There are 64 replies in this Thread which has previously been viewed 18,027 times. The latest Post () was by Jay J. Foraker.
Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!
I think you missed the ending...
Walt was dying and he needed a way to get ALL the bad guys.
Just killing one or two of them would not have worked. He came up with a way to die on his terms and get all the bad guys at the same time.
I agree it was not the type of ending I was expecting, but I thought it was a well thought out twist.
Just finished reading your post... remember this is the movies, nothing real ever happens here. :teeth_smile:
I think I saw it as erthomp did. Walt dying on his terms (like Books going out shooting and being shot, rather than dying a long, torturous death by cancer) AND having so many witnesses to these thugs' actions, they would surely be locked up and the key thrown to the bottom of the ocean. I didn't see it as an anti-violence message, because Walt didn't seem opposed to violence, particularly.
But Bob, I also see your point of view, that these creeps (cockroaches!) would be better off dead!! Let's face it, Walt would only have taken out one or two even if he'd had a gun. Doing it his way, maybe the whole bunch got hauled off to jail (and hopefully split up between numerous prisons).
Mrs. C 
As great and varied a talent as Clint has been over the years, and as big in the industry as he is, I'm sure it's icing on the cake for him anytime he can be mentioned in the same sentence with John Wayne. The similarities between his supposed last acting role in Gran Torino and John Wayne's The Shootist will forever invite a comparison and get them mentioned in the same sentence. Was it perhaps intentional on Clint's part in an attempt to get a legacy that includes a positive comparison with the Duke as opposed to what he's probably seen a lot in the past - contrast and debate? Smart move........and a good movie.
Speaking of the long running debate of who would win in a showdown between John Wayne and Clint Eastwood.......
A lot of younger audiences assume Clint would take it. I say do as they do in a tiebreaker for teams that have never gone head-to-head, look at their record vs common opponents.
Lee Van Cleef was a worthy opposite to Clint Eastwood in 'The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly'. He was but an inferior side-kick to Liberty Valance who himslef was inferior to John Wayne's Tom Doniphon.
Bill McKinney was a worthy foil for Clint Eastwood over the years in several films. He could be nothing but the cowardly blowhard Jay Cob in the John Wayne movie The Shootist.
No contest. Any script that would have pitted these two against each other would out of necesity for believability have to have John Wayne coming out superior and the victor. The one exception would be if they made Clint Eastwood the Bruce Dern type in The Cowboys. Right?
Quotethe one exception would be if they made Clint Eastwood the Bruce Dern type in The Cowboys. Right?
Even then Duke would have come out the better man, because Clint would have been without honor.
If they had ever made a movie together they both would have to men of honor.
Speaking of The Duke & Clint...
Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…CAv0&feature=channel_page
Well, I sure didn't mean to offend anyone, and if I did, then I sincerely apologize. And I did like Gran Torino, I just didn't like the ending. And I suppose that's just due to a 23 year career in corrections, and knowing how it really is. I guess because I worked for so long in a prison, I have become just a tad cynical and biased, and I tend to view the world, and the movies I watch, with that same cynicism and bias. In fact, my wife often has to tell me when I see someone that I think looks just a little bit suspicious, "Come on Bob, not everyone is an inmate!" (After all these years she DOES know what I'm thinking!).
Maybe I was disappointed in the ending because I found, while watching the movie, that I could really relate to the character Walt. My grandkids (don't worry, they're 17 and older) kept telling me that Walt reminded them of me. Not that I'm a racist, because I'm not, but I do tend to speak my mind and call things as I see them without sugar coating it in any way.
At any rate, my opinions about Gran Torino are just that. My opinions. Nothing more than the ramblings of a cranky old cuss.
Well, Bob, I can only speak for myself, but . . . (1) I wasn't offended in the least (and I don't think anybody else was, either), (2) I certainly don't think you're a racist, and (3) I consider it a pleasure and privilege to know a 'cranky old cuss' like you 
!
Mrs. C
Ditto... no offense taken here, was also just stating my opinion.
Nothing like a good debate to get the blood circulating.
huummm what's that saying... oh yeah! opinions are like a$$ holes, everyone has them and they all stink... lol 
huummm what's that saying... oh yeah! opinions are like a$$ holes, everyone has them and they all stink... lol
I'd always heard "opinions are like noses, everybody's got one."
Mrs. C
I'd always heard "opinions are like noses, everybody's got one."
Mrs. C
You obviously socialize with a higher class of people than Eric does, Sue. :teeth_smile:
P.S.
I've heard and used both expressions.
Yeah, I'm on of those Garth Brooks "friends in low places" ... lol
I still have not seen it but will buy the DvD as soon as I see it hit shelves here.
Colorado Bob-you and I share something. I too spent some time as a C.O for the State of Texas. I KNOW exactly where you come from and my opinions are exactly the same as yours-where criminals are concerned. My career wasn't as long as yours-I got tired of it all-both inmates and bad supervisors I like to call: "Stuporvisors."
I still have not seen it but will buy the DvD as soon as I see it hit shelves here.
Colorado Bob-you and I share something. I too spent some time as a C.O for the State of Texas. I KNOW exactly where you come from and my opinions are exactly the same as yours-where criminals are concerned. My career wasn't as long as yours-I got tired of it all-both inmates and bad supervisors I like to call: "Stuporvisors."
Howdy Carl,
Yeah, I know what you mean. A lot of the folks I worked with seemed to share the same opinion, that the higher you go in the DOC, the more you know about less and less, until you reach the highest rank and you wind up knowing absolutely nothing about everything. My biggest complaint was that the higher one went in rank (at least once you passed sergeant) it seemed that you had to be willing to sacrifice more and more of your morals and principals. When I was asked why I didn't take the lieutenants test, my standard answer was, "I can't. My sense of justice is too well defined." Needless to say, not many lieutenants and above liked me. But at least I can still look at myself in the mirror and have a clean conscience.
But at least I can still look at myself in the mirror and have a clean conscience.
That is FAR more important in the scheme of life!! Way to go!
Proud to know you,
Chester 
That is FAR more important in the scheme of life!! Way to go!
Proud to know you,
Chester
Well, to quote Ol' Mose Harper, "Thank ya, thank ya kindly."
Howdy Carl,
Yeah, I know what you mean. A lot of the folks I worked with seemed to share the same opinion, that the higher you go in the DOC, the more you know about less and less, until you reach the highest rank and you wind up knowing absolutely nothing about everything. My biggest complaint was that the higher one went in rank (at least once you passed sergeant) it seemed that you had to be willing to sacrifice more and more of your morals and principals. When I was asked why I didn't take the lieutenants test, my standard answer was, "I can't. My sense of justice is too well defined." Needless to say, not many lieutenants and above liked me. But at least I can still look at myself in the mirror and have a clean conscience.
Hi Bob, I applaud you for keeping ones self dignity and morals intact. I pretty much did the samehting when I was asked why I never tried for Sergeant rank. MOstly it was because as you said-the higher one went up-the less they knew and or were willing to admit to-with rare exceptions. I was topped out as a CO III-and I was comfortable with just being one of the masses. Also, at the time I worked there-a Sergeant made only $50 bucks more a month than I made as a COIII-plus they had all the extra responsibilities that supervisors get. It wasn't worth the effort then but, about 6 months after I resigned-the State gave everybody across the board-a $10,000 a year raise. I might have stayed if we had been given that raise a year or so earlier. When I first started working-I took home only about $700 a month after taxes. Needless to say, after paying rent and other bills-the average COI/COII at the time-no matter how we watched our spending-were always broke 1-2 weeks before the next check arrived. It took me at least 2 7 1/2 years of working there-before I could actually keep money in my bank account.
That is FAR more important in the scheme of life!! Way to go!
Proud to know you,
Chester
I fully agree-Bob is a rare exception to the case ;-))
then but, about 6 months after I resigned-the State gave everybody across the board-a $10,000 a year raise. I might have stayed if we had been given that raise a year or so earlier.
Out here in California, everybody in the higher levels of Government have
been getting these $10,000 raises pretty regular, to where the Government employees are making more than the private sector. Gives one the reason why the state is so broke.
But to get this back on topic, even the actor Clint Eastwood worked as a city Mayor. 
Chester
I have heard a lot lately about Californias woes. I think you all are probably getting taxed out of your homes to pay for all of their spending.
Speaking of Clint-just watched The Outlaw Josey Wales for the 3rd time this week. A local station seems to have a fix of somekind on that movie and Clint Eastwood. It's OK but I have not seen any local station play any of Dukes movies-which is irritating in the least. >:-((
