Smashbomb

Search

Search results

All (1348)

Content

The Historian

Elizabeth Kostova

9.2 (5 Ratings) Rate It

Book

What does the legend of Vlad the Impaler have to do with the modern world? Is it possible that the...

Real Steel World Robot Boxing

Games

(0 Ratings) Rate It

App

STAR ROBOTS ARE HERE! Fight the greatest ranked robot brawlers among 100 million WRB players in...

Awix (3310 KP) rated Dirty Harry (1971) in Movies

Feb 17, 2018 (Updated Feb 17, 2018)

Dirty Harry (1971)

1971 | Classics, Drama, Mystery

8.2

(30 Ratings)

Movie Rating Watch

Supremely tough cop thriller that helped elevate Clint Eastwood to iconic status. Worthless hippie-scumbag Scorpio commences reign of terror in San Francisco, only laconic police detective Harry Callaghan has the spine to do what must be done in order to stop him.

Probably best not to think too hard about the morality and politics on display: they are at best deeply illiberal and at worst borderline fascist (antihero Harry doesn't give a fig about Scorpio's legal rights, tortures a wounded prisoner for information, etc). The film is playing with a stacked deck, anyway: Scorpio (nice performance from Andy Robinson - it almost ended his career, as he became so closely associated with the role) is an irredeemable monster, the embodiment of every concern respectable folks had about the 60s counterculture. Needless to say Harry (embodying traditional American values) shows no mercy as the story progresses. Story is very well-told, with just enough moments of ambiguity to keep it from being solely a piece of ultra-right-wing wish fulfilment. Essential Clint.

Kudos

Deborah (162 KP) rated White Rose Dies in Books

Dec 21, 2018

Main problem is that as its heart it assumes that the skeletons found in the reign of Charles II are the so-called Princes in the Tower and that they were murdered, neither of which I believe to be true. There isn't a shred of evidence that they were killed by anyone and the skeletons in questions we can't even be sure of the gender of. The author claims they are where Thomas More said they were buried, but in fact they were supposedly found exactly where More said they weren't! Said skeleton were also supposedly tipped on a rubbish heap and then later recovered, so there can be no absolute certainty that the bones interred in Westminster Abbey are the same ones. Of course science could answer so many of our questions now, but these bones have been refused permission for further examination - presumably as the powers that be realise that this will put paid to what they see as a good story on their tourist trail!