MovieChat Forums > MeYouFools
MeYouFools (153)
Posts
Has nobody actually noticed...
Will Somebody Please...
The ending (no spoilers-- yet)
So it turns out...
I just got back from "The Godfather Coda"...
Mary Lou's voice
Stallone seems to have changed his tune about the movie.
Did Auntie commit suicide?
Martha was the real MVP of this movie
View all posts >
Replies
"His being from the Carolinas doesn't 100% guarantee that he was a CSA soldier though."
I guess you're right about that, but do keep in mind the movie was written by Italians and would they know the nuances of the American Civil War and its politics of the time? Probably not. Of course, Leone would do his homework for "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly," but for this one? Also probably not.
I believe writer Luciano Vincenzioni claimed that the Man With No Name took that gold and gave it to Father Ramirez's mission and that's why he's poor again at the beginning of "A Fistful of Dollars." If this is so, it's reasonable to assume he also gave them Setenza's Arabian stallion and traded it for a mule they had on hand.
So, at the end of "For a Few Dollars More" (which chronologically is the last adventure), Il Straniero/Joe/Manco/Blondie/The Man With No Name is going to be a rich man once again (but not owe his life to anyone this time) and could retire as he postulates to Colonel Mortimer at one point.
This is not true. Firstly, Eastwood played him in all three films as the same man.
Secondly, in "For a Few Dollars More," Eastwood is known as "Manco," which in Italian means "mangled." It is a reference to his right hand being crushed by Chico at the end of "A Fistful of Dollars." If you pay close attention in "For a Few," Eastwood wears a gauntlet over his right hand and does everything in the movie with his left hand... except shoot. Additionally, if you pay closer attention, you can find the bullet holes in the Man With No Name's poncho from where Ramon had shot him in the previous movie. He wears the holes to his back, though (I believe).
In the screenplay for "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly," while he is only referred to in the dialogue as "Blondie/Il Biondo," the character himself is identified as "Joe" in the action descriptions. Leone and Vincenzioni meant for him to be the same man.
Well, you know, he was a civil war officer on the side of the Confederacy (he's specifically said to be from Carolina). The war was over and I don't believe the U.S. army would've allowed Confederates into their ranks.
"Colonel" is a title for him now, not a rank. So his skills in fighting in the war would have parlayed into bounty hunting well.
This was one of his first movies and he wasn't a really a "name" at time (and he probably wasn't on drugs so badly), so I imagine his behavior was probably the best it ever was.
Jason Robards showed up to his first day of shooting drunk on "Once Upon a Time in the West" and Leone, who had to fight hard to get Robards to sign on in the first place, told him if he ever did that again, his ass was fired. And Robards sobered up for the movie. So, like you said, Leone would not have suffered Kinski's infamous behavior.
This is how I understand it from various sources:
Yes, "Once Upon a Time in the West" was supposed to be the fourth and last Dollars movie. It would concern the revelation that everything Il Straniero/Joe/Manco/Blondie/Man With No Name did in the previous movies was all sort of a training for a revenge duel with Frank (presumably because Frank did to him what he did to Harmonica in the finished film). The problem is that on the set of "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly," Eastwood and Leone had a huge fight that nobody seems to talk about often. I've heard that it was Eastwood finally having enough of the lackadaisical manner in which Italians made movies and I've heard it was Leone finally having enough of Eastwood cheating on his wife with his interpreter. Whatever the subject of the fight was, it is what ruined/ended the relationship between Leone and Eastwood. When it came time to make "Once Upon...", Leone flew to California to personally deliver the script to Eastwood, but Clint would not meet with him.
I've also read an interview with Lee Van Cleef where he revealed he was offered the role of Frank, but turned it down because he didn't like the script (and he didn't like the finished film either when he saw it).
So with his main star gone, Leone was forced to turn Il Straniero/etc into the new character Harmonica and go from there. Leone came up with the idea to have the three gunmen at the beginning of the film be cameos by Eastwood, Van Cleef, and Eli Wallach (though, they were never meant to be the Man With No Name, Angel Eyes, and Tuco--just three randos like in the finished film). It was both a gag and a storytelling device to show the audience, "You thought these guys were bad/cool... Harmonica's even worse/better!" Wallach was in for it. Eastwood was having none of it and Van Cleef turned it down too.
Leone continued to try to work with Clint; he wanted him for the James Coburn character in "Duck, You Sucker," but Eastwood wouldn't do it either.
"A Fistful of Dollars", "For a Few Dollars More", and "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly" were certified blockbusters all over the world. And that's really all Leone needed to be set for the rest of his career.
"Once Upon a Time in the West" really only made money in Europe, but not in Italy, strangely enough. The Italians were having none of it. It played theatrically for years in France, even as late as 1972!
"disagreeing with you about the quality of a movie does not make someone a 'troll'."
That's not what happened here. Someone who hates Godzilla movies went to a Godzilla topic'd board and decided to tell everyone they hate Godzilla. That is absolutely trolling.
"an anti-Godzilla-movie opinion is no less asked for than a pro-Godzilla-movie opinion."
It is when you're on a board about a fuckin' Godzilla movie.
Well, unlike you, the writers were there and they say otherwise. I'mma run with them instead of your cynical ass.
"You can feel it through the screen."
And yet, nobody was.
Murray's speech at the end is a result of how the scripted speech ended with "For a couple of hours out of the whole year, we are the people that we always hoped we would be," and Murray didn't think that Frank Cross had yet earned redemption. So he discussed it with the writers and Donner and when it came time to shoot, he just kept going with what's in the final movie and they managed to get all of what he delivered in one take.
Cynicism is just as much a helluva drug as cocaine.
View all replies >