Dirty Harry (1971) User Reviews

I feel awkward about liking this movie. But it's still an inimitable classic.

[GiraffeDoor · 8/10 · 17 March 2019]

For me this is that movie that you love when you're young but as you get older you see the dark side to it.

I mean...it's not exactly Masha and the Bear even on a superficial level but you know what I mean.

As an action movie, this is just timeless. It has a gentle, yet uncompromising tone that immediately puts you in the mindset that you are in an unforgiving, violent world. It's clearly going for the X rating. It's not about elegance, it's just about being honest.

There's something folkloric in this tale of hunter and hunted where it's hard to tell who is the more brutal. That was indeed meant to be the gimmick: "two killers on the loose, one carries a badge".

It's a vivid movie about sadism and unapologetic brutality. Where there is only kill or let others get killed. Harry is a delicious character and Eastwood's cool portrayal, always seeming to be one jolt away from going nuts is captivating.

But in recent years I've had new feelings. Harry seems to personify that kind of cop who hates the 4th amendment, who sees themselves as the only barrier between the innocent and monsters and is devoted to protecting without a thought for who will protect the public from him. It's that counter-counter-cultural thinking wear one wants more power to law enforcement not less. I know the title suggests that these are Harry's negative traits but when watching, these are why we fall in love with him as a character. It's kind of a double bluff. Especially when Harry's violation of protocol is seemingly respesented as necessary.

Scorpio is amazing. He is played with maniacal relish that complements the stony Harry like how the Joker does for batman. But I would say he's scarier. We don't get the comic fantasy as a barrier.

I might be overthinking this movie but it is a fascinating rumination on grey morality and how it's not always easy to tell who to root for. even when you think you've realised that the official heroes aren't always good.

it's a difficult movie to interalize and ultimately, that's why it's brilliant.

There's never been a movie quite like it.

One of "The" films of the 1970s

[MovieAddict2016 · 9/10 · 27 April 2005]

Don Siegel's "Dirty Harry" was arguably the start of the serial killer/cop genre inherent in so many mainstream American movies released today. Setting the stage for countless rip-offs and sequels, "Dirty Harry" was one of the true first of its kind--not only in regards to its genre influence but also in terms of its content. (Full frontal nudity, heavy vigilante-style violence and strong language.) It is, in fact, one of the quintessential 1970s films--capturing the very essence of the typical gritty '70s film style we're all familiar with. If "Midnight Cowboy" began the trend, "Dirty Harry" extends it.

Clint Eastwood delivers one of his finest performances as the titular "Dirty" Harry Callahan. He's got just the right amount of cocky cynacism and inset sense of self-justice and importance to make the character realistic and likable, despite his flaws.

The plot almost seems routine now, but back in '71 it was controversial stuff: Harry is a tough cop trying to track down a mad serial killer in San Francisco, who is murdering victims in an effort to receive ransom money. When he kidnaps a young girl, Harry makes it his mission to disobey direct orders and take on the killer by himself.

It's easy to point at this now and say, "I've seen this already." In many cases film classics can only be graded well for nostalgic purposes, because their imitators have improved upon the original material.

Not here. The original really does still remain (one of) the best.

Siegel would later follow up "Dirty Harry" with another examination of criminals and cops, and would also team up again with Clint Eastwood. This is probably his best film, which is saying a lot. Its reputation precedes it, but in this case, the strength of the film itself really is deserving of its popularity. The final speech is awesome stuff.

Eastwood and his .44 Magnum blew away this original action classic!

[emm · 8/10 · 7 May 1999]

In quoting these famous lines: "A man's gotta do what a man's gotta do!" and "Go ahead, make my day!". They meant something for Clint Eastwood, turning from cowboy to hit man with a surge of raging anger and ambition. The mountain terrains became an urban metropolis, thus putting the guy off the saddle and into the bloody streets of San Francisco. Which makes DIRTY HARRY an incredible classic not to be missed, as well as Eastwood's shift to the action genre where society is run by evil. Its continuous impact of the events take place with a tight grip and a smooth pace. This remains to be one of the most entertaining experiences in classic movie history. All it takes is a cop over the edge and "The Most Powerful Handgun In The World".

Violence was the key factor of DIRTY HARRY, and continues to be violent even today. We've never come to see staggering sights of brutalities before, but it was made possible to heighten the overall realism of a dark San Francisco infested with crime. Another was the quality of Clint Eastwood's character as "Harry Callahan", which was obviously a breakthrough for him at the time. He is best described as a smart-talking cop who hated criminals and broken the laws in serving time for the police. A very unique character he was, for going by his own personal business and taking the job "dirty". The best acheivement goes for the cinematography. It sure doesn't look pretty, but the effectiveness of the dark renders this haunting where no place is safe enough to run or hide. The real winner is Don Siegel, for presenting the perfect atmosphere to shoot a picture that already had a premise driven by fear and anxiety, anger and tension. He sure hasn't done anything like this before, and possibly no movie had since then. Otherwise, we would have still been seeing these one-dollar Western shows in the afternoon!

Watch DIRTY HARRY today and you can see how the styles of moviemaking has evolved slow and easy, but it still packs a powerful bullet or two. If you've seen this six times or only five, you knew how lucky Clint Eastwood got the perfect part for being an all-new action star. This is the one, and original cop movie. And remember, this is "In Tribute To The Police Officers Of San Francisco Who Gave Their Lives In The Line Of Duty"!

Dirty Harry is Clint Eastwood's masterpiece!

[ivo-cobra8 · 10/10 · 10 December 2015]

This film has it all, amazing soundtrack, amazing cinematography in the amazing San Francisco area, terrific cast of actors who played believable in their roles. This movie is what it is, a perfect 10, because it takes the vision of one of the most imaginative directors on Earth, and realizes them almost perfectly with all the tools that fit the task -- actors, stunts, story, cinematography. It is one of my personal favorite action movies of all time.

Dirty Harry (1971) is Clint Eastwood's masterpiece and one of his best movies including the best memorable character! The movie that started it all! It is the best action thriller film from Clint Eastwood and director Don Siegel! Clint at his asskicking best! It is my favorite best film from Clint Eastwood and the first best one in the series. Even tough he did not directed this film he gave us one if his best performances ever! I love all Dirty Harry movies but this one is a classic and the best in the series. It has action suspense from end till beginning. A movie that will make anyone's day, if you feel lucky punk. I have seen the first one 20 times and will argue that it's the best with no question, but it is somewhat a matter of opinion :)

"I know what your thinking. Did he fire six shots or just five? We'll Do I feel lucky? We'll do ya punk?" Harry Callahan's best quotes. This is one classic Clint Eastwood film. He funnels traits of himself into "Dirty" Harry: no nonsense, dry humor, some charm and a good logical mind. Andrew Robinson had trouble getting work for a while after this movie because he did such a great job as Scorpio. Getting typecast as a psychopath kind of limits your casting options. Andrew Robinson also played in my favorite action Stallone flick Cobra (1986) and horror flick Hellraiser (1987). He did a great performance ever as a psychotic killer Scorpio. Reni Santoni was also cast in this movie as Harry's partner Homicide Inspector Chico Gonzalez. He also started 15 years later in my action flick Cobra (1986) alongside Andrew Robinson! I can say both of the actors did a fine job playing in bot cop flicks. First one is the best.

But, a little bit of background is due. Academy Award-winner Clint Eastwood ("Unforgiven," "Million Dollar Baby") stars as "Dirty Harry" Callahan in this riveting action film that spawned several blockbuster sequels. In this original, Detective Harry Callahan is determined to bring in psychotic killer Robinson, even if he's determined to break some of the rules. Brilliantly filmed for maximum impact. Recently selected by the prestigious American Film Institute as one of the 400 greatest American films of all time and added "Dirty Harry" as part of the 50 Greatest Heroes of all time.

Dirty Harry is a 1971 American action thriller film produced and directed by Don Siegel, the first in the Dirty Harry series.

The basic plot is about catching a serial killer who was based on a Zodiac Killer. This is one of best movies ever. The story is good, acting is brilliant and effects and action scenes are epic. Watch this movie now!!!! Great films stick inside your head,and this one is a brain limpet! The cinematography and evocation of the San Francisco setting are hauntingly memorable,the dialogue taut and sparse and Schifrin's score is still super cool.Don Siegel and Clint must have studied the European stylists because I read Dirty Harry as the finest amalgam of US Noir and 60's new wave. I find echos of Antonioni and Melville in the tight,clean mis en scene and impeccable action sequences honed by Siegel's long Hollywood pedigree. superb. This movie is 10 out of 10.

Something wild about Harry

[ian-433 · 29 January 2005]

Don Siegel's highly polished .44 magnum-opus, with Clint Eastwood as the daddy (or should that be mutha?) of all maverick cops. Given an A-picture budget by Warners, Siegel delivered a tremendously taut thriller, as provocatively amoral as anything he had done in his 20-year career of expert B-pics like The Killers.

Dirty Harry also gave Eastwood a definitive Hollywood identity after leaving spaghetti westerns behind. It may lack the humour of Siegel and Eastwood's first collaboration, Coogan's Bluff, but it packs a much more uneasy political punch.

Inspector Harry Callaghan is the taciturn, laconic spokesman of Nixon's Silent Majority, elevated to iconic status. His dialogue with criminals is delivered behind the barrel of a devastatingly phallic Magnum hand-gun. "Feel lucky, punk?" he taunts one wounded miscreant in a famous line he repeats at the end of the film.

There's just enough moral ambiguity about Harry in this film to escape it being an endorsement of vigilantism – but if it poses resonating questions about how a liberal society can be held hostage by those outside the law, it also contrives a worryingly two-dimensional picture of psycho-killer Scorpio (Andy Robinson) - and of Harry, himself – with which to frame those questions.

Made by the veteran director in the same year as Hollywood-new wave young gun William Friedkin shot The French Connection, it's just as coolly authoritative and exciting. Siegel uses Bruce Surtees' always serviceable photography of San Francisco locations with flair (years before, he had shot the low-budget but excellent The Line-Up there). The swooping helicopter shot out of the baseball stadium, as if to rush the audience away (either as witnesses or as voyeurs) as Eastwood presses his foot on Scorpio's wounded leg, shows Siegel's smooth mastery of the medium.

Siegel made the insouciant Charley Varrick with Walter Matthau next, after which his career went into slow decline.

The Conflict of Two Rights

[JamesHitchcock · 8/10 · 29 August 2006]

The late sixties and seventies saw the growth of the "tough cop" thriller. In earlier crime thrillers ("White Heat", from the late forties, is a good example) the police had generally been portrayed as honourable and incorruptible men who did everything by the book. The new breed of heroes were different. They were not only tough but also morally ambiguous, capable of bending and even breaking the rules when they thought it was necessary.

Before making "Dirty Harry", Clint Eastwood had acted in another film of this type, "Coogan's Bluff". Both films had the same director, Don Siegel. "Coogan's Bluff, however, is a lightweight film, with a rather annoying hero who likes to cut corners because he cannot be bothered to go through the proper channels. My sympathies are with Lee J. Cobb's old-school New York cop, irritated beyond measure by Coogan's impatience and cowboy brashness.

In "Dirty Harry" much more important matters are at stake. A serial killer calling himself "Scorpio" is terrorising San Francisco by carrying out killings at random. Some of his victims seem to have been chosen on the basis of religious or racial bigotry, but Scorpio's main motive is blackmail; he will stop killing if the city authorities pay him $100,000. When this blackmail fails, Scorpio kidnaps a young girl, buries her underground with a limited supply of oxygen and announces that he will let her die if his demands are not met. Reluctantly, the authorities agree to hand over the money.

The police officer on the case is Inspector Harry Callahan, nicknamed "Dirty Harry", partly because of his uncompromising methods and partly because he gets the jobs other officers don't want. Disgusted by the willingness of the authorities to meet Scorpio's demands, Harry tracks down the main suspect, arrests him after shooting him in the leg, finds the murder weapon and forces him to reveal the girl's whereabouts (unfortunately too late to save her life). Although there can be no doubt of the man's guilt, the city's Mayor and District Attorney order his release because the evidence against him is inadmissible; Harry had no warrant to search his premises and the confession obtained by strong-arm methods would not be admissible in Court. Scorpio's narrow escape does not, however, persuade him that crime does not pay, and soon afterwards he kidnaps and holds hostage a busload of schoolchildren. Only Harry can save them……

In some ways Harry is an unsympathetic character. He is cool to the point of coldness and always has an air of menace about him, particularly during the famous "Do you feel lucky?" speech. Some of his dialogue suggests that he is racially prejudiced himself. Clint Eastwood made the role so much his own that it is strange to think he was only fourth choice after Frank Sinatra, John Wayne and Paul Newman. It is doubtful whether any of those actors could have played the part so well. Sinatra might have made him too unsympathetic. Newman could have conveyed his coolness but might not have had the same underlying menace. Wayne (as he was to prove in "Brannigan" a few years later) was definitely too old for a role of this type.

This film has always been controversial, with critics divided along ideological lines. (The film-makers seem to have intended a deliberate juxtaposition of Harry's values with those of the city of San Francisco which, during the hippie era, was becoming known as America's most liberal city). Liberals such as Roger Ebert have loathed Harry, seeing him as a man who thinks himself above the law, even a fascist. They note that his treatment of Scorpio violates (as the DA points out) at least three, and possibly four, constitutional amendments. (Such liberal critics are divided as to whether the film condemns or condones Harry's methods). Conservatives, however, see him as a hero, a man who will defend the public from crime while his superiors seem more concerned to defend the criminals. They point out that the seventies liberals who were so quick to condemn Harry for acting in breach of the constitution did not apply the same literal-minded legalism to, say, those who were resisting the (constitutionally permissible) Vietnam draft or to civil rights protesters who were engaged in civil disobedience against (constitutionally tolerated) racism in the Southern states.

"Dirty Harry" is much more than a cop thriller; it is a film that asks some important questions. It may seem odd to compare a tough cop with draft resisters or with civil rights campaigners, but Harry faces a moral choice similar to that confronting those two groups of people. In each case the central question is "If there is a conflict between the two, should one obey the law of the land or should one obey one's own conscience". This is a question to which there is often no easy answer and is particularly acute for Harry because, as a police officer, he is duty-bound to uphold the law. The law states that he should not carry out a search without a warrant and that he should not use force to obtain a confession from Scorpio. His conscience tells him that he must do both these things to save an innocent life.

The German dramatist Friedrich Hebbel once remarked that tragedy does not arise out of the conflict of right and wrong. It arises out of the conflict of two rights. This is the situation which we see in this film, which means that both the liberal and conservative viewpoints quoted above are right- and both are wrong. The law is right to impose limits on police powers, in order to protect the citizen from abuse of those powers by corrupt or over-zealous officers. And Harry is right to go beyond those limits in an effort to save a life. 8/10

Classic renegade justice

[mstomaso · 7/10 · 5 July 2005]

This stylish 1970s critique of the U.S. justice system is well known as a crime action drama, and is widely regarded as one of many breakthrough films for Clint Eastwood. Eastwood plays the same sort of character he typically plays - a likable tough guy with a powerful sense of justice and ice for blood. This Eastwood, however, has lost his wife to a drunk driver, some of his partners to murderous criminals, and some aspect of his sanity to his job. He's an inspector in the San Francisco police force's Homicide Division. The film is highly regarded for Eastwood's charismatic performance, for the boldness of the Dirty Harry character, and for the several spaghetti-western quotes uttered by Eastwood.

I have a slightly different take on this film. Dirty Harry was released in the same year as The French Connection - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0067116/combined - a film partly based on real life detectives catching the feeling of police dealing with the hard realities of the drug trade in the big apple of the early 1970s. Dirty Harry - as cool as Eastwood's character may be - is a one-dimensional creature compared with Gene Hackman's Popeye Doyle. Something about Harry Callahan's political incorrectness resonates in a disturbing way with people who have only examined police work and the justice system through their televisions. The reality of this aspect of modern life is far less interesting, dramatic, and straightforward. And the critique of "American justice" is at least as powerfully made in the French Connection as it is here. Furthermore, The French Connection was an extremely innovative film, while Dirty Harry was a fairly typical stylized police-fantasy. The only explanations for the on-going popularity of this film, then, are Eastwood's charisma and the sheer entertainment value of this gutsy, gritty, hardcore crime drama.

Harry is on the trail of a serial killer played by the phenomenal character actor Andrew J. Robinson in his major film debut. Andy Robinson makes a great psycho, and, at times, appears so out-of-control (nicely contrasted with Eastwood's reptilian calm) that it is a wonder he didn't seriously injure himself during the shooting of the film. When Robinson abducts a young girl and buries her alive, extorting $200, 000 from the mayor's office, Harry uses some unconventional tactics to bring him to justice. This brings us slightly past the midpoint of the film, and just to the point where it accelerates into a first-rate action thriller.

While I think Dirty Harry is a very good film, and worth seeing at least a couple of times, I do not necessarily agree with the general opinion concerning the film. It is disappointing to me that this film did not make Andy Robinson the star that it helped to make Clint Eastwood into - especially since the range of characters and emotions these two men have shown themselves capable of is so disparate (in favor of Mr. Robinson). It is also surprising to me to see that the obvious connection (dare I say plagiarisn) between this film and the French Connection has been glossed over by film history so completely. In the same light, it bothers me that this film is rated so highly as compared with the French Connection. And finally, I am pleased that Dirty Harry is still a film that action fans enjoy, because unlike most of what the action genre produces today, this is a film with a message, and a subtle and hauntingly memorable intelligence.

One of Clint Eastwood's best movies

[TheLittleSongbird · 10/10 · 9 January 2011]

If there was a category for quintessential crime thrillers, I would almost certainly put Dirty Harry in that category. Everything about Dirty Harry is wonderful. The cinematography is fine and the locations and scenery are quite striking. Lalo Schifrin's music sets the atmosphere very well too, while the story is taut, the script is quotable and cleverly written, Don Siegel's direction is superb and the violence is shocking and daring. The acting is also great, in his more complex roles Clint Eastwood was born for the role of Dirty Harry, and all the supporting roles are very well played. All in all, brilliant and one of the crime thrillers there is. 10/10 Bethany Cox

Some Punks Feel Luckier Than Others

[bkoganbing · 7/10 · 2 September 2008]

When someone is in a dilemma like Harry Callahan on the trail of a psychotic freak who's kidnapped a young girl and holding her for ransom, even the most liberal of judges would recognize the exigent circumstances of his situation. It's a phrase we hear on Law and Order all the time. They too, come up with some exotic interpretations of the law for their shows.

That's where the story line of Dirty Harry falls apart. But in terms of entertainment Dirty Harry is spot on. Clint Eastwood created his most iconic character in this film directed by Don Siegel.

Eastwood is Inspector Harry Callahan, a cop from the old school who hadn't heard of Miranda and Escobedo and other such court decisions that give the perpetrators a few weapons of their own in the legal system.

He's assigned to the Scorpio case. Scorpio is a psychotic and random killer who's been striking down innocent victims at random with a high powered rifle with telescopic sight. When he graduates to kidnapping and burying a victim alive and giving the city of San Francisco a set time to cough up a ransom, he's reaching a new low.

A lot of people, mostly of the liberal persuasion, have a hard time grasping the concept of pure evil for its own sake. In Andy Robinson who's made a career as a successor to Lyle Bettger playing a lovely variety of psychos, as Scorpio he's come up with a career role. This is one unredeemable dude, he's the reason you have capital punishment.

Playing the liberal types who frustrate Eastwood are John Vernon as the Mayor of San Francisco, District Attorney Josef Sommer, and Judge William Patterson. Caught in the middle are police chief John Larch and Eastwood's immediate supervisor Harry Guardino who spends the entire film being terribly harassed and getting it from both ends.

Of course Eastwood has his own methods of dealing with hoodlums as well who wish to play his own chicken game and want to test their memories as to just how many shots were fired from the most powerful handgun in the world. The 357 magnum isn't standard police issue, but it's Clint's equalizer. Some punks feel luckier than others.

Dirty Harry is not Clint Eastwood's best film, but it's certainly his most enduring character.

No Nonsense, No Baloney

[ccthemovieman-1 · 9/10 · 22 October 2005]

This was the first of the always-entertaining "Dirty Harry" cop series and it was a good one - maybe the best of the series.

One of Harry's famous lines was in this opener: "Do ya feel lucky, punk?" Speaking of punks, Andy Robinson, who played the villain, never got famous as Clint Eastwood ("Harry") certainly became but he was tremendous in this film. He didn't even have to utter a line: he just looked deranged! Great casting.

Looking back, the one thing I really appreciate about this film as opposed to the rest of them in this series was the absence of Harry's annoying superiors constantly on his case. He actually got support from his bosses in this movie.

The film as a big hit because people were already tired of all the liberal preaching of the 1960s in which we were supposed to feel sympathy for the criminal instead of the victim. This series was on the side of the cops, not the crooks, which is probably why the sick film critics never liked Dirty Harry.

This is one solid crime story with no boring spots and no sappy sub-plots with romances, either. And it's always nice to enjoy the interesting San Francisco skyline.

Dirty Harry is a film and after that a leading film

[mo-mohtasham · 7/10 · 25 January 2017]

Popularity of works like Dirty Harry is more about the wave it created in a genre of it's own type (here thriller Genre), for this reason when someone writes about films like dirty harry must face the wave that film has unleashed and this is not fair. A work should be first analyzed independently to indicate its inherent values. Dirty harry is initially quiet entertaining work. The only aim the director had was entertain the viewers while producing the film, a job Don Siegel has fairly successfully done. Film wholly revolves around Clint Eastwood and it is his charisma that has kept dirty harry standing; Perhaps imagining someone other than Eastwood in the role of harry and gaining this amount of popularity for the film is completely vain. The biggest drawback to this movie is the villain pole of story(Scorpio). A character which hasn't been developed properly. It is very weak character. Opposing someone with this level of intelligence and ability (just compare Scorpio's intelligence and ability with zodiac's, it is said Scorpio's character inspired by his character and actions) for ransom (100000$ or 200000$) with the heads of a big city is eccentric and idiotic. The script does not provide any information about the biography and features of this character. The amount of information Which is scheduled to be presented about this serial killer,played by a weak actor for this role (Andrew Robinson) in this job is powerless and unsuccessful. To me it is strange why a professional director like don Siegel has used such an inept actor for villain role of his film. Perhaps if both the character and acting the villain role had been effective a better balance between positive and negative poles of the story would have been created and we would have a better movie. Since the first mission of the cinema and a movie is entertainment Dirty Harry must be respected; of course adequate respect, not exaggerated one. 7/10.

One of the defining film of the 1970s

[bwaynef · 10/10 · 18 October 2003]

Released on Christmas Day 1971, "Dirty Harry" transformed Clint Eastwood from cult figure to superstar. Another maverick cop thriller, "The French Connection," was released a few months earlier, and it may have won the Oscars and garnered the critical acclaim, but "Dirty Harry" is the true classic of the two, and the most influential. Great action magnificently directed by Don Siegel, the master of the genre, great dialogue, and relentless tension make this the ultimate detective thriller and one of the defining films of the 1970s.

I know what you're thinking

[chaswe-28402 · 7/10 · 27 July 2018]

A couple of memorable lines. Iconic. But it doesn't make me feel lucky, and I've watched it more than once. It doesn't get better with repeated viewing. I'd have thought it was financed by the LA Police Department, if it wasn't for the ending, which seems to be based on High Noon, the conclusion of which reportedly angered John Wayne so much.

The recent reviews of this film seem to have got it just about right. There is something dissatisfying about its plot and narrative account. Although there is a basic theme involving the pursuit of a maniac killer, it is also structured round a disconnected series of episodes designed to portray a cop who is stressed and driven beyond endurance by the rules and regulations of the society in which he operates. There appears to be no solution to this conflict. The viewer is left at a loss. Siegel's next film, Charley Varrick is more entertaining.

Reactionary message movie with many logical fallacies

[kyrat · 5/10 · 17 February 2010]

The more I think about this film, the more the way this message movie was presented and the way it has been received by many really annoys me. I'm especially sensitized, given that Bush n' co. spent most of the last decade taking away our rights in the name of "security" & "safety". They must've loved this film!

The message seems to be a very reactionary one. Rights/legal protections are bad. Rule of law is useless. Vigalante abuse of power is great.

This movie is full of several logical fallacies, generalizations and other issues. It sets up a False Dilemma -either ignore the laws & get to kill the guy OR he goes free. It also sets up a Straw Man argument of picking a very rare/unlikely instance of a super psycho as an argument of why honoring the rights of criminals is bad.

Sure, it's really easy to set up a grossly exaggerated portrait of an inhumanely disturbed racist monster who killed at random, raped & threatened children, threatens priests & had no redeeming values. Then show how all those pesky civil rights helped him go free and kill again. Blame the civil rights!

Showing the rare instance when something that GENERALLY is a good thing failed (NOTE: it didn't work because HARRY did not follow the rules- not because the rules were there!) and then use that as an excuse to rant about the rules and make it seems as if there is no point to them.

No grey areas. No thoughts as to what argument means if you carry it out the whole way through. No consideration on why those rights exist or the positives of protection, especially for someone who may be innocent.

Think about it- how often does SF suffer at the hands of a madman serial killer? Not since the 70's. I just checked the crime stats for SF for the last 2 months. Not a single murder. Sure, SF isn't crime free there were probably a thousand or so burglaries, robberies, etc. But I'd much rather have strong rights and let a few people (mostly non-violent offenders) get to go free because their rights were protect then to not have Miranda rights or the 4th amendment. I'll take my chances that a psycho killer may come if it means I don't have to live in a fascist state with no expectation of privacy.

I don't want some admittedly racist misanthropic cop who feels that he can doing anything he want & shoot anyone he wants if he even *thinks* they're being bad. What happens when Harry shoots an innocent person? What would have happened if that guy at Kezar stadium had been innocent and Harry had beat the crap out of him? Is that OK because Harry's *usually* killing bad guys?

To be fair, I did check and it looks like "exigent circumstances" that allow for a LEGAL warrantless search if "necessary to prevent physical harm" doesn't appear to have become solidified until after the film (in '76)

And what was the point of the lingering shot of the killer wearing a peace sign belt buckle? Was it merely supposed to be ironic because he was a killer? Or was it meant to equate a merciless killer with those stupid"peace-loving hippies" who are causing murders to go free by advocating for rights and opposing oppressive police practices?

In the end, I chose to read the final scene as Harry goading the killer into an action so that he had an excuse to shoot him. Then Harry realizing he had no right to uphold the law as an officer if he could not follow the laws. So he threw away the badge as an admission of his failure. However it seems to me as though many reviewers saw his action in an opposite light, of choosing to reject the rule of law and embrace his vigilante ways.

"Harry Hates Everybody!"

[stryker-5 · 14 February 1999]

How radically different cinema history, and our collective consciousness, would have been if Frank Sinatra hadn't injured his hand before shooting started on "Dirty Harry". Sinatra was due to play Harry, but had to withdraw, clearing the way for Clint. Given Sinatra's unique brand of self-loathing, Harry would have been an uglier personality than Clint made him. As it is, Lieutenant Callaghan is an ornery anti-liberal cuss of a guy, but he is straight and likeable. Arguably, it was this characterisation which made Eastwood a megastar.

San Francisco in 1971 was ready for stardom itself. The West Coast love-in scene and the gay 'boom', together with McQueen's "Bullitt", raised awareness of San Francisco as an exciting liberal city with a photogenic skyline. The film's funky score by Lalo Schifrin is perfectly-judged, and spawned numerous imitators.

The central narrative concerns a lone nut who is trying to hold the city to ransom. He starts by murdering citizens to extort money from the mayor, then progresses to kidnapping children. This plays cleverly on the inchoate anxieties of Middle America, where law-abiding people were puzzled and alarmed at the 'crime wave' and the threat it posed to them and their families. Crime in the decades before the Kennedy assassination had been compartmentalised by Hollywood. Gangsters were bad, but they killed other gangsters. Now the danger was unpredictable, irrational - and solitary. The lone madman was as likely to strike against me or you as against an institution. Only a single-minded strong man, operating on the fringes of the rules, could combat this new terror.

Harry is a paradox. In one sense, he is an 'outlaw'. He has little respect for formal authority (in the opening minutes, we see him being rude to the mayor) and he carries a strictly non-regulation monster of a gun. Harry is openly racist and mutinous. And yet he is also deeply moral. He conforms to an unarticulated ethical code that is anglosaxon American. He protects the weak and confronts the wrongdoers, no matter how the odds are stacked against him. Indeed, the cowardly bureaucrats who will never reward him or promote him are able to exploit his profound decency. They send him on all the difficult, dirty jobs because they know that his sense of right and wrong won't allow him to walk away.

Early in the film, the famous bank robbery scene occurs. This has become so familiar that it hardly needs elaborating here, but to summarise, Harry foils an armed robbery using icy courage and grim humour - and his magnum handgun. The special brand of Eastwood humour recurs throughout the story (eg, the suicide jumper and the gay called 'Alice'). White anglosaxon America is encouraged to laugh at the undergroups which supposedly threaten it.

When the bad guy 'Scorpio' is cornered, he immediately starts bleating about his civil rights. This is meant to arouse our fury, because we have seen him callously destroying the lives of others, and here he is exploiting the protection of the state. To make matters worse, the state agrees with him. We see the DA and a judge explaining to Harry why the cogent evidence against Scorpio is inadmissible. Just exactly why the DA would call a meeting with a lowly policeman in order to explain department policy is far from clear, but the scene is thematically necessary. Scorpio is using the System against the decent, godfearing people who own it. The liberal apparatus is skewed if it lets a killer walk away scot-free.

There are some illogicalities about the plot. Such an important event as the cash drop is left to two cops working alone, when in reality there would be a massive covert operation. When Scorpio beats the rap, there is no public outcry or media storm, and he is allowed to get on with his anonymous existence virtually untroubled.

However, this hardly matters since the main thrust of the story is the coming showdown between Harry and the bad guy. As the climax approaches, Harry drops out of the police operation. Scorpio is at his manic worst on the hi-jacked school bus, alienating us nicely and suppressing any liberal twitches we may still be feeling. Then we see Harry, standing as upright and sturdy as the Statue Of Liberty ....

Eastwood shines as the soft-spoken but deadly serious detective Harry Callahan

[inkblot11 · 8/10 · 14 May 2021]

In the opening scene of the film, a beautiful young woman swims in a rooftop pool. Poor gal. A shooter (Andrew Robinson) from a nearby building kills her with one shot. Soon, the SFPD will send detective Harry Callahan to investigate the happening. As "Dirty Harry" discovers the place where the shooter did his deed, Harry finds a note. Calling himself Scorpio, the assassin insists the city pay him big bucks or he will kill again; the victim will be a priest or a black American. Pulling his hair out, the mayor decides they should pay but Harry is adamant they should NOT. A compromise posting in the SF Chronicle says they will pay but need more time. Meanwhile, Harry goes to lunch but can't even digest his food without needing to stop a bank robbery nearby! Harry is one cool cop. The top police brass give Harry a new partner named Chico (Reni Santori) but he's rather green. Nevertheless, together these two hatch plans to "catch" Scorpio without paying big money. Unhappily, Scorpio matches them with tricky escapes. Now, a school bus full of children may be in danger! What can Harry do? This gritty, somewhat violent film is taken from the story of the real Zodiac killer. Its a sick, twisted tale but Harry is one admirable detective, played to understated perfection by Eastwood. Santori is quite likeable, Robinson is great as the loathsome killer and other cast members quite fine. Add on good cinematography and a tense, inventive plot and the movie is quite compelling. Its a classic folks! Don't delay in viewing it.

"Well, I'm all broken up over that man's rights."

[Hey_Sweden · 10/10 · 10 April 2014]

"Dirty Harry" is an incredible action film, one of the finest ever made and certainly an *extremely* influential one, spawning legions of imitative cop flicks made in the subsequent 43 years. It gave Clint Eastwood a contemporary-set star vehicle to rival the Westerns he'd headlined in the 1960s, and gave us an iconic hero character with whom we could identify: a man who's weary of a "justice" system that shows too much sympathy to lowlife bad guys who don't merit that sort of thing.

Eastwoods' "Dirty" Harry Callahan (so nicknamed because he gets stuck with "dirty" jobs that nobody else wants to do) is a police detective with a wicked .44 Magnum (that will blow your head *clean* off) and a disgust at having to deal with weak superiors and criminal slime. Harry picks up the trail of a psychotic rooftop sniper, "Scorpio" (Andrew Robinson, in one hell of a breakthrough film performance), and is willing to do anything necessary - the rulebook be damned - to get his man.

Highlighted by Lalo Schifrins' groovy jazz score, impressive aerial photography, and exemplary location work (director Don Siegel and company make the city of San Francisco just as much a character here as any of the human players), "Dirty Harry" is wonderfully put together, and features a solid action climax involving a bus. Harry's dialogue (the screenplay is credited to Harry Julian Fink, Rita M. Fink, and Dean Riesner) is memorable and quotable; his "do I feel lucky" speech is now cinema legend.

The film is very well directed by Siegel and features a strong supporting cast including Harry Guardino, Reni Santoni, John Vernon, John Larch, John Mitchum, and Josef Sommer; small uncredited roles are played by the likes of Max Gail, Richard Lawson, and Albert Popwell; Popwell, as buffs well know, became a recurring actor in the "Dirty Harry" series.

Overall, this is absolutely essential viewing for action fans of all ages.

10 out of 10.

"I get every dirty job that comes along."

[classicsoncall · 7/10 · 16 June 2021]

The very first review I read here on IMDb for "Dirty Harry" mentions how the Netflix streaming version is particularly dark and muddy. I'll attest to that having seen it just the other day, and it brings down one's appreciation for the film somewhat. This is the flick that took Clint Eastwood from being a spaghetti Western vigilante into a modern day, big city vigilante, if that's how one's political sensibilities wants to characterize it. I could care less whether Harry Callahan (Eastwood) quizzed criminals on whether he fired five shots or six, the fact that he got the bad guy is all that matters to me. It seems we've been battling about the rights of criminals over victims for a long time now, so it's not surprising that guys like Harry Callahan and Paul Kersey find an audience that lets folks cheer for the good guys. After a half century gone by now since the movie's release, it's reputation might be just a tad better than the original product by now, but it's still sweet to hear Harry ask some punk - "Are you feeling lucky?"

Five or Six Shots?

[claudio_carvalho · 9/10 · 6 August 2011]

In San Francisco, the psychopath Scorpio (Andy Robinson) snipes a woman in the swimming pool on her penthouse. Then he demands ransom of US$ 100,000.00 to the Major (John Vernon), otherwise he would kill a black man and a priest. Inspector Harry Callahan (Clint Eastwood) a.k.a. Dirty Harry, investigates the case with his partner, the rookie Inspector Chico Gonzalez (Reni Santoni).

When the serial-killer kills his victims and abducts a teenager, he demands US$ 200,000.00 and Harry is assigned to deliver the bag to the criminal. Inspectors Callahan and Gonzalez are wounded by Scorpio, but Callahan stabs Scorpio on the leg. The killer goes to the emergency of the hospital and Callahan tracks him down and tortures him to find where the teenager is imprisoned. However, the Dist. Atty. William T. Rothko (Josef Sommer) advises Callahan that the evidences would not be accepted in court and Charles "Scorpio"' Davis is released. Callahan chases the deranged criminal and becomes his implacable persecutor.

The last time I saw "Dirty Harry" was on 29 December 1999 and today I have decided to see this excellent 1971 film by Don Siegel again. It is great to see that this film has not aged after forty years.

"Dirty Harry" was one of my favorite heroes, bringing real justice and breaking the bureaucratic rules. I believe that a great part of honest citizen feels powerless with the unfair justice system in Western countries that usually does not punish those who deserve, and characters like Dirty Harry are worshiped due to their attitude.

"Dirty Harry" is the first out of five films of this character played by Clint Eastwood. I intend to see all of them again to recall how Hollywood knew how to make good films in a near past. My vote is nine.

Title (Brazil): "Perseguidor Implacável" ("Implacable Persecutor")

Cult classic, but shows it's age

[dannnclarke · 7/10 · 11 July 2022]

Clint Eastwood has a great performance as Dirty Harry, a tough, no nonsense san Fransisco cop. There are some great lines that have been immortalised in pop culture and some funny cinematography, but it ultimately shows it's age and dated nature which, for me, undermines the drama of the film. Obviously nothing that could be done by the production on this, dated film are dated and this was made in the 70's, but it reminded me of a less intense, simpler Die Hard.

"Welcome to Homicide"

[richardchatten · 9/10 · 26 August 2022]

Another film inextricably linked to a star cast as a last-minute replacement; it's impossible now to imagine how it would have turned out had Sinatra not dropped out and Harry Callaghan will forever more be Clint Eastwood.

As it stands San Francisco looks an urban hell with suitably nightmarish music by Lalo Schifrin and grimacing gargoyle Scorpio seems completely at home (evidently he killed for feral pleasure rather than merely attention like his inspiration Zodiac).

As for Harry himself his cynicism was aptly demonstrated by the famous speech that bookended it: evidently he knew precisely how many shots he'd fired, the first he was purely feigning ignorance for fun, the second time he was in deadly earnest about to commit judicial murder.

No brain required

[sme_no_densetsu · 6/10 · 30 April 2008]

"Dirty Harry" was a trend-setter for action films. However, when those trends include one-dimensional characters and gratuitous nudity the term trend-setter loses some of its lustre.

I've seen a lot of action films over the years but I began tiring of them in my teens, mainly because I realized that if you've seen a handful of them then you've seen just about everything that the genre has to offer. That is simply because nine times out of ten one action film is just a knockoff of a better one. This movie might have been a breath of fresh air back in 1971 but today it's just a cliché factory. Granted, it's not the filmmakers fault that countless others shamelessly copied their formula; I just feel that it wasn't a formula worth copying in the first place.

The 'good' and 'bad' guys are unmistakable here. There's the no-nonsense cop pitted against the deranged serial killer. Never mind any glimpse into why Harry is so bent on justice or why Scorpio is intent on mindless destruction. As I said, the characters are completely one-dimensional; it's standard 'good guy' versus 'bad guy', with no more depth than that. Don't be fooled by the film's reputation, this is just another shallow action flick.

The film's production values are pretty good, though. Don Siegel's direction is well-handled overall and is certainly above the usual action flick caliber. The score by Lalo Schifrin also has a funky, early seventies flavor. The acting is passable, though Eastwood's iconic performance is as one-note as it gets.

I would recommend this film only to see what kind of impact it had on later films. Many, many mindless action flicks owe their inspiration to "Dirty Harry" but this is one case where the original is little better than the imitators.

Eastwood is the archetypal cop of the 1970s!

[Nazi_Fighter_David · 8/10 · 5 February 2004]

The film might easily have passed for a popular tale of cops and robbers or, more particularly, cop and psychopath had it not been for the ruthlessness of Harry's methods...

In this character, Eastwood is the archetypal cop of the 1970s... He is unsociable, insensitive, silent without apparent reason, incapable equally of thought or of any human feeling, solving all problems with a blast from a revolver so heavy that it takes two hands to aim it... In fact, the reason why Clint Eastwood behaves so ruthlessly in "Dirty Harry" is carefully plotted at one point in the film: his wife was killed by a hit-and-run driver escaping from the scene of a crime, so he hates all baddies…

'Dirty Harry' supplanted suspense by action, tension by brutality, character by a bigger and better bullet...

Eastwood is a plain-clothes policeman who puts his faith in his Colt Magnum.44 and his ability to use it... He is ready to shoot down a criminal as arrest him... Eastwood brought the rude justice of the lawless West to the regular laws of the modern city... Perhaps his behavior would have been less controversial if he had merely been a renegade cop who broke the rules when roused by anger, but in the cool neon light of his superior's office, he is evidently unrepentant about his behavior...

Eastwood had played 'Dirty Harry' five times in the sequels 'Magnum Force', 'The Enforcer', 'Sudden Impact' and 'The Dead Pool.' Callahan is always in a situation where he has to be his own judge and jury... Harry always gets somebody who's very lethal... In the case of "Dirty Harry", it was a psychopathic killer... Callahan wants to get him off the streets so that nobody else becomes a victim... He is a man on the side of the public... He feels that the law is wrong and he should fight that or try to solve it... Harry is not a man who stands for violence... He is a man who can't understand society tolerating violence...

Eastwood is reassuringly indestructible and in real situations he adopts the fantasy mastery of a traditional Western loner... He may be beaten up, but never beaten by the criminals or by authority...

The Bestest!

[Gunnar_Runar_Ingibjargarson · 7/10 · 20 June 2008]

Whether or not you can sympathize with its fascistic/vigilante approach to law enforcement, Dirty Harry (directed by star Clint Eastwood's longtime friend and directorial mentor, Don Siegel) is one hell of a cop thriller. The movie makes evocative use of its San Francisco locations as cop Harry Callahan (Eastwood) tracks the elusive "Scorpio killer" who has been terrorizing the city by the Bay. As the psychopath's trail grows hotter, Harry becomes increasingly impatient and intolerant of the frustrating obstacles (departmental red tape, individuals' civil rights) that he feels are keeping him from doing his job. A characteristically taut and tense piece of film-making from Siegel (Invasion of the Body Snatchers, The Shootist, Escape from Alcatraz), it also remains a fascinating slice of American pop culture. It was a big hit (followed by four sequels) that obviously reflected--or exploited--the almost obsessive or paranoid fears and frustrations many Americans felt about crime in the streets. At a time when "law and order" was a familiar slogan for political candidates, Harry Callahan may have represented neither, but from his point of view his job was simple: stop criminals. To him that end justified any means he deemed necessary.

Vastly overrated

[Kansas-5 · 1/10 · 18 April 2011]

I've heard of this movie since it was new. It came out about the same time as "The French Connection," a splendid movie with great acting, direction, cinematography, dialogue, story line and believability.

I always assumed this was a great movie, based on its reputation.

I was very misinformed.

I watched it on television, through all the bad cinematography, errors and lapses in continuity, absurd plot, hopeless screenplay, but after the scene with the judge and the D.A. in the latter's office, that was it. It was way too stupid to put up with it any longer.

I lived in San Francisco off and on from 1961 to 1982 and it didn't represent anything close to reality in criminal justice with which I was extremely familiar, during that period. It didn't even make any sense geographically, for instance with the bag man magically moving from one end of the city to the other in the absence of available transportation, and the same with the final bus scene.

This debacle was inspired, if you could call it that, by the Zodiac killer, who murdered individuals and couples in San Francisco and all around California. He was never apprehended and his identity remains unknown. This was an opportunity for a great movie that was completely wasted.