What are your unpopular Spaghetti Western opinions?

Town Hall
41

First, let me say that I am happy that you are taking the time to explore the films of Kurosawa and that you are appreciating them - despite the whole “football” incident. lol We will have to agree to disagree about Throne of Blood though as I think this is the most enjoyable version of Shakespeare’s Macbeth that I have ever seen. Ikiru is brilliant in every aspect. I absolutely loved Stray Dog though I can certainly understand why others don’t hold it in as high regard. High and Low is another personal favorite of mine that I would recommend if you get the opportunity to see it.

As for the “intermission”, I completely agree. I guess they do it in an attempt to recapture the entire 50s and 60s movie going experience…for some reason.

To give you the scenes in the two Leone films that I find to be tedious and unnecessary, it will require me sitting down and watching them again which is something I plan to do in the near future just so that I can put myself on trial over my prior statements. Once I do, I will re-visit this post.

There is one scene from GBU though that I can bring up now that never fails to grate on my nerves and is burned into my brain. First of all, let me state again that I do consider GBU to be a classic but if this one scene did not exist or if had been done differently, it would raise my opinion of the film dramatically. The scene that never fails, and this may sound like an over reaction, to anger me is the monastery scene and especially the interaction between Tuco and his brother Father Ramirez. It literally pisses me off every time I see it.

First of all, let me say that both Eli Wallach and Luigi Pistilli played this scene brilliantly. As a matter of fact, this scene is some of Pistilli’s best work as an actor. But, this scene does absolutely nothing to advance the story and actually stops the progression of the film in its tracks.

Leone, by this point in the film, has the story absolutely rolling. He has the viewer sitting on the edge of their seat in eager anticipation of what happens next. But what does Leone do? He slams the brakes on this feeling and brings it to a dead screeching halt.

Why? Just so that he can dredge up cheap sympathy for Tuco from the audience? Why was this necessary? It doesn’t change who Tuco is or what he has done. Tuco is still Tuco. You want the audience to feel sympathy for Tuco? If you must, then fine but don’t wait until this point in the film when you have the drama rolling. Or do it in a way that progresses the storyline and doesn’t completely annihilate the feeling of anticipation that you have worked so hard to build.

I don’t expect everyone (or anyone for that matter) to agree with me but I can’t help but humorously (at least for me) imagine that Leone looked at the script and said: “This movie isn’t long enough. What can we do at this point in the movie to make it longer so that people with think of me as they do Kurosawa and other great artists of film making? I know! We will take a break from the story so that we can introduce a completely unneeded brother for Tuco!”

This is strictly my opinion of course but, whether some may think it is too long or not, everything Kurosawa did in Seven Samurai was done to advance the story. I think Leone’s flaw was that he, at times and particularly in this instance, took a break from advancing the story for completely unneeded reasons and to the detriment of the film and the overall anticipation he had worked so hard to build.

Once more, my opinion and one that I don’t expect others to share.

1 Like
42

I think it shows that ‘Tuco’ is capable of having a guilty conscience, that he isn’t just the impressive list of crimes, recounted at the hangings. He’s likable right from the outset, even though he’s capable of the worst imaginable acts.

When we see that he feels bad about the death of his parents, and then tries to laugh it off, “Nine years, … so it’s nine years” … I don’t think it’s to necessarily garner sympathy, but just to show him as more than a one dimensional ruthless comic strip character.

I’m not trying to sway your take on the scene … there’s plenty of stuff that bugs me in certain films, which others will find perfectly ok :wink:

4 Likes
43

I can certainly accept that but, for me, it still breaks the flow of the film needlessly. If Leone wanted to establish that, I still think he could have done it in a way to advance the story. And Leone picked one of the most tired movie tropes of all time to do it. The criminal brother and the good Catholic brother has been done over and over and over again. Sure, you are going to get the same Western tropes over and over again…because it’s a Western. Leone wasn’t satisfied with that but had to use one that has been done endlessly across the entire spectrum since the dawn of film.

I just believe it could have been done better so that it doesn’t interrupt my enjoyment of the film. LOL

3 Likes
44

(Aldo was faster on the draw, but here comes my reply)

Impressive. You managed to pick the one scene I forgot to list among potentially unnecessary scenes. I don’t find it “unneeded”, though.

Firstly, the sequence presents a subversion of the all-too-common “Hollywood healing” trope, and it’s more creative to make them visit a place Tuco has some connection to, otherwise it would feel even more episodic and “breaking the plot”. Secondly, the scene marks an emotional turning point for the film. As Aldo pointed out, what we have been watching up until that point is basically three comic book characters (not counting the extended version, which gives Angel Eyes a good deal of more depth) with no connection to society whatsoever. But Tuco and Pablo’s fight together establish that these men are real people, with real feelings and real connections, not only for Tuco but for Blondie, who is visibly touched by the fight he secretly witness, and later gently plays along when Tuco tells him how close the two brothers are, just to make him feel a little bit better. I think it marks the point where they begin to develop some kind of respect of each other, for all their hostility. Also, in the original Italian cinema release this happened right before the break, so people would have twenty minutes to reload before the story continues (personally, though, I’ve always imagined the closing of the camp door as the perfect pause point - it occurs just about midway trough the film and is reminiscent of closing a curtain at a theater).

But I suppose this is a matter of personal disposition. I happen to be the kind of person who actually like films that take their time to observe things and/or develop a certain feel, which sometimes is more important to the vision than the actual plot (I suspect you’re then not the greatest fan of such films like L’eclisse, or some later Fellini, but to me, there’s just something about that mood which goes straight into the heart - it really has nothing to do with any fine-cultured pretentiousness).

As for High and Low, I watched it recently at the local culture house when they showed Kurosawa. As you said, a great film, especially up until the rescuing about midway trough the venture. But I have the feel that I should re-watch it to evaluate it properly - I lost it slightly when it became a straightforward cop thriller, but if I’m prepared for that shift I might like it as much as the “ransom drama” part. In the case of Throne of Blood, I just never got involved in the thing, and this time several scenes felt overacted even within the context. It doesn’t help that MacBeth is no favorite of mine to begin with I have a natural inability to take sequences with ghosts et consortes seriously (which is also my one issue with the otherwise magnificent Rashomon - the scene where the samurai’s spirit is called upon felt a bit like Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde.) Also - and this is what made it somewhat difficult for me to get truly invested in Ran, at least until about midway trough it - I think AK is best when he depicts ordinary people in adventurous situations - his stories centered around lords and people high up in the hierarchy doesn’t appeal to me the same way.

All, in all, though (and before this topic goes off the rails), I’d like you to know that I highly appreciate your slightly unorthodox viewpoints. It’s really stimulating to ponder about those issues and formulate my thoughts on them.

3 Likes
45

I cringe every time I hear Clint’s lame unconvincing comments at the Battle of Langstone Bridge … “Never seen so many men wasted so badly”, sorry, Blondie … you clearly don’t give two fucks about those fellas. Also, “Looks like it’s gonna be a good long battle!” … d’oh, do ya think!? :wink:

2 Likes
46

I think he does mean it, but people like him are seldom very verbose or used to expressing their feelings, which often causes such quotes to feel rather monotone and unnatural despite being intended as sincere.

3 Likes
47

That is what makes this site so enjoyable. Typically, everyone presents their viewpoints in an intelligent (at least I do my best :laughing:) and respectful manner that really opens things up for some thoughtful discussion. You don’t always have to agree but it is always intriguing to see how others see things differently and why.

I do actually enjoy Fellini and much of Antonioni’s work as well (especially his whole semi-trilogy) but I have to certainly be in the right frame of mind for either…much like when I watch a David Lynch film. I just have to be in the right mood.

For me, this is one of the kindest compliments you can offer. And I can say that I have thoroughly enjoyed reading your viewpoints and appreciate all the genuine thought and consideration that led to them.

3 Likes
48

I think Mr Eastwood is just better when he says nothing at all :wink: it’s poor acting as much as anything.

2 Likes
49

I always liked Blondie’s delivery there. It’s certainly a bit flat, but he’s a near mute character who reserves most of his feelings. Anything more would feel out of place in my opinion.

4 Likes
50

A disapproving grimace would then have been more appropriate for such a character?

Look … this is my favourite film, and I’m really just nitpicking, but the dialogue is a directorial choice which simply feels forced - Perhaps it works better in the Italian dub :wink:

3 Likes
51

Maybe, but he’s already responded so many times with just a grimace. I think the fact that the battle is so bad he’s willing to break form with a few words is a nice touch. Not that I don’t get your position either, I think the following scene with the cigar and the dying soldier which follows is more effective at communicating his humanity overall, but I never disliked Blondie’s dialogue here.

6 Likes
52

It’s more or less the same - ‘Mai visto morire tanta gente,
tanto male’. Salerno also delivers the line in the same resigned manner.

1 Like
53

Mmmm … but Enrico Maria could act! :wink:

54

Unpopular opinions:

  1. I’m not a fan of the two Ringo movies. I find them overlong and boring.
  2. Companeros is overrated. The Mercenary is one of my favorite SW and basically does everything better.
4 Likes
55

  1. I find myself agreeing somewhat when it comes to Pistol. When I watched it i couldn’t let go of the thought that maybe the whole venture was about ten minutes too long. But I still certainly think it rises above your average SW in most departments, concerning inspiration, characters and the inventive dialogue. And that viewing was a couple of years ago, before I was a clear-cut aficionado. I might not find it overlong at all today.

  2. That’s not a very unpopular opinion, I think. The Mercenary is generally higher held internationally, although there seem to be a regional difference here in the Nordic Countries where Companeros is some kind of cult film and regarded by many (me included) as Corbucci’s best film and/or the best non-Leone SW (I suppose it has something to do with Nero’s character, even though “Yodlaf” is not an actual name. It’s probably meant to be “Olaf”, which is the Norwegian variation of the name “Olof” - Swedes portrayed in foreign media generally have a striking tendency to bear much more resemblance to Norwegians).

1 Like
56

This may not be as unpopular an opinion as you think.

57

I actually enjoy the first Ringo film quite a bit, when I first saw it I felt it had a kind of Die Hard vibe, minus all the swearing.

7 Likes
58

I find the Ringo movies to be entertaining - Gemma plays an easy going character.

9 Likes
59

I like the second Ringo movie better. It’s essentially a heartwarming love story. It’s not long at all.

9 Likes
60

Once Upon a Time in the West is miles away from being my favourite and it’s far too long.

4 Likes