All time favourite!
Unfortunately Iāve got a Spanish version, as usually it doesnāt have original audio or subtitles.
[quote=āmwaf, post:28, topic:468ā]I donāt think itās a bad movie; not top but one of the best made in the 70s.
somewhere I read - maybe imdb or ofdb - that there would be exist an alternative end, in which Coburn commits suicide ā¦ does anybody know something about that?
I would prefer such an end.[/quote]
Iāve got 2 versions of this but I think one is just a cut of the other - Iāll check, but I reckon they have the same ending. I remember Savalas getting his dribbly death cut short in one of them which is a shame, as it is one of the best in the genre ā¦ maybe only Silence and Milianās in the Bounty Killer being better.
Sorry - both the same ending and no āextrasā on the discs. Oneās a shitty pan n scan running at 88 mins, tāother is widescreen with scadinavian? (sorry again that my languages are so bad) subs - running for a much improved 111 mins.
Good film - due another watch before I give my rating.
Joe Hembus described this suicide end in his Western Lexikon.
In all probability only an error due to a wrong memory.
It wasnāt a waste of time to watch this one but it was pretty disappointing. Not a lot of originality here, little character development, no surprises in the plot. Too bad, it could have been a lot better.
If you like Coburn, then he is never bad. I like Coburn.
But this canāt save a film which gives me the impression that none of the people involved had any interest in this film. They had probably a slightly larger budget, but the screenplay and the directing are mostly hopelessly uninspired.
Well, there are a few good moments, but there are also too much surprisingly dull moments. The whole long part when they enter the fortress is so ridiculous conceived that I never know should I cry or laugh.
The then following action scenes are at best routine, but often are also only dull.
I donāt know what went wrong, but it surely was a lot.
I transfered this from the ālast westernā thread.
Maybe we can discuss a bit about the different enough opinions to this film.
Lordradish is surprised that people dislike RtL,RtD
Iām surprised that people really could like it
It seems for both of us the surprise is, that we are so sure about the flaws or merits respectiveley, that the opposite view is not understandable.
Yes, Coburn is one of the best points of this film and itās a pitty that Savalas screentime is so short.
@Stanton: I canāt understand your impression with the involved people ā¦!?
I think the acting is ok and the directing of Valerii is ok too.
here I have to agree. but such compareable things you can see in many other SWs.
the only thing I really donāt like at the entering part, that it is too long.
Iām not really a fan of such big action scenes - I prefer more long duels or sudden eruption of violence - so here I donāt have any real opinion if good or bad, itās ok ā¦ Iāve already seen much more worse action scenes.
all in all I think itās a good SW, not top, because it could be much better - with Valerii as director and Coburn and Savalas as main actors it should be a better movie.
so I can understand, that this movie could be a disappointment.
this movie is very atmospheric and I like the epic style.
there are some realy nice ideas; for example it is somewhat surprising that not all āhangdogsā say yes to Pembrokeās offer.
or the scene in that little town, when Bud Spencer shouts the myth, that the war is over - maybe for some people also dull, during watchin the first time for me too - but after rewatching I changed; it is so absurd but it shows in such a simple manner that the people canāt wait until the warās end.
otherwise in some parts the story is too uneven - I mentioned it before that it looks unfinished for me. during watching, Iāve always the impression, that there are some scenes missing.
for example: thereās the nice scene, where we see the station of the confederates (here I always await something special will happen)ā¦ but next we see Pembroke and his men running out of the tunnel ā¦ and the next scene we see them waiting for the sended āscoutā.
maybe the budget was finished due to the explosive showdown ā¦?
so, Iāve to say that I can understand both sides, liking and disliking.
for me the good moments outbalance the ānot so good momentsā, because the good moments are really good! and without the few failings it could be a top 20 (?) ā¦
But Savalas is terrible. Another quote from me copied from the ālast westernā thread:
āLook at Telly Savalas, does he do anything? Only standing around with hanging arms like heās waiting for some acting instructions, but becomes nothing. Never seen him so dull. But so is the complete film.ā
Except for his death scene he was completely wasted.
@Stanton: I can't understand your impression with the involved people ...!? I think the acting is ok and the directing of Valerii is ok too.I don't think so. The acting is generally weak. Coburn is only not bad because he can't be bad in any film as I already had explained above. His character is as flat as the film and he does only what he was used to do. He seemed not very interested to give more than necessary.
You have used the word āunfinishedā, which is a perfect word to describe the screenplay. Nearly everything in this film seems to be unfinished or undeveloped or inlogical or (concerning the few good ideas) not connected with the rest of the film.
If I define that Leone was the creative force behind My Name is Nobody, than I would say that Valerii is not a good director. Heās a routinier at best, and even his best western Day of Anger lacks the necessary style to make more out of it than a good film.
And A Reason to Live is badly directed. Mostly uninspired the directing often makes an helpless impression to me. This is way below Valeriiās 3 previous genre contributions. He was a good enough director in these SWs, but he always had his limits.
I have seen another film from him named Sahara Cross which was also very bad.
this movie is very atmospheric and I like the epic style.
Here we have again a completely different view. I couldnāt spot any interesting atmosphere and also no epic style. This is surely not an epic film as it uses history only as an interchangeable background for a (simple) action adventure.
there are some realy nice ideas; for example it is somewhat surprising that not all "hangdogs" say yes to Pembroke's offer. or the scene in that little town, when Bud Spencer shouts the myth, that the war is over - maybe for some people also dull, during watchin the first time for me too - but after rewatching I changed; it is so absurd but it shows in such a simple manner that the people can't wait until the war's end.otherwise in some parts the story is too uneven - I mentioned it before that it looks unfinished for me. during watching, Iāve always the impression, that there are some scenes missing.
for example: thereās the nice scene, where we see the station of the confederates (here I always await something special will happen)ā¦ but next we see Pembroke and his men running out of the tunnel ā¦ and the next scene we see them waiting for the sended āscoutā.
maybe the budget was finished due to the explosive showdown ā¦?
Well, yes there are a few ideas, itās not a Fidani.
The one prisoner who preferred to be hanged was the best moment in the film. At this point I had a rest of hope that this would be another SW which wasnāt as a bad as I remembered it. But thereafter the film paves its way down.
Pembroke shooing away their horses so that they have to go by foot is another ridiculous idea and a terrible scene.
The āwar is overā scene was not good enough directed to make forget how silly this idea was.
The good scene at the farm was out of place for me, as this sequence doesnāt fit with the rest of the film.
And the 2nd half of the film is even worser.
No, Iām really sorry that so less in this film works, as there was enough potential for a good actioner.
Haha, reading it again, it seems as we were talking about 2 different films.
After the recent discussion on this film I thought it was overdue a rewatching. I remebered it quite fondly and was surprised at all the negative comments. Having rewatched it. Iām still surprised. Itās no masterpiece but is a whole lot better than many and is a solid 3 star spaghetti for my money.
However, I wonder if peopleās opinions are shaped in some part by the version they see. I, like the Rev, have two very different versions. One which I taped off the TV in New Zealand some years ago which is full screen and heavily cut, the other a DVD-r from a Danish (I think) VHS in widescreen and which runs for about 112 minutes. (Considerably longer than the theatrical release as far as I can tell) This is the version with Coburn dubbed by an alternate voice actor. I found the wrong voice for Coburn annoying but apart from that the longer version was a much better film. I became intrigued by the differences in the two versions though (I am a geek after all) and scanned through both to see what had been cut and changed. The differences are quite large.
The shorter version misses about twenty minutes from the beginning where Spencer and Coburn first meet and get arrested for looting. It also misses the āpissingā scene mentioned earlier as well as a couple of the slightly more graphic killings and f word language. But it also includes a few shots which help make sense of some of the gaps which make the long version seem jumpy. For example, you actually see the team riding in the train before running out of the tunnel. It also, in my opinion, has a better score. The music used in these two versions is very different and the shorter version has a more spaghetti vibe to it with electric guitar etc. So I wonder whether what is wrong with the film has little to do with Valerii at all but more about a third partyās decisions as to how the film should be presented. For me, a combination of the two versions based predominantly on the longer one would equal a pretty good film as a whole.
One last thing. I also noticed that during the seige of the fort towards the end my shorter version is printed in reverse for about 15 minutes. I guess youād have to see both together to notice it but there is one sequence when Spencer runs across the courtyard of the fort and the sign which reads ācompanyā on the wall behind him is back to front. Now how the heck did that happen? ???
My version is the german 118min, which is believed to be uncut, but it seems there are longer versions available.
I saw the film for the 1st time in the shitty german heavily cut comedy dub version. Surprisingly the longer version with the straight dub didnāt improve anything.
I there a version which starts with the last scene?
Yes, my shorter version does. It opens with Coburn and Spencer standing amongst the carnage and Spencer says ā I killed for the first time todayā etc. It then has a rolling type narrative starter running over the picture setting up the personal feud storyline before going to the credits and then into the scene where Coburn and Spencer arrive at the Union army prison / fort.
[quote=āStanton, post:37, topic:468ā]But Savalas is terrible. Another quote from me copied from the ālast westernā thread:
āLook at Telly Savalas, does he do anything? Only standing around with hanging arms like heās waiting for some acting instructions, but becomes nothing. Never seen him so dull. But so is the complete film.ā
Except for his death scene he was completely wasted.
ading it again, it seems as we were talking about 2 different films.[/quote]
yes and no, the figure heās palying is an arrogant, cold-hearted (etc.) asshole. so for me his laconic acting here is adequat.
[quote=āStanton, post:37, topic:468ā]Here we have again a completely different view. I couldnāt spot any interesting atmosphere and also no epic style. This is surely not an epic film as it uses history only as an interchangeable background for a (simple) action adventure.
Well, yes there are a few ideas, itās not a Fidani.[/quote]
the badness (or better sadness) of the war is the atmosphere.
more often I saw this movie, I consider this movie as a congeries of absurd (one time more funny, other time more bleak) stories besides the front of the war (-> the war as cause of grazy stories; f.e. the idea at the beginning with the one armed sheriff, very nice) ā¦ hold together by the revange story (a war in the war).
so I wouldnāt say that itās only a simple action movie.
itās a movie which uses a simple metaphorical language to transport emotions ā¦ or whatever ā¦
I have the wild-east release (about 112min). maybe I forgot this scene ā¦
also I know some different german versions, but I couldnāt remember very much. do somebody know, if there are differnet scores too.
what version is this?
also the wild-east version.
[quote=āmwaf, post:41, topic:468ā]do somebody know, if there are differnet scores too.
what version is this?[/quote]
Yes. My two versions have different scores although both obviously from the same original source as the themes are the same.
I like laconic acting, but I still would call this refusing to act.
the badness (or better sadness) of the war is the atmosphere. more often I saw this movie, I consider this movie as a congeries of absurd (one time more funny, other time more bleak) stories besides the front of the war (-> the war as cause of grazy stories; f.e. the idea at the beginning with the one armed sheriff, very nice) ... hold together by the revange story (a war in the war). so I wouldn't say that it's only a simple action movie. it's a movie which uses a simple metaphorical language to transport emotions ... or whatever ...
Interesting
what version is this?
Itās from a bonus disc from a Spencer/Hill box with the ZDF dub (which was made in the 90s and the DVD ends with the ZDF closing credits), but only in 1,78:1. It wasnāt released outside the box.
The actual Pal lenght of the DVD is 113 min (=118 min cinema). It starts with the credits followed by the scenes in the half destroyed town.
I just re-watched this one the AWE label, it runs 113 min and is in 2.35:1 ratio.
The film was better than I remembered, but still no more than average.
And I agree with those in this thread who says that more time should have been spent on character development and conflicts within the group.
I had always wondered why they hadnāt used Coburnās voice and if there was a version out there with it. I wonder if the reason is because Coburn dubbed a shorter International release and then when they tried to do an English dub of the longer version he was no longer available?
Why the producers did some of the sub-standard dubs they did is one of the great mysteries of life ???
watched this one earlier ON DEMAND. The versionon demand wasthe cut versionwith recycled scores of Day of Anger and Beyond the Law. Theyfit well. The entire bombed out town opening is cut. The language is dubbed over ridiculously. Instead of yelliong GO FUCK YOURSELF! He yells GO FLY A KITE! Cāmon!!!
Watched it yesterday - not a terrible one but average. I liked the assault on the fort but the beginning is a bit slow. Thereās a lot of long stretches where no action takes place especially in the very beginning.
3/5