I don’t mean any offense, but everything you typed is wrong!
In truth, I was perhaps a bit disappointed because the film was so notorious and wasn’t as shocking all that. However, it’s a solid film, with good twists and a great central premise. I don’t think it’s a waste of time, I did enjoy it, although it had its dull parts and the mood overall is very sombre and bleak.
For me, the gore was not a problem, but some parts worked better than others. I particularly liked the burnt flesh effect later in the movie, but thought some of stabbing/slicing stuff was just unnecessary.
Ultimately, I think it definitely deserves it’s cult status and I would urge anyone who is a fan of westerns to check it out. I think if you’re a fan of The Great Silence then you ought to find aspects of Cut-Throats Nine attractive.
TGS and Cut-Throats Nine have nothing in common. Except maybe the snow-covered locations.
TGS is a masterpiece by a master director. Cut-Throats Nine is an average work by a incompetent director. With many boring and uninspired scenes.
And then these scenes, which reminds a zombie horror movie. Ridiculous.
And without this Gore scenes, this movie would probably be completely unknown.
But with these scenes, the film has earned the reputation as one of the most brutal Euro-Western. And this reputation has boosted the sale.
With the sensationalism of people, you can earn good money.
I should qualify my comments and say that if you love one it doesn’t mean you’re going to love the other, but I think they have enough in common that make Cut-Throats Nine worth watching if you like The Great Silence.
[quote=“The Stranger, post:64, topic:971”]TGS and Cut-Throats Nine have nothing in common. Except maybe the snow-covered locations.
TGS is a masterpiece by a master director. Cut-Throats Nine is an average work by a incompetent director. With many boring and uninspired scenes.
And then these scenes, which reminds a zombie horror movie. Ridiculous.
And without this Gore scenes, this movie would probably be completely unknown.
But with these scenes, the film has earned the reputation as one of the most brutal Euro-Western. And this reputation has boosted the sale.
With the sensationalism of people, you can earn good money. ;)[/quote]
I typed out a really long response justifying my comments, but then managed to accidentally delete it. Essentially, though, I think you’re being overly dismissive and a tad blinkered.
If you can appreciate the unrelenting brutality of The Great Silence then you owe it to yourself to check out Cut-Throats Nine. You may not like it as much as I did, but it is most definitely a film worthy of consideration. It has a lot more in common with The Great Silence than just snowy locations.
I’ve only seen one film by Joaquín Luis Romero Marchent, Fedra West, but judging by that film alone, incompetent seems way too harsh. Hard to completely judge the aforementioned spaghetti as the only available form is butchered, but it has some really well-directed parts and it’s overall a little unknown gem.
I know what you mean, but still, I would never recommend CT9 to anyone who likes TGS.
There is for their days extreme violence in both, but the one in TGS is completely different. While TGS is still disturbing, the violence in CT9 is of a rather childish kind imo.
Both are set in winter, but TGS has a real winter atmosphere, while CT9 has only the atmosphere of a warm Mediterranean winter.
Anything else in both films is also completely different. CT9 has not even a real western atmosphere.
I also don’t think that Joaquin is an incompetent director. In parts his SWs are well directed (CT9 has some good looking shots), but nevertheless, and for very different reasons, none of them is really convincing.
The “Zombie” scene is well made, but looks a bit odd in the film.
My comment from page 2 of this thread (it still stands):
Condenados a vivir is more notorious than famous for a lot of mostly senseless gore shots, but even without them it’s a cold and nasty film.
Unfortunately this is a rather unimpressive movie which lacks interesting story and characters and therefore also interesting conflicts. So it plods along without catching my attention, even some surprises were only noticed, not enjoyed, until the film reaches its lame end in which the rest of a possible continuing story is thankfully blown away.
Joaquin Romero Marchent’s directing is not bad, but also not good either. So is the complete film: Nothing bad, but also nothing outstanding, except a few nice flashbacks in unusual moments and a dreamlike scene which seems to come straight out of a horror movie. (Also the music in connection with the gore and the general atmosphere reminded me more of the horror genre)
Actually there isn’t much of a SW in it nor has it a particular western feeling (even most of the costumes are not exactly western typical), so as a whole it’s more a survival drama (albeit an undramatic one) than a western.
There is more gore in Cut-Throats Nine, which you’d be within your rights to consider childish. However, there’s a lot of violence in the film and not all of it can be reduced to childish gore.
The murder of Sergeant Brown is particularly disturbing, because I seem to remember his daughter is raped while he is tortured. I don’t really know how you can dismiss that as “childish”. It’s not in the film for laughs and the whole scene is important to the film; it causes the group of convicts to fraction and is important to setting up a relationship between the daughter and one of the convicts.
Similarly, there’s a bit where Sergeant Brown shoots one of the prisoners in the face. It’s pretty bloody, but the brutality serves a purpose because it’s the first time you start to question the morality of the man you thought had been established as the hero.
Put aside the gore and the scenes of violence and not unnecessary, they are crucial to the telling of the story and the development of the characters. Apart from the gore, there is simply no difference between the scenes of violence in Cut-Throats Nine and the scenes of violence in The Great Silence.
That makes no sense. The sense the prisoners are about to freeze to death is palpable in Cut-Throats Nine.
They’re both set in snow-covered landscapes and that creates a different, sombre kind of mood which I think is exploited by both Corbucci and Marchent. Whereas Corbucci uses the landscape to make a more gentle, peaceful kind of mood for so many scenes, Marchent from the beginning uses it to create a atmosphere of desolation and hopelessness. The isolation of the mountains is characterised by unspoilt snow stretching into infinity, which helps to establish that the convicts are completely detached from civilisation and its laws.
Sorry you feel that way, but that’s simply not true.
The snow settings in Cut-Throats Nine and The Great Silence is a reflection the bleak outlook of both films. In both Cut-Throats Nine and The Great Silence the heroes and villains are established only for them to ultimately fail the audience. In Cut-Throats Nine the audience is repeatedly let down; first by Sergeant Brown, who not only gets killed, but is ignomiously revealed to be as ruthless as the men he’s guarding; then by the one convict who seems to have a conscience, but who actually murdered the Sergeant’s wife; and finally by the daughter, who kills herself and the remaining convicts with her. Both films are concerned with turning the conventions of westerns on their head, destroying audience expectations and forcing us to face the reality of injustice.
You could argue that The Great Silence does not have a western atmosphere, because it certainly is unconventional in this respect. I am willing to be a little more generous than that, so I think it’s an unconventional western and so is Cut-Throats Nine.
It looks odd, but so does the opening dream sequence of Johnny Hamlet, the boomerangs in Matalo! and just about anything to do with The Silent Stranger. Are we really going to start turning our noses up at these elements which might not be typical for the genre? Personally, I’d rather not.
I happen to think the scene is one of the best in the film and one of the most interesting. I think it works extremely well and is not gratuitious or without context.
It is a cold and nasty film, but that’s sort of the point. The gore shots have made it notorious, which perhaps means a lot of people are less likely to look beyond the sensational and see merits of the film.
This is not the first time we’ve disagreed on a film, and you are entitled to your opinion. However, I think the concept of the film is original and the plot tiwsts have genuine impact. There are a lot of surprises with the characters, which I enjoyed, and I liked having my expectations pulled from under me.
The series of flashbacks were used brilliantly, at first providing relief from the relentless misery and brutality of the mountains. As the film progressed, the flashbacks looped back to the beginning of the film and any sense that the characters could belong to a happier world was simply destroyed by some shocking revelations. It really paints a pretty dismal view of the world and certain elements of human nature, the same as The Great Silence.
The directing is not amazing, but it does the job. There are some brilliant flourishes, such as the flashbacks, and overall I would say it is good if not great. I did love the scene where the cabin rebuilds itself in slow-motion; it’s such an amazing and original way to represent the mental process of recognition.
It’s not a spaghetti western, it’s a Euro-western, hence why this discussion is in this part of the forum. It’s set in the west, so it’s a western, irrespective of whether it’s typical or not.
It tries to do something a bit different, which is why I personally find it interesting and worthy of note. As I said before, you might not like it, but it’s worthy of consideration. I still think that is particularly worthy of consideration for those who liked the more unconventional elements of The Great Silence.
I didn’t set out to be a champion for Cut-Throats Nine, but I don’t like to see its artistic merit unappreciated. Beyond the gore it is a very strong film and anyone looking for something beyond the conventional should see it.
At first I have to say that all what you have brought in in your defense of the film, was already considered by me in my opinion about the film. So it hardly won’t change as there is nothing i hadn’t thought off.
Still there are a few misunderstandings, where I maybe wasn’t exact enough.
[quote=“TheBigSmokedown, post:69, topic:971”]There is more gore in Cut-Throats Nine, which you’d be within your rights to consider childish. However, there’s a lot of violence in the film and not all of it can be reduced to childish gore.
Apart from the gore, there is simply no difference between the scenes of violence in Cut-Throats Nine and the scenes of violence in The Great Silence.[/quote]
The childish remark was indeed aimed mainly at the gore scenes. They reminded me on children tearing of the wings of butterflies or blowing up frogs to see the outcome. They made me chuckle when I first watched the film 4 years ago, while I think that e.g. the ear-cutting in Django is still a disturbing and hurting scene.
The general difference between the violence in TGS and CT9 is that the one in TGS is very well made and conceived, while the one in CT9 hadn’t impressed me at all.
That makes no sense. The sense the prisoners are about to freeze to death is palpable in [b]Cut-Throats Nine[/b].
For me these scenes are not palpable. I'm working just now very often in a cold surrounding, and sorry, but these don't look really cold imo.
Sorry you feel that way, but that's simply not true.
The snow settings in Cut-Throats Nine and The Great Silence is a reflection the bleak outlook of both films. In both Cut-Throats Nine and The Great Silence the heroes and villains are established only for them to ultimately fail the audience. In Cut-Throats Nine the audience is repeatedly let down; first by Sergeant Brown, who not only gets killed, but is ignomiously revealed to be as ruthless as the men he’s guarding; then by the one convict who seems to have a conscience, but who actually murdered the Sergeant’s wife; and finally by the daughter, who kills herself and the remaining convicts with her. Both films are concerned with turning the conventions of westerns on their head, destroying audience expectations and forcing us to face the reality of injustice.
You could argue that The Great Silence does not have a western atmosphere, because it certainly is unconventional in this respect. I am willing to be a little more generous than that, so I think it’s an unconventional western and so is Cut-Throats Nine.
Having snow in it is not enough to make a film unconventional. TGS is still an unconventional film (but not an anti-western) while CT9 wasn’t unconventional (apart from the gore scenes) for the year of its making.
Nearly all in CT9 came for me without a greater surprise (except for the early death of the Sergeant). It is not a completely foreseeable film (and for that it is not a boring film), but is also not a film for me which could surprise me. The ruthlessness of all characters is pretty typical for a 70s SW.
It looks odd, but so does the opening dream sequence of [b]Johnny Hamlet[/b], the boomerangs in [b]Matalo![/b] and just about anything to do with [b]The Silent Stranger[/b]. Are we really going to start turning our noses up at these elements which might not be typical for the genre? Personally, I'd rather not.
I happen to think the scene is one of the best in the film and one of the most interesting. I think it works extremely well and is not gratuitious or without context.
For me also the best scene in the film, but still an odd scene in this film. Not because it is odd for a western (I don’t have any problems with anachronisms or strange scenes and elements in western), but because it simply doesn’t fit for this particular film. For me it doesn’t fit, for others it does.
The series of flashbacks were used brilliantly, at first providing relief from the relentless misery and brutality of the mountains. As the film progressed, the flashbacks looped back to the beginning of the film and any sense that the characters could belong to a happier world was simply destroyed by some shocking revelations. It really paints a pretty dismal view of the world and certain elements of human nature, the same as [b]The Great Silence[/b].
Yeah, why not. Does a film make better which I like, but doesn’t help a film in which I don’t care for any of the characters
It's not a spaghetti western, it's a Euro-western, hence why this discussion is in this part of the forum. It's set in the west, so it's a western, irrespective of whether it's typical or not.
Again a matter of definitions. I don't make any differences between SWs made by Italian or by Spanish directors, so every Spanish western is also always a SW, no matter if there was an Italian involvement in the production or not. Marchent is a SW director so this is also one. Only that imo it doesn't have too much of a western, just like some other examples. Just like in The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (which many consider as a western, but many others including me not) the clothes are different from the typical western clothes, and the story is also not a typical SW one. But as it was made in the time of the SWs, and as it was made by a SW director, and in parts looks like a western, it is a SWs for me.
I would call it a half-western, though.
But in the end it is for my opinion not important if this is a western or not. I like these definition things, but in the end what counts at first is that it is a film regardless of the genre it belongs to, or does not belong too.
So my opinion isn’t influenced by the genre definition. Saying that it is not a real western isn’t a verdict, but only a declaration, which doesn’t imply any judgement.
It tries to do something a bit different, which is why I personally find it interesting and worthy of note. As I said before, you might not like it, but it's worthy of consideration. I still think that is particularly worthy of consideration for those who liked the more unconventional elements of [b]The Great Silence[/b].
I didn’t set out to be a champion for Cut-Throats Nine, but I don’t like to see its artistic merit unappreciated. Beyond the gore it is a very strong film and anyone looking for something beyond the conventional should see it.
And that is were we still disagree. Read the whole thread, and you will see you are not the only who defends the film (at least 11 members have CT9 in their top 20), but I’m also not the only one who doesn’t think much of it.
Good discussion btw. I like your arguments, even if can’t share them.
[quote=“Stanton, post:72, topic:971”]For me these scenes are not palpable. I’m working just now very often in a cold surrounding, and sorry, but these don’t look really cold imo.[/quote]A very good discussion you guys are having but my only addition is that the above statement seems beside the point. The scenes may not look cold but that is definitely not fake snow and it definitely is cold.
I agree with Stanton in that CT9 lacks the spaghetti western atmosphere. I enjoyed CT9 but mainly just for the shocking/gorey scenes like a “zombie” movie as someone said. The music is also really eerie in parts. But, I wouldn’t recommend it to someone who likes TGS…
To me they had exactly the same feel as the ear-cutting scene in Django.
Seems like you’re still confusing the gore with the violence overall.
As korano points out, even if this is how you personally feel, you cannot deny that the film is set in snow. Trapped on the mountains, it follows that it is a cold and inhospitable environment.
Having snow is enough to make a film unconventional if you’re talking about spaghetti westerns. It is conventional for spaghetti westerns to be set in arid landscapes.
Clearly your powers of perception are greater than mine, as there was plenty to surprise me. I certainly didn’t expect the Sergeant’s daughter to blow herself and the remaining survivors to kingdom come at the end of the film.
Fair enough. For me it fits into the film nicely.
I don’t understand this comment.
[quote=“Stanton, post:72, topic:971”]Again a matter of definitions. I don’t make any differences between SWs made by Italian or by Spanish directors, so every Spanish western is also always a SW, no matter if there was an Italian involvement in the production or not. Marchent is a SW director so this is also one. Only that imo it doesn’t have too much of a western, just like some other examples. Just like in The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (which many consider as a western, but many others including me not) the clothes are different from the typical western clothes, and the story is also not a typical SW one. But as it was made in the time of the SWs, and as it was made by a SW director, and in parts looks like a western, it is a SWs for me.
I would call it a half-western, though.
But in the end it is for my opinion not important if this is a western or not. I like these definition things, but in the end what counts at first is that it is a film regardless of the genre it belongs to, or does not belong too.
So my opinion isn’t influenced by the genre definition. Saying that it is not a real western isn’t a verdict, but only a declaration, which doesn’t imply any judgement.[/quote]
This seems extremely muddled to me.
Cut-Throats Nine does not have a typical spaghetti western feel, I agree with you on that point. However, when you understand how little Italian involvement there was, it’s hardly surprising! I think it’s perhaps more helpful to think of the film as a Eurowestern, because that’s simply what it is.
Your personal approach to classification and catergorisation is all somewhat moot.
I know, and our opinions are not really at completely opposite ends of the spectrum. I guess I have just a little more fondness for the film and am willing to accept it has a greater degree of artistic merit than some others.
That’s very generous. I’m not afraid of a debate when I’m in the right mood and have some time on my hands. You seem to be one of the few on here with a similar mindset.
Rewatched (again) the Eurovista version -which seemed to be have a picture a little skimmed off the top- and liked it a lot better this time. Maybe it was the fact I only consumed weed while watching instead of weed and beer. It also seemed pretty new because of that. The gore had more impact this way and I dug the grim atmosphere a lot more this time. Editing is pretty crude, as is the camera work. There’s no fun to be had, which is good. At times it feels like a work of hate; vile and without compromise with themes of greed and despair seeping through. The rolling in the snow is done a tad too much, but fuck it. Overall it’s above average in the ‘engrossing department’ and the music adds tot this. Will probably write a review in Dutch, providing I’m not too drunk after reviewing L. Bava’s awful Graveyard Disturbance (2/10). Condenados a vivir: 7/10.
