mkk41
US Veteran
One would think that official word from the movies director , John Milius , that it was indeed a .44 magnum that by the way he owns , would put these rumors to rest once and for all.
Dirty Harry Model 29
- Thread starter stevenorlando
- Start date
One would think that official word from the movies director , John Milius , that it was indeed a .44 magnum that by the way he owns , would put these rumors to rest once and for all.
Oh goodie! Another Dirty Harry 44 magnum thread! Please...did anybody read post # 12? Been a member of this forum 4 years and this has come up at least every two months.
Doesn't anybody know that they used a model 19 because Clint Eastwood is only 5' 6" and the 19 was more proportional to his size?
Hold on, that last sentence was only to see if you were paying attention! It was a model 29 everybody. Not a 19/25/57. There are pictures in this thread of real people holding the real gun. They have them in museums. That's good enough for me.
Doesn't anybody know that they used a model 19 because Clint Eastwood is only 5' 6" and the 19 was more proportional to his size?
Hold on, that last sentence was only to see if you were paying attention! It was a model 29 everybody. Not a 19/25/57. There are pictures in this thread of real people holding the real gun. They have them in museums. That's good enough for me.
Last edited:
jj2am44
Member
Supposedly Frank Sinatra had hurt his hand filming his last picture-don't know what it was- and could not hold onto the 44.
You can't find it, Ernie! Hal Holbrook made you throw it out the car window!
Jack
I Asked S&W Historian Roy Jenks ...
A few years ago I e-mailed Roy Jenks - the longtime S&W historian - about the first Dirty Harry movie, since I'd read so much about it being a .41 mag, the barrel length, and so on.
He replied that Clint did sometimes hold a .44 mag with the 8 3/8" barrel in the movie for the look of it, but I've watched Dirty Harry several times and I can never spot it!
Regarding John Milius, in his autobiography with Richard Schickel, Eastwood says he doesn't remember Milius being involved with the movie at all and that he certainly doesn't remember being a part of giving him a Model 29, although Warner Bros certainly could have.
And it was a Model 29-2 with a 6 1/2" barrel, although a buddy of mine swore when the movie came out that it was a 4", but that had to be due to the camera angle in the bank robbery scene when Harry first utters his, "I know what you're thinkin' ..." The barrel does look short from that upward angle!
But Roy Jenks said it was always a .44 mag; never the .41.
A few years ago I e-mailed Roy Jenks - the longtime S&W historian - about the first Dirty Harry movie, since I'd read so much about it being a .41 mag, the barrel length, and so on.
He replied that Clint did sometimes hold a .44 mag with the 8 3/8" barrel in the movie for the look of it, but I've watched Dirty Harry several times and I can never spot it!
Regarding John Milius, in his autobiography with Richard Schickel, Eastwood says he doesn't remember Milius being involved with the movie at all and that he certainly doesn't remember being a part of giving him a Model 29, although Warner Bros certainly could have.
And it was a Model 29-2 with a 6 1/2" barrel, although a buddy of mine swore when the movie came out that it was a 4", but that had to be due to the camera angle in the bank robbery scene when Harry first utters his, "I know what you're thinkin' ..." The barrel does look short from that upward angle!
But Roy Jenks said it was always a .44 mag; never the .41.
Sorry - wrongo!
The director of Dirty Harry was Don Siegel; not John Milius. Milius was a screenwriter who supposedly did a lot of work on the script but got no screen credit. According to the story, this was why he later was given the .44 by Warner Bros - in appreciation. I say "supposedly" because, as I said in a different post, Eastwood said in his autobiography with Richard Schickel that he did not remember Milius having anything to do with the first Dirty Harry movie ...
And a little-know tibdbit is that Clint actually directed the sequence where Harry goes up on the fire ladder to talk down the suicide jumper. I've also read where Siegel was always urging Clint to try directing and that it was because of this urging that Clint directed Play Misty - in which Siegel played the part of the bartender. Story goes that Clint wanted Siegel around for emotional support on Clint's first project (and maybe to get some pointers, too?).
The director of Dirty Harry was Don Siegel; not John Milius. Milius was a screenwriter who supposedly did a lot of work on the script but got no screen credit. According to the story, this was why he later was given the .44 by Warner Bros - in appreciation. I say "supposedly" because, as I said in a different post, Eastwood said in his autobiography with Richard Schickel that he did not remember Milius having anything to do with the first Dirty Harry movie ...
And a little-know tibdbit is that Clint actually directed the sequence where Harry goes up on the fire ladder to talk down the suicide jumper. I've also read where Siegel was always urging Clint to try directing and that it was because of this urging that Clint directed Play Misty - in which Siegel played the part of the bartender. Story goes that Clint wanted Siegel around for emotional support on Clint's first project (and maybe to get some pointers, too?).
There was a rubber model made, this is also in the NRA museum.
An interview with the NRA Museum curator on Dirty Harry and Josey Wales movie guns: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52Zg6wnFhXg
153
Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2009
- Messages
- 912
- Reaction score
- 2,399
A few years back I attended the NRA Convention in Reno, NV. While browsing in the Colt booth I turned around and found John Milius standing behind me. I introduced myself and took the opportunity to ask him about some of his film work, including the casting of Frank Sinatra as "Dirty Harry".
Milius related that he was asked to meet with Sinatra regards the role, and brought with him the .44 Magnum. Soon after they sat down Sinatra asked to see the "gat". Milius handed over the .44, and Sinatra gave it a heft. Milius said that this was shortly after Sinatra had surgery on his right hand, the scars were very apparent. Their meeting was not very long and by the time Milius returned home Sinatra had already called back and declined the project.
Milius related that he was asked to meet with Sinatra regards the role, and brought with him the .44 Magnum. Soon after they sat down Sinatra asked to see the "gat". Milius handed over the .44, and Sinatra gave it a heft. Milius said that this was shortly after Sinatra had surgery on his right hand, the scars were very apparent. Their meeting was not very long and by the time Milius returned home Sinatra had already called back and declined the project.
I have heard the same thing about certain scenes. In the scene where they are chasing the man with the suitcase, right before Harry goes down an alley he draws his gun. Watch that scene and see if you think the gun has a longer barrel. The barrel does look longer or shorter depending on the camera angle and zoom. But at the alley scene, I don't think camera effects are the reason the barrel looks longer.
rdcl
Member
I know which scene you speak of......and for a brief instant the gun actually DOES look like an 8 3/8th" version. The scene is just as Harry peeks around a corner, and the guns shadow cast upon the wall just an instant before we see the gun itself......and when we see the gun it clearly looks to me like the 8" version.
Russ
BigBill
Absent Comrade
If you watch the movie closely they switch barrel lengths in the different scenes so the N frame S&W looks bigger. They used the 8 3/8" and the 6 1/2" in the movies thats jollywood. Look closely when the S&W N frame is on an angle in harry's hands.
If they used the M57 thats ok with me too I like all the S&W N Farme Revolvers.
If they used the M57 thats ok with me too I like all the S&W N Farme Revolvers.
Attachments
Last edited:
I saw John Milius last wkend. at the Safari Club show in Reno, ran into him at the S&W display. Unfortunately, he showed evidence of a stroke, w/ some mild speech impediment and right hand weakness. He had trouble pulling the trigger on the 29 on display, couldn't pull it through DA. But he and the gentleman with him confirmed the above accounts of wanting the 4", couldn't get them, used 6 1/2 inchers. An honor to meet him, he enjoyed the memories and recounting them to me. I lived in SF when these movies came out, so I ended up with a dark green "Bullitt" Mustang and later my two 29-2s. Great to look at and to shoot.
AkRay
Member
In addition to Milius saying they used a 6" gun in this clip instead of a 6.5", Milius also wrote that Harry carried "a light Special. With this size gun it gives me more control." That line in Magnum Force caused a lot of grief for all concerned.
NFrameFred
Member
He didn't write it that way - Clint muffed the line, got the words put of sequence and at the time they didn't see it as grievous enough to re-shoot the scene. And yes, that is one of the most twisted things all the "experts" seize on and want to argue about trying to turn the whole concept of "Dirty Harry" using a 44 magnum into something it wasn't.
The whole point of that exchange was the department competition and comparing what he shot in the match to the others using 357's with wadcutters, not what they carrying on the street.
All the above and more: Even with the muffed line, Harry wasn't talking about the gun anyway. He was talking about the load he was shooting at the range. That is what the rookie asked about. It's not even a reference to the ammo he was using on the street. So people are making something out of less than nothing when they use this scene to argue the gun is not a Model 29.
Jack
I was thinking about this while getting my morning coffee and feeding the cats. What is the practical difference between "a light Special load" and "a special light load" anyway? Both are ways of describing a reduced power load in the .44 Magnum. The only possible difference I can think of is that the former might imply that you are using .44 Special cases rather than simply less powder (and maybe a different bullet) in the Magnum case. Either way, it is just a lighter load for the .44 Magnum revolver to shoot. This would in no way imply the use of a different gun - unless someone wants to say it was a Model of 1950/Model 24, which I don't think anyone has ever suggested!
If I was Ted Post, and I had just gotten a good take on that scene, I would not have reshot it either. It simply doesn't make any difference, although the scripted line would arguably have been better. Re-takes cost money and this one just wouldn't have been worth it.
(Fodder for the book, NFrameFred?)
Jack
If I was Ted Post, and I had just gotten a good take on that scene, I would not have reshot it either. It simply doesn't make any difference, although the scripted line would arguably have been better. Re-takes cost money and this one just wouldn't have been worth it.
(Fodder for the book, NFrameFred?)
Jack
153
Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2009
- Messages
- 912
- Reaction score
- 2,399
Sorry to hear Milius may have suffered a stroke. Hope he fully recovers!
If you want to see the first movie (I think) that features a .44 Magnum Model 29, try "Point Blank" made in 1967, it features a 4" model - just what Harry wanted but couldn't get. Lee Marvin is the star and he handles the magnum just fine.
