Too true. Then again he could easily question my opinion on films he’s in love with, such as Requiescant. There’s one i’m guilty of not ‘understanding’ I suppose.
In a certain way yes, but “understanding” is a difficult term in that context. Not understanding a film is not necessarily an intellectual problem.
Sometimes people cannot connect with certain films, while others easily can.
You either like a movie or you don’t, end of story. You cannot go awry with some film education, but at the same time your opinion doesn’t magically become irrelevant just because you’re not un intellectuel like monsieur Cox. I don’t like Requiescant all that much either. I don’t think it’s a masterpiece and I don’t give a rat’s ass whether monsieur Cox thinks otherwise.
Got the book today in the post. I can tell immediately what people like Dean were getting at by reading some of it. It is informative, yes. It’s a thick book so he must’ve put some effort into it at least. It’s a bit clumsy, though, wondering if I have to fact-check things from the book here in the forums. Too soon to judge, I guess, even knowing what has been said in this topic already. If not truly informative then entertaining at least, one would hope.
Yes, I can’t deny it’s an entertaining read, but it can’t be taken very seriously.
I had typed out two long rants and decided to delete them both. Sufficed to say, I think Alex Cox should stick to writing about Spaghetti Westerns for his so-called Spaghetti Western books and not delve into volatile, controversial subjects. My main SW gripe, though, is his downplaying and minimizing of GBU as an epic of the genre. I am only about half way through the book, though.
Damn, I needed some entertainment tonight.
Me too … a little, Cox bashing ( pardon the expression ) is good for the digestion
Ah, c’mon, aldo, Cox is a good man.
I’m sure in his mind he is.
I don’t hate Cox or anything. I enjoyed his commentaries for Death Rides a Horse and The Mercenary and for the most part I really liked his commentary in the book about FOD and FAFDM, the Ringo movies, etc. I just find myself irritated with him injecting his political and social opinions into things so often and digressing so far from the topic of SW.
Well one could certainly make a case that the SW genre was at its best when it was dealing with political and social issues. Clearly one of the reasons Cox likes Corbucci so much is that there is a lot of depth to Corbucci’s best in spite of how they appear on the surface.
I am fine with politics and social issues within the films themselves, it’s Cox’s obsessing over it and going an extra mile with his opinions I find irritating. I want to read about SW, not be preached at. There is no major brow-beating in the films themselves. I would say more on this but I do not want to provoke a political debate. I don’t have to agree with Corbucci or Sollima’s politics to enjoy the films, do I?
No not at all - their films were after all made for entertainment. Incidentally, while Sollima might perhaps be considered the more political of the two in real life, Corbucci could be pretty explicit in his intentions too as the following from his autobiography shows: “Django era un film contro il razzismo e l’intolleranza, Navajo Joe era un film contro il genocidio degli indiani, Gli specialisti era un film contro lo sopraffazione del ricchi”
I will make it clear right now that I am not a racist and Django’s and Navajo Joe’s adversaries were indeed very evil. Rich people? Not all rich people are bad, and not all poor people are good. One thing that unites Leone, Eastwood, Corbucci and Cox is that they all made money from their films.
Now I’ve gone and started talking politics, I need to pack it in for the night.
Really … in what sense ?
I don’t understand why people stick up for him, when his writing and commentaries are so full of holes and inaccuracies.
To me, that’s someone not good at their job. One could forgive the occasional error, but when there are so many, and they’re presented in such a pompous fashion … well, there’s not much for me to like.
Fact: People who state their opinions as facts usually aren’t very likable.
Fact: I’m in agreement with this fact.
Of course, but did he do this?
Interesting how Cox refers to the Mexican Revolution spaghettis as “Tortilla Westerns.” This is the first I’ve ever heard of that term. To me, they’ve always been Zapata Westerns, and I’ve observed most people using that term here in the forums and in the database, as well.