MovieChat Forums > McQ (1974) Discussion > John Wayne's version of Dirty Harry

John Wayne's version of Dirty Harry

posted 21 years ago by dmittelberg
36 replies | jump to latest

After passing up the oppurtunity to play Dirty Harry in 1971, John Wayne had another chance to play a detective. This time in 1974 as McQ. Here he is bent on revenge as a cop who goes after the men that killed his partner who we learn early on in the film was a dirty cop. Much to the Duke's dismay he does not learn this for some time. The film's main bad guy was played by Al Lettieri who made a name of playing the heavy in other films of the 70's such as The Geteway (with Steve McQueen), Mr. Majestyk (with Charles Bronson), and his best known character as one of many bad guys in The Godfather. He does a great job as ever as the bad guy, but it is The Duke's character of the detective that takes center stage here. Crawling through the seedy sides of Seattle in bars & dance clubs and even offering cocaine to an informant looking for his partners killer. There is a car chase scene on the beaches of Seattle at the end that is really cool. But to see The Duke using a smaller version on an UZI makes it for me worth watching every once in awhile. I give it 3 1/2 out of 5 stars.

[–] 21 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cheval52 19 years ago

It was a great movie but the final scene was shot along
the Pacific coast at a place called Ocean Shores, so I
have been told.

Patrick of Seattle

[–] hi_seas46 17 years ago

The final scenes were shot at Pacific Beach and Moclips. I was stationed at the Naval Facility in July 1974 after the shooting was completed. The access to the beach, where the gun play and car chase started, is called Analyde Gap and runs under the Northern Pacific railroad trestle. The trestle has since been removed. The gap is at the north end of the naval base between Pacific Beach and Moclips. You can see an old photo at the following website:
< http://www.moclips.org/regions/pb/D2/pages/47_jpg_jpg.htm >

The last scene where John Wayne says, "There's a bar over there. Let's get a drink" was on Pacific Ave at the Moclips beach approach.

A scene during the car chase shows a car hitting one of the pilings on the beach in front of what was the Moclips Beach Hotel. A fake piling was placed where the remaining pilings were located. Today, all that’s left of the original pilings is about 4 inches of ONE piling, the rest are buried in tons of sand.

They did use some stretches of beach on the Quinault Indian Reservation heading toward (USCG) Point Grenville and Taholah. Less chance of the public getting in the way.

My wife and I celebrated our 1979 honeymoon at the Ocean Crest Resort in the vicinity. < http://www.oceancrestresort.com/index.html >

A house in Pacific Beach now owned by Maggie Alexander was also used in the filming.

Pacific Beach is about 16 miles north of Ocean Shores.

Ken in Puyallup

[–] filmmakeracf 19 years ago

This was an obvious 'Bullitt' wannabe!!! The title/charachter's name. McQ!!! The fact that he drove a hot rod car made up to look like a close relative of McQeen's car from 'Bullitt'!?!?! The car chase with low angles and the cars going over many bumps with hightened sound effects of the motor from Wayne's car!!! Brutally obvious ' Bullitt'/ 'Dirty Harry' rip off. A low point for Sturgess as a director...The Duke was good at least.

A better moviealong these lines with Wayne is Brannigan. That is a pretty good police actioner...more fitting to Wayne's style.

[–] BluePlateSpecialA13 19 years ago

I also thought it was a 'Bullitt' rip-off.

It was just wierd seeing Marion (Duke) in a car case. And he seemed so uncomfortable behind the wheel!

'Brewster McCloud', though...that chase scene was probably equal parts 'Bullitt' parody and 'Bullitt' tribute.

Better than that Jack Lord 'Bullit' wannabe, though.

Seriously, I didn't hate this movie, I just thought it was wrong for the Duke.

"I'm just the guy who does the thing."
Toby Ziegler--The West Wing

[–] heyjohnny40 17 years ago

Say what tou want, but with the Duke and Sturges you still get solid entertainment. This is just one of those movies that provides solid entertainment from performers that hollywood to me just will never have again.( Duke, Albert, Sturges). Just sit back and enjoy this movie for some good action and entertainment.

[–] litmustest-648-564237 8 years ago

I'll take this over Dirty Harry, at least MCQ gets better every time you see it. Dirty Harry I would rate higher but it has below average final section, if they would have had chase like Bullitt...

[–] nickm2 8 years ago

And McQ was a bit more subtle with it's villains. Sure Andy Robinson was great a Scorpio, but the crooked cops & mobsters seem to be an unconventional twist.

Why can't you wretched prey creatures understand that the Universe doesn't owe you anything!?

[–] crazydave682000 19 years ago

It was MAC-10 not an UZI.

[–] hotknifethrubutter 18 years ago

The 'Weapon' was an "Ingram' 9MM automatic.

[–] twell76 18 years ago

It was actually an AK-47. It pisses me off to see all of you novices that think you know guns (but really have no idea).

[–] terryrterry 18 years ago

It was an Ingram. They say the name in the movie.

Yeah, this is his Bullitt copy. Take a cowboy, make him a cop, put him in a souped up dark green car, with a convoluted script that makes sense at the end. Too bad it's second rate. Bullitt chased a badass black charger, while McQ chased a laundry van. The machine gun was the coolest thing about the movie.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ga526 17 years ago

That roll is called a cannon roll. A piece of 12 or 14 inch thick walled pipe is welded to the frame in the trunk. It's maybe 2 feet long and has one end closed like a cannon, the open end faces the ground maybe 6 inches away. A piece of telephone pole is cut to fit the inside of the cannon leaving enough room for a large explosive charge and a couple feet of beefy chain, one end of which is welded to the bottom of the cannon, the other end is attached to the pole by means of a piece of quarter inch thick by 3 inch wide strap iron that wraps the post once and is welded end to end and has spikes driven through holes a couple inches apart all the way around. At the appropiate time the driver by a hard wired switch or the effects coordinator by remote sets off the charge, firing the pole directly at the ground. Properly done it's possible for the car to turn 720 degrees or more without touching the ground. Back in the 70s and 80s this gag was a mainstay of a lot of movies and tv shows where the point seemed to be to destroy as many cars as possible in an hour or two. It was once done on Vega$ with a rented Pontiac with less than a thousand miles on it. Pretty good era to be a Teamster on a movie set.I would've loved to have been on this one.

[–] hotknifethrubutter 18 years ago

The 'Weapon' used was an Ingram 9mm Automatic (it was used by the S.P.D. Special Riot Unit i.e. pre 'SWAT'). The 'troll' who claims it was an AK-47, and refers to it as a 'gun' (obviously not a veteran !); must be a 'Chuck Norris' fan.

[–] mmjd01 13 years ago

"It was actually an AK-47. It pisses me off to see all of you novices that think you know guns (but really have no idea)."

At 105:40 into the movie the weapon mentioned is actually an Ingram 9mm.
AK's are 7.62x39.

Maybe it's you that needs an education. Be sure of your facts before you try and dig the speck out of someone elses eye---turd!

[–] worthkeeter 12 years ago

It was an Ingram 9mm made by Military Armaments Corporation, maker of the Mac 10. I've used them in many films and I'm very familiar with them.

[–] URBANCOW2001 18 years ago

Clearly Wayne was trying to keep up with the young talent of the time like Eastwood and McQueen. "McQ" is clearly mean't for a younger actor; Wayne really seemed out of his element in this film.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ga526 17 years ago

If he'd retired after Rio Lobo, there'd be no Shootist, and that would just be wrong.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] knight_hawk2002 17 years ago

I disagree the Cowboys was excellent and the Shootist superb.

I also enjoyed Big Jake, Brannigan and even McQ.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ediaz8 17 years ago

He made this film with "Dirty Harry" in mind. He obviously was trying too hard to be just as good as "Dirty Harry", you can notice by his mannerisms, trying to come up with unique and original lines, pretty much trying to do anything Clint Eastwood would do. I'm sure that if he would've done "Dirty Harry", his acting would've been different than his actng from "McQ" as he wouldn't have had any competition or pressure to measure up to a popular movie. He was waaay too old to be a convincing menacing cop (he was 67 at that time, he should've been loooong retired). I couldn't see him in a cop movie, he was more made for Westerns. Good time killer though.

[–] Misanthropic_Humanist 17 years ago

No, no, no!

He was using an M-60!

"There's no point in being grown-up if you can't act childish, sometimes." - The Doctor (Tom Baker)

[–] tdickson 17 years ago

Naah, it was a WWI German "Big Bertha" artillery piece. The Duke was so big he made it look like a handgun.

Seriously, the cannon used to flip the car became known as the "Needham Cannon" after Hal Needham. I was surprised to see that Hal wasn't even credited on this film. It must have been one of his first. Later on, he was second unit director on a few films and even directed some.

The Needham Cannon was recently used in "Casino Royale." That Aston Martin just wouldn't flip without it.

[–] dalldorfw 15 years ago

It was like Dirty Harry, except nothing happens

[–] melsen 14 years ago

But it's a good looking film at least, and a much better cinematic style than DH.

[–] jeff_the_dj 13 years ago

John Wayne did not pass up the opportunity to play Dirty Harry... Infact he lobbied hard for it but the producers decided against it since he was 64 at the time and decided that the role needed a younger actor, which went to Clint Eastwood.

We can DO IT ALLLL DAY LONG, (We'll have to pay more for the light bill if we do it at night!)

[–] JSouth1 11 years ago

As for the "Needham cannon" if you look HARD_-you can see the anchor chain on rear of the car that is rolled as it comes to a rest after rolling several times. The chain flips down and bounces on the ground, just before the scene changes to Wayne and the other car.

[–] nutsberryfarm 10 years ago

it's like his brother, ron harry.

We have a pool and a pond...pond be good for you.

[–] jmichael3387 10 years ago

Check the Dirty Harry trivia on IMDB. The writers of Dirty Harry wrote the script with John Wayne in mind to play the lead. Wayne was not interested, because he felt the violence was glorified. I mean come on, you should know the story on that by now. McQ was John Wayne's cop movie with a script he could deal with. Like the movie or not, but don't say stupid stuff like John Wayne or McQ is a Dirty Harry wannabe. It's a cop movie with some good action....but it's a different type of movie. Most people these days like glorified violence, so of course Dirty Harry is more popular. But show respect to Wayne. Personally I loved McQ. I liked seeing Wayne in that Trans Am, in the seedy parts of town, etc. And he's still tough as nails. I like it better than Brannigan. Brannigan is good, except for the corny fight scene in the bar.

What a joke for that other guy to say John Wayne was trying to keep up with Eastwood and McQueen. I like them both, but come on, there is only ONE John Wayne. Those guys aspire to be like Wayne. There's photos of Steve McQueen at a party drooling all over Wayne. Can't say I blame him. King Of Cool acting like a teenage girl when he's near his idol. Do a Google image search of 'steve mcqueen john wayne' to see the pics.

[–] ccoombs-1 10 years ago

There is only one John Wayne, but there is only one Steve McQueen and there is only one Clint Eastwood. All three are as equally 'iconic'

I love John Wayne but face it, 'McQ' was trying to cash in on the new wave of cop movies like Bullit and 'Dirty Harry' (and maybe Bronson's 'The Stone Killer').

I don't think John Wayne was trying to 'keep up with Eastwood' (indeed, in his last movie 'The Shootist' when Wayne refused to shoot a character in the back, director Don Siegel said 'Eastwood would shoot him in the back'. Wayne replied 'I don't care what that kid would do I don't shoot people in the back').

I like 'McQ' (and 'Brannigan'), but it IS a Dirty Harry wannabe. It not a different type it is the SAME type - Tough, gritty, loner cops who buck the system, who nearly quit because of disgust at politics, who defy authority and do things their own way because they ultimately seek justice, with location shooting using the city as a character.

But I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, as long as it is well made with good performances and has some freshness to it. McQ had good location filming and the beach chase was something new. Solid cast, well directed. Some posters say Wayne was too old or the role didn't fit him, but I disagree.

When a genre becomes popular, it is only natural for others to jump on the band wagon.

Now, as for saying that Dirty Harry glorified violence, I disagree. The violence in that film was brutal, often disturbing. (the boy with his face shot off, Scorpio paying to have his face beat, Scorpio kicking Callahan in the head at the cross and getting stabbed in the leg, The cop shot dead in the street at the church, the dead girl being removed from underground, the attack on the liquor store owner (brutal), slapping the kids in the bus (particularly disturbing).

Take two famous scenes.

1) Harry stepping on Scorpio's wound in the stadium. The camera pulls back as the scene and Scorpio's screams fade into fog. That's not glorified. That is disturbing.

2) The ending. Harry quick-shoots Scorpio in the shoulder Scorpio is gasping, Callahan shoots him and he is shown bloody, dead, floating in the water. Even though this is the climax, the end of the killer, the scene plays downbeat because of Eastwood's intensity and rage, and finally disgust as he throws his badge away.

I don't think there is any glorified violence in Dirty Harry. Even the bank robbery scene where he first delivers the line, the shoot out is underscored with the alarm bell and screams of a woman. Though the scene ends with the amusing (but character establishing) bluff, that is Harry NOT shooting the perp.

So I think McQ is enjoyable, even if it is following the footsteps of Bullit and Dirty Harry

[–] joekiddlouischama 10 years ago

There is only one John Wayne, but there is only one Steve McQueen and there is only one Clint Eastwood. All three are as equally 'iconic'

I love John Wayne but face it, 'McQ' was trying to cash in on the new wave of cop movies like Bullit and 'Dirty Harry' (and maybe Bronson's 'The Stone Killer').

I don't think John Wayne was trying to 'keep up with Eastwood' (indeed, in his last movie 'The Shootist' when Wayne refused to shoot a character in the back, director Don Siegel said 'Eastwood would shoot him in the back'. Wayne replied 'I don't care what that kid would do I don't shoot people in the back').

I like 'McQ' (and 'Brannigan'), but it IS a Dirty Harry wannabe. It not a different type it is the SAME type - Tough, gritty, loner cops who buck the system, who nearly quit because of disgust at politics, who defy authority and do things their own way because they ultimately seek justice, with location shooting using the city as a character.

But I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, as long as it is well made with good performances and has some freshness to it. McQ had good location filming and the beach chase was something new. Solid cast, well directed. Some posters say Wayne was too old or the role didn't fit him, but I disagree.

When a genre becomes popular, it is only natural for others to jump on the band wagon.

Now, as for saying that Dirty Harry glorified violence, I disagree. The violence in that film was brutal, often disturbing. (the boy with his face shot off, Scorpio paying to have his face beat, Scorpio kicking Callahan in the head at the cross and getting stabbed in the leg, The cop shot dead in the street at the church, the dead girl being removed from underground, the attack on the liquor store owner (brutal), slapping the kids in the bus (particularly disturbing).

Take two famous scenes.

1) Harry stepping on Scorpio's wound in the stadium. The camera pulls back as the scene and Scorpio's screams fade into fog. That's not glorified. That is disturbing.

2) The ending. Harry quick-shoots Scorpio in the shoulder Scorpio is gasping, Callahan shoots him and he is shown bloody, dead, floating in the water. Even though this is the climax, the end of the killer, the scene plays downbeat because of Eastwood's intensity and rage, and finally disgust as he throws his badge away.

I don't think there is any glorified violence in Dirty Harry. Even the bank robbery scene where he first delivers the line, the shoot out is underscored with the alarm bell and screams of a woman. Though the scene ends with the amusing (but character establishing) bluff, that is Harry NOT shooting the perp.

So I think McQ is enjoyable, even if it is following the footsteps of Bullit and Dirty Harry

... excellent post; I concur with every point.

The violence in Dirty Harry is indeed brutal, chilling, and disturbingly realistic. I don't see how any reasonable person could view the film and think that violence is glorious, grand, or fun. The film might have (somewhat inadvertently) glorified the .44 Magnum, but that's more a matter of movie hero (or antihero, in this case) cool and panache, as opposed to the actual violence itself, which is almost shocking. As Eastwood said years later in the late 1980s, the new breed of cop movies (Lethal Weapon, Die Hard) made films such as Dirty Harry seem like documentaries.

McQ's best quality really is that Seattle location shooting. It provides the film with a fresh milieu and a different look and feel for a movie that would otherwise lack curiosity value (aside from the novelty of Wayne playing a cop).

[–] litmustest-648-564237 9 years ago

I like it better than Dirty Harry because it has a much more exciting finale, Dirty Harry is a classic until the last 15 minutes which are a huge letdown. Some people are harsh critics of this film, but I believe it improves with each viewing (it is far superior to the mediocre Brannigan)

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]