January 6, 2013

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly


Finally committed myself to watch this through to the end. I'm sure I'm not alone in this, but there are a lot of "classic" films out there that can be grueling to watch. After buying this DVD years ago, I've made many attempts to watch it through to the end. Every time I've fallen asleep only to wake up 2 hours later at the ending. Proud I've made it through. So, the big question: Is this all-time favorite western film all that it's cracked up to be? I'm giving it a "meh" with some hesitations. 

In case you don't know, this is last film to complete Sergio Leone's (one of the most renown western-genre filmmakers) The Man with No Name trilogy. Note: this is not an exact trilogy. Leone and Eastwood teamed up to make three westerns (back-to-back-to-back) that all centered around his timeless character, The Man with No Name - as seen above. Although I've yet to see his previous two films, A Fistful of Dollars and A Few Dollars More, many reviews online state that this film can be considered a prequel in some ways to this trilogy. (I guess it has something to do with how Clint's character acquires his iconic poncho or something - really no idea?) But you can chuck all this talk about a trilogy out the window. I don't believe any of the plots interconnect. You just follow the same character.

Moving on, this story follows three ruthless gunslingers on search for buried treasure (the sum of $200,000 in Confederate gold) sometime during the Civil War out the Wild West. To my previous point of how the movie seems to barely chug along, of the 2 hour and 45 minute western, you spend the first half establishing the relationship of "Blondie" (the nickname to Clint's nameless character) and Tuco (the Ugly in the title). An uneasy partnership if form between the two and they continuous screw each other over until they are forced to depend on one another as they each hold one half of the location to their prized treasure. On the other half with have "Angle Eyes" (the Bad). Hearing about the treasure while doing his job as a gunman for hire, he opposes the other two in the scramble for the goods.

I will say that the film really does begin to pay out as you reach the ending. It culminates to this three-way standoff where they all face-off for the rights to the treasure. Leone builds up the suspense with a variety of far and extreme close-up shots. Mean eyes and itchy trigger fingers hanging over low-riding pistols. All of this to Ennio Mariconne's sweeping  western score. Seriously, Mariconne's brilliant.


This might not be the famous - and most recognizable - theme to this legendary film (I'm sure you know the one I'm talking about), but this is my favorite Mariconne track from his score. Perfect anthem for our hero to rise up and take the day.

The film has a lot of great aspects going for it. I want to say that the only reason I fail to enjoy it as much as most others seem to is the fact that I'm stuck to watching on my TV rather than on the Big Screen. There's only one other Sergio Leone western that I've seen, Once Upon A Time in the West. I saw it while back in school where we had a 35mm print we were able to put it up in our theater. It was amazing! I'll admit the story was a much stronger and more exciting (focused on the idea of revenge - something I find far more entertaining than a mad dash for buried treasure), but if you're going to appreciate the vast sceneries of the western landscape, better watch it on a screen that can truly make it into a larger than life experience. 

Maybe one day I'll return to Leone's westerns and try and finish off the rest of his Clint Eastwood trilogy. Let's say I'm in no a rush to do so, however. 

2 comments:

  1. "I'm sure I'm not alone in this, but there are a lot of 'classic' films out there that can be grueling to watch."

    Good God, YES. Lawrence of Arabia and Ben-Hur were two of the most disappointing movies I watched last year. It's not just the sound and picture quality or the lesser special effects, either. It just seems like for the first fifty or seventy years of filmmaking, no one realized you could frame movie shots differently than you would a stage play or multi-camera sitcom.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I do want to see this one someday though.

    ReplyDelete