Clint Eastwood built his whole legend on being the calm one. The man who never raised his voice, the squint that ended an argument before it started. For 70 years, that was the image America trusted. The quiet professional who showed up, did the job, and went home. >> When you’re on the set, QUIET ON SET, ACTION, YOU KNOW, LET’S GO. CUT.
And Clint isn’t like that at all. He’s just like, “Okay, go.” Uh, so when you’re in a Clint Eastwood movie, you don’t even know the camera’s rolling and you just hear over your shoulder. >> All right, go ahead. >> But that was the screen. Off it, the man behind the camera could make the biggest stars in Hollywood feel like they were in his way.
Seven of them found that out the hard way. Household names, Oscar winners, legends in their own right. Each one pushed back, showed up late, or asked for one more take. And each one learned exactly who was in charge. We’re counting down from the smallest friction to the one that ended up in court. These are the seven actors Clint Eastwood hated the most.
Number seven, Shirley Mlan. In 1970, Shirley Mlan was one of the most powerful women in Hollywood. Four Oscar nominations. A real box office draw. A woman who had spent a decade refusing to be treated as less than the equal of any man she worked with. Clint Eastwood was a different kind of star. Riding the Dollars trilogy, 12 months from Dirty Harry, already replacing John Wayne as the face of the western.
On paper, putting them in one film should have made something great. What it produced, according to the people who were there, was a cold set. The film was two mules for Sister Sarah. >> So, you’re not married? >> Nope. >> Ever been? >> Nope. >> Want to be? >> Nope. >> Don’t you want a woman of your own? What for? >> Share your name, bear your children, be a companion.
>> It was directed by Don Seagull, Eastwood’s closest collaborator, the man who would direct Dirty Harry the very next year. And from the first week of shooting in Mexico, Seagull and Mlan clashed. They fought openly. Seagull found her demanding and difficult, and he said so. The two of them argued over how scenes should be played and how the character should be read, and the tension hung over the production for weeks.
There is one detail that tells you how the power on that set was arranged. Mlan got top billing. Her name came first above Eastwood’s. It was the last time Clint Eastwood took second billing on a film until A Perfect World in 1993. And that film is coming up later on this list for reasons of its own.
Eventually, Seagull and Mlan worked it out in private and the rest of the shoot went smoothly. The film turned out fine, but the friendship a partnership like that is supposed to build never formed. She went on to The Apartment, Terms of Endearment, and Steel Magnolia’s. He went on to everything else.
They never made another film together. Two icons who shared one set one time, then spent 40 years on opposite sides of the same town. Number six, Army Hammer. The year is 2011. The film is Jay Edgar. Army Hammer is 34 years old, and he is playing Clyde Toulson, Jay. Edgar Hoover’s right-hand man.
and the film strongly suggests the love of his life. It is the most demanding role of Hammer’s career to that point. It covers decades of a man’s life. It asks for physical transformation and a level of emotional control that most actors need weeks of takes to find. >> Um, what kind of research did you do to find out about Clyde? >> Tons.
Advertisements
Uh, I actually I hired a researcher cuz I couldn’t find anything. And um, I basically just said, “Get me everything you can.” >> Hammer arrived ready. He had done the preparation. He had trained under directors who believed great performances are built slowly, take after take until the scene finally clicks into place.
That was the only way he knew how to work. Then he met Clint Eastwood’s set. By 2011, Eastwood’s one-take method was already famous. He shot fast. He shot lean. He often rolled the camera through what the actors assumed was a rehearsal, then used it. The take Hammer thought was practice was in Eastwood’s mind already the performance.
And I think the thing that makes Clint Eastwood Clint Eastwood is he knows exactly when he has it. So if he gets it in a rehearsal, he’s not going to do another take. Got it. Done. That’s what I wanted. That’s all I need. It’s going to look great. Hammer told the Hollywood Reporter about one moment that caught the whole cast off guard.
Eastwood wanted to show them how a fight scene between Hoover and Tolson should look. So he called in his longtime stunt coordinator, Buddy Van Horn, a man he had worked with since the Rawhide days. and the two of them put on the fight themselves. Eastwood was 81 years old. He exploded into it. The two men threw each other around the room, smacking into each other, rolling on the floor while the cast watched in silence.
Then Eastwood stood up, brushed himself off, looked at Hammer and DiCaprio, and said three words, something like that. Then the cameras rolled. One take done. Hammer was generous about it afterward. He described watching Eastwood work like watching a master craftsman. Someone so in command that the normal rules of the room stop applying.
But the gap was real. The slow, careful way Hammer trained and the fast, instinctive way Eastwood ran his set were two different worlds with no meeting in the middle. He hasn’t made another film with Eastwood since. Number five, Kevin Cosner. To understand this one, you have to know what Kevin Cosner did before a single frame was shot. It is 1993.
Cosner is at the absolute top of his career. Dances with Wolves, JFK, The Bodyguard, one hit after another. He is one of maybe three actors alive who can get a film made just by saying yes to it. And he wants Clint Eastwood as his co-star in a perfect world. Not in a small role, but as an equal.
The problem was the script. The Texas Ranger part that Eastwood would play wasn’t big enough to interest him. So, Cosner did something almost no star at that level ever does. He sat down with screenwriter John Lee Hancock and spent weeks rebuilding a role that wasn’t even his own. He made The Ranger richer, deeper, more worth Eastwood’s time.
Producer Mark Johnson later told the Los Angeles Times the truth of it plainly. Causner rewrote the part specifically to lure Eastwood into the film, and it worked. Eastwood signed on. Filming began. Then one morning, Cosner showed up late. Eastwood didn’t call his trailer. He didn’t send anyone to check.
He didn’t wait. The shot only needed a figure walking through a field out of focus. So Eastwood turned to his crew and said it quietly, find his extra, and put a shirt on him. They filmed the scene with Cosner’s stand-in. When Cosner finally walked out and realized what had happened, he asked if they were going to do it again.
Eastwood’s answer was short. Never mind, we’re moving on. Cosner pressed him. He wanted to know if Eastwood had really just shot the scene with an extra. Eastwood looked at him and said the line the crew would repeat for years. I get paid to burn film. The argument got heated.
Eastwood reportedly told him that if he walked off, the film would simply continue with his double. After that, Cosner never left the set during shooting again. Here’s the part that stings. A Perfect World was no flop. Strong reviews, more than $130 million worldwide, and critics still call it one of Eastwood’s best. But the two men never worked together again.
The role Cosner spent weeks rebuilding to bring Eastwood in turned out to be the only thing they ever made together. He built the door. Eastwood walked through it once and never came back. Number four, Bert Reynolds. This one starts before either man was famous. In the late 1950s, Universal signed two young contract players and let them both go inside a year.
They told the first his Adams apple stuck out too far. They told the second he couldn’t act. The first was Clint Eastwood. The second was Bert Reynolds. >> And I said, “Why are you firing me?” And they said, “You can’t act.” Same studio, same year, same humiliation. They should have been friends for life. And for a while, they were.
For 20 years, they ran alongside each other, two of the biggest stars of the 1970s, watching each other the way only a true rival can. Then came 1984 and City Heat, the one and only film they ever made together. >> And uh I play a private detective and he plays a cop. We were cops together. And then I decide to become a gum chew and he doesn’t like me too much.
And everything those 20 years had built came apart on a single production. The trouble started before they even rolled camera. Reynolds had wanted Blake Edwards to direct. It made sense. The film was a screw ball period crime comedy, and Edwards had the light touch it needed. Edwards was attached.
Then Eastwood pushed him out, replacing him with Richard Benjamin, a director who would follow Eastwood’s lead. Reynolds was already committed. He watched the director he had fought for walk off the lot and the film he had agreed to make was suddenly a different film. He had no way out. His 1987 Los Angeles Times interview is the most honest account of what came next.
Reynolds didn’t soften it. He said Eastwood was playing the same Clint that always worked for Clint while he was off playing comedy in a movie where people were getting gunned down. Two stars, two different films shot at the same time on the same set. That mismatch can’t be fixed in the edit, and Reynolds knew it while they shot.
He said he never read a single review because he already knew what they’d say. >> Well, it’s it’s what’s called a TM temper mandibular joint problem, which is right here in the head. I got hit and uh >> hit by what? >> A chair uh during a fight scene. >> Then came the accident. On the first night of shooting, a stunt called for a chair to be smashed over Reynolds.
It was supposed to be a breakaway chair made of balsa wood. Someone used a real metal one instead. It hit him in the face and broke his jaw. He tried to power through. He didn’t want to shut the production down, so he kept working on a liquid diet, lost more than 30 lbs, and developed a jaw disorder that his doctors would spend the next 2 years trying to treat.
>> But you get headaches. you can’t uh focus on anything. I the light bothered me. I couldn’t uh look at television. Um I couldn’t eat. I couldn’t chew. And uh I worked through a lot of pain. >> The pain led to painkillers and the painkillers led somewhere worse. The jaw problem affected his speech.
The speech affected his performances. The performances affected his reputation. The decline that people blamed on Bert Reynolds checking out actually started with a stunt prop that nobody checked on the first night of the only film he ever made with Clint Eastwood. There is one grace note in all of it.
In his own memoir, Reynolds wrote that Eastwood was the one person on that set who noticed he was hurting. Eastwood was the one who called early finishes. He watched Reynolds carefully and quietly adjusted the schedule when it became clear something was wrong. Whatever the film cost Reynolds, and it cost him years, Eastwood saw what nobody else saw, and he did something about it without making a speech.
The friendship survived. The working relationship did not. They never made another film together. Number three, John Wayne. In 1973, John Wayne watched High Plains Drifter. Then he sat down and wrote Clint Eastwood a letter. Wayne was 66, the most celebrated western star in the history of American film.
and he had spent 40 years building one clear vision of what the west meant. Stage coach, Red River, The Searchers, films where the frontier tested a man’s character and more often than not proved it. That was the deal, as Wayne saw it, between a western and its audience. You showed them the best version of the story.
You honored the people who built the country. High Plains Drifter did none of that. Eastwood’s film was dark and strange, almost a ghost story dressed up as a western. It was built around a town that had let its own protector be murdered and a stranger who rides in to make them pay for it. The town’s people weren’t heroes.
The land wasn’t kind. The violence wasn’t clean. Wayne watched it and felt it as a betrayal. Not of him, but of something bigger, of the people the western was supposed to stand for. Eastwood recounted the letter years later to Los Angeles Times film critic Kenneth Tran in 1992. Wayne’s words were blunt.
That isn’t what the West was all about. that isn’t the American people who settled this country. He believed Eastwood had taken the whole genre and turned it against the very audience it was built to serve. Eastwood’s reaction was calm. He said later that he understood it as a gap between two generations. Highplains Drifter, he explained, was meant to be a fable. It was never meant to be history.
And here’s where it gets strange. There was a real chance these two could have shared the screen. A writer named Larry Cohen had a western called the Hostiles. A young gambler wins half a dying man’s estate and is forced to share it with the old gunslinger who owns the rest. Eastwood loved it.
He optioned the script himself, planning to play the gambler with Wayne as the old man. He sent it. Wayne turned it down. Eastwood rewrote it and sent it again. Wayne, by some accounts, only got angrier. Then Wayne’s own son, Michael, who liked the project, brought a copy to his father one more time out on Wayne’s yacht.
Wayne looked at it, said this piece of garbage again, and threw it over the side into the Pacific. That was the end of the hostiles. That was the end of any real chance the two of them would ever share a set. Wayne died in June of 1979, 6 years after that letter, with the argument unfinished.
And that’s what makes this one different from every other name on the list. This wasn’t a directing method or a late call time. This was a real argument about what American stories are for. Whether a film owes its audience comfort or honesty. Whether the myth of the West should be protected or questioned.
Wayne believed the first with his whole heart. Eastwood believed the second just as hard. Both were right about something. And because Wayne died before they could finish it, it stayed unfinished. Two great men, two visions that could never meet, and a script at the bottom of the ocean off the California coast.
Number two, Leonardo DiCaprio. By 2011, Leonardo DiCaprio had earned the right to expect a certain kind of set. He had made Gangs of New York, The Aviator, The Departed, and Shudder Island with Martin Scorsesei, a director who treated film making as a long search, who shot from every angle, and trusted that the right performance was somewhere in all that footage.
DiCaprio built his whole career on that idea. Great work needed room. room to fail and room to try again. Then came Jay Edgar and Clint Eastwood and the discovery that none of that preparation bought him a second take. DiCaprio was playing Jay Edgar Hoover, a role that asked him to age 50 years across one film and carry the weight of a man with enormous public power and enormous private shame.
He prepared the way he always prepared. He arrived ready. >> I wouldn’t be doing my job. I I I like I I try to I try to embody the character as best as I can and leave it all on the table, so to speak. You know, whatever whatever you have to portray about that character should be burned into celluloid.
And then mid-scene, Eastwood called cut and that was it. Whatever DiCaprio was building toward, whatever adjustment he wanted, whatever instinct told him the next take would be better, none of it was on the table. Eastwood had what he needed. The crew was already moving on. October, there was so many more questions still to be answered about him on a personal level, about his sexuality, about what motivated him.
And that’s always you have to retain some of that to keep that ambiguity. >> Judy Dench, who is also in the film, described Eastwood’s method with the dry calm of a woman who has seen everything. He would sometimes not even call action. He would just let the camera run through what the cast thought was a rehearsal and then quietly decide the scene was done.
The actors only found out later that the thing they thought was practice had already been filmed. >> We’ve done two scenes this last week that I didn’t know we’d shot. Irresistible. >> DiCaprio, in the middle of a scene, asked for another take. Eastwood said no. That exchange is the whole story. No shouting, no big confrontation, just a quiet, total refusal from a man who had been making films since before DiCaprio was born.
Delivered to one of the most powerful actors alive in front of a full crew. There was no one to appeal to. He doesn’t have a lot of people around him advising him or give him giving him second opinions about what he sees up on screen. And if he believes it, he moves on. If he doesn’t, he makes his adjustment. >> On Eastwood’s set, Eastwood’s word was the last word, and the word was no.
He was not the only one to hit that wall. Matt Damon ran into the same one-take rule on Invictus when he wanted another pass, and Eastwood simply moved on. Jay Edgar opened in November 2011 to mixed reviews. A lot of critics found it stiff and lifeless for a story with so much drama in it.
Whether more takes would have fixed that, nobody can say. What we know is that DiCaprio found the experience deeply frustrating. And the two men have not worked together since. No public attack, no name calling on the record, just the silence that sits between two stars of that size after a single collaboration. A silence that in Hollywood says plenty.
He was 36 when Jay Edgar came out. Since then, he has made Django Unchained, The Wolf of Wall Street, The Revenant, and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. He has never once gone back to Clint Eastwood. Number one, Sandre Lock. Everything else on this list is a professional dispute, a directing style, a late call time, an argument about what the Western owes its audience. This one is different.
This one went to court twice. Sandre Lock met Clint Eastwood on the set of The Outlaw Josie Wales in 1975. Do you see them? >> What? >> The clouds over there. Clouds are like dreams floating across the sky. >> She was an Oscar nominated actress already married to a man named Gordon Anderson, an arrangement both understood as a deep friendship rather than a romance.
Eastwood was at the peak of his stardom and recently separated from his first wife. What started on that set became a relationship that lasted around 13 years and put the two of them on screen together in six films. For a whole generation of moviegoers, they were as familiar a pairing as any in Hollywood. They shared a home in Bair. They shared a life, or what looked from outside like one.
In 1989, Lach came home to find the locks changed. Her belongings had been moved out while she was away directing a film and put into storage. The Bair house she had lived in for years was simply closed to her. There was no conversation, no warning, no explanation waiting at the door. As far as Eastwood was concerned, it was over.
And the way he chose to end it was to make the physical fact of her life there disappear while she was at work. What followed was a lawsuit. The claims Loach put in it were not the kind that stay quiet. She alleged that during their years together, Eastwood had pressured her into two abortions and into being sterilized.
According to her autobiography and court filings, he insisted twice that she um have abortions and then have a tubal lation so there would be no more unintended pregnancies. >> Eastwood denied it. His filing stated that those decisions were her own. The case settled. Eastwood agreed to pay her and to hand over certain property and a separate deal was set up for her at Warner Brothers.
a development and directing contract worth $1.5 million that on paper looked like a generous gesture toward a woman whose career had been built largely in his shadow. Then Loach found out what that Warner deal really was. Over 3 years, the studio passed on every project she brought them, around 30 in all, including one that already had Arnold Schwarzenegger attached.
They wouldn’t let her direct anything in-house either. Her income for two of those years was zero. So, in 1995, she sued again. This time, she alleged the Warner deal had been secretly funded by Eastwood himself, that he had quietly paid the studio to offer her a contract it never meant to honor, to make her original claims go away.
A deal built to look like a career designed to make sure she never actually made a film. A judge found enough in it to let the case go forward. It’s now taught in law schools as an example of good faith in contracts. It settled in 1996 during jury deliberations reportedly just as the jury was leaning her way. Lach published her memoir in 1997 titled The Good, The Bad, and The Very Ugly.
In a sworn court declaration, she described Eastwood as a man with a terrible temper who had often been abusive to her. In the book and the interviews that followed, she gave the public a version of Clint Eastwood that stood in complete contrast to every character he ever played. Not the quiet man of integrity, someone capable of a very specific kind of coldness.
The locks changed, the belongings in storage, and a phone that didn’t ring. She died in November 2018. Oscar nominated actress Sandre Lock died at age 74. About 6 weeks ago on November 3rd, Lach died due to a heart attack. >> The two of them had not spoken publicly about each other in years. She and Gordon Anderson were still legally married when she died.
For the people who watch these two build something on screen across six films and more than a decade, the distance between that image and the court record is almost impossible to sit with. The quiet hero, the woman he left behind. The locks changed while she was at work. And a Warner Brothers deal that a judge agreed may have been built from the start to make sure she never made another film.
That is the number one story on this list. Not because it is the loudest, because it is the one that no amount of time and no number of great films has ever fully answered for. If this one held you all the way to the end, you are exactly where you belong. Offscript puts out a new documentary every week.
The real stories behind the names you grew up watching. Subscribe so you don’t miss the next one. And leave a comment below. We want to know which of these seven surprised you the most. We’ll see you in the next one.
