I concur.
If it is Jack’s voice then he did a great job of masking it.
None of the actors did their own dubbing on this film. I was told that the producers didn’t have much faith in the film and didn’t want to “waste anymore money” on bringing the “expensive” American actors back to loop their own lines. Usually, the actors’ contracts include dubbing clauses at the outset; but, for some reason this was not the case for GOD’S GUN.
In fact, this film almost didn’t get released at all, from what I understand–because the producers were really unhappy with it. The funny thing is…apart from the poor voice choices for the three American leads…I don’t think this film is all that terrible.
I mean…it aint great by a long shot…but, I have seen a lot worse Spaghetti Westerns!
That is one of the main reasons I dislike the movie - I like hearing Lee’s voice - I don’t want to hear some schlep do the dubbing on it.
That’s understandable!
I agree, and i like to hear Palance’ voice.
let me just say that I think the movie isn’t as bad as many here claimed, in my opinion. it’s a solid revenge story with some nice spaghetti moments, it suffers from lots of mistakes, but its not a fidani or something 
My point exactly!!!
Same here - it does have some bright parts for sure. Lee and Jack in the same movie - solid!
Holy shit, it only needed 2 years and 4 DVDRs to get me a running copy of the german VHS tape (good enough quality, open matte fullscreen).
And it wasn’t worth the wait.
The best part about the waiting was, that, in the process of it, I watched the wonderful opening scene, with the puppet theater and the laughing kids accompanied by great music, again and again.
The rest of the film is a helpless mess with most of the participants giving their worst.
And meanwhile I had become just used to Parolini’s way of directing westerns, but there’s not much left of it in God’s Gun, except for the opening scene of course.
Not easy to decide what’s the worst aspect:
The unimaginative directing?
The dull acting?
The unatmospheric sets and costumes?
The lousy photography?
The shitty action scenes?
The standard dialogues?
Jack Palance?
I’m really sorry for Jack Palance, who at this time was maybe at the nadir of his career, and he seems to know it, only indifferently repeating his evil grinning baddie routines, walking through the film like a zombie.
And what’s about Richard Boone? He simply disappears after 20 min (in which btw his role wasn’t needed) and returns out of nothing for one scene near the end.
And he’s the sherriff. Where was he in between? Fishing (like all good sherriffs do)?
Then there’s the kid.
Yes, I like these type of kid roles as much as most of you do, even if this one is by far not the worst of them.
Lee van Cleef. Oh, he’s ok, quite ok. Only in the wrong movie.
I liked the main theme of the score. Not much else.
Have I mentioned the lovely opening scene?
[quote=“stanton, post:29, topic:346”]The unimaginative directing?
The dull acting?
The unatmospheric sets and costumes?
The lousy photography?
The shitty action scenes?
The standard dialogues?
Jack Palance?[/quote]I can almost hear the words NEIN NEIN ACHTUNG! etc…
Not the greatest of westerns but it’s still quite enjoyable enough, must admit it though, i’ve never seen Palance so wooden.
[quote=“Bill san Antonio, post:30, topic:346”]I can almost hear the words NEIN NEIN ACHTUNG! etc…
:D[/quote]
Ha ha, yes, where is he when you need him?
Well, I didn’t thought that bad about God’s Gun before, but when I watched it now again, and complete for the 1st time, I was shocked how uninspired most parts of the film were.
Btw, Diamante Lobo, the italian title, I don’t understand it.
It’s also known as Pistola di Dio.
I recently watched this tonight. It was the 94 minute version of the film. Ill have to say i liked the film, but for sure it was nothing special. The plot was very interesting in a cheesy way, the whole twin brothers thing. I have to admit though when Lee Van Cleef died so early in the film i was almost stunned. i was like WTF. I actually thought thats all he was in the film for, until Leef Garret finds his twin brother. The soundtrack was mediocre. Jack Palance’s acting seemed a little off. Overall it’s thought it’s good and worth a watch, but definitely nothing remarkable.
LVC is my huge crush, and so despite the its horrid reputation and Lee’s even more god-awful toupee, I watched it anyway. Until the 22nd minute the Father guy got shot. I was like, “WHAT??? Dead already???” I turned the damn thing off. Then I read reviews that there’s a twin. Oh boy, how original and imaginative!
So I slaved through it again. I couldn’t sit through other LVC’s miserable films, as much as I love the man.
Poor directing, poor cinematography, poor costumes (it was definitely 1976, not 1876), poor DVD transfer, poor dubbing, poor gun choreography, rancid acting… etc.
The rape scene in the saloon was so poorly acted that I wonder if any of them were professional actors. Parolini must have been high throughout the whole thing or just tossed the filming to someone else in the crew to direct it.
I concur!
I could never understand why this movie is so universally derided when there is so much worse out there.
Could it possibly be the fans were expecting more from a film that had a great cast and was directed by Parolini?
I’m certain that must be it.
True, it isn’t a great movie but it has a handful of scenes that are pure genius (A gunfight involving flowers during a flashback, LVC killing some baddies off one by one while posing as an avenging spirit and the final gun duel is one of the most memorable the genre has to offer).
The film does tend to spiral into a very bad territory at times with pointlessly overlong scenes (The scene where the baddies molest some of the hookers comes to mind) but over all it is a pretty solid romp with an atypical twist (twin brother angle).
At times the score can get quite bad but there are some damn fine tunes in some instances.
And hey… Ya get to see, yet again, another glimpse of Sybil Danning’s boobies!
Well, one booby… but what a booby!
I give it 3 out of 5.
P.S. I’m certain Palance was intoxicated all throughout filming.
Must ask Mr. Paraloni when next I speak to him.
[quote=“YourPallbearer, post:36, topic:346”]P.S. I’m certain Palance was intoxicated all throughout filming.
Must ask Mr. Paraloni when next I speak to him.[/quote]Was Palance a heavy drinker? LVC certainly was one.
Jess Franco also told in the interview how Palance used to be intoxicated all the time while working on Justine.
[quote=“Bill san Antonio, post:38, topic:346”]Was Palance a heavy drinker? LVC certainly was one.
Jess Franco also told in the interview how Palance used to be intoxicated all the time while working on Justine.[/quote]
I had the idea that he was intoxicated while working on Compañeros, but in none of the articles on the movie I read, this was mentioned, so I guessed it was only an illusion.
I know Van Cleef was, and I’m quite sure it has ruined his health in combination with working in the burning Almeria sun; just compare the LVC of the Leones with the one of The Grand Duel or Diamante Lobo.
If Palance was a heavy drinker, he must have stopped later. I remember him doing all kind of athletic tricks on stage when he received the oscar for City Slickers; I know heavy drinkers can hide their disease pretty well, but he looked really fit and healthy at that time, so I can’t imagine he was still an alcoholic then.
If I was working for Jess Franco, I reckon I would have to be drunk all the time.