|Page 9 of 82:||               |
|Index||819 reviews in total|
The Good......it is one of those "New", groundbreaking, and completely
different Movies that was quite influential, broke Taboos, and in the
midst of a Decade of change was an announcement from a Director that
said..."take this, you Western Movies", and the Western Movies did and
never looked back......The Cinematography expanses and lingering
affection for landscapes brought the John Ford aesthetic to a new
Generation and to a new level of opulence. There are some other Camera
Tricks here that are playfully fresh (for 1966) and it was without
doubt, Psychedelia before it was fashionable......The Soundtrack that
is now an indelible part of Pop Culture and reminds us Today of how
different it really was.
The Bad......Endless Closeups of squinting eyes. A tendency to elaborate on already elongated Scenes to add to the already established Suspense......The Character Tuco becomes relentlessly obnoxious, overbearing, irritating, and unlikeable immediately and this keeps up for almost 3 Hours. It is an overacted Performance that makes the Movie less engaging......The length seems padded and indulgent.
The Ugly......All the Characters, their Personalities and the Makeup. This is truly a Panorama of Ugliness throughout and given its length, a bit too much to bare......There is for your viewing pleasure...flies, filthy Faces (almost always in close up) chewing little cigars and sporting blood, pus, scabs, and other assorted flavors like food being shoveled into salivating mouths with Technicolor glee......Ugly could be a word that would describe this Movie. Another would be overrated.
In conclusion......The best Spaghetti Western is from the same Director...Once Upon a Time in the West (1968).
I saw this movie for the first time on my tiny 15 inch screen of my TV/DVD player, and even on this minuscule format I was still simply amazed by the sheer scope of it. Now I understand and acknowledge the usual complaints against the film, namely the fact that the movie is almost three hours long with many scenes that tend to drag on for minutes with little dialog or action, however it is these scenes that make the movie the masterpiece that it is. Every shot whether it be an expansive landscape or an extreme close-up Sergio Leone draws you into his own version of the old west. A world where three men chase each other across the desert in search of 100,000 dollars worth of Confederate gold. Along the way they encounter Yankee and Confederate soldiers, Mexican bandits, bounty hunters in a journey that culminates in one of the most riveting showdowns in cinema history. What I found most interesting about this film however was the influence it obviously had on modern filmmaker Quentin Tarentino. Many of his trademarks (very memorable characters, long shots centered on a single character, intense standoffs involving multiple characters) can be found in abundance in this film as well. In fact Tarentino's Kun Fu epic Kill Bill goes so far as to barrow multiple songs from Leone's Dollars Trilogy. In the end all this adds up to make The Good the Bad and the Ugly in my opinion one of the greatest films of all time.
i first saw this film in about 2003. i had seen A FISTFUL OF DOLLARS and FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE on the television and i thought they were really good so i decided to buy them on DVD. Searching the shops for them i found that they came in a box set with a third film, THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY. I hadn't seen THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY at the time but I liked the first two so I thought that I would buy the whole box set, as that was all that was available at the time. What I didn't realise until after I watched all three was how great THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY was and I thought that the first two were good. it turned out that THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY was the best of the three. THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY was probably the only film I had ever bought on DVD without having seen it before and I'm SO glad I did. This film is excellent and although i have seen it many times it still stands up well after multiple viewings. it may be nearly three hours long but it is never boring. all the elements work so well (music, acting, dialogue, setting etc...) i can't really find fault in it. i liked it so much i bought the special edition DVD just to see the extra footage incorporated into the film. if you've not seen this, then rent it because i guarantee you'll soon be buying it shortly afterwards
Quentin Tarantino has called it "the best-directed film of all time."
For me it is a majestic film. Sergio Leone is the greatest director. He
is the complete artist, stylist. His films have a specially charm,
though are full of the outrage. They are can watch for hundred times.
It is a quality of the great artist what was S.Leone. The fine story,
with a wonderful photography and adequate music of the greatest film
music composer E. Morricone plus the rhythm generates a masterpiece.
Does not need forget the excellent actors whose merit is the big for a
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Morricone's stunning score is too good for Leone's film. Now, the
acting is good, the casting is perfect, the idea is great. So what went
For one, it feels dull. It has a slow pace and often times it becomes irritating. Moreover, some of the scenes have little, if any relevance for the plot. This has an alienating effect on the audience.
Another problematic thing is the humour. The film tries to insert humour quite often, but these attempts by and large fail and scenes come across as silly rather than funny. Too often one is left feeling disappointed that the punch line failed to materialize.
The action scenes are quite dull as well. The huge numbers of extras in uniforms and all the guns and explosions fail to create any real sense of war. They remain as a rather pale mat painting in the background. As for the revolver duels, they too are surprisingly dull. Granted, the final showdown is quite memorable, but the others are unfortunately rather unimpressive.
There is also a lack of logic, which is quite frustrating. There is little in the film that makes sense, the decisions made by characters are often absurd, and the audience is left wondering what actually happened and why.
Regarding protagonists, 'the ugly' steals the show, while Eastwood is not given enough things to do. His character remains undeveloped, although Leone makes some attempts to give him depth. Also, the antagonist is not menacing enough. He is given too little screen time and never manages to be a genuine threat.
Unnecessary gratuitousness. This is something Spaghetti Western is known for, and something I tend to dislike. There is a scene where Tuco is beaten about in order to extract information from him, and this goes on forever for no reason. Throughout the film there are moments where we are forced to endure protracted, often violent scenes that may seem grand and intense, but carry no emotional punch and have little relevance in terms of advancing the plot. Leone does this time and again, and it is clear that he experiences these scenes in a way that is peculiar to him, but which remains a mystery to many viewers. Too often I feel that he is aiming for an emotion I simply do not experience while watching the film.
I will not go on about what else is wrong. I will conclude with some more positive things. As I said, the music is superb and does wonders for the film. Also, I like the general tone. His depiction of the warring parties may be inaccurate, but Leone does manage to create a sense of dread and disgust. The scene in the graveyard, accompanied by Morricone's score is excellent. The counterpoint between the greedy misfits in search of buried gold and the solemnity and horror of the huge graveyard littered with graves of men who died for their ideals is quite effective.
The story is definitely a good one, shame the actual script is too weak and Leone's sensibility and sense of humour are, at least in my view, somewhat peculiar.
I'm not a fan of westerns, but feel I've shoved myself in a sci fi
horror orientated corner of ignorance so am slowly working my way
through the IMDb top 250 in an attempt to broaden my horizons (and
possibly catch that rare film that blows u away without expecting it) I
did REALLY appreciate the level of accomplishment this film expressed.
For its time the cinematic atmosphere of comedy, emotion and gritty
drama was clearly above average for even now, and the acting skills
were brilliant and really added personality.
however (and i don't think its cuz I'm a girl) this film just wasn't for me. it was very slowly paced and i didn't manage to follow or care much for the characters stories.
that said, i would definitely recommend watching it as its surely one of those films that depends heavily on personal tastes, and judging it as a western just doesn't give it the respect it warrants.
The Good, The Bad and The Ugly has become a metaphor for the relentless and ruthless pursuit of wealth (the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow) and the victims and victors (mostly victims) it produces along the way. The beauty of this film is that it does not take itself too seriously, it is a precursor to movies like "Sin City" , "Natural Born Killers" and "No Country for Old Men" that have a comedic and "matter of fact" feel to the graphic violence. Plus the musical score and cinematography are excellent. Who would of thought that a "spaghetti western" would become such an honoured classic movie masterpiece? Clint Eastwood, Eli Wallach and Lee Van Cleef all play characters that are right out of a Greek tragedy who represent different aspects of society. Watch, enjoy, and don't take the movie too seriously, that's how I believe the director wanted the audience to watch it.
This movie is not only sheer entertainment, it has the most profound
music in the number 'ecstasy of gold' by Ennio Morricone. Although
there is no comparison in the quality of one musical piece with
another, but I would rate 'ecstasy of gold' as the best orchestral
piece ever - simply a masterpiece from Morricone, who has produced the
best music for western genre films. The theme music is also superb.
The mood of the film transports you to that time and world and gives a feeling of that time and places were everyone was desperate, adventurous, daring, even reckless for the most coveted thing - gold. It has been called the yellow fever - a state in which people were willing to die or commit massacres for gold.
This is the theme, and although it is a sad and haunting picture of man turning into wild beast - more savage than the so called savages, the action, the plot and the acting turns it into an ecstasy. Not to be missed.
In the last of the so-called 'Dollars' trilogy Eastwood now plays a man
called Blondie (despite clearly having brown hair) who has hooked up
with Tuco, a bandit with an amusingly long list of crimes, to run a
reward-and-release scam with various towns and cities across the Old
West. Soon tiring of Tuco's behavior, Blondie ends their volatile
partnership and heads off on his own.
Angered by the double-cross, Tuco exacts a laborious revenge on Blondie, but just as the punishment reaches its zenith under a burning hot sun in a remote part of the desert a wagon carrying dead Confederate soldiers interrupts. With his last breath, the sole surviving Rebel tells Tuco of a stash of treasure buried in a cemetery, and, while Tuco is distracted, tells Blondie what grave it is buried under. Their difficult partnership is quickly restored as they trek across the West, through Civil War conflicts, towards the treasure.
So far I've only covered the Good and Ugly. The Bad just so happens to be Angel Eyes (Lee Van Cleef), a ruthless mercenary who has also learned of the hidden loot and eventually crosses paths with his rivals. He has the least screen time, but is necessary as a pure villain to lessen the crude vulgarity of Tuco.
It's a long film. But it's not about the destination, it's about the journey, and Sergio Leone allows himself plenty of time and space to indulge in quirky idiosyncrasies. I especially like Tuco having a bubble bath in the midst of his current location being blown to smithereens.
Villains always interest me, and actors mostly choose villains over heroes as they make for better characters. Blondie may comfort dying soldiers and play with kittens, but he's just too bland. Angel Eyes, is hardcore, and a better character, but he's nothing compared to Tuco. Eli Wallach owns this film, and takes most of the screen time away from Eastwood and Van Cleef. The scene where he searches the cemetery, as the camera spins around and around and around has such a beautiful innocence to it. Even though Tuco may have killed and robbed many this scene makes him seem like an easily excitable child at heart. It's absolutely wonderful.
If you've got an evening free, and just don't know how to spend 3 otherwise empty hours, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly is a fine way to spend them.
The Good, The Bad, The Ugly (1966)
A classic? Well, not so fast. Are we really okay with brutal (if brief) mistreatment of women, fast and senseless bloodshed, and lots of bad overdubbing of dialog?
Yes, this is a cinematic movie, and if you can overlook its flaws (some) you will be wowed and dazzled by its merits (very many).
Overflowing with archetypes, filmed with huge widescreen effect, brimming with familiar scenes vividly re-imagined, this is a movie that is dramatic (or ironic) in softspoken (or cynical) ways. There are gunslinging shootouts, long lonesome treks across the desert, and showdowns between tough guys. Yup. And it's all built around a story that leads scene after scene to one big moment after another. There's no question this is a movie that is great fun to watch. In fact, for its visuals, the sheer cinematography and sets and editing, this is as good as it gets, amazing stuff. The man behind that was Tonino Delli Colli, the cinematographer for some other of director Sergio Leone's legendary movies beyond this one: Once Upon a Time in the West, and Once Upon a Time in America (and well as the astonishing Life is Beautiful.) But overall, for its content, its plot, its message (if that matters), is TGTBTU a great film, a masterpiece?
Well, the movie is smart. It deliberately plays off of its genre, which had worn itself thin by the 1960s, so things push over the top in a campy, awesome, excessive way. It almost feels obliged to revisit and exaggerate all the themes of American Westerns, including the Civil War, including slapping women around and killing people in a flurry of fast six-shooter magic. Even the title makes clear this is about a stripped down, pumped up version of older classics.
Whatever his aura over time, Clint Eastwood is no great actor, not in my book, and here he is easily out shined by Eli Wallach, who plays a less attractive type, and by Lee Van Cleef, who plays a more attractive one. But Eastwood isn't meant to be acting, not exactly. He has aura. He's stoic and inscrutable, exaggerated make-up and all, and he shoots a mean Colt, or Smith and Wesson, something classy and throbbing. He's a great archetype, in a movie that is about archetypes. It's not a "realistic" movie, of course, not at all, and it's actually a comedy at times, overall, and it's totally fun and never laughable.
Go ahead, compare it to The Wild Bunch, and then to Butch Cassidy, both coming just after this one (and no doubt influenced by it). Both of these later movies have more impressive acting, and more intense intentions (both in brutal violence and in cinematic innovation). But all three have a similar effect, playing within a genre that has always, since the 1939 Stagecoach, been beautifully trapped by its limitations (that's part of its staying power for fans). The Searchers (1956) and High Noon (1952), for starters, are working within the genre, and gnawing at it, as if its something to feed off of. That's where The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly really shines. I have trouble with aspects of it, but I really like it in a bigger sense, looking the other way as needed. I switch to first person because I think it's a personal preference, and a lot of guys I know love the movie to pieces, and a couple women I know think it's either stupid or insulting or boring (actually boring!).
It's an Italian production, which explains some of the out of sync dubbing. Sergio Leone obviously has an intuitive sense of what makes a movie moving, something sorely missed in a lot of productions since. It's gritty, dirty, and it pounds "profound" hard in a male kind of "toughness prevails" way. Sorry guys, but bite that bullet. Oh, and the soundtrack? Amazing, perfect, and rising above the movie, which is great in its own way, I admit.
|Page 9 of 82:||               |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Plot keywords||Main details||Your user reviews|
|Your vote history|