The fairs I attend are catered mainly for the Horror market, with the Spaghetti western and other genres a sideline of this.
Yes that was SD doing an impression of a deranged Klaus Kinski as Lindberg posted ;D
Now Lindberg just between us 
Is this BELOW the Lindberg Portrait :o :o you asked me Not to show the Forum ?
Or did you mean the other portrait that you say shows “your best side” ?
Sounds like something people liking weird/obscure/subtitled/pretentious arty/farty/crappy DRAMAS would say ;D
Lets put this in perspective:
Number of films starring Tom Cruise with over 10000 imdb votes: 30
For Tom Hanks: 31
Brad Pitt: 25
Ok, how about older stars,
Cary Grant: 8
John Wayne: 5
Sean Connery: 26
Ok now for SW stars:
Gianni Garko: No movie in which he had a leading role had more than 400 votes.
Giuliano Gemma: No lead roles in movies over 400 votes
Anthony Steffen starred in only two movies with more than 100 votes.
Peter Lee Lawrence: Only one film with more than 100 votes. black beauty, and he wasn’t the lead.
So yeah there is obviously a huge gulf between mainstream stars and mainstream movies and SW stars and SW movies.
[quote=“AvatarDK, post:59, topic:576”]You are probably dismissing a couple of billion people as not sane then, SD. Not that I want to contest your point, but that is what you’re doing 
I’ll take a guess and say that the number of people really interested in spaghetti westerns / gialli / other non-mainstream stuff probably number in the low few (1-2) thousands in Denmark. OK, so there’s about 5½ million people in Denmark, which means that a considerable amount do not give a damn / care or even know what we select people are dealing with. I’ll take a quick guess and say that the ratio is about the same in other countries, so yes we are a minority, SD, but there’s nothing wrong with that as long as one realizes it :)[/quote]
I appreciate your calculations, estimations, ruminations AvatarDk all very amusing. 
What I said and posted is exactly the reality/situation I saw and witnessed at 100s of
FILM CONVENTIONS
I was not entering into a world estimation of good/bad taste and my comment is also
correct because nasty/twisted critics like loser Halliwell love those insane dull dramas
and always malign the truly great films. Of course now in 2007 the films of 2007 are
being shown and get the cinema goers, I was not posting about that. 
The original argument was about International Film Stars and Euro Sws Stars as I wrote
COL.DM that IMDB analysis is not in MY OPINION worth anything and I tell you why:
MOST (over 90%) of the IMDB users are teen/young aged 11-30 and all they “know” is
the “RECENT RUBBISH” 1980s/1990s/2000s that is in front of their NOSES and hence that is what they blindly vote for. The usual junk…Hanks, Gibson, Pitt, Streep yawn zzz
Many/most of the real connoisseurs/good judges of films/stars are either DEAD or
NOT using the IMDB. The IMDB is not accurate or representative over the ages :'(.
It is recent 90s and beyond contaminated.
To prove my point we have had dozens of examples in the 1990s/2000s POP charts
in Uk , whenever a classic “old tune” is released EXAMPLE :
IS THIS THE WAY TO AMARILLO TONY CHRISTIE Enormous Number 1 in 2005 UK
Was actually a number 18 Hit only in 1971, but the teens heard in now in 2005 and
they bought it in their millions as if it was a recent hit. It was made known to them 2005
Yes this is my best side 
Guys, I don’t see the point of these discussions about who was where why and when a mega star with millions of devotees
[quote=“Lindberg, post:66, topic:576”]Yes this is my best side 
[/quote]
OOOHHHH :o :o Yes Lindberg that is definitely a “much better side”
I am so happy that you did not mind me posting that “other side” of you earlier 
I hope these enthusiastic discussions are not straying from the “Terence Hill” topic.
Scherp just between the two of us I heard that these mega millions star debates
work for “some forum guys” BETTER than viagra and there is no “touching” involved :o
This topic is fast becoming a Beast ;D.
SD I completely agree with you concerning the 11-30 group voting on imdb, that they don’t know better. But still its unreasonable to think that Peter Lee Lawrence and Anthony Steffen are every bit as popular as Cruise/DeNiro/Julia Roberts. And unfortunately those clueless 11-30 year olds far outnumber us “in the know” movie buffs. Back in the 60’s these same young people were the ones supporting the film market in Italy that is why SW’s were so popular. It was a youth driven market. The older guys prefered John Wayne etc…
Well said CoL.DM fair points you make.
I would not dream of claiming now in 2007 worldwide that NERO/STEFFEN/LAWRENCE
were as popular or the most popular as the recent “mainstream” films/stars :-.
Clearly as we all have stated the recent/box office power of Cruise/Pitt/Hanks dominates.
This is Lindberg’s correct point and hence our beloved SWS/Giallos/Horror etc are CULT.
But I was trying to relate my experiences at Film Fairs/Conventions/Fan sites/blogs/shops
where the memorabilia/Films getting most attention and biggest prices are as I said:
HAMMER / 50s/60s HORROR/SCI FI / CULT TV SERIES . SWS & WESTERNS
While the big mainstream material is in excessive supply, lower priced & less asked for.
I was as surprised as some on here but that is the factual truth at conventions/fairs.
You tend to have 100s & 100s of real experts/connoisseurs at film fairs not kids/teens :o
At various Film Fairs I had the most recent mainstream film materials Posters/Stills and
wanted to exchange for some Classic 1960s HAMMER FILM POSTERS.
I thought well I got the hot mainstream Film stuff I should be OK to trade 1 for 1 ?
NO WAY I had to give about 15 of my mainstream posters/stills sets for just 1 HAMMER.
Hence my arguments/points on this thread.
Lindberg-If it weren’t for T. Hill, we’d never gotten to see your best side. See, he’s greatness.
[quote=“SARTANA DJANGO, post:65, topic:576”]MOST (over 90%) of the IMDB users are teen/young aged 11-30 and all they “know” is
the “RECENT RUBBISH” 1980s/1990s/2000s that is in front of their NOSES[/quote]
You’re overrating them SD, in fact all they know is 2000s and sometimes 1990s because all the older movies [1980s and sometimes even 1990s included] are obviously ‘too old’ for them. I tried to recommend some good older stuff to guys like that and i heard was something like “i have no intention of watching that” or “och who watches movies like that nowadays?”. Makes me want to puke
Thanks Alko, for pointing out your experience of IMDB “teen/youth” majority users.
I think your analysis is more accurate as these arrogant teens/hoodies/youths in fact
just about “know” (even that is very little :D) 2001 to 2007 and maybe some 1990s.
They are unlikely to have any good taste or desire to research/study or learn classic Films
I hope more “mature” real film/TV Series fans/collectors will log unto IMDB and make their
expert presence felt to give a more accurate voting pattern. 
You know what the funny thing is though? For the demographic breakdown of IMDB votes for many spaghetti westerns, it is the younger voters who give SW’s higher ratings than older.
My guess is these younger voters are SW fans like you and I who have “rediscovered” SW’s, while the older voters are John Wayne fans who prefer to keep in line with Loser Halliwell haha.
But then there are also some who like both spaghetti-westerns and classical westerns, even really old westerns from the 30s and 40s.
They are even on this forum, which is a little surprising maybe?
Also some cineastes who like all sorts of films are here 
But you are all welcome even if you’re not only into cult 
[quote=“Lindberg, post:77, topic:576”]But then there are also some who like both spaghetti-westerns and classical westerns, even really old westerns from the 30s and 40s.
They are even on this forum, which is a little surprising maybe?
Also some cineastes who like all sorts of films are here 
But you are all welcome even if you’re not only into cult ;)[/quote]
I am one who LOVES SWS / GIALLOS and
WESTERNS USA 1946 to 1977 But especially I LOVE WESTERNS 1960-1972
As posted previously high up in my All Time 50 Greatest Favourite Films are:
FIVE CARD STUD 1968 Dean Martin Inger Stevens
FIRECREEK 1968 Henry Fonda Inger Stevens
HANG EM HIGH 1968 Clint Eastwood Inger Stevens
BANDOLERO 1968 Raquel Welch Dean Martin
POSSE FROM HELL 1960 Audie Murphy John Saxon
CHISUM 1970 John Wayne Christopher George
HANNIE CAULDER 1971 Raquel Welch Christopher Lee
MAN CALLED NOON 1973 Richard Crenna Rosanna Schiaffino
And of course I am a devoted dedicated lover of all things CULT, but sometimes “cult”
I have found to be extremely popular and in much demand (as earlier discussed).
Back to topic its Terence Hill in a good serious Western
Yes Lindberg I like all types of movies as well. Even the odd “boring” drama and “tedious” comedy occasionally. But when it comes to westerns I prefer SW’s over Hollywood.
SD, Viva Django is a personal favorite of mine. You’re postings are once again tempting me to change my top 20!
This is the only Django without Nero that actually has something to do with the original Django story. Something of a prequel, and Hill looks enough like Nero to make it convincing.
I like to call it:
Django: The Early Years
[quote=“Col. Douglas Mortimer, post:79, topic:576”]SD, Viva Django is a personal favorite of mine. You’re postings are once again tempting me to change my top 20!
This is the only Django without Nero that actually has something to do with the original Django story. Something of a prequel, and Hill looks enough like Nero to make it convincing.
I like to call it:
Django: The Early Years ;)[/quote]
Yes indeed CoL. DM I agree with you VIVA DJANGO 1967 is an excellent, tough
SW and when Terence Hill appears in these violent/revenge/tough SWs I like him much
The DJango series of films is an exciting one after the original Classic 1966 with F.Nero.
Like you I may have to ALTER :o my TOP 20 SW and My TOP 40 Westerns and more