If you are a fan of Clint Eastwood in practically anything he stars in, then you get a good overall gist of his general character. Kind of old, always cranky, and at least at some point in the movie, someone is going to die…or get hurt at the very least. So for the most part, the man is rather predictable for his roles, and it seems with every movie comes a deeper and groggier voice. That’s why when I saw his 1989 action flick “Pink Cadillac”, I was surprised to see some of his major key characteristics blended with something I have never seen from him before…his idea of range.
This time around, Eastwood plays a bounty hunter named Tommy Nowak. Nowak is not your typical bounty hunter either. He specializes on putting on guises and costumes, creating a character to blend into the current circumstance. That’s right, for once Eastwood is not just…Eastwood in a movie, he does voices, characters, puts on flashy costumes…it’s a riot. When he gets his latest assignment, he has no idea what he is in for. You see Lou Ann McGuinn (Bernadette Peters) is accused of running away while on bail. She takes her husband’s pink Cadillac, and goes to Vegas to paint the town red. Unbeknownst to her (at first), but her husband’s counterfeit money is in the trunk of the car. A dangerous white supremacist group is out for blood…and money. So it is up to Nowak to save the day. Typical for Eastwood, can he handle it?
At the heart of everything, the story is very simple to understand. A bounty hunter is going after someone that needs his help for whatever reason, and there is just more than meets the eye with her case. The story has what it takes to be solid, but it just isn’t. First of all, because the movie has a simple idea and foundation, did it really need to be two hours? Not really, so the extra stuff felt like filler, slow, and boring. It was cool to see Eastwood play different characters, but in the end it just felt like Dirty Harry trying to impersonate someone else. Second of all, why do these old men like Eastwood have to have these young floosy women as love interests in their movies? Do they think it really helps out their on-screen chemistry? It doesn’t, it is just weird because he could be their father in almost every film.
Before I forget, this film was on the list of Jim Carrey movies I was going through, which is interesting because never would I have thought Jim Carrey would have had roles in not one, but two different movies with Clint Eastwood. However, Jim’s role in this is no longer than fifteen seconds long. It was interesting to see his cameo though.
When I think of a typical Clint Eastwood flick, I think of the action that is used in this movie, some fist fights, and some gun fights with no such thing as gore. That’s what I think, almost like a western in that regards. Is the action really all that exciting? No it’s really not, is the story all that gripping, again no. It really isn’t that great of a movie when you take a bigger look at it. Sure it had an inkling of a foundation, but what more did it have? Clint Eastwood, sure, but it just didn’t grasp me like maybe it should have.