelings teenagers possess, their parents can be dissected as well, and want the very best for their kids.

The romance is not just about Bud and Deanie. Other players and potential love interests are introduced and we begin to wonder if Bud and Deanie will ride off into the sunset together.

Inge and Kazan make us pose several questions. Do people who belong together make it? Do some people settle for different lives based on sacrifice? Can heartbreak lead to madness and a different perspective for some?

The terrific screenplay written by Inge is the film’s sweet spot. It’s complex and fraught with emotion and questions. The setting of remote Kansas in the late 1920s gave me a feeling of stifling predictability and one’s life already planned for them rather than encouragement to reach for the stars.

This is dangerous territory in itself.

Bud is expected to get an education but wants to live on a simple ranch and be a family man. Deanie is trained to be sweet and kind and to resist the pleasures of the flesh like her mother did but is that enough for Deanie?

The great writing is brought to life by Kazan, a master at offering brutal yet realistic films. Based on his other films I knew I was not in for a cheery experience but the rather harsh reality. That sits well with me as films that make one think are celebrated.

Splendor in the Grass (1961) is similar to Rebel Without a Cause (1955) and stars Wood. The film teaches me that although generations come and go the feelings and emotions felt by young people in the moments that they are young never change.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Actress-Natalie Wood, Best Original Screenplay (won)

On the Waterfront-1954

On the Waterfront-1954

Director Elia Kazan

Starring Marlon Brando, Eva Marie Saint

Scott’s Review #876

Reviewed March 9, 2019

Grade: A

Led by one of the best acting performances of all time, On the Waterfront (1954) was an important and relevant film when made and is still powerful in the modern era.

Director Elia Kazan and newly minted Hollywood star Marlon Brando join forces for a film spectacle that is as much a character study as a tale of morality and social injustice.

The musical soundtrack score composed by Leonard Bernstein only enhances an already astounding picture that is deservedly referenced as a masterpiece.

Terry Malloy (Brando) is a washed-up former local boxer who now spends his days slaving away as a dockworker on the dingy waterfronts of Hoboken, New Jersey. Terry’s brother Charley (Rod Steiger) works for a vicious mob boss, Johnny Friendly (Lee J. Cobb) who has complete control over the area.

The police are aware of the ongoing corruption but are limited by the lack of evidence and witnesses to regular crimes. When a fellow dockworker is killed, Terry falls for the victim’s sister, Edie (Eva Marie Saint), leading him to rethink his priorities.

The positive aspects of On the Waterfront are enumerable. Enshrined in the rich story and flawless acting are marvelous cinematography and location sequences. The film was shot almost entirely on location in New York and New Jersey using real docks and outdoor sequences that give the film authenticity.

The dingy and water-soaked locales are riddled with secrets and dark violence that reach new levels using realism and grittiness.

Never looking more masculine or more handsome, though his portrayal of Stanley in A Streetcar Named Desire (1951) is a close second, Marlon Brando achieves riches in the world of stellar acting.

He is rugged and compassionate, macho yet tender, and pours his heart into the role of Terry, and one cannot help wondering if the self-professed method actor became Terry during filming.

With both vulnerability and strength, Brando embodies the character so well that he has become my favorite of all the film roles he has undertaken.

The supporting players dutifully flesh out the resounding cast with gusto. Special mentions go to Karl Malden as Father Barry and Steiger as Charley. Like Barry, Malden brings warmth, patience, and benevolence in a world of crime and deceit. He attempts to console and mentor the folks in his world and is eventually beaten for his honesty and earnestness.

Charley is a different story, selling his soul to the devil and accepting the cards he has been handed, choosing to join with Friendly. At a crucial moment, he makes another devastating choice that changes his life forever.

Few films can proudly boast a scene or dialogue that remains timeless and imprinted on cinematic history, but On the Waterfront contains a scene of this caliber.

During a tremendously important moment in the film, Terry has a conversation with Charley and makes an impassioned statement-“I coulda’ been somebody. I coulda been a contender”, laments Terry to his brother, “Instead of a bum, which is what I am – let’s face it.”

This line is a historic piece of writing and is true to the character.

The film reaches further in its power and truth because it is representative of Elia Kazan’s real-life plight. During the early 1950’s the director famously informed on suspected Communists before a government committee while many of his colleagues chose to go to prison rather than name names.

Many Hollywood actors, directors, and screenwriters were blacklisted for decades to come. On the Waterfront is frequently deemed an allegory to the director’s plight and is a personal story.

On the Waterfront (1954) is sometimes violent and all-times realistic, painting a portrait of one man’s struggle to overcome the lousy life given to him to do the right thing.

Thanks to gorgeous direction, an explosive lead performance by Brando, and all the pieces fitting perfectly in unison, the film is one of the greats and will remain one that generations will discover.

Oscar Nominations: 8 wins-Best Motion Picture (won), Best Director-Elia Kazan (won), Best Actor-Marlon Brando (won), Best Supporting Actor-Lee J. Cobb, Karl Malden, Rod Steiger, Best Supporting Actress-Eva Marie Saint (won), Best Story and Screenplay (won), Best Music Score of a Dramatic or Comedy Picture, Best Art Direction, Black-and-White (won), Best Cinematography, Black-and-White (won), Best Film Editing (won)

The Strange One-1957

The Strange One-1957

Director Jack Garfein

Starring Ben Gazzara, Pat Hingle

Scott’s Review #129

70118583

Reviewed July 23, 2014

Grade: B

The Strange One is a strange (no pun intended) obscure psychological drama from 1957 starring a very young Ben Gazzara and George Peppard.

The setting is a military academy where bullying and intimidation run rampant between the young cadets and some of the staff.

The sadistic lead bully is Gazzara who is mesmerizing to watch in his low-key yet frightening portrayal as a macho guy who gets what he wants and decides to destroy his victims.

The film reminds me of a long Twilight Zone episode as it feels like a television thriller but is effective as a shot in black and white.

Gazzara is the standout in the cast as a charming, sadistic, bully in a military academy who terrorizes and manipulates anyone in his path.

One flaw is there is no explanation for his behavior. How did he become so terrorizing? Was he abused? What is his motivation?

In a sense, however, this makes it all the more fascinating.

There are some homoerotic scenes, which is surprising to find in films in 1957 when the Production Code was so strict.

The Strange One is an interesting little film.