Clint Eastwood vs. John Wayne

Help Support CattleToday:

So different. I don't think anyone in the era of Hollywood was more natural than John Wayne. John Wayne was John Wayne. I have to go with John Wayne. I think I appreciated how natural John Wayne was when Jeff Bridges who I think is as good an actor as there is today (The Big Lebowski) tried to do True Grit. No one can duplicate John Wayne. No one can crawl into his skin and that is what it would take. I got to go with John Wayne and I am a big, big Clint Eastwood fan. I named my son Clint Cody....
 
s1316.photobucket.com/user/Jody_Beam/media/image_zps71582830.jpg.html]
image_zps71582830.jpg
[/URL]
 
John Wayne all day. Pale Rider, Unforgiven, and outlaw Josey wales are the only three Clint Eastwood westerns I like. The rest are kind goofy and almost gothic. Pale Rider pulls that stunt a little, but I like it.
 
Can't really compare the two from different era's really and the movies grew so much from the sixgun that fired all day to being historically correct on the weapon's.
John Wayne was of the Gene Autry and Roy Roger's generation and took the western up a quite a few notches from the singing cowboy's.
Clint Eastwood was Generation behind and had an advantage of the advances in the film industry.
Eastwood was a B class actor during the spagetti western's .

IMO starting dead even in the same era I think Wayne might have edged him out.
Eastwood got better script's if they had produced in the USA.
 
I hate to choose because I like both of them but I would pick John Wayne over Clint Eastwood.
 
I will go with Eastwood. To me he is/was a lot less contrived.
He is a lot more versatile!
 
I don't recall any John Wayne movie that had objectionable language or content. He was one that you could take your wife and kids to and not be subjected to offensive language or expletive sexual content. I wish I could say the same about Clint Eastwood as I do like some of his movies.

I too believe in Hope Eternal
 
Clint Eastwood vs John Wayne ????? In what manner?

A fist fight I am taking John Wayne. I believe that he was the bigger and strong of the two.

In a gun fight I am taking Clint. He just seems quicker and meaner.

A knife fight? It is a toss up. John would try to punch Clint who would try to go for a gun....... if John lands the punch he wins. If Clint gets ahold of the gun he wins.

At handling cattle? I know that yelling, screaming and shooting your pistol in the air doesn't work so I don't think I would want either one of them around when I was working cows.

As actors? What they really do for a living. I enjoy the work both of them have done. But I think that Clint has play a wider spectrum of roles in his acting career and has done a better job of that.
 
Dave":2kyy6ruf said:
Clint Eastwood vs John Wayne ????? In what manner?

A fist fight I am taking John Wayne. I believe that he was the bigger and strong of the two.In a gun fight I am taking Clint. He just seems quicker and meaner.

A knife fight? It is a toss up. John would try to punch Clint who would try to go for a gun....... if John lands the punch he wins. If Clint gets ahold of the gun he wins.

At handling cattle? I know that yelling, screaming and shooting your pistol in the air doesn't work so I don't think I would want either one of them around when I was working cows.

As actors? What they really do for a living. I enjoy the work both of them have done. But I think that Clint has play a wider spectrum of roles in his acting career and has done a better job of that.
well pilgram somebody ought to teach you a lesson :cowboy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifRKu1W1fXQ
 
For a single movie I'll take Eastwood - Josey Wales
For an overall body of work I'll take the Duke.
 
3waycross":3rkix2rh said:
I will go with Eastwood. To me he is/was a lot less contrived.
He is a lot more versatile!
1. Think about this 3way. Sit Clint down at a table with a patch over his eye playing cards with a chinaman and think how silly he would be. Wayne did that in True Grit and was endearing and funny at that.

2. Put Clint with Robert Mitchum in El Dorado and have him put a Winchester over his shoulder and swagger down the street. He would look silly.

You can go on and on. Think about Searchers. The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, Red River etc. Eastwood is not more versatile, he is less versatile in my opinion.

IMPORTANT: Whayne could interact with another actor. Eastwood cannot. Eastwood can confront or intimidate, etc. That is what made him. But in no role I can remember could he interact. For example, Whayne could play with a sidekick like Walter Brennan and not seem goofy. When Eastwood plays it has to be as a dominant independant. He has not skill to seem real when he really has to act. Like someone said, he had good scripts, but they are basically all the same. A dominant, independant force. He never was able to share the screen. He tried, i.e., what ever that goofy movie was with Burt Reynolds. And in the Oranutang movies he had a side kick of sorts but those could not be compared to Whaynes numerous side kicks like Walter Brennan, etc.

Think about Eastwood in White Hunter, Black heart trying to be John Huston. As Bigfort said he looked goofy. And I loved those spagetti movies when they came out and I saw them the first time in a theater. But I cannot even sit for 5 minutes on one now. Like Bigfoot, they are so goofy.

I like Hang Em High, Wales, Unforgiven. Other than that t is hard to watch Eastwood reruns. Wayne on the other hand, I can still watch a lot of them.
 
I'm with the Indian "Good party but no whisky we go home" :drink:

Wayne cared about fairness Eastwood had a mean streak, Man for man Wayne portrayed more of the ideals most would like to live up to.
 
This thread might become like polled vs. Horned Hereford thread. I like John Wayne and respect what he stood for, but his movies were kinda hokey to a degree. Clint Eastwood's characters usually portrayed the reality of human nature, but like Caustic said, both actors represented different eras.
 

Latest posts

Top