I hope you’re not talking about my judgement
Silver Saddle was one of those few films which tried, after the SW was already dead, to make a (more or less) serious and dramatic contribution to the genre. Gemma had spent most of the previous yes with often weak comedies, and he tried to come back then to more serious films.
But it’s an enigma why he and director Fulci chose such an average script for their effort. The first half is often nicely directed, but in the 2nd half it’s only a tired routine show. Many of the sets and the costumes have also only a routine look and the use of landscape lacks any imagination.
It’s easy for Geoffrey Lewis to steal the show cause there isn’t any competition in the acting department (the child is quite good), but the script loses him halfway in the film, only to bring him back without much need shortly before the end.
Some of the early action scenes are good, but towards the end when they become bigger. they also become worser. The final shootout with the Garrincha gang is the low point of the movie.
All in all, forgettable. 4/10
I actually like this film, and i often listen to the theme song ;D
Has anyone got the German Blu-Ray yet?
Yodlaf, you’re completely nuts :o
The theme song is … ohh, I don’t like it. A pop song, not a good one.
[quote=“Dillinger, post:44, topic:1241”]Yodlaf, you’re completely nuts :o[/quote];D
I like the theme song too but it’s repeated bit too often in the film.
It is played to much in the film for sure.
Stanton’s points are valid as usual but I never had any problem with the later action scenes. Maybe you pay too much attention to action scenes, Stan?
Anyway, the main theme is played too often. But find it rather irresistible.
My thoughts on the film will be published on Fistful of Pasta soon, hopefully.
Action is what SWs are about.
And badly staged action scenes are always a weak point in any westerns.
But I think the 2nd half of the film looks generally pretty uninspired, and the final shoot-out is only the low point.
While I re-watched the first half I thought (and hoped) it was probably better than I had remembered it, at least the directing was quite nice to look at, but then it turned into routine story-wise and the style followed quickly.
One more thing, the girl had an expressive (and beautiful) face, but the film gave her not much chance to show her potential. Hmm, and the boy’s acting was quite good.
You really think so?
Of course, what else?
Believable characters? Deeper meaning? Lyrical mood? In a few Spagies, yes, but only very few.
Yes, it’s all about action, even if it is only one single shot at the end of a long film. Waste this scene and the film has a problem.
Basically westerns are tales about conflicts which are solved in violence. And it’s art to conceive and film this properly.
Of course, there are also a few SWs in which other things than action and violence are also important, or even more important, but these are the exceptions.
What I like about SWs is that there isn’t anything more than the surface, and the only interest is to make this surface look interesting.
Action is a big part but I personally wouldn’t say it’s what their all about. For me, style over content is what their about. Or atleast style in general.
Some of the best spaghettis are not about action. GBU is a relatively actionless filmthough it doesn’t have a fare amount. Shoot the Living… is an actionless film. Sartana Does Not Forgive is somewhat low on action. but all these films are incredibly stylized.
And yes, you were good in Silver Saddle, Silence. ;D 
If we wanted non-stop action, why not simply watch an Action film? Which is what I used to do. To be honest I don’t really know why I watch SWs. I just do ;).
Thanks ;D.
[quote=“korano, post:53, topic:1241”]Action is a big part but I personally wouldn’t say it’s what their all about. For me, style over content is what their about. Or atleast style in general.
Some of the best spaghettis are not about action. GBU is a relatively actionless filmthough it doesn’t have a fare amount. Shoot the Living… is an actionless film. Sartana Does Not Forgive is somewhat low on action. but all these films are incredibly stylized.[/quote]
That’s what I said above, only with other words. Endless action is not what I’m primarily was talking about.
Style, that’s the point, but still in SW the action is mostly the main point of the style. Especially in the scenes which don’t contain action, but which lead in the end and in their sum to the action (=culmination) of the movie.
GBU is an absolute action film, and Shoot the Living, which is far from being actionless, also. Which does not mean that there must be much action in such a film. As I said one single shot can be enough, or, like at the end of The Shooting, the refusal to show what the whole film was moving towards.
Apart from that, many, if not most SWs contain more action than necessary, which is always a flaw.
What a boring technical attitude
These films are westerns and in westerns there is shooting and other types of action, otherwise they wouldn’t be westerns
To me the mood, atmosphere, nihilism, humour, dramatic style, etc, is what SWs is about
This is what I look for in these films and what makes them special
Of course there are a lot of very simple SWs as well, but they are not the interesting ones or the ones that should represent the genre
It’s not a technical attitude I’m talking about. And working on the surface doesn’t mean that these films are simple (even if of course many SWs are indeed simple).
And that “These films are westerns and in westerns there is shooting and other types of action, otherwise they wouldn’t be westerns” is exactly what I said.
And things like “mood, atmosphere, nihilism, humour, dramatic style, etc,” is for me also what SWs are about. And that’s no contradiction to what I said. On the surface only means that there is mostly no intended deeper meaning. The style is the content.
You said SWs are ‘all about action’, ‘what else?’
And you often have this technical approach when you talk about films, you must be aware of this Stanton? 
Never mind, that’s your business
Anyway to me an action film is just action and excitement, like James Bond or martial arts movies for example
A quality spaghetti western has other things to offer, it’s not the action or gunplay that is the main point here, even if it’s a part of the genre
Maybe some people get a thrill out of the bang-bang or horse chases in the simple spaghettis, I just find it boring 
Read again what I have written. I wasn’t talking about films which are containing nothing else than action. I said an action film can only have one single shot at the end, and can still be an action film, if the whole film is building towards this final shot.
Films with endless action are indeed often more boring than exciting.
And my approach towards film isn’t as technical as you think. In fact I’m not excactly sure what you mean with technical approach. I’m mainly feeling films, and talking about technical things is only a way to describe what is fascinating and maybe why.
For me it is more important to feel films than to understand them.
Agreeing with that.