The film business is widespread by the tantalizing of what-EFS. What if Ams Cameron made "Spiderman?" What if CBS did not use its option for Tom Selek's Magnum Pi and allowed Steven Spielberg to win his first choice for the role of Indiana Onesons in the "thieves of the lost casket?" What if Sylvester Stallone was playing Axel Foley in "Beverly Hills Police Officer?"

We have no idea whether these alternative timeframe opportunities would be better worked out than what we got, but it's fun to think about what it might be. These questions also remind us how much study projects can be. There is a huge element of happiness that enters any creative venture. You may think you have a great director, a script that can't fail and the order of the cast of the cast, but then you go and shoot the movie And you wind with "hook". There are no guarantees.

No one knows this better than Clint Eastwood. The current of the current "dollar trilogy" and "Dirty Harry" has bet a lot of seemingly sure things just to watch the cubes come to snake eyes. In 1984 Six years later, he teamed up with the Hot Yot Young Charlie Sheen Excessive action blinks "rookie" And he was happy with being probably the worst film in his career.

It is clear that Eastwood should have said "no" to those two projects. But what about the time he had the opportunity to make a massive military film that some people think is the biggest film of all time, a full station?

In an interview for 2015 With Stephen Galloway, Eastwood was asked about the time when he now rejected the "apocalypse". Eastwood was already in the 40s when director Francis Ford Coppola approached him to play, believe it or not, Captain Willard, the part that eventually went to Martin Sheen. I can't see it at all, but Coppola's creative instincts were not to be doubted at this time. After all, the man came out of the "godfather", "conversation" and "godfather Part II".

Eastwood couldn't see it either. As Galloway said, "(I) said" i, I don't know, I don't understand too much this show. I read the "heart of darkness" when I was young, and so, I knew where it was going, but then I said, "No, I don't think I can go to that for a long time." "Coppola was planning to go to the Philippines for 16 weeks, but the main photo lasts 238 days. Imagine a director known for making films before the anticipated and budgeting in this infamous chaotic production.

Stunningly, Eastwood also had to refuse Steve McQueen, who wanted to play Kurtz. According to Eastwood, "I said," Well, why do you want to play that? "He says" Well, I get the same money, but I have to work only two weeks. " "Eastwood agreed that this is a good deal for McQueen before choosing the part for the second time. Is it possible for Eastwood to give the best performance of his career in" Apocalypse now? " Absolutely. I think it's even more possible that he would kill Coppola, which means you would never get the wrongly understood masterpiece -"one of the heart" (Although this will spare us the horror of "Jackec").