Itâs not an exception, one can check that, but I assume that for between 10 and 30 % of all SWs the year associated with them is not the release year.
And yes, these are usually films which were released early in the year after they were produced.
well thereâs no reason why it would be an exception to the rule, its a normal case of it being released in the following year.
If TBG is a 1966 film then once upon a time in the west is a 1966 film as well with the same logic, since that is when they technically started the treatment for it.
Now the discussion gets odd. OuTW was shot in 1968, not 1966, so I donât know why that example?
And we havenât said that we know the reasons, I have so far only guessed, so donât ask me why, ask the film industry. 
But I know for sure that not only the release date is used for the officially given year for a film, and thatâs at least a fact.
I checked a German film magazine I read, and in the credit section of German films released early in 2024 itâs mostly âGermany 2023â, not 2024.
So maybe it is just the IMDBization of film data which makes things worse?
1 Like
yeah but the year it started being written is just as arbitrary as filming year and is generally the same year for most of these movies⊠the year it was made available to the public is more logical.
And we havenât said that we know the reasons, I have so far only guessed, so donât ask me why, ask the film industry.
Haha, fair enough⊠but i think there should be a fixed objective way of associating a year with a film, and that should be the year it was made available to the public, with some exceptions when there is a 5+ year gap between filming and release.
I think IMDB ratings are horseshit for the most part, but IMDB is very good at being a film database, it always has the most objective and comprehensive info⊠letterboxd also notes it as 1967 btw.
LB draws their data from themoviedatabase automated
2 Likes
I now have watched the 110 min Italian version several times and surrender to this epic SW with extremely its good Morricone music, and it moves up to number 5 on my SW top list, even if it feels strange and boarding to sacrilege to put A Fistful Of Dollars and The Good, The Bad And The Ugly as number 6 and 7. The landscapes also are nice with some seldom used locations in Spain.
2 Likes
Another rewatch of a personal favorite (US cut, which I prefer)⊠my opinion hasnât changed, this film is a great experience every time. Itâs a flawed film, but a flawed film that I love. The scene in the cabin is as useless as I remember it being (except for the part where LVC rides off while that woman is begging him to stay after he shot everything that had a dick - that was awesome), but everything else is great stuff. This time it was really noticeable how that particular scene was basically the cause of the pacing issues, because everything else is well paced. I would also like to emphasize how great the filming locations here are. In a genre that had always struggled somewhat with filming locations, this film stands out a lot every time. The filming locations here are very convincing and aesthetically pleasing.
I agree @runner, this joins films like Day of Anger and Death Rides a Horse, in being very complementary to Leoneâs FFDM/FOD style. They feel like a natural extension of his style but are still different enough to have merit of their own.
1 Like
âThe Big Gundownâ premiered in the U.S. at Loewâs Hollywood Theater, Los Angeles, August 7, 1968. It did a âwhoppingâ $11,132 business in its opening day at New York Cityâs Astor Theatre, August 21 1968 (Daily Breeze, [CA], August 27 1968).
A few reviews below: "Itâs so enjoyable, in fact, itâs too bad it isnât a ârealâ western.â (Los Angeles Times)
Source below: (2) (Valley Times, August 8, 1968)
In the UK, aside from the âDollarsâ movies this was one of the more enduring spaghetti westerns. Opening in early February 1969, it was screened regularly until about 1974/75, backing films such as âThe Wrecking Crewâ, âThe Virgin Soldiersâ, â10 Rillington Placeâ, âCactus Flowerâ, âDirty Harryâ and even a double bill with âDead or Aliveâ aka âA Minute to Pray, A Second to Dieâ.
Source below: (Evening Post, 21st February, 1969)
4 Likes
Ignorance knows no bounds ⊠LVC was never, âMr Uglyâ, that mistake was due to the trailer for GBU which has him as âThe Uglyâ, rather than âThe Badâ, because no one at United Artists knew that âCattivoâ means Bad and âBruttoâ means Ugly when they re-voiced the Italian trailer.
All The Big Gundown had in common with itâs top billing titles was Colombia Pictures, which later became, Colombia, EMI, Warner, at least in the UK .
A good time to be alive for double features ⊠I suppose.
3 Likes
âThe Big Gundownâ ⊠showing today on UK TV channel 33. 5 Action @ 2.00 PM
⊠now thatâs a surprise! However, quite a few LVCs have turned up on British Telly recently ⊠âDeath Rides a Horseâ, âSabataâ, âReturn of Sabataâ, âCommandosâ, âBeyond the Lawâ and âDay of Angerâ ⊠all being shown on relatively LQ SD, but itâs still nice to see them turn up, and perhaps inspire a new generation of SW fans.
1 Like
Itâs usually the USA 90m version which turns up on these cable channels.
Yeah ⊠it probably is the shorter version - but better than nothing.
âDay of Angerâ was the shorter cut, and âA Bullet for the Generalâ is just cut to pieces as it was being shown in the mornings FFS! ⊠it seems these channels arenât too bothered about content or artistic integrity. Theyâre just another slot on the dial to sell advertising space.
Does it really matter? I mean, who still watches TV? And these are all on BluRay anyhow
1 Like
I think so ⊠because not everyone interested in film, hoards physical media - Perhaps you mean from the perspective of regulars on site, itâs not that important ⊠but as I said, it may well introduce a new audience for these films.
Also, there are plenty of us who still watch TV, selectively of course ⊠and itâs a refreshing change to see a few more genre films turn up on the box, rather than all the mainstream crap owned by the big American studios and distributors, which dominate most digital TV channels.
4 Likes
Back when you had to pay for a subscription fee to see Filmfour ?
I wasnât âhooked upâ, but did have a workmate tape this for me, and I still have the VHS cassette - The Sergio Leone documentary preceded the screening, so that was real treasure for me in the days long before Ultimate Boutique releases.
PS: âOnce Upon a Time: Sergio Leoneâ (2000) which was shown in the full 57 minute version - IMDB have it incorrectly listed as 20 minutes, as that may have been what was included in the âOnce Upon a Time in Americaâ DVD/BD release.
1 Like
Yeah, it was a few extra quid per month but very cost effective. When the channel started in November 1998, films were shown uninterrupted (and in widescreen) but I think that changed when it went free-to-air in the mid-2000s. In the early years they had seasons by Kurosawa, Buñuel, Melville, Herzog etc. Iâve got a box somewhere full of VHS tapes of those FilmFour screenings.
2 Likes
That was probably the 90m version shown at Pal 25fps speed. I donât believe the UK theatrical version has ever turned up on home video or cable. Certainly not in 2001. I have never seen it.
1 Like
You may be right about the PAL but bear in mind you have to factor in a few minutes either side for previews etc. However the one below from 4th March 2000 could be the complete version.
It seems unlikely that Film Four would have two versions to choose from - The recording I have was a print in rough condition, with splices and jump cuts ⊠maybe even some scratches, which wouldnât have been acceptable for normal broadcast standards - I think they were just showing what was available. I donât think youâd show a short âgrindhouseâ print otherwise.
1 Like