Good work, Jonathon
I’m thinking Ramirez, the young bandit with Cipriano or the young man who escapes with Ascencion (husband, fiancee ?) could be Vito
Interesting that you mentioned this.
I have noticed these interlocking Vs a few times (which form a third V at the top 
) in words that would contain a V rather than a W. I figured that was what happened somewhere along the line with Stevens.
Prescott’s son is played by the Italian singer Rino Sentieri a.k.a. Joe Sentieri.
Strangely I don’t remember a houseman or a character named Renaldo in the English dub, in any case Fedele Gentile (the first pic is dated 1942, the second is from Killer Kid) is the third landowner.
[hr]
I too have noticed this W thing, but what I meant to say is that both names, Stev(w)ens and Calisti, appear on posters and lobby cards!
Looks like you have hit the nail on the head with these pics of Cipolla and Cevallos. Regarding Gentile, I got the impression he worked for Don Enrique, seeming to be in charge of the servants and distributing the bread. I don’t remember him as being another landowner or neighbor. In my notes I have him being referred to as Renaldo, Looks like I’ll have to re-watch his scenes with your remarks in mind.
In the short sequence before Maria is kidnapped the Dons are discussing the peons and Gentile is called Renaldo (in the English track) by Enrique. Of course you are correct, coupled with the sequence at the church (why would Fernando start shooting people, didn’t understand why he would risk his mission at this point), he would be another landowner. Ascencion calls her lover Juan in the cave and later he is named by Fernando, along with Alvaro, as being one of the objects of his revenge. Prescott’s son is called Charlie on several occasions. It appears we may have discovered all the credited cast save the mysterious Tommy Roy :).
Re-watching this one the other night my confusion was total, as I after first viewing had noted that “most of the music is Morricone recycled, the rest trash”, and this time it was not so. Reading the thread on it afterwards, Corbett’s’ remark explains it. Still I don’t think the score adds much to the film.
Lenin’s thesis that revolutionary consciousness can be brought to the working people only from without was observed by most writers and directors of the Zapata westerns. Not so in this one. And sure enough, Fernando’s attempt to arouse the peons is not very convincing and amounts to nothing.
I really like this one, despite its weaknesses, and I have given it two stars. But I may have started out on the wrong footing with these stars, as two stars with me will mean within top sixty, and most SWs will not get a star at all. Have you at any point discussed and laid down common rules for this?
Use your common sense to figure it out, it ain’t rocket science.
Zero stars is not an alternative? So all films will have to be given at least one star?
Seems to be the idea. I don’t see a problem, you can use the BOMB to **** rating or 1 to 5 stars rating or score films on a scale from ONE to TEN, it’s always more or less the same idea, they’re rated from AWFUL to MASTERPIECE. So in our case, the idea must be something like:
I’ll go along with that. Three stars for this one then. Very uneven, enjoyable most of the time and very much so some of the time.
[quote=“scherpschutter, post:64, topic:1540”]* - Awful
** - Average
*** - Okay, Good
**** - Very Good
***** - Masterpiece[/quote]
The 2 Stars should not be below average, but average. Makes more sense to me. Awful is already below average.
Okay, that sounds okay to me as well.
The problem I have is the gap between ‘average’ and ‘good’ (3 stars), you should have something like ‘above average’ in-between, but we don’t have half stars. Otherwise a five star system works pretty well.
Yes, but you have written okay and good. These are acceptable films, entertaining, but not particularly good.
Yeah, this is the same old discussion all over again.
If you have to give stars, then 1* means that it’s an awful film, it can get no worse. Unless it’s possible to also give half stars.
2* is, of course, better than 1*, but still bad.
3*, on a 5* scale, is literally in the middle -> okay film, but nothing more than that, sufficient marks.
4* good
5* excellent
OR:
(0,5* = 1/10)
1*=2/10
etc… 5* = 10/10
Tend to forget about ratings as most films I view are average.
This one I think is a little above average. The most average SW I’ve seen: One Silver Dollar.
I watched this one again today, this time I watched the scenes in correct order and film made much more sense. Jeff Cameron has his best role in it and Woods is good as usual.
The ending is extremely unusual. The hero doesn’t achieve a single thing.
Revisited this one recently. It’s definitely an interesting film, definitely above the average spagh. I’m pretty convinced that Eduardo Mulargia directed this, it can’t be Fidani. It could be that Mulargia left the set at some point and Fidani took over, or the other way around… Just take a look at Jeff Cameron’s great performance and compare it to They Came to Kill Sartana, Shadow of Sartana or any other role that he had in a Fidani film, it’s incomparable…
This film’s page in the database has been updated to the new layout. Please help us improve it by contributing to it.
