I wonder why Tessari made these films back to back?
And they’re very different from each other, the first one is more like many early SWs, still very American in style
While the second is definitely more spaghettiesque, and apart from that a bit unique really
To me the final scene with the shoot-out at the villa doesn’t fit with the rest of the film though, and is a little cheesy unfortunately
Other than that it’s a great SW
Yeah, the siege shootout at the end is RoRs weakest element I think. In particular Fernando Sancho’s death by exploding pot plant is a waste. But Gemma’s man to man fight with George Martin is great (I especially enjoy the knife in the rifle butt moment) and the rest of the film is good enough to make up for any faults.
As for why Tessari made them back to back…maybe he just secured funding for two and decided to make them one after the other. The producer was the same in both (Ercoli) and he was Nieves Navarro’s boyfriend so that explains why she’s in both anyway. The repertory company aspect of the two films is one of the things I like most about them to be honest. Would have liked to have seen more of that over the years.
I don’t quite get this, you mean the same actors or characters or what?
This is more or less in the Dollars trilogy in that case
Or in Mercenary/ Companeros
Monte Hellman also made his films Ride in the Whirlwind and The Shooting back to back, also in 1965 btw
Both films are in my top 10. i like them both very much.
[quote=“Lindberg, post:43, topic:477”]I don’t quite get this, you mean the same actors or characters or what?
This is more or less in the Dollars trilogy in that case
Or in Mercenary/ Companeros[/quote]
Yes, that is what I mean and although there are other films which share some personel I don’t know of any which are as identical in cast as the Ringos. Certainly not Mercenary/Companeros or the Dollars which only share one or two people other than director at best. The Ringo films have six major cast members the same plus some minors like Pajarito as well as the director, composer, cinematographer, producers etc. This is what we call a repertory company in England. They used to be very common in provinsional theatres where the same group would put on a different play every other week.
In spaghettis we obviously have familiar faces which pop up a lot but the Ringos are unique I think in the extent of their ‘repertory’ nature.
Of course the composer Morricone is the same for all these films as well
But what do you think is so good about this, having the exact same cast and crew?
It’s probably different to theaters compared to a movie also, not so strange for a theater but a bit odd for movies
I remember someone on this board wondering the same thing about the Garko/Camaso westerns. Its quite curious really. I guess the producer wanted the same guys for some reason. Familiarity breeds competancy, or something like that.
[quote=“Lindberg, post:47, topic:477”]Of course the composer Morricone is the same for all these films as well
But what do you think is so good about this, having the exact same cast and crew?
It’s probably different to theaters compared to a movie also, not so strange for a theater but a bit odd for movies[/quote]
I guess what I like is the idea of a single team of creative people putting their slant on various projects. In the Ringo films for example George Martin plays completely opposite roles in each of the films and Casas is similarly stretched. And as you said earlier, the first was more American in style to some extent whereas the second was more classically spaghetti. Plus, the cast is such a great one I would happily see anything they might have done as a group.
In fact, the whole idea has got me thinking. If you could have put together a similar ‘Spaghetti Super Troop’ who would you chose?
Maybe I’ll start a new thread for this. 
After having rewatched both Ringo films and the interviews on the Koch discs I’m not so sure any more that both were made back to back.
There is not one mentioning in the interviews about that. But the camera operator Sergio d’Offici claims that shooting for Ritorno started in July when it was very hot.
Pistol, which was released in may 65, was shot in the winter in Almeria in South Spain, whereas Ritorno was shot in North Spain near and in Catalunya.
Interestingly you can see in Pistol a lot of green gras between trees and around ways, but in Ritorno at similar places you can spot only withered gras, which is typical for Catalunya (and Spain in general) in Summer. The winter in Catalunya is not that hot and you can see everywhere gras at places where in a normal summer the ground is absolutely dry.
But in Pistol I can see in many scenes these greenish spots which clearly indicates a winter shooting.
Of course, it still could have been a dry winter or spring in Northern Spain.
But why should they release Ritorno, when it was already cut in spring, in December, and give meanwhile 2 other SWs with Gemma in the lead the chance to cash in on the success of Pistol?
Also Gemma: Is shot in the legs and arms, beaten up, stabbed in hand, bad guys leave him in the sun and he becomes temporarily blind…
I like both Ringo films. They’re cool with beautiful soundtracks. I can’t say which one I prefer, but I feel like The Return of Ringo has more memorable scenes than A Pistol for Ringo
I really like both of these films too… I think they’re underrated, especially a pistol for ringo. Maybe not as dark as leone’s films but they do share a lot of elements, they’re still much more violent and more operatic than american westerns and the way the story is written and paced is distinctly italian, there’s no extended scenes of people having meaningless conversations here plus they are more action packed and focused on visual storytelling when compared to american westerns. Definitely examples of more “pure” spaghetti westerns, clean shaved hero or not. Some of the most unique filming locations too, they have so much charm.
Timothy, you got there something wrong with the quoting, as I haven’t written that the films were shot back to back, the quote is actually from Scherp.
Apologies - you are correct. You actually disputed the back-to-back in the posting. I’ll delete my post.
No reason to delete it, you could just have replaced the quote by one taken from the original post by Scherp.
And now your answer is also gone.
For the subject of the discussion if the films were shot back to back, it seems that Scherp also gave the possible answer to the memories of Castellari, we just can’t trust our memories, or at least we can’t always rely on them, we should be aware that they may trick us.
I think that the state of the discussion is at the moment that the Ringo films were not shot back to back
Have to rewatch these films too I think, was many years ago since last time.
At least both were shot in scope, the really wide 2,35:1 aspect ratio. This benefits SWs and western movies in general because of the vast landscapes.
Some SWs were not shot in scope and this is not as effective unfortunately. Even worse is of course older films with “4:3” (1.33:1) aspect ratio.
The ratio 1.33:1, which was dubbed “Academy aperture” in 1932 by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, soon became the first standard ratio in film, and was used until the 1950s.
You are mixing up a few things. This is a question of masking. They may have shot “open matte” (no masking) which makes the picture appear 4:3 and lets them mask it afterwards, e.g. to 1.78:1, 1.85:1 or 2.35:1 depending on the need (but you’d habe a 4:3 read for TV without a need for panning and scanning). In those cases where films were masked from the get go, “in scope”, a modification after the fact would mean a loss of image content “on the sides” to achieve other aspect ratios.
Of course technology and tastes change. Today all TVs sold are wide screen. Theater screens become more and more square, etc…
No I mean older films weren’t masked, they were actually shown in theaters in 4:3, and this seems not very good today.
Then they masked standard film to get a wider image, and eventually the scope image using an anamorphic lens emerged.
Yeah but the academy ratio that pretty much ended before the Italian Western even began