Ringo and His Golden Pistol / Johnny Oro (Sergio Corbucci, 1966)

Another interesting point is that the hero (not anti-hero :wink: ) looks with his black clothes and his small moustache like the filmā€™s baddie, while the sadistic baddie has the soft and sympathetic looks of motherā€™s dream of the perfect fiancee for her beloved daughter.

But that and some nasty violence and the strong opening scene, thatā€™s all the film has to offer.

Interestingā€¦

Also interesting

Although, in some ways it feels more like a Corbucci film than ā€œHellbendersā€ which others have noted to often show the hand of the producer Albert Band. Corbucci might have lost interest in this one and left others to finish some things up for him, but at least it doesnā€™t feel like someone else was behind the overall conception (in spite of it being at an early stage in his career).

Yes, the Corbucci feeling is there, only in a rather primitive basic version. Corbucci was developing his style and his ideas, and it is easy to understand why he had more interest in doing Django.

Hellbenders has like Johnny Oro some of the yet unfinished early Corbucci style, but it is put on a stuff not suitable for that style. Like Navajo Joe it would have been more logical if I Crudeli had been made before Django, but then, there was never much logic behind Corbucciā€™s output.

[quote=ā€œstanton, post:43, topic:1130, full:trueā€]Like Navajo Joe it would have been more logical if I Crudeli had been made before Django, but then, there was never much logic behind Corbucciā€™s output.
[/quote]

Yes, Django followed by the Great Silence would have made more sense.

Alex Cox once said that he had the idea that Leone was more fond of preparing a production, so planning it, than of filming it. I donā€™t know if that is true, but if so, Corbucci was his direct opposite: he was a very impulsive man, accepted a job and would even walk away from one set if another project looked more promising. He lived from set tot set, so to speak, and felt happy in-between. Instead of polishing a script beforehand, he preferred to write it, scene for scene if necessary, on the set. No wonder that thereā€™s hardly any logic or consistency behind his choices or output

Thatā€™s a very interesting point. Leone certainly acted as a creative producer in the classical Hollywood style (as I pointed out in my Cinema Retro article on My Name is Nobody). Given how close they were as friends, itā€™s interesting how they differed in that sense.

Watched it on Youtube, and it was not boring and not bad but not very good either, and I wouldnā€™t rate it over 6/10 SW. The music was OK. The attack on the town by the indians etc was much too long. And as mentioned before strange that there was no follow up after the death of the saloon girl. The sheriff seemed a bit part of a more american western style and Mark Damonā€™s mustasche annoying. He was in jail too long for the movie.

I often imagine if Corbucci got his way and cast Mark Damon as Django.

1 Like

One of my many recurring nightmares.

1 Like

LOL ā€¦ Iā€™m not even a Django fan, but I can appreciate the anxiety of this, ā€˜What ifā€™ :wink:
I never liked Damon in these SWs ā€¦ always looked too much like a California beach bum / just way too cocky, but not likeable.

Seemed like an ok guy in various interviews Iā€™ve seen ā€¦ but not a western hero, in my eyes, or anti hero for that matter.

And who was it Leone first wanted for Fistful?

Wasnā€™t it Richard Harrison ? ā€¦ amongst others. We wouldnā€™t be having this conversation if that had happened ! :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

So true! And history would have taken another courseā€¦

I wonder how many imitators Django wouldā€™ve spawned if he had this smile:

mdamon2

1 Like

Richard Harrison would have suited Clint Eastwoodā€™s role in my opinion.

Nah ā€¦ I think you could be on your own there :slight_smile:

I donā€™t mind Harrison, but heā€™s not much of an actor, and heā€™s a bit goofy looking.

I donā€™t think Clint is much of an actor, either. Looking at Harrisonā€™s other westerns, I can understand why Leone wanted him. Obviously Iā€™m happy things worked out the way they did but I donā€™t see why Harrison couldnā€™t have pulled it off. It didnā€™t require much other than creating a certain mood and Harrison is capable of that. His style is very similar to Clintā€™s.

Agreed, Clint is rubbish, outside of the dollars trilogy ā€¦ and even in it, to a certain extent. :rofl: But he looks good - just leave the acting to Van Cleef and Wallach.

I believe Eastwood was born for, defined and to some extent created the role. He played it with subtlety, intelligence and a revolutionary, miraculous economy. The SW anti-heroes that followed often looked like weak imitations thereafter, rarely capturing more than one dimension of Eastwoodā€™s performance. I would agree itā€™s apparent from his later films that heā€™s not an actor with great range, but thatā€™s not the issue. Although Leone explored other possibles (wasnā€™t Coburn too expensive?), I think we have to put it down in part to his instinctive genius and determination to fulfill his vision that his first efforts employed so many overlooked and undiscovered talents: Eastwood, Volonte, Van Cleef, Morricone, Simi, Kinskiā€¦

3 Likes

September 7, 1966

2 Likes