Thoughts on this film

[noodles_leone]

Cigar i didn''t know you had never "really" seen this movie... have you ever seen the version with mao''s quotation at the begining AND the final flashback?

[cigar joe]

Just pan & scan not in widescren or in a theater unfortunately, looking forward to the DVD.

[shorty larsen]

Let's discuss about this: I believe Leone's intention with this movie is to give a strong message against the way in wich revolutions are made. Juan's speech against the intelectual leadership of revolutions is extremely clear, where are the people that can't read after the revolution? They are dead. While the intelectual leadership rules now the country. Don't get me wrong, I'm not myself against revolutions, "on the contraire".

It is clear to me that after exploring the american dream disillusion Leone was in his way to explore the revolutionnary disillusion. He started with DYS and he was about to get more serious with "900 Days". Death took him from us before he could make that (for sure) masterpiece.

[dave jenkins]

But wasn't that the way Juan always was? He was a bandit by choice, and a revolutionary only by accident. And a bandit is a guy who is about as independant as you can get.

I'd say Juan doesn't get much of a political education in the film (he doesn't need one); what changes for him is his understanding of personal relationships (he learns what it is to have, and lose, a friend).

Sean, on the other hand, does seem to learn (or re-learn) some truths about politics.

[grandpa_chum]

well i think it's obvious sean learns something, if not during the film than directly before, like he says "i used to believe in many things, now i only believe in dynamite"... also that he is done judging people based on their politics, the obvious that i alluded to earlier is that he kills his friend back in ireland for turning in his brethren in revolution and not viega, although it brings up terrible memories, and probably something he regrets doing... like he says, he judged a traitor only once and he doesn't do that anymore.

[shorty larsen]

Yes, and also Sean throws up Bakunin's "Patriotism" after Juan's speech against the way in wich revolutions are made...

Sean is a politician, even if he is anarchist, he believes in something and in a better world. I don't think Juan believes in this at all.

I personnally think (and I agree with Dave Jenkins) the only think that changes in Juan's vision of life is that know there is a place for friendship and trust in his heart, even if Sean is dead. And that's what Sean changes in Juan's life.

On the other side, Juan contribution to Sean's life is that friendship and all that surrounds it is a better way to hapiness than revolution...

[Alan Shearer 9]

I think you can only really appreciate this film fully if you understand it within the political context that it was made in. I am hesitant to call it a masterpiece because I feel I am biased towards Leone films but deep down I really think it is that good.

[Johny_Exhale]

most underrated film thats been made to date, not most underrated western, most underrated film, period

giu la testa is genius, pure leone, underrated without a reason at all, it goes much further than people think, its is a goddamn great film, right up there with the dollars trilogy

[Film-Junkie Zach]

Just as great as AMERICA, WEST, and GBU. Even though I only have seen the two hour and 18 minute cut on TV.

Sony, Please let Americans have the special editions of Dollars, Dollars More, and Dynamite. I swear on my life I will buy all three films and I'll tell everybody I know to buy em'

[Juan Miranda]

Wow, what a thread. I guess, I'll chuck in my 2 cents. For me this is one of the finest movies ever made, beaten by Leone only by ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA. I also consider it one of the most underrated films of all time too, beaten only by TWIN PEAKES: FIRE WALK WITH ME. But that's another story.

As for the worst Leone film, if we're talkin' oaters, surely that's MY NAME IS NOBODY. Seen once and utterly forgotten (OK, I know, thats cheating a bit).

One of its major drawbacks is its terrible title, DUCK YOU SUCKER. Its origional screenplay title, ONCE UPON A TIME, THE REVOLUTION is better, but I can only bear to call it by its Italian title GIU LA TESTA.

One of its major peculiarities is how Coburn's character is always called Sean, even though his name is clearly John Mallory, and is called John by everyone in the film. When I'm chatting with friends about the film I always call him Sean, and always have to correct myself. Perhaps its the insistance of the unforgettable "Sean Sean Sean" Morricone refrain?

Of course when Juan askes Coburn his name, he is gazing off in the distance and mumbles "Sean", then changes it to John. Pehaps "Sean" is in fact the name of the David Warbeck character seen in the flashbacks? But that's probabaly for a different thread all of its own...

ETA. In fact I just found a couple.

[cigar joe]

Ahhh, another David Lynch fan, lol, me too.

[Juan Miranda]

There are two types of people in this world, my friend. Those who come in through the window, and those who come in through the door pretending to be "the bug man".

[cigar joe]

There are two types of people in this world, my friend. Those who come in through the window, and those who come in through the door pretending to be "the bug man".

lol, I've been recently posting pics from Lynch's Missoula circa 1970's on:

 
http://www.lynchnet.com/anyboard/General_Discussion/index.html

[Alan Shearer 9]

Sean is his mate's name, he is John Mallory and he's daydreaming and calls to sean. The sean SEan SEAN!!!!!!! in the Morricone score still makes sense because he's longing for his friend who he lost because of a revolution.

[dave jenkins]

That's a possible interpretation, and one that someone on the new SE DVD (Glenn Erickson, perhaps?) is trying to foist upon us. I find it less persuasive than the idea that Coburn is actually Sean. The many references in the film to Coburn as John are easily explained, as John is the anglacized form of Sean. The newspaper article that identifies Coburn's character as John Mallory may have had an editorial policy to render all Irish names as English ones (stranger things have happened). Or Sean may have even used John as an alias while on the run, and the paper used what info it had. Clearly, Sean uses John with Juan because he knows the peasant will be more familiar with that form of the name.

The crucial fact regarding this matter is the lyric added to the music by Carla Leone: "Sean, Sean, Sean." If we did not have SL's other movies, and had only DYS to go by, we might possibly be tempted to imagine that these words refer to the dead friend. But we do have the other movies, and so know that Leone NEVER used music in this way. By the time of OUATITW, SL (in collaboration with Morricone, natch) had developed a fairly consistent approach to film scoring, one that borrowed from operatic techniques. Specifically, he assigned leitmotifs to each of the major characters in his Once Upon a Time trilogy. This is easily seen in OUATITW, where Jill, Cheyenne, and even Morton get their own themes. Harmonica and Frank share a theme, or rather, both are identified by complementary phrases that combine to form a single theme that is only revealed in its entirety at the final gundown. In DYS the two main characters certainly get their themes: Juan gets the one that is sometimes called (by Frayling, for example) "The March of the Beggars." The character played by Coburn gets the "Sean, Sean, Sean" theme. That is HIS theme, and it always plays when he is present on screen or just about to appear (there are two exceptions, the first at the very beginning of the film where the motif serves as foreshadowing, the second at the end after the explosion as a kind of memorial for the dearly departed). This theme is not restricted to thoughts of Ireland, or of the dead friend. The music is always with Coburn whatever he is doing or thinking. It is, in fact, an element of his character.

So I find it unlikely that a dead character who we only see in flashback is the focus of one of the two major musical motifs of the picture. It seems more logical that the motif should be seen as applying to Coburn, and that it is referring to him by name.

And I'm pretty sure that if you pull any first-time viewer of the film aside afterwards (before he has a chance to read any criticism) and asked him to state the name of the character Coburn plays, he/she would reply "Sean."