MovieChat Forums > The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (1966) Discussion > Once Upon a Time in the West is far supe...

Once Upon a Time in the West is far superior.


I saw both movies back in the 60's. I was not impressed with GB&U back then. I was mesmerized by OUATITW. I watched both movies recently and I felt GB&U was so contrived and ridiculous, where as OUATITW has held up quite well and stands the test of time. Even Clint Eastwood said GB&U was "bloated".

The scenery in GB&U and the sets however were fantastic.

reply

While I do love me some OUATITW I still think TGTB&TU is far superior. It's just more epic.

reply

I'm with you. I think OUATITW is the best Western of all-time.

The themes are more important. The characters are more interesting (Tuco was excellent, though). The twist is genius. I'm talking about Harmonica's anecdote from his past. Stuff that send chills down your spine.

And the score!... Morricone outdid himself. It's probably the best, the more poignant movie score in the history of cinema.

reply

And how about Henry Fonda's Frank? Just watching him stand and stare toward the camera and spit some tobacco is riveting.

reply

True facts.

reply

not even close. Good/Bad/Ugly is far better. who wants to see so many face closeups of sweaty guys?

reply

As a younger man I preferred gb&u.. now I think outtitw is a superior movie.

reply

I feel like overall OUATITW is a better film in all ways but the entire graveyard scene till the end of the film in GB&U is easily one of the best scenes in movie history.

reply

I haven't seen OUATITW but For a Few Dollars More is easily better than TGBU.

reply

That's one thing I don't get, why For a Few Dollars More is so revered. Both that movie and A Fistful of Dollars quite more primitive than tGtB&tU, which seems far more perfected in both story and cinematography.
I guess For a Few Dollars More is more of a true western, while tGtB&tU is is an epic Odyssey and a war movie, quite different from the previous films - in many ways it has more in common with Apocalypse Now.

reply

TGBU isn't a bad film but in comparison For a Few Dollars More feels less contrived and better cast. Lee Van Cleef has an insanely better role and El Indio is a better villain. The story of Douglas Mortimer is morally justified and something most people can respect. For me it's just a better vibe all around. The partnership is built on something a bit more noble. And even Manco is a bit more likable than Blondie, as a person.

And nothing's wrong with epic but sometimes it seems that TGBU is trying to put 10 pounds of story into a 5 pound bag to the point that it sometimes seems disjointed and rushed. The simplicity of For a Few Dollars More gives it some breathing room that makes the pacing work better. Maybe if they would have taken a bit more time or trimmed the story in TGBU it would have worked better. A good background story on Angel Eyes wouldn't have hurt either. He's just a devil who popped up one night.

TGBU could have been Apocalypse Now but feels more like Apocalypse Now Redux.

reply

Wasn't the first film in the trilogy the most popular in the 60's? I think it was the most iconic, Eastwood's character seemed more defined in his uniqueness in that one, later films gave him more nuances and that reduced its essence of being a mysterious man. The simplicity is very powerful, in music score, storytelling, tight editing and pacing, and especially the length of the film.

reply