Out of the 3 I prefered Ace High, mainly for the excellent (as usual)performance by Eli Wallach.
Quite a dissapointment this. The balance(if there is any) between slapstisck-crap and serious action is hard to find and all the good scenes(because they are there) are spoiled by the supposed-to-be-funny scenes that follow them. Hill is good though and like I said, there are some good scenes that I enjoyed. 5.5/10
Now letās try and find Ace High, the one I still gotta see(and letās hope itās as good as God Forgivesā¦ I donāt)
yeah Ace High is a serious western and I can recommend the Paramount DVD to ya. It is a bit long and dragging but itās decent
I bought other version (16x9), good. This time I liked it more, there some points thats just lost in. Just like Boone, he helps all (but what made him choice that, arenāt Fisherās men bad enogouh to fear him too ???) The gold claim (Terence) mixes with the revenge (Strode), so whatās the gold part for them ??? They just ride awayā¦
There has been some discussion going on about this outing on another (Whatās the worst ā¦) thread, that made me want to rewatch it.
I found it slightly more entertaining this time, but still donāt understand very well why Stanton thinks so highly of this director
You can read my full report here:
This is from another forum, where the film also was mostly bashed:
āI love Colizzi. To some he might be boring, not to me. Come to think of it, they are a bit slower on TV than they did in the theatres. Like Sergioās films, they belong to the big Screen ! (!) I think he was Leoneās best student. The photography (composition, angles, lenses, framing) tops almost everything in the genre. HILL is my favorite in Italian Westerns, he moves like a cat, does his own stunts (like Belmondo, another one of my heros), looks very handsome, has the best costumes (especially hats) and plays it really cool. Believable cool, at least in my opinion. I canāt stand Steffen or some of these guys who look phony to me. No, I think the Colizzis are among the best. And COLLINA DEGLI STIVALI is almost an experimental film. As mentioned, the leading has not that much screen time and there is almost no dialogue at all during the first 20 minutes! Also, like MERCENARIO, it treats the CIRCUS-theme very well. The score is weird and just great. Cool film.ā
I would underline everything he says about ābest student, photography, costumes, almost experimental, circus theme, score, coolā.
[quote=āStanton, post:26, topic:47ā]This is from another forum, where the film also was mostly bashed:
āI love Colizzi. To some he might be boring, not to me. Come to think of it, they are a bit slower on TV than they did in the theatres. Like Sergioās films, they belong to the big Screen ! (!) I think he was Leoneās best student. The photography (composition, angles, lenses, framing) tops almost everything in the genre. HILL is my favorite in Italian Westerns, he moves like a cat, does his own stunts (like Belmondo, another one of my heros), looks very handsome, has the best costumes (especially hats) and plays it really cool. Believable cool, at least in my opinion. I canāt stand Steffen or some of these guys who look phony to me. No, I think the Colizzis are among the best. And COLLINA DEGLI STIVALI is almost an experimental film. As mentioned, the leading has not that much screen time and there is almost no dialogue at all during the first 20 minutes! Also, like MERCENARIO, it treats the CIRCUS-theme very well. The score is weird and just great. Cool film.ā
I would underline everything he says about ābest student, photography, costumes, almost experimental, circus theme, score, coolā.[/quote]
Absolutely agree on all points regarding Hill and Colizzi.
I thought his hat in Preparati la bara/Viva Django is preposterous (too small)
Interesting comments. I planned to do the other Colizziās too, and Iāll try to watch them with a ācinema eyeā
I started with this one, because I thought it was the weakest of the three
I still donāt really like it, but I must admit some compositions (and some action scenes) were very good
The biggest problems of the movie are related to the script (and - probably - some cuts that were made, it sometimes feels chopped up)
It fascinates me that some people (whose judgement I trust) see the greatness of a director, while I fail to see it
But Iāll keep trying (or die rich)
Scherp, what version do you have?
Dutch Video Film Expres
Not a very good version, indeed
93 minutes, AR about 2,20:1 (4/3, Letterboxed, not anamorphically enhanced), only English audio (not very good) 2.0 Mono
The image looks very flat and colours have faded considerably in many scenes
I donāt know if itās cut, but one scene, at the end of the movie, seems added to the movie (colour scheme is completely different, the scene, a saloon brawl, doesnāt belong here)
Iāve just viewed the film. Iām disappointed. I had more fun awaits. As in the Trinity movies. Moreover annoy the many scenes in the circus.
Iāll give this one another try. Maybe Iām too harsh the first time.
Stanton, youāll be pleased to hear that Boot Hill is no longer the āworstā Iāve ever seen. That spot now belongs to Bounty Hunter for Trinity, which is absolutely preposterous as 1/3 of the movie came from another shitty western, Black Killer. Plus Jeff Cameron is probably the worst leading man Iāve ever seen in an SW. Even worse than Hunt Powers. At least Powers can act a little. Heās better at playing heavies and henchmen and character parts. Simply not a leading man. Joe DāAmato definitely belongs with that elite group of master directors occupying the upper echelon of greatness along with Fidani and others.
Colliziās worst, too much circus stuff in the first 30 minutes and horrible score. Hill should have had more screen time. 4/10
Well, hereās another one the same amigo wrote (but maybe he is only another crazy german like me):
"Iāll always love that film. I stay with it: Colizzi got better every time. DIO PERDONA is good, different, a bit rough in itās style, not right thereā¦ AVE MARIA is great, yet too long. By COLLINA he learned, it is over 20 minutes shorter. And hey, plot? Plot is for American reviewers who miss it during films initial release and when they become classics they forget about the story and rave about the style. And Colizziās style is great. Extraordinary. See for me itās the other way around: Iām bored with suspenseful revenge stories and tight scripts - seen it all in 30 years and most of the time much better. I think of Robert Ryan who said in 1969:(during shooting WILD BUNCH): 'all westerns are made. now itās only a question of style. and Peckinpahās style is extraordinaryā¦'
I feel the same way, 'love Colizzi therefore. A film in which the leading man has no dialogue for 20 minutes? Brave. Forget about Colizzis plots. Theyāre told with three lines. Heās great at shooting āscenesā, like Hawks, who wasnāt interested in plots. The motive of the circus I like a lot, as in MERCENARIO beautifully included. Everything is a bit different here, the weird score which is unique (probably more jazzy than any other Western score). His duels and shootings are always non-cliche. I hate face-to-face duels, almost only Sollima and Leone did that good enough to get away with it.
Cool film, especially in a theatre, looks great on the screen."
Itās not easy for me to find words to describe Boot Hill, cause itās one of these films I never thought much about why I liked them. Above I have used some found words which describe my feelings very well.
Most of the fascination of Boots Hill lies in things which Iām feeling while Iām watching it, and itās not easy to describe feelings in words. Maybe I should try to write a review about Boot Hill, then Iām forced to do so, but I think I would probably fail.
Boots Hill is of course a weird film, not completely weird, not silly in a positive way like They Call Me Halleluja, itās often a very straight and sinister looking film, but several parts look rather strange. (And it seems these strange or weird parts are not to everyones taste.)
It starts with the title, you wonāt spot a cemetary (or boot hill) in the film, but the title sets a feeling.
Then thereās the credit sequence which alternates (also musically) between shots of gambling people and a weird looking dance amongst men, but the film is not about gambling and the film also doesnāt come back to the dancers. I canāt explain it but it is somehow a fitting start, and I would call it one of the great credit sequences in SWs. At least I love it.
This is followed by a gloomy looking typical SW scene which goes straight into the middle of the plot, and is crosscut with the introduction of the circus motives. After the unconnected credits had set the mood for the film, the actual beginning shows us immediately the 2 different poles of the film (sinister SW and lighthearted dances and acrobatics) between which the film will alternately change until they are brought together in the final circus show.
This show starts as a seemingly carefree entertainment and suddenly leads into a political theatre which for one time really brings the intended illumination of the working class. The final duel could so become a mass duel, for once the heroes have not to fight alone and so the film could end as a utopia. (He he, now even the mutes can speak.)
And suddenly, suddenly one might think that the credit sequence which confronts money and dancing, is not that wrong in a film, in which at the end the workers are united with the capital.
There surely is more in the film, but the main point for me is the style. Style, style, atmosphere and even more style. Just so beautiful to look at all these tele lens framings.
What the film keeps off my top 10 is that the final shootout is not the best part of the film. Like in some other films (Giu la testa, Today itās Me, Tomorrow Itās you) this what should be the climax is not on par with the scenes before. There is even an idiotic 2,30 min Trinity like fistfight scene which should be (and could be) cut out of the film.
Otherwise Boots Hill is a pure pleasure.
One of the problems.
The circus scenes and all these scenes with the marching and trumpet playing clowns belong for me to the absolute highlights of the film.
Oddly enough I had always read favourable things about Boots Hill before I digged really deep into SW territory. And the opinion that Boots Hill is the best of the trilogy was also no isolated case. So the first surprise was that Colizzi was generally not regarded as an interesting director (he is so much more talented than e.g. Valerii), and that Boots Hill reputation was generally very, very low, to say the least.
The surprise is still not that so many fans are not too fond about Boots Hill, this i can perfectly understand, the surprise is that so many can think so extremely bad about this film. Thatās the most puzzling thing in the SW world. (Apart from the disturbing absence of Nicoletta Machiavelli nude shots)
[quote=āscherpschutter, post:30, topic:47ā]Dutch Video Film Expres
Not a very good version, indeed
93 minutes, AR about 2,20:1 (4/3, Letterboxed, not anamorphically enhanced), only English audio (not very good) 2.0 Mono
The image looks very flat and colours have faded considerably in many scenes
I donāt know if itās cut, but one scene, at the end of the movie, seems added to the movie (colour scheme is completely different, the scene, a saloon brawl, doesnāt belong here)[/quote]
But also not too bad, at least itās not full frame
Amigo, I gotta give this one another try. God Forgives is in my top ten (Frank Wolff!!!)
I saw Boot Hill several years ago and, among other things, was put off by the poor quality print I viewed. After I picked up the Wild East version I did not re-view it.
I find myself agreeing with you much more often than not, so maybe I should approach this with an fresh, open mind.
If I can get my son to finish his homework in a reasonable amount of time tonight I will watch it post haste. (I donāt want to go back and read the whole thread looking for this answer but: Is the Wild East version a good one?)
Sheās always naked in my brain.
Your text about the movie is great, I guess it took some time writing it, or not?
Great ideas, great style, if you wrote this tonight, within an hour or so, youāre one of Germanyās finest writers
Letās make a review of it
I need to clarify that i believe that Colizzi is a quite talented director. Even during many of the circus scenes i caught myself many times thinking that this or that scene was beautifully shot and with great style! Itās the story itself that bores the hell out of me and of course the soundtrack which really got on my nerves.
[quote=āscherpschutter, post:38, topic:47ā]Your text about the movie is great, I guess it took some time writing it, or not?
Great ideas, great style, if you wrote this tonight, within an hour or so, youāre one of Germanyās finest writers
Letās make a review of it[/quote]
Actually, it was really only an hour or so.
Actually, I started without having any idea and the ideas came easily while I was writing.
Actually, I had never thought before about some of these things.
Actually, this is one of the benefits of the writing process.
Actually, I also thought while I was writing it, this could be the basis for an interesting review.
Actually, it goes normally the other way round. I have several ideas to write about, but when I start most is gone and what remains sounds somehow shallow or terrible. You said it elsewhere Scherp, staring at the white page.
Actually, writing a review is hard, hard work, it seldom goes easily.
Actually, Iām feeling now like being one of Germanyās finest writers. 