What "Great" SW movie do you not like?

[quote=“Lindberg, post:20, topic:893”]If only a few people considered a film “great” it wouldn’t be controversial to say you think it is rubbish, and we wouldn’t need this thread :wink:

They Call Me Trinity is considered great by many I think, although perhaps not on this forum.

I also think OUATITW is overrated, but most of all I think it doesn’t quite belong to the SW-genre, it’s just “a western” by an Italian director…[/quote]

Again, i concede the point. :slight_smile: Just in a mood i guess! Oh…must hasten to add that i wouldn’t call any of those films rubbish…i just don’t get anything out of them. (Found OUATITW uninteresting/unengaging…Tony Musante annoyed me in Mercenario, and Trinity, well i loved it as a kid, but upon rewatching it recently just didn’t feel the same anymore…)

Interesting what you say about OUATITW… :wink:

I’ve never really liked KEOMA as a whole, it’s ambitious and technically impressive with some fine parts (mainly William Berger’s scenes) but having given it many tries I’ve sort of given up. I can understand its über serious soulfulness in the context of all those poor SW comedies being produced back then, but can’t help wishing the massive “attitude” would allow some humor or irony to liven things up. The script has a very short attention span, feels like a very loose collection of vignettes and half-developed themes.

Don’t know if DJANGO THE BASTARD has a classic status but I suppose it appears in top 20 lists more often than for example AND GOD SAID TO CAIN which I find far superior Goth SW. I love the concept and the opening credits & music always get me in the mood but the rest is somehow uninvolving and mediocre, makes me wish Margheriti had directed.

Django the Bastard is a good SW, but it could have become a classic with a more imaginative director at the helm. Nevertheless it’s easily Garrone’s best.

Keoma is another case, a film with a mixture of scenes ranging from highly inspired to very ordinary.
I’m never sure if this is (partly) a work of “art” or a great heap of kitsch.
But also a good one, only partly disappointing.

“Garrone’s best” seems to indicate Sergio is a director to watch out, on the other hand if Django the Bastard is his best… It’s interestingly strange with some effective moments, but the subject is SWs that didn’t live up to their great reputation and that’s what DTB and Keoma have been for me, OK movies which had potential to be more.

Keoma’s script seems to have undergone heavy last minute rewrites, interviews with Castellari & Montefiori and Unitalia synopsis suggest it originally had deeper brother against brother themes, a prologue where baby Keoma causes the death of his father’s killer and a bigger bang climax with Keoma using “an old army cannon” to destroy his enemies. The mind boggles at what might have been…

Eh, why? OUATITW is classic spaghetti western for me. Got all the classic spaghetti western ingredients, an Italian director and a fabulous score by the ‘inventor’ of the spaghetti western ‘sound’, Morricone. How can it NOT be a spaghetti western? It’s got a bigger budget than most spaghetti westerns but that shouldn’t mean that it fall out of the genre, surely !?

It’s a spaghetti western and it isn’t.
It’s what post-modern critics would call a meta-western: it tries to summarize the most important western themes and to make a statement about them at the same time. The western theme par excellence of the classic western was the transition of the American West from a natural state to a civilized society (all this, of course, from the white man’s point of view), the theme par excellence of the spaghetti western, is the vengeance tale. They’re both present in the movie. At the same time the film shows a) that this transition (‘how the West was won’) was not an unconditional positive developement: an entire family is sacrificed at the altar of progress and b) that vengeance takes away something from a man: Harmonica does not seem a independent character for most part of the picture, he identifies himself by referring to dead people, and in the end he doesn’t accept the girl (although she’ll have him) because he has become more or less a dead man himself.

After the slaughter of the McBain family it would have been very difficult to glorify the frontier, the way the West was won
And after Harmonica walking off (Will he return some day? Yes, some day) it would be have been nearly as difficult to shoot a revenge western without questioning the theme itself

[quote=“AvatarDK, post:25, topic:893”]Eh, why? OUATITW is classic spaghetti western for me. Got all the classic spaghetti western ingredients, an Italian director and a fabulous score by the ‘inventor’ of the spaghetti western ‘sound’, Morricone. How can it NOT be a spaghetti western? It’s got a bigger budget than most spaghetti westerns but that shouldn’t mean that it fall out of the genre, surely !?[/quote]Right… I couldn’t imagine OUATITW existing if there had not been a spaghetti western boom, or any other westerns by Italian directors for that matter. Not only are the director, the screenwriter, the DP, the composer, the set designer (etc) established Italian genre names but the “internationalism” of the cast is also typical of the genre. The main stars are spaghetti newcomers but some of them had been courted by Leone for his previous westerns.

More to the point, I don’t think it’s a matter of taste whether a movie is a spaghetti western, while the genre has its borderline cases, it is relatively easy to define spaghetti westerns as Italian western productions. Whether OUATIW is what you want from a SW is of course another thing…

[quote=“scherpschutter, post:26, topic:893”]It’s a spaghetti western and it isn’t.

A lot of yada cut :)[/quote]
Very interesting points but still sounds a lot like classic spaghetti western to me. The revenge theme is as you say a main part of the root of spaghetti westerns and so of course is the “progress with a price” plot, so therefore classic spaghetti :slight_smile: That it tries to “say” something about these themes doesn’t take any of it “spaghetti-ism” away. It’s a spaghetti western and more :slight_smile:

But I must say that I haven’t sat down and actually analyzed the movie per se. It is so much of a visual and atmospheric “ride” that that wouldn’t do :slight_smile: Would never read an analyzation of it either, would not know what to do or use it for !?

Re: OUATITW

We’ve had this discussion before, sure it’s a SW but it’s a “one of a kind” movie, I think we can agree on that.

It’s also in part an American production, and more epic and high-budget than most other SWs.

Some regard it as the ultimate spaghetti-western, some regard it as just a unique western.

Both opinions are ok

Yeah but innumerable spaghettis are international co-productions with “the intellectual property” coming mainly from the Italians and OUATITW is one of them. I gather THE GOOD, THE BAD & THE UGLY was also made with some American finance (at least on pre-sales level) and it was also more epic and high-budget than most other SWs, working hard to be bigger and sometimes more meaningful than the competition. “One of a kind” as you put it and I can’t understand how being a “different” SW could equal not being a SW, as there are a so many differences out there.

On another level I guess you’re on to something as Sergio Leone definitely wanted to distance himself from the term spaghetti westerns (not invented by the Italians but imposed on them) and the low-end genre output often associated with it, creating bigger and more artful productions so the “better than standard SW” quality would not go unnoticed. I see the results as expansions of a movie genre or cycle that was already expansive from the word go, soon developing into more complex scenarios, bigger budgets, deeper themes and more star-studded casts. All this has probably been brought up in previous discussions I haven’t read, sorry it I unwittingly repeat their points.

Wow I feel like such a beginner here, some of my most favorites – DEATH RIDES A HORSE, TEPAPA and FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE – just get drenched here! All I can say is that I can’t defend the movies because I am just in awe of them, DEATH RIDES A HORSE in particular. I can see how to advanced viewers it might be a bit too ubiquitous. And FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE was the first Spaghetti I ever saw on anything but commercial TV. TEPAPA is TEPAPA, you either love it or you hate it, I worship it.

I don’t know if I’ve seen enough “great” Spaghettis to pick one I dislike, I usually seek out the more obscure titles. The lower the budget and the more low key the cast the more I enjoy them. But I was disappointed by MINNESOTA CLAY when I made myself sit through it, dreadful movie. I was also very disappointed by THE STRANGER & THE GUNFIGHTER, which may have been a great idea on paper but is just plain tedious as a movie.

But if I had to pick one that seems to be a staple of the form that I have just never really enjoyed much, beyond seeing the different cast members working together, it would be BEYOND THE LAW, which is not only annoyingly conventional but has Riz Ortolani’s worst music score ever. It’s got a great ending and a great cast, but I am always reminded of a quote by Shaw about a manuscript that some aspiring writer sent to him. His response was “The covers of your book are too far apart.” I always felt that BEYOND THE LAW would have worked better as an episode of “Bonanza”, about 50 minutes long with commercial breaks.

So

MINNESOTA CLAY
THE STRANGER & THE GUNFIGHTER
BEYOND THE LAW

but as someone else asks a couple times, are they really “great” Spaghettis in the first place? I don’t even know.

[quote=“Squonkamatic, post:31, topic:893”]MINNESOTA CLAY
THE STRANGER & THE GUNFIGHTER
BEYOND THE LAW

but as someone else asks a couple times, are they really “great” Spaghettis in the first place? I don’t even know.[/quote]
It’s rare to see them considered as such, I believe they have their fans (I’m a MINNESOTA CLAY fan) but a great reputation, not really… Movies get compared to other movies with the same names in them, and Lee Van Cleef and Corbucci have much bigger favourites on their SW resume, often overshadowing less popular gems.

I’m not sure if TEPEPA has a great reputation either, it’s maybe slowly building one or getting forgotten again, hard to say. Not many have seen the director’s cut (the dvd situation is not great) and as you said, seems to be a love it or hate it film.

[quote=“Squonkamatic, post:31, topic:893”]Wow I feel like such a beginner here, some of my most favorites – DEATH RIDES A HORSE, TEPAPA and FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE – just get drenched here! All I can say is that I can’t defend the movies because I am just in awe of them, DEATH RIDES A HORSE in particular. I can see how to advanced viewers it might be a bit too ubiquitous. And FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE was the first Spaghetti I ever saw on anything but commercial TV. TEPAPA is TEPAPA, you either love it or you hate it, I worship it.

I don’t know if I’ve seen enough “great” Spaghettis to pick one I dislike, I usually seek out the more obscure titles. The lower the budget and the more low key the cast the more I enjoy them. But I was disappointed by MINNESOTA CLAY when I made myself sit through it, dreadful movie. I was also very disappointed by THE STRANGER & THE GUNFIGHTER, which may have been a great idea on paper but is just plain tedious as a movie.

But if I had to pick one that seems to be a staple of the form that I have just never really enjoyed much, beyond seeing the different cast members working together, it would be BEYOND THE LAW, which is not only annoyingly conventional but has Riz Ortolani’s worst music score ever. It’s got a great ending and a great cast, but I am always reminded of a quote by Shaw about a manuscript that some aspiring writer sent to him. His response was “The covers of your book are too far apart.” I always felt that BEYOND THE LAW would have worked better as an episode of “Bonanza”, about 50 minutes long with commercial breaks.

So

MINNESOTA CLAY
THE STRANGER & THE GUNFIGHTER
BEYOND THE LAW

but as someone else asks a couple times, are they really “great” Spaghettis in the first place? I don’t even know.[/quote]

Well, Death rides a horse ended #10 in our poll recently (I don’t know if the Top 20 has been updated yet) and For a few dollars more #3 . So yes, there are people here on the board who dislike these movies, but their’s is a minority standpoint.

Personally I adore TEPEPA; I’ll propose the text for a review on these pages, this week or the next one, so stay tuned.

My personal choice for WGS (worst great spaghetti) would be Four of the Apocalypse - absolutely dreadful - but I don’t like Beyond the Law either. Some say the longer version (never seen it) works better, but to me the cut version felt already way overlong.

About Shaw: his laconic, malicious answers would’ve done very well in spaghetti land
The first answer Harmonica gives in OUATITW could have been written by the great George Bernard

Would you say BEYOND THE LAW is generally considered a great SW? I’ve seen some positive reviews but think it’s quite marginal for a 60s Lee Van Cleef SW, sort of fall from grace for him. Typical viewer response seems to be disappointment with the relative softness of his character, not helped by the slow-moving first half and sometimes overly cute tone… I don’t really like it either except for the last 20 minutes or so (after the kidnapping of Bud Spencer’s daughter) with the sudden turn into more dramatic and tragic mode, which is also an improvement action-wise… How I’d like to see a closing act like that in ACE HIGH or BOOT HILL. :wink:

Yea, I think 4 of the Apocalypse is totaly over rated too. The music is bad enough on it’s own but the rest of the film has very little going for it. A lot of people go on about the violence but it seems pretty tame to me. Having said that, if you don’t like seeing animals die, those poor mallard are being shot for real. Looks like they’re being hit with a shotgun rather than Chaco’s rifle but being killed all the same. Fulci was an erratic director at times and in my opinion this is one of his lesser works.

Eh, isn’t 4 of the Apocalypse one of those spaghetti westerns which have always been looked down at? I had a feeling that it was considered (way) below average by most fans of the genre but I may be wrong? I certainly have never gotten the impression that it was one of the “great” spaghetti westerns.

That said, I actually find it an entertaining above-average spaghetti western, but still not great.

4 of the Apocalypse is also not a real classic, there are enough fans who think the same way as you, Cian. I like the greater parts of the film, but the whole end is problematic. A good one for me, nevertheless.

I think this thread is mainly about the SWs most fans like. It’s about the forum’s Top 20 or maybe 30, about the films which were praised in the books about the genre.

It’s always interesting to to see for what reasons a “classic” is disliked by a few (if it weren’t a few the film wouldn’t be considered as a classic).

I thoroughly enjoyed 4 of the Apocalypse. It’s a feelgood movie so offbeat, that it appealed to me. Once again Milian steals the show. Pollard is great too, especially in his scenes with Milian.

Yeah, the middle section works very well. One of Milian’s best roles.

Of the dozen or so Fulci films I’ve seen FOUR OF THE APOCALYPSE is probably my favourite (patchy but so are his horrors) and when I first saw it I had no idea what was in store, did not know the director or the production date etc, no expectations or “politics” getting in the way of what I felt was a different, somehow rewarding emotional experience. And that was a heavily cut print… :wink:

Whether the movie has a classic or good reputation in the world at large is a tough one. The audience seems to be a mixed crowd composed of horror buffs and western fans, neither camp fully embraces the movie and the defenders are quite isolated. Of the genre books Weisser’s controversial SPAGHETTI WESTERNS considers it one of the very best, not just Weisser (who favors SWs with strong “exploitation” elements) but also his then amigo Craig Ledbetter. In his expert Fulci book BEYOND TERROR Stephen Thrower appreciates FOUR as Fulci’s best western but somehow doesn’t seem to know what to think of it. All of the reception is bit of a mess, hard to classify and this seems oddly fitting for the movie… :slight_smile: