christopher-underwood Likable, if less known than some of Eastwood's films, it is not without significance. This movie neatly segues from the Leone westerns to Dirty Harry. Indeed this is where Eastwood and Siegel first pair up and the seeds of the subsequent violent thrillers are clearly visible. It is also significant in that being a 1968 film we get a depiction of sexual politics that still resonates today. There is an early scene where Tisha Sterling is talking to her 'client' or probationer played by Don Stroud and the slimy kid touches, strokes and finally takes a hold of one of her breasts. Eastwood's 'country boy' from Arizona, looking more like a cowboy than a cop takes exception and knocks Stroud away. Tisha's character, who seemed to accept the sexual attention, is upset that her 'client' is now upset. Even more odd, as we now look back, Eastwood then picks up his case, takes her by the arm and announces he's taking her to lunch, and more as it subsequently turns out. Within the storyline of a film of this period it doesn't seem all that strange, no more it was, but looked at now from the era of a new morality, quite astonishing. The story moves well, Siegel has an eye for composition and can choreograph a bar room fight or a chase as good as anyone. The final motorbike chase is set on the slopes of an autumnal Fort Tryon Park and looks very good. Also good looking and very well shot is a hippy gig with back projections, coloured lights, near naked boys and girls and painted faces. Well worth a watch.

TonyMontana96 (Originally reviewed: 10/02/2017) Clint Eastwood's first and hopefully only awful film. Coogan's Bluff holds a 94% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and so I thought well this has a fair chance of being a classic, but to my disbelief as soon as the film continued to progress I hated it even more than I did when it started. Eastwood is probably the only good thing about this film, or maybe his performance and some of the classic 60's background music that fit's the film quite well, but it cannot work too well if the film it plays in, is as disgusting as this one. I'll keep this short as the positives are already out of the way, the entire supporting cast which were so forgettable do not deserve a mention and they were mostly playing stupid, crazy or laughably bad characters. The first truly morally incorrect scene start's when a female police officer is being groped in plain sight at a police station with plenty of witnesses, and during this scene the creep says "I can feel your heart", it made me sick to my stomach, this guy was not her lover he was a stranger and I don't care what era you're in, you have no right to touch another person inappropriately without their consent. But what really annoys me is that when Eastwood saves the day, by punching that jerk in the face, she starts shouting at him, telling him to apologise and I kept thinking so the women in this film are portrayed as mere objects and there happy to let someone touch there boobs without consent? This film is so wrong, if you did that in real life you would be facing a suspended hearing before a judge. The film isn't even a chase it's like a bad police drama with a final chase sequence, and there's even a nightclub scene involving junkies and loonies; now Coogan (Eastwood) thinks that for some suitable info, he should ask these drugged up mental patients, always a good idea; and while he's trying to get them to talk, one of them even pulls out a blade and Eastwood is ready, which is laughably clichéd, later on he goes with the female nutcase to find the escaped criminal, in which she leads him into an ambush and a severe beating; who would of thought a drug addict and a nutcase could be lying? Rarely am I sarcastic but here is a film that is so dumb it's required to do so. Special mention to that crazy woman getting used as an object, insulted by her so called 'boyfriend' and shouting "Jimmy" loudly three times; when she shouts Jimmy I can't deny I laughed because it's unintentionally hilarious and shows how awful she was.Every scene has some corny, forgettable one liners, it's not funny, there's even a joke from some ugly old hag who shouts some nonsense that I somehow can't remember. Coogan's Bluff is not an action film or even an entertaining one, it's a clichéd worse than usual bore-fest, with ugliness, sexism, a forgettable villain and a laughably lame final sequence. This is the only Eastwood film I actually despise.

valleycapfan It's hard to believe that "Coogan's Bluff" was made just three years earlier than the iconic "Dirty Harry," for it looks ancient in comparison. Eastwood is portraying a very similar character - tough, cynical old school cop trying to maintain law and order in a world that doesn't seem to want it.While "Dirty Harry" still holds up well today (2016) due to an engaging story line, tight script, and a tremendous supporting cast topped off by a mesmerizing Andy Robinson as the deranged Scorpio killer, "Coogan's Bluff" looks like a pair of bell bottom jeans we find in an old foot locker. The clothes, the sets, and the slang look like they were out of date within a couple of years after this was made, and Don Stroud is about the least intimidating adversary ever cast in an Eastwood film. He's more pathetic than pathological. Lee J. Cobb and Susan Clark do their best with the material given to them, but it's no use.Watch this only to get a glimpse of late-1960s American pop culture, much like what you'd look for in an American museum display. As for convincing crime drama, forget it.Only "Easy Rider" looks more outdated than this film.

Leofwine_draca A fish-out-of-water comic action film in which Eastwood's cop cowboy is sent to New York to track down an escaped criminal. Once there, his Stetson-wearing character causes chaos in the local police department, while taking time out to romance a beautiful flame-haired woman.COOGAN'S BLUFF is very much a slight and lightweight piece of filmmaking that can't hold a candle to the star's more serious police thrillers and westerns. That's not to say it's unwatchable, though; in fact it's fairly appealing, trading in on the star's youthful charm and giving him more of a chance to experiment with comedy than he usually gets. As the film progresses, he finds himself caught up in the era's counter-culture movement with some memorable results.Don Siegel shot the film, so it looks great. There isn't a great deal of action, but it does close off with a rousing motorbike chase which is one of the most inventive I've seen on film; playing things simple always works out for the best in the end. Lee J. Cobb delivers an amusing turn as the exasperated lieutenant and Susan Clark (best known as 'Cherry Forever' in PORKY'S) is fine as the would-be love interest. Eastwood's character, a forerunner of Dirty Harry, is understated but also deliciously amoral and his visit to a liberal club makes for an amusing highlight.