The other four points seem correct (as far as I know, haven’t seen too much of the man)
Fidani’s movies aren’t really an unintentional comedies some of you make them sound like, they’re just bad, although I’ve seen much worse. I have to admit my Fidani vote was a counter-reaction to strong Raoul following. This guy really gets on my nerves. Over-emoting every word in the song with horribly thick accent and generally sounding like a mediocre relic from singing cowboy times. I don’t remember if that was the case but I’m sure SDB loved the guy as he is a sort of Engelbert Humperdinck of spaghetti westerns.
Anyway, I’m digressing now. I would like to change my Fidani vote for Camaso if it’s still possible, because I think Col. Douglas Mortimer pretty much convinced me it makes no sense to induct him to the hall of fame.
I don’t think it’s fair to retro actively change the voting process for one person, just because he has a bad reputation.
Also I suggest you watch some of his work to judge for yourself.
The points you raise about him go for 9 out of 10 sw directors. Hell, the genre in iitself is derivative as fuck. And there are loads of other spaghetti westerns where characters never run out of ammo, firing hundreds of bullets from their six shooters. Steffen never worked with Fidani, now did he? (Would have been pretty awesome though). And like Bill said, the action is often pretty good actually. So is the cinematography when helmed by Mr D’Amato.
I’m glad Fidani gets love. Most of his films equal fun to me. Because of the lowkey nature and pleasant vibe his work exuberates, he inspires me as a filmmaker even. That, and I’d rather watch a fun z-grade flick than a boring all star drama. Just my 2 cts.
Why should Fidani be included?
-
It’s a Spag Hall of Fame. His is a famous name within the sub-genre. Game, set and match right there, really.
-
If any Hall of Fame can be seen as a guide to who’s who in a given field, a signpost to the uninitiated as to who to look out for if you like, then the trumpeting of Fidani’s name is as necessary as the trumpeting of Corbucci’s, if for nought else than as a cautionary example. Welcome to the splendour of the Spaghetti Western, celluloid traveller! Here be hidden treasures! But here be dragons, too. Have a care.
-
Let’s be honest for a second. Yes, a lot of diamonds have been mined out there in the Almeria sand; more than casual observers know. And those accomplishments should rightly be recognised and celebrated in a Hall of Fame. But it would be delusional and dare I say even a little churlish for even the most star-crossed and lovestruck Spag fan to pretend that those diamonds aren’t sprinkled in amongst a fat sack of dung. We all know that the Spag scene churned out a lot of crap and while there’s no need to waste time wallowing in all of that muck, it would be far more even-handed and representative of the Italian Western experience as a whole to at least concede a corner of the room to one or two of the most (in)famous examples of that murkier side of the genre. And who better or more famous than Demofilo Fidani to serve the Hall of Fame as a symbolic representation of the more challenging side of Spag? Not all history is pretty, and we can’t just airbrush out the bits we don’t like. Besides, Fidani and his contemporaries of a similar standard help lend perspective to just how stellar the “good” ones really were.
-
Fidani’s comparative lack of talent might be a commonly held view (indeed, it’s the view upon which my argument above stands), but it’s subjective. Maybe, like Ed Wood, he’s as famous - loved, even - for the earnest charm of his glorious debacles. Those super-regurgitated rip-off movie titles add a certain, bizarre richness to the Spag tapestry, don’t they?
-
Dick Spitfire!!!
Fidani films are very enjoyable and I often have a good laugh at the same time, two important elements for me. But like Bad Lieutenant has already mentioned the films are fun.
I think the man should be included in the Hall of Fame.
[quote=“ENNIOO, post:885, topic:2068”]Fidani films are very enjoyable and I often have a good laugh at the same time, two important elements for me. But like Bad Lieutenant has already mentioned the films are fun.
I think the man should be included in the Hall of Fame.[/quote]
Good man, Ennioo! Using up your milestone eleven-thousandth post in defence of D-Fiddy. Kudos! ;D
OK, here’s my 2 cents.
First off, let me make it clear I don’t believe we should change the rules mid-vote. If Dick Spitfire gets sufficient votes then he should be inducted.
However, that said, I do believe his inclusion in the hall will highlight a problem which I think I mentioned a couple of years ago in relation to our current voting system. In short, I think inducting 5 new names every year is too many. To begin with it was fine as there were plenty of people clearly deserving a place in the pantheon but, to be honest, most if not all of those guys and girls are in now and if we continue adding 5 names a year it is inevitable that the hall’s general level of excellence or importance will be continually diluted. For my money, at this stage of its development I would argue that a maximum of 2 new inductees a year would be more than enough and would ensure that it is not too easy to get in. I would also like to see an argument written for any nominees by the person suggesting the names. In my opinion liking or not liking someone is not enough. We should be considering their contribution to the genre and if an argument can be put forward that is compelling enough to get others to vote then all well and good. If not then the nomination will fail. Either way, we have to be clear as to why someone is being inducted. People’s likes and dislikes will always come into it but this should not be a simple popularity contest. On these terms it is possible that Fidani would still get in. His prolific output and dedication to a genre already heavily in decline could be sufficient reasons alone. But at least he would do so (or not) because he fits the criteria and not just by default or because enough voters enjoy laughing at his films or because he might be seen as a good example of how crap some Spaghettis could be.
Like I said right at the beginning, I think we have to stick to the current rules this year and let the inductions fall where they may. But for next year and beyond I think we should rethink the process somewhat. I would propose a limit of only one nominee per person with argument provided and then 2 votes per person after the nominees had been set. Any ties would need to go to a second ballot until we got the two new inductees settled. Hopefully, with only two new names a year the hall won’t become overcrowded and inclusion will still mean something.
Well that’s my idea anyway. I’d be interested to hear what the Colonel (who’s excellent efforts have made this thing work so well this far) and the rest of you think?
Here is the answer through the words (source: Marco Giusti, Dizionario del Western all’italiana) of eminent cinematographer Luciano Tovoli, practically first-time director of photography in The Four Who Came to Kill Sartana:
“I’m so proud that I keep the poster on a wall in my house! I enjoyed very much working with Demofilo Fidani: I was sorry, indeed, I have not done other films with him. He was a great set designer. I had a very good relationship with him. He had a very precise directorial ethics. For him, even though money was scarce, it was like making a big movie, with all the necessary commitment. We were shooting the film without any of the stress of intellectual films, those that then I shot with Authors”.
Some of the Fiddler’s action scenes are indeed not bad, the short quick shoot-outs. But many other ones are hilariously bad imo. Especially when he has to fill the time. When the finale goes on forever around and in a gravel pit. And then there <are these funny looking jumps which the ones have to perform which were hit by a bullet.
Well, but when he gets his votes, then he should be in.
Somebody here from Canada who spends the Colonel a Fid copy? So that he knows what he is writing about …
I completely, 100%, agree with what Phil said. It looks like Fidani will get in (although as there is/could be a significant number of anonymous votes, I have no way of knowing for sure) and it would be wrong to move the goal-posts half way through just to prevent a name being elected into the pantheon. However, the point Phil raised about 5 nominees I consider to be extremely valid and would like to see his proposed changes or something like them next year to make the Hall of Frame “exclusive”. Still, this is the Col.'s show and it is his call - whatever his decision is, I’ll stick by it.
haha, this topic has exploded since I last checked it. I’ll probably reply again as have to finish catching up, but…
5. Weakly choreographed action
I strongly disagree, Fidani is really good at making action scenes.
I was already getting to say something about the action in Fidani’s films before reading this, and I also really have to agree that Fidani can handle action very nicely. Its actually one of the main reasons I really like some of his work. The action sequences, particularly those that involve quick-draw & fire, include some of the best I’ve seen and I regularly think back to them when considering what this kind of scene should look like in best form.
And some of the fistfight scenes are handled in a way that I actually like them a bit, whereas usually its a real chore sitting through these fights.
Totally agreed on all of these points. In all honesty, if I really look past the total cheapness of a Fidani film, which reflects in writing, sets, costumes, music, and the quickness with which the film is put together, then all I have left to judge is Fidani’s ability as a director of spaghets. Really all of that other stuff has nothing to do with his ability anyway. And what I see in his directorial ability is just as good as most SW directors, with some key points being really good. If Fidani had regular access to some of the better SW actors, and a larger budget to work with, it seems likely that his skill would be much more apparent.
Gotta echo the sentiment about the Fidani/D’Amato combination, and yah it would be great to have seen Steffen in a Fidani SW. The biggest star I can think of to appear in one of Mr. Deem’s works would be Kinksi (Barrel Full of Dollars)
Yeah I mean when it comes down to it, the man made SWs that I consider among my favorite and most enjoyable viewings in the SW genre. If we’re talking about what qualifies as greatness, then we’re really getting into subjectivity, unless no one feels there isn’t any greatness in his films (which is being demonstrated as untrue).
I also agree with everything Phil H said. If you want to keep this going for a while, then the list of names will be running thin shortly and the rules should probably be modified or the list finalized at a certain point. I like his ideas about having to include at least a short statement as to why you think someone should be included.
Thanks for that quote JonathanCorbett, never read that before.
Just a little side note: For me one of the scenes in the genre that is über spaghetti is in, yes, a Fidani film. The way Jeff Cameron super casually shoots a bank robber coming out of the bank blazing is almost too awesome for the screen. So damn effective in its simplicity, so cool.
[quote=“Phil H, post:887, topic:2068”]I would propose a limit of only one nominee per person with argument provided and then 2 votes per person after the nominees had been set.
(…)
I’d be interested to hear what the Colonel (who’s excellent efforts have made this thing work so well this far) and the rest of you think?[/quote]
I think the very interesting, uncertain and consequently exciting situation this year is mainly due to the new 2-5 voting system, but maybe for more in-depth evaluations and comments it is better to wait until the vote is over.
That’s true, JonathanCorbett. A bit of excitement here as a result of the voting setup, although also a result of slight modification (adding unused first ballots).
By the way, if everyone feels adding first ballot after voting is unfair, I’m fine with not including them. I was originally going to use it on Fidani but then for whatever reason didn’t use it at all. It wasn’t just a reaction vote though.
I’m not going to get offended if you’re not gonna include my later changes. Changes are result of my over-analyzing things and I’m OK with all my other nominations, so whatever 
Thanks everybody for chiming in. There’s been alot of interest in this year’s voting and I’m grateful.
Just for the record, I never intended to change any rules midvote. If Fidani gets enough votes, he’s gets in end of story, whether we like it or not. I personally don’t have a problem with Fidani being voted in, I merely wanted to make sure that he was being voted in for the right reasons and to make sure that the hall keeps its integrity. Your pro-Fidani arguments have convinced me that the inclusion of Fidani is not necessarily a bad thing.
As it stands, the 3 first ballot votes for Fidani will remain. You guys didn’t change who you wanted to vote for, you merely added a first ballot to one of the names, so I don’t mind. It was an underused feature up until that point anyway.
Phil I agree 100% with your points. I too wanted to have less nominees and less votes per person but I remember us having the same conversation around the same time last year and it seemed most people were in favor of more nominations and more votes, which is why I did it 2-5.
I might have the final say on things, but I’ll always make sure to consult with you guys first before making a decision and so far I’ve stayed true to that.
Another concern that I have is that the nominees were too concentrated in one or two categories. We haven’t inducted a cinematographer, writer or producer since the very first year of induction and unless the rules change, there likely won’t be any more inducted and there are still quite a few of them who are deserving who haven’t been inducted yet.
Here are the changes I propose for next year as per Phil’s recommendations:
-
Option A: 1 nominee per voter
Option B: 2 nominees per voter and one of the nominees must be either a cinematographer, writer or producer.
-
Each nomination must be accompanied by a short paragraph (or at least a couple of sentences) expressing why the individual should be inducted and highlighting their accomplishments. Nominations without any argument will not be added to the ballet.
-
Option A: 2 votes per voter
Option B: 3 votes per voter but one of the votes has to be for someone in the cinematographer, writer or producer category.
-
First ballot votes will count as 1.5 instead of 2.
-
Ballots cannot be changed (including first ballots votes). And this includes ballots that were not done correctly because you didn’t read the instructions first.
-
Option A: The 2 nominees with the most votes will be inducted, regardless of category. If there is a tie, than a tie breaker vote will take place.
Option B: The 2 nominees with the most votes will be inducted, but also the nominee from the writer, producer or cinematographer category with the most votes will also be inducted. In another words, 3 inductees including one mandatory producer, writer or cinematographer inductee.
What do you guys think?
Lead actor: Peter Lee Lawrence
Supporting actor: Jose Manuel Martin, Gordon Mitchell (and first ballot vote for Gordon)
Director: Demofilo Fidani
I agree with changes 2 and 5.
Apart from that, Option B would be preferable but in my opinion there is no point in changing a winning team (voters increase compared to last year = +60%). In other words, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it! 
Point taken JC. I think I just have to take it upon myself to nominate some writers, producers and cinematographers next year. And I’ll probably do it 2-2-2. 2 nominees, 2 votes, and 2 inductees.
Well folks, its the moment you’ve all been waiting for. Voter turnout was great this year, thanks everyone and thanks for your input and feedback.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you this year’s Spaghetti Western Hall of Fame Inductees, class of 2014:
Peter Lee Lawrence- Lead Actor and leading vote getter this year
Roberto Pregadio - Composer
Gordon Mitchell - Supporting Actor
Demofilo Fidani - Director (yes, he made it!)
Lucio Fulci - Director
Sadly, all 5 inductees this year are posthumous. Nevertheless, a warm and heartfelt congratulations to them.