Clint Eastwood s Law by Matthew Schmitz | Articles | First Things
Eastwood s rejection of liberal sentimentalism and hatred of bureaucracy have led conservatives to celebrate his work and to overestimate his agreements with them. In an essay on Eastwood published in Commentary in 1984, the film critic Richard Grenier connected the extraordinary reluctance of many on the Left to use U.S. military power anywhere in the world, even in self-defense, with liberal opposition to harsh penalties for criminals. Eastwood s films, he went on to say, suggested that the star has never had the slightest doubt as to the legitimacy of the use of force in the service of justice.
Writing in the same magazine ten years later, Grenier concluded that somewhere along the line, Eastwood had succumbed to political correctness. One of his complaints was that Eastwood s character in In the Line of Fire (1993) had spoken to a CIA agent insultingly: What are you up to now? Running coke for the Contras? Running arms for Iran?
But Eastwood had not changed. His suspicion of large institutions had always been directed not only against those staffed by liberal lawyers, but also against the police, the military, and the intelligence agencies. Police malfeasance was a prominent theme in Magnum Force (1973) and The Gauntlet (1977). The Eiger Sanction (1975), a cynical espionage thriller, presented the U.S. as no better than its unnamed opponent. The Outlaw Josey Wales (1976), one of Eastwood s finest films, presents men in uniform as villains, except insofar as they disregard orders.
This is a good, brief essay. Read the whole thing if you’ve got time.