Alternate Best Actor 1971: Clint Eastwood in The Beguiled

Clint Eastwood did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Corporal John McBurney in The Beguiled. 

The Beguiled is a brilliant film about a wounded Union soldier being taken in by an all-girls school of southern women during the civil war. 

This film is a marked departure for both director Don Siegel and frequent collaborator Clint Eastwood, known for hard-edged thrillers like their other film later in 1971 Dirty Harry. Where Dirty Harry played into Clint Eastwood's known strengths, quite effectively at that, The Beguiled considers his then established presence, however, doesn't abide by it. What Eastwood here actually is more than anything this representation of masculinity in a most potent form, which is befitting to the time where Eastwood was pretty much seen as a primary badass style hero from the late '60s on. There is a marked difference however in the way we are first introduced to Corporal McBurney, a wounded Union soldier seeking help from a southern schoolgirl. Eastwood portrays the weakness of the wounded man pleading for help with desperate urgency, not some ease of a man dismissing a wound. He rather is controlled by it as he comes across the girl. Within this moment though we will see the Eastwood presence, however itself, not quite the expectation. This is to keep the girl quiet while a southern patrol lurks, McBurney kisses her, his first action of many that will define the man. Eastwood himself evokes his more traditional leading man charm at the moment, however, this itself is subverted as the target here is a prepubescent girl. 

McBurney is taken in by the school where he catches the eye of all including the headmistress Ms. Martha Farnsworth (Geraldine Page), her virginal assistant Edwina (Elizabeth Hartman), lustful student Carol(Jo Ann Harris), and even the little girl he initially kissed Amy. Eastwood's performance fits into a kind of fascinating place as what exactly McBurney is doing in many ways is more enigmatic than the rest of the character. We learn about the women, many times through literal internal monologue, but this is not present for McBurney. Rather McBurney's nature is told to us by himself which is often contradicted by flashbacks that are truer to his nature. In turn, what Eastwood presents is initially seemingly the ideal Eastwood to each of these women. Eastwood is terrific in crafting really what is McBurney's manipulations per woman at the school. This as to Ms. Farnsworth he gives her a smile and an affable manner after initial suspicions. He presents himself as a good man, whereas Eastwood with a quiet passion speaks of trying to help wounded confederates and the shame of their destroyed farmlands, this is undercut by flashbacks with McBurney as he kills all southern soldiers and burning the lands without hesitation. With Carol, he goes straight with a smile of pure lust as he doesn't dissuade her obvious urges, strongly against Edwina where Eastwood delivers the aggression in the lust, while also speaking false statements of a more sincere relationship.

Eastwood each in a way plays each seduction slightly different yet all of them are also kind of the same. This as he accentuates different sides of himself, speaks as the nobleman with Farnsworth, the lover with Carol, and the husband with Carol. Eastwood articulately this through slight adjustment in delivery of each, however, the similarity of all is this sense of manipulation in his performance. This being in all of them the quiet sense of joy in all three. Eastwood shows that McBurney knows what he's doing and has no shame in any of them. Honestly the most authentic he is with Amy, where Eastwood, despite the first scene with her, smiles towards her a slightly more paternal grace that doesn't feel completely false if still, the man is manipulating. Eastwood is fascinating here because in this performance we have much ambiguity, though not the way we're used to with Eastwood. This as Eastwood never lets us know if really there is any actual goodness in McBurney, rather what may seem more genuine and what may seem is not. Where he does deliver a lack of ambiguity is that McBurney is active in his manipulations, and we see here Eastwood turn on the charm, particularly in the first dinner table scene. Eastwood presents with a smile and bright ease his inviting manner to each of the women at the table, and while we never know what McBurney truly feels about any of them, he does let us know in this clear presentation, that McBurney knows what he is doing to each of them. 

 

Eastwood shows this sort of smooth control however with this unnerving duplicitous nature here. The one person he does not convince is the slave of the school Hallie (Mae Mercer). A great character removed from the remake, despite being a terrific character and showing truth to the period. Of course when a filmmaker removes a character because it means the main women in this story won't be "role models" that filmmaker must have read the wrong story, as no one in the entire story should be looked at as a role model, except to maybe some extent Hallie, the character removed. Now apologies for the digression, but there is a point to all of this. This as Hallie is the one character who makes known her suspicions of McBurney and speaks directly to him, and speaks her mind towards his despicable behavior. Eastwood reactions with Mercer are great as their undercurrent isn't lust for one another rather there is this fantastic combination of intense suspicion but also this kind of understanding that both have a greater awareness of the situation than anyone else in the school. These scenes are incredibly dynamic within both performances and they stand out against what we see between McBurney and the rest of the school. 

It is then in a way waiting for the sword to fall, or here the man to fall, where McBurney's choice for a late night rendezvous leads him to be injured by Edwina followed by his leg being permanently amputated by Farnsworth. Eastwood is amazing in his first scene awakening as the viciousness of his performance but also the genuine reaction of horror in the moment is fantastic. We get Eastwood at his intense best here but reworked towards something more vulnerable and desperate than usual. He's truly in pain as he tears at the woman, however even in his voice there is a terror within himself as he spews his hatred towards them. Eastwood is unlike you've seen him before, and really most of the time afterwards, in the following scenes as he tries to take over the school by stealing their few weapons and threatening all the women. Eastwood is great because he neither plays it as badass Eastwood nor does he play it as an overt villain. He rather presents it as this raw desperation and intensity. He presents McBurney as not really knowing what to do exactly other than to threaten. There is a sense of fear even in his verbal attacks, and random acts of violence, such as killing Amy's pet turtle. The switch from blithely killing the animal to apologizing to Amy, Eastwood shows a man really just going by the moment in a desperate state that turns into a most dangerous state. Eastwood wields the danger not with a precise aim, rather that of a blunt instrument in just such a messy way at all the women. This naturally in a way finding calm when Edwina forgives him and expresses her love for him. Eastwood's performance isn't that of creating some instant reform in McBurney, rather playing it as the man finding some kind of calm in her offer which he turn states in the next dinner with the school. Unfortunately this the same dinner where the rest of the women conspired to murder him via poison mushrooms. Eastwood is once again great by showing such a different side of his presence in first his initial gentleness then his complete gripping fear at the moment of realization when it is too late. Eastwood here never plays the hero, he plays just a man, and is tremendous here by playing just a man with many flaws. Where the remakes ending is rather hollow, this one is deeply unsettling and heartbreaking in a fascinating way. This as there are no heroes in this version, just about everyone is flawed, and the tragedy comes from everyone giving into these flaws rather than overcoming them. What we see in the end is the minor potential in both McBurney and Edwina, in Hartman and Eastwood little tender moment before the end, and that potential is destroyed. In turn the ending is truly haunting, not because a good man was killed, he was not killed, but because hate and distrust just ended in a betrayal and loss for really everyone. The film itself being a portrait of the complex state of humanity without easy choices or answers. Eastwood's work is an essential facet of this portrait, this as the man who allows himself to be everything to everyone, while he himself is a weak foolish sinner, defined by his indulgences and his flaws. Eastwood hides none of it, granting a greater impact in revealing in his work so much more to this man of the past than a cool glare or a sly smile.