Well, I am an absolutely huge Leoni fan, and have seen his Dollar Trilogy and Once upon a Time in the West. I always argued for the kind of tongue-and-cheek emptyness of the American West that the Italian western director created. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly was always about the Gold and silver Rushes in California and Colorado as far as I'm concerned, and I loved how there was really no difference between any of the characters. If any one of them, or none of them, had gotten the gold, it wouldn't really matter now would it? Kinda like everyone who went stream filtering and gold digging.


But I've recently spoken with people about how Spaghetti Westerns are just pretty much aline because of some fanboy base, and that the movies do not resonate in today's intelligent minds. The fact that it didn't matter if Tuco or No Name got the gold just proves that there is nothing more profound to the movie going experience or to the retelling of American Frontier Myth.

The counter point is the obvious High Noon for me.

A clear cold-war agenda and a clearly defined Hero who stands by the western way of life even when the town has given up on it. You know...Justice and commoderie, and some moral agenda of right and wrong. It wasn't a bad movie, I just find that its construction of Manifest Destiny is way off, and seriously identified with Helen Ramirez character more than any other in that film. Leoni's films are far more to the point.

But apparently...its just a bunch of robbers and more robbers tales with nothing to ground it to thought, questions of nationalism, and film constructions of identity. I disagree.

I've always considered most Italian films to be pretty shallow. The most obvious examples of this are the Italian westerns and Italian horror. They were genrally almost always about style over substance. I really don't see that as a problem, though. I've always been of the belief that a striking image in a film can fill in just as much exposition as pages and pages of long winded dialogue.

I certainly can not complain about Italian horror...some of the best splatters I have ever seen are Italian.

I dont know how someone can criticise The Good, The Bad and The Ugly to be honest, whether it is shallow or not, not that i think it is, but does it matter.

Its the characters and scenario's that people watch these films for, they dont watch them to get a life lesson out of it.

That's exactly it Algren...the "characters" were interchangeable (which I thought was the point...not an oversight) and the "scenario" was a simple treasure hunt (I disagree...I think there was a bit of a critique, as I mentioned before, about the gold and silver rushes).

Did you ever find yourself bored while watching it? What did you think of it in relation to a film like High Noon?

I was never bored whilst watching it, then again it never kept me on the egde of my seat, its not that type of film anyway, so yes, there were parts of teh film that i 'thought about other stuff' or 'looked away' etc.

But also, watching a film like "TG,TBaTU" after seeing countless new films with special effects etc, it naturally wouldnt keep me entertained as thoroughly as a newer film, regardless of the story or how shallow it is.

I havent seen High Noon Dont intend to, doesnt interest me.

I honestly cannot imagine getting bored by The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. The showdown in the end is probably one of the most intense and well-filmed scenes ever.

And that music...

I have a collection of Morricone's film music. He did all the music for Leoni, its pretty good. But Dottore, would you have cared if the shoot-out had ended differently? That's really interesting especially if you say no, which is the case for me. I didn;t have sympathy for one guy over the other, so for me it was just more like a mystery. Even when I watched it a third time I realize I still have anticipation at the end. Makes me wonder why since the film could have been equally as interesting if Joe or Sentenza died. That's I guess the part about the characters being interchangeable I mentioned before. Still I think its just that the narrative of the film wasn't based on individuals, but rather an era and the ruined American landscape after the Civil War. I consider the men to be allegorical figures. That's why I still have invetment in their experiences without having a personal attachment to them as individuals.

The characters were interchangeable? One of them Sentenza/Angel Eyes, was willing, or more than willing, to engage in torture to get what he wanted and to kill innocents. Blondie was willing to kill when necessary but didn't go around torturing people, instead he made a deal with Tucos and actually helped save some lives (with blowing up the bridge). The differences in the characters were in what they were willing to do (or alternately put, to give up of their soul) to go after the treasure.

But it was never supposed to be a deep film in the sense you are thinking. To its fans it is "pure moviemaking" in the sense that a large part of the enjoyment is simply feeling in the hands of a master cinematic craftsman. A movie like High Noon is good, but it might just as well have been a book. Good, Bad Ugly could only really exist as a movie.

I'm glad you brought up High Noon though because if you want to read deeper meanings into the Spaghetti Westerns, that's a good one to bring up. HN is typical of the pious black and white thinking that pre-dated the Vietnam War (and the Iraq war...).

The Spaghetti Westerns are more informed by the gritty reality of being hip deep in the Vietnam war, where all the silly reasons that old men gave for creating the war don't matter anymore, what matters is just finding a way to get out and to a better life, as symbolized by the treasure. The rise of the anti-hero was because of this change, a new distrustful reality in which people still liked the genre of the western but no longer bought the discredited paternalistic motivations.

By the way, to add to my previous post above, what separates Angel Eyes from Blondie is also what separates Little Billl from Will Munny in Eastwood's Unforgiven. Little Bill is in many ways a good guy, but he is fully willing to torture to get what he wants. It's a fatal flaw in the villains in both movies and is very relevant to today's world for obvious reasons.

Nah, I thought the whole point was their power positions. Blondie and Tuco spent plenty of time torturing eachother, especially at the beginning, and may I remind you, at the end. lol. They just didn't have the power or authority to do it to many others the way Angel Eyes did. Otherwise I don't know if they wouldn't have. I thought the parody of the title was that all three of them could have been either good, bad, or ugly?

I guess I see your point about the film being a movie vs. a book. Because otherwise Koyanisquatsi and Micorcosmos and all those other movies would also be considered "boring" just because they are not so much narrative based as they are cinema based. Forcing the viewer to make connections and decisions instead of just spoon-feeding those to them.

Yeah, I always saw it, as I said, about the post civil-war destroyed landscape of the East coast, and how everyone was dirt poor and fleed west to the mineral rushes in hopes of a better life. I like the anti-hero, as you say, alot because I was distrustful of elements in High Noon's sheriff. Like why the hell he cares to defend a bunch of fickle people that doubly (past and present) don't stand by him.

But about the anti-hero in westerns being about jaded audiances? How do American westerns that aren't so "paternalistic" fit into here? Like Magnificent Seven or even True Brit? They have a bit more sentimental approaches to their cowboys without the benefit of imbuing them with Nationalist agendas.



At the end, *spoilers* Chris and Vin still kind of ride off alone and unsettled even after their efforts. So its not quite the same as either the cold-war indulgent High Noon, or the Anti-Vietnam bitter Italian Westerns.
Same with John Wayne and True Grit (rare moment). He just kind of leaves old and alone at the end after Mattie had finished her revenge and moved on with her life.

I love all of Sergio Leone/Clint Eastwood movies. I love the way he sets up the wide angle shots, background music and unfrenzied action. As somebody mentioned earlier, I loved the fact that the good is not always all that better than the bad.

I love the music in the Good, the Bad and the Ugly, especially towards the end. That is exhilarating

A majority of Hollywood westerns lacked depth till early 70's barring a few like Mckenna's Gold, The Magnificent Seven (a Japanese Remake) among others. Clint Eastwood changed all that with his terrific movie High Plains Drifter. Since then he has made several remarkable westerns.

The Spaghetti Westerns were loved all over the world. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly was rereleased in Bangalore, India for the umpteenth time in 1988 and was in the theaters for over 6 months. Hollywood westerns were too straight forward and bland to be successful overseas.

The music as Eli Wallach is running through the graves is probably the best theme in any film ever in the world, i love it, not only that, but it fits so well with the situation, a feeling of desperation is going through Eli's mind, and the music shows that. Brilliant!

Also, the showdown music at the end, gives a feel of panic as you dont know whats going to happen, also adds that ultimate showdown camera shots, simply amazing, orgasmic!!!!!

I'm not usualy that big into westers but I have seen a couple Lee Van Cleff movies and all those clinty movies I love TG,TB&TU so much. It isn't meant to be one of those deep thinking movies but it sure as hell had me entertained full way through. Look at movies now-a-days that do the same. Bad Boys II for example. Story wise/writting, it's a piece of shit but the fact that it kept me entertained because of all the action and stuff like that did what it was intended do to. Though Good/bad/ugly is much more deeper then bad boys will ever be it still works on the same level.