 Messages |
Topics |
Attachments
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - poderator
1
« on: January 08, 2008, 03:18:27 AM »
Couple a days ago I watched spaghetti western "Wanted" (1967) with Giuliano Gemma in a leading role as Gary Ryan, who is accused for murder, and he is forced to escape. Of course he need to prove his innocence and only whore in the hotel where crime is comitted knows full truth. He is forced to hide in a small mexican village, but he is a wanted man, so he is forced to find a shelter in brother Carmello's little church.
Village is very poor, and 5000 dollars is not small amount for the peasants. So mexican peasants searched the whole village in pursuit for Gary, and they finally came to the church door. Brother Carmello first pulls the "church is a safe place for those who need it", but peasants are wild, because they smell money, and they are ready to break into church by force if neccesary.
Main point; in order to prevent them going into the church brother Carmello pulled heavy guns; it is not exact quote but something like this; " You are a honest folks, i know you all, but this is wrong, what you are doing now. How can you kill a man for a 30 silver coins!". And the bunch of peasants said: " No brother Carmello, not for a 30, but for 5000 yes!"
So this movie is relised in 1967, so that means a year before OUTIW. It contains the similar joke about Juda as in OUTIW auction scene, and the amount of money is the same: 5000 dollars.
It is not a direct quote I know, but it is very close.
2
« on: November 06, 2007, 01:51:11 AM »
I wrote this on IMDB while ago, and I was refering to the dilemma expresed in the first post on this thread; was he or wasn't he "forcing himself on Jill". I think there is no doubt whatsoever that he tears Jill's lace was for a purpose of setting his trap. It the way he did it that I find mostly interesting. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0064116/board/thread/84473244?d=84539898#84539898So I don't think anyone here is thinking that Harmonica wanted to rape Jill. It was a perfect trap, sort of speak. I was refering not to the why Harmonica did what he did, but HOW? To set trap for Franks men, is why, HOW he did it, rexnobus already explained. So both POV are equally important for a plot, WHY- in order to kill Frank's men, and HOW- for us to see his true agenda. 
3
« on: November 05, 2007, 03:13:28 AM »
I think rexknobus is right. And I think this scene where Harmonica tears up Jill clothes is not meant for those Frank's gangsters. It is a show for us. Leone took a common clishe and turned it upside down. Tough unknown stranger is attacking beautiful widow, he is trying to rape her. Or does he? Sergio wanted to ruin our expectacions, and he suceeded entirely. If he doesn't want her body, then what does he want? Result: his actions are very odd to us, wich adds to the aureol of mystery around Harmonica's character. Also, this scene prepared us for future events in this movie. He is not after quick pleasure, that is what we can conclude from this scene; he is not after money either, we can see it from the auction scene and after when he returned "his farm" back to Jill.
So IMHO, this is only one step, a small revelation in Harmonica's character, which separates him from the other characters (all other characters are seeking some kind of materialistic satisfaction, at least at the begining of the movie; Jill-safety and money, Cheyenne-money, Frank-money, power, women).
Pleasures of our world have no meaning for Harmonica. IMO, the only two moments where he showed some kind of emotions is (and I don't think it is coincidence both times in the interaction with Jill), bathtub scene-When he felt urge to explain to her why he spared Frank's life, and in the famous "someday" scene when he looks at her with those eyes. Jill is the only one that can reveal those "positive emotions" in Harmonicas mind, afection, maybe even love.
Of couse he felt something for Cheyenne when he dies, but those feelings are connected with Thanatos, Death and we can put them together with his feeligs about his brother.
4
« on: July 27, 2007, 12:06:47 AM »
Yes, main difference between thiese four guys is the fact that Harmonica has a deep past (actually everyone does, but only his we actually see in the movie), and MWNN is without past. As a result Harmonica is a much more complex as a character, and perhaps we care more about him, because we know more about him and his tragic past. To be honest: personal vendetta will always be more powerfull motif then gold chasing. I must say Harmonica. He is the most powerfull character in the movies (at least for me). 
5
« on: July 26, 2007, 11:51:40 PM »
Yes, you are right, I guess I should watch this once more
6
« on: July 26, 2007, 01:09:49 AM »
When I saw OUATIW again recently I noticed maybe irelevant fact. In the scene where Frank and Morton had their coversation, and in the Frank/Jill "love scene" Frank didn't have his hat on, of course  .Cheyenne is also without his hat in the famous shaving scene at McBain's farm. But Harmonica? Did he ever took of his hat in this movie? If he did, I somehow missed it. I know that he didn't have his hat in the hanging scene, but it is different thing, he was young, and it was before his tragedy occured. Also in the scene that was cut out from the movie when sheriff's men are beating Harmonica. Even inside the house he is wearing his hat. Like it was his part of the body or something. 
7
« on: July 25, 2007, 02:11:18 AM »
Nice trolling! But first, before writing a review you should set your facts straight. First of all Harmonica is not bounty hunter, in fact you made this thing up, it is NEVER mentined in this movie whatsoever. He is after Frank, because of revenge, not money. Clint Eastwood has never suppose to play main character in this movie. Sergio wanted him, Lee Van Cleef, and Eli Walach to play the three gunmens at the begining of the movie. Clint refused this offer. West as a minor classic?!  Implausible plot?! I wouldnt boast with my ignorance
8
« on: July 23, 2007, 12:05:14 AM »
What do you guys think, who would be faster, in the duel between Harmonica (present time of course) and Frank, but the real Frank when he was in his primes ( when he tortured H. brother for instance?) Who would win then? Frank was probably the greatest badass in the Wild West at that time. 
9
« on: July 23, 2007, 12:00:03 AM »
It is hard to choose, but if I have to, it would be the final showdown.
10
« on: July 20, 2007, 03:45:59 AM »
In 1968 we had two maior movies Space Odissey 2001 and OUTIW.
Famous scene in SO 2001;
1.Ape man's first learning to use bone as a tool. And the first wheapon (the bone) match-cuts to the latest wheapon (orbiting nuclear bomb platforms). Perhaps the most famous cut of all time. It explains how people developed more and more deadly wheapons as they civilisation grew. Kubrick managed to spend only frame or two of his movie and he covered two crucial moments separated by milions of years.
2.Sergio managed to pull something similar; his famous shot in the McBain massacre scene. Frank draw his gun very slowly, cock it and as he fires, we have a cut on the train arriving to Flagstone station, and sound of the gun is mixed with the sound of the locomotive.
What do you guys think what was Sergio's intention with this shot. He was obviously trying to tell us something, just like Kubrick did. But what?
Clearly we have to establish some kind of conection between the gun and the railroad. But what kind of connection?
Train as a simbol of the future wheapon? Maybe, but train in OUATIW is not only described as a negative thing(well yes but only in the Morton/Frank storyline) it has positive conotation also (civilisation of the West, Jill's storyline).I would like to hear your opinions.
11
« on: July 20, 2007, 03:07:58 AM »
12
« on: July 19, 2007, 02:53:17 AM »
For me, this movie is perfect as it is now But I would prefer those extra/missing scene on a separate part of the disc. Sometimes more is not better
13
« on: July 08, 2007, 12:07:47 PM »
I guess I would have to go along with it being a noble act or a kindness for a friend.
Are we talking here about same character!!!? Sean showed noble act of kindness!? No way, Sean was the guy who was responsible for death of all Huan's kids. He knew very well that there was no gold or money in thet bank, only rebels. And still, he decieved Huan and used him for his own selfish purposes. So only thing that Sean can feel is GUILT. Huan didn't want to be a part of the Revolution, he only tried to steal some money for the kids and him to enjoy. Of course, Huan is not inoccent at all, far from it, but Sean draged him into something very serious, and result we all know; his childerns are dead. That is why Sean saved his life after that. And all his actions after this point (especially after that great scene where Huan identifed his dead family) is his way to redeem himself somehow. Sean cannot pass any more judgements, because he is done more evil things than everyone in this movie (killed his friend, decieved another, and blow up that bridge with all thiese soldiers).
14
« on: July 07, 2007, 05:02:00 AM »
So Frank gave the "instrument of Death" to young Harmonica, and he carried Death for about 20 years, and then he is ready now to return the favour? That is what I call "Circle of Death"
15
« on: July 06, 2007, 04:43:03 AM »
No, I mean when was the full version first released in the States? Was it not until the DVD? What I'm after here is that it's possible that Tarantino hasn't seen DYS in it's full glory until recently. That might explain why he has never mentioned it when he's spoken about Leone's films. Or then he just doesn't like it as much as the others (which seems to be the common opinion outside this forum).
I see what you mean. But DYS is not Leone's best work. Don't get me wrong, I love that movie, it has something that other Sergio's movies doesn't have, but when you have OUTIW, OUTIA ant TGTBTU in your CV, it is easy to forget that there is anything else. P.S. I think that this is common opinion even on this forum. IMHO, DYS has weaker replay value than the rest of Leone's movies. Just a little less but that is true. I think it has something to do with a fact that DYS was first "historic" movie in his career. Before he made DYS he became expert for Wild West mithology, mithical characters, landscapes etc... And now he made movie with too much history, if you know what I mean? Revolution, ghosts from the Old World (Sean, Ireland) now came over the sea to lead Mexican Revolution etc. Best examle is this: name of the character. In all of his previous movies, Sergio managed to retain nickname as a distincive trademark of his main characters: Joe, Manco, Blondie, Harmonica. They stayed anonimus even at the end of the movie, they kept their personal lifes away from the main story, and they become simbols. What about the nickname of James Coburn's character, Firecracker? He hasn't been able to keep his nickname all the way trough the movie. Because thiese are now "historic times" and revolution wants names, so we have his name Sean( John) Mallory, and as a result we have his personal history about his love life, his involvment in revolution in Ireland etc. Whenever you add something that separates someone from the others, that character become more human, full of life, but he cannot be a simbol anymore, he looses his strenght as an archetype. This is the only movie where Sergio couldn't pull his old magic: to make characters appear unearthly. Because thiese are historic times, and all people are created equal.
|
Show Posts
