One of my all time favorites, the musical score is phenomenal, as well a the setting, and the adventure.
Could be the greatest movie of all time, surely worth being in the top 10 greatest films of all time anyway.
Iâm sure we have talked about this somewhere in our labyrinthic forum. But maybe we can have a little discussion here in the filmâs thread as well.
Many of us (well, the most) have lived for decades with versions of GBU which had a runtime of between 161 min and 165 min. And I think we donât missed anything, at least not enough not to call it already a masterpiece.
The DVD age brought us for the first time the additional scenes of the Italian version, and then a DVD which included all the new scenes as part of the film, and gave us even one scene extra never seen before.
Well ,some people say the short version is already overlong, while others think the short version is the perfect one, and then there are a few which think that the longer the better.
(The last fraction would then also include the longer Tuco torture scene (bonus on the DVD) and the so called Socorro scene, if it re-surfaces, but it is considered lost for now.)
So we have now a version (the MGM DVD) with a 179 min runtime. The Italian theatrical version is mostly given with 180 min or sometimes 182 min, but that may include an intermission, or simply isnât absolutely correct.
Cut the Cave scene out, which was maybe originally cut out between the world premiere and the theatrical release, we have a 176 min runtime which could be called the DC.
According to a book by Oreste de Fornari some of the other scenes (he mentions Tucoâs foot bath) had also been cut after the Premiere, but were restored for a 1983 re-release.
Of these other scenes for me 2 are unnecessary:
- The one in which Tuco asks for the way to the mission.
- Blondy and Sentenza after they left the prison camp are disturbed in their night rest by Sentenzaâs men.
#1 is completely unnecessary and # 2 isnât necessary for the story, but has a funny dialogue about âcounting machinesâ. But it is shot with a bad looking day for night filter, and doesnât add anything to the characters we did not know anyway. Both together are about 3 min long.
The other 5 scenes or parts of scenes should be in imo, especially Sentenza at the ruined fort (4 min), Tucoâs foot bath (2 min) and more of the drunk Captain at the bridge (beneath 1 min).
The other 2 scenes show a bit more of Blondie and Tuco putting dynamite to the bridge (30 sec) and another civil war based part of a scene directly after leaving the mission in which Tuco consults a map and they are crossing a place with dead soldiers (50 sec).
This makes a runtime of 173 min, and would be the perfect cut imo.
In recent times I have been changing on what version I view. Recently viewed the Leone Nut fan edit version which restores the longer length Tuco beating scene into the actual film. English mono soundtrack with english subtitles with Italian audio for some scenes, instead of the older voices of Eastwood and Wallach.
I really like the special feature where he does a side by side comparison of all the cuts.
I was wondering Stanton if you could create a list of all the extra scenes? It would be helpful for people like me who have seen some of the scenes youâve mentioned, but not others.
All the scenes are on the DVDs except for the so called Socorro scene, which seems to be lost, or at least hasnât surfaced yet.
The first MGM DVD has the new scenes from the Italian version as bonus in Italian with subs. The Special Edition DVD has these 7 scenes (or parts of scenes) now included and adds an extra 8th scene (the cave scene) to the film which was never part of any theatrical release.
The Socorro scene takes place after the hotel scene in which Blondie kills 3 hired Mexicans while Tuco comes from behind.
After Blondie has escaped again Tuco arrives in a town where the Confederates try to get volunteers for their army. After the soldiers have left Tuco too helds a speech and asks for donations, but of course only for himself. He enters a saloon and asks for a blonde man, and Blondie is indeed upstairs with a woman in bed (stupid idea btw), but the barkeeper lies about Blondies whereabouts to Tuco. Blondie observes the plaza, where the people still bring money to Tucoâs sombrero, and sends the girl away. The girl goes to the sombrero unnoticed by Tuco, and when Tuco later comes back to his sombrero to fetch the donated money, it is empty except for a half smoked cigar.
This is followed directly by the sequence in which Tuco follows the trail of the half smoked cigars.
I would like to see this scene, but as bonus, not as part of the film. The description of the scene is even a bit longer, and with Leoneâs slow narrative style in mind I wouldnât wonder if it takes another 5 to 10 min screentime. And thatâs simply too much at this point of the film.
An absolutely flawless movie- Iâve watched it so many times, Iâve ruined 2 DVDs and have had to buy it a 3rd time (no joke). The score is amazing, the characters are incredible and the ending is breath-taking.
This is a 6 out of 5 star movie ;D
Okay thanks Stanton. Iâve only seen the movie through a TV recording, which might explain why I havenât seen some of these âextraâ scenes.
Iâve just found this bit on the forum after watching the ârestoredâ version of GBU yesterday, and I have to say I agree with Cox, who was obviously drawing on the updated version where there are some slow scenes where characters ask for directions (Angel Eyes in the cave scene, Tuco asking the whereabouts of the monastery) and assembling gangs (Tuco with the chicken) that really did slow the movie down significantly for me. I was showing the film to someone who hadnât seen it before and I found myself apologizing for the version I had, saying, âThis is a very slow scene, and itâs not in the movie as Iâve come to know and love it,â which is a strange statement to have to make.
But apart from the cave/chicken scene all these scenes were always part of the original Italian version. The one which Leone wanted. The one which is indeed the directorâs cut.
And according to Grimaldi Leone wanted even this needless cave scene to be in the movie. (which maybe is true or not)
[quote=âStanton, post:230, topic:307â]But apart from the cave/chicken scene all these scenes were always part of the original Italian version. The one which Leone wanted. The one which is indeed the directorâs cut.
And according to Grimaldi Leone wanted even this needless cave scene to be in the movie. (which maybe is true or not)[/quote]
Wanted by Leone or not, the film is definitely better without them. Another example that the âdirectorâs cutâ is not always the best one.
But then you dislike Leoneâs movie, and prefere someone elseâs, which isnât a true representation of the film. Faults or not, Leone wanted them there, which means any version without them isnât his, if you see what I mean.
Its not like the directorâs cut had his blessing, he wanted them in in 1966, his opinion probably changed after many years. Imo, I doubt he would have approved of that English dub.
I do John, but Iâve mentioned this problem before: filmmaking is a collective work, but we tend to credit one person for everything, usually the director. It happens that screenwriters or cinematographers feel betrayed by the director (just think of Dallamano) because their contribution isnât valued.
A second remark: even in the case of literary works, it might be a problem who is responsible for the final version. I have worked as an editor for several publishing houses, and although my name was never on the cover, in some cases I was as much responsible for the final version as the author. I never had a problem with that situation: it was the authorâs original story, so his name should be on the cover. Editing a book is another job (not credited in this case).
If Leone was responsible for the final cut (the 'directorâs cut), the film would still be a collective work: a lot of people were involved in the making of it. On the other hand: if the final cut is done by anybody else, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly is still a Leone movie.
[quote=âPhil H, post:231, topic:307â]Wanted by Leone or not, the film is definitely better without them. Another example that the âdirectorâs cutâ is not always the best one.[/quote]Most of these cut scenes are unnecessary but I really like the scene where Angel Eyes meets Victor Israelâs character. Without that scene Angel Eyes is far too long out of the film and his presence in the fort is left unexplained.
You raise good points; however, without Leone you wouldnât have this film. Directors are commonly the person who try to get a movie made; although there frequent exceptions with producers and actors. Leone probably contributed creativity wise, the most and therefore it has âstampâ as it were. Movies that donât have an overall âstampâ are usually quite bland and anonymous - a good case of this would be most superhero films or other modern blockbusters: itâs rare you can actually guess correctly who directed it, unlike with a Leone, where you always know who was behind the camera.
In the end if there is more than one version of a film available, everyone can decide for himself which one probably the best is. Phil is right that not every DC improves a film necessarily.
And than the directorâs opinion is just one opinion of many. We have to respect it for being the creatorâs opinion, but we must not accept it as the best.
I have discussed this a few posts above, and described there my favourite version, which would be one with 173 min. A compromise between the DVD version and the former cut versions.
The perfect version imo. But one which I would have to cut myself, as it does not exist in this version so far. Except in my head.
Thatâs my opinion too.
The scene isnât necessary for knowing now more exactly how Sentanza got the idea for joining the army at the prison camp. This was something I figured myself, and it is not a problem to get more information about this, but it also not really necessary.
This scene improves the rhythm of the film, and it is the only one which shows a slightly sympathetic side of Sentenza.
Does this mean we should be allowed to alter an authors novel, or change an artists painting? Filmmaking is an art form, and the director, for the most part, is the artist. And I highly doubt anybody would agree that perhaps the Mona Lisaâs colour scheme should be changed as the subjective views of the person looking at the painting are as valid as Da Vinchiâs.
Slightly off topic, but has Dallamano uttered a feel of betrayal in an interview or wherever, or is it just another guess of Cox? Cox doesnât give any source for his speculation. And it is not the only speculation in his book.