Sergio Leone Web Board
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
November 23, 2017, 05:47:33 AM
Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
News:


+  Sergio Leone Web Board
|-+  Films of Sergio Leone
| |-+  A Fistful of Dollars (Moderators: cigar joe, moviesceleton, Dust Devil)
| | |-+  Alternate opening
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Alternate opening  (Read 21363 times)
grandpa_chum
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 833



View Profile
« Reply #15 on: November 16, 2004, 10:20:10 PM »

the fact the opening is still in existence is... stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid.

Logged

Harmonica: So, you're not a businessman after all.
Frank: Just a man.
Harmonica: An ancient race...
drinkanddestroy
Global Moderator
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8387

trust a man who wears both a belt and suspenders?


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: December 23, 2011, 01:24:25 AM »

so I've been having some fun lately reviving old FOD threads  Smiley

I am sure by now,  everyone knows the opening was indeed included on the SE dvd. Personally, I am very happy it was included (separately, of course!) cuz it is an interesting piece of history and shows what censorship was like back then. That opening was only used for the very first time the movie was shown on tv in America, cuz the powers that be thought that it was a bit too rough for the times to have a guy come into town and slaughter the place for no apparent motive.

But that stuff about the dvd and the opening is all old. The reason I am responding here is cuz this brought up the topic of Joe's motivation, which is always a relevant and important topic, and I'd like to respond to that:

Frayling always points to TMWNN as being a new kind of anti-hero who "works strictly for cash." I agree with Frayling, and I disagree with you guys who believe Joe is like Shane * coming here to rid the town of evil. Sure, he ultimately accomplishesthat, but I don't think he in any way sets out to do that or cares about achieving that result.


I believe Joe indeed works strictly for cash, and has no other motivation, and doesn't give a damn about helping the good citizens of the town. To the extent that their interests (getting rid of the crime families) coincide with his (getting as much money as he can), great. But he doesn't care about helping anyone but his wallet, and doesn't have many morals.


Sure, he is somewhat of a better person than are the most evil people, such as Ramon, Esteban, and Chico. Other than the extremely cruel acts of those who mistreat women and children -- and perhaps what John and Consuela Baxters did, in returning Marisol to her captivity -- I don't think there is any act of violence/evil that anyone of the others do does that Joe would not do. Sure, he does stick out his neck to save The Holy Family based on some incident in his past, but overall he really is not much of a better person than most of the others in the town.

As Frayling says, this new "hero" Leone created is the hero not because of his morals, but because of his style: how cool he is, how stylish he is, how fast on the draw he is, etc. An interesting line Frayling says  (which he may have been citing someone else, and which I am probably completely butchering) is that in previous Westerns, the hero is also the quickest draw; in Leone's Westerns, he's the hero because he is the quickest draw. (Totally butchered, but you get the gist  Wink).

So yeah, he works strictly for cash. Some objections raised in this thread are that he returns the money before leaving the Rojos, that he leaves town with nothing but what he came with, and that he doesn't take the gold that was stolen from the Mexican army.

IMO these are not difficult to answer: a) Joe is "also intelligent," as Ramon says. It's not very intelligent to take money from the most powerful crime family in the neighborhood and then skip out on them. Joe figured 9correctly) that there would be plenty of opportunities to make more money later on, that were much better than basically telling Ramon here, "I took your money and now I'm leaving." If he'd have done that, at worst, Ramon would have tried to kill him or take the money back; at best, he'd have never trusted/hired him again. Maybe indeed, as someone said, he really did want to "earn it." But I prefer my answer. Joe certainly left town with far more than what he came with: we clearly see him getting money from the Baxters' twice (once it's $500, the second time it's unclear how much; Consuela simply says, "Very soon, you're going to be rich"), and $500 from the Rojos once; and perhaps it's assumed that he received more off-screen. So he made over $1000 in town. And considering that the only thing to spend money on in the town is food and drink by Silvanito and coffins by Piripiro (admittedly, Joe is responsible for a lot of them!), IMO it is pretty clear that Joe indeed leaves town with a fistful of dollars.

Taking the gold would have been absolutely asinine. The gov't was certainly conducting investigations, and for one man trying to flee from the Mexican gov't/army with a chest of gold -- especially since Silvanito and perhaps others in the town would know that Joe had taken it, and perhaps their allegiance would be to their own gov't -- would have been absolute suicide. Or, as Joe says, "too dangerous." Joe is the "last man standing" cuz, as Ramon said earlier, "he's also intelligent." It wouldn't have been intelligent to take a chest of gold the Mexican gov't is after.

(Interestingly, there is a similar issue at the end of FAFDM, where Manco takes the loot that was stolen from the bank. There, it's probably meant to be somewhat ambiguous as to whether he was gonna keep it or return it...)


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


* Once I mention Shane, I'll address those who compared FOD with Shane:  The plot of FOD is of course a direct ripoff of Yojimbo, which was probably heavily influenced by Shane. IMO Shane's only real influence on the plot was that Shane influenced Yojimbo; I don't think much was copied directly from Shane that Yojimbo hadn't already. The reason I believe that I don't see much you can point to in the plot of FOD that has a source in Shane but not in Yojimbo. So IMO Shane wasn't much of a direct influence on the plot, except insofar as it was the inspiration for Yojimbo.

« Last Edit: December 23, 2011, 04:31:05 AM by drinkanddestroy » Logged

There are three types of people in the world, my friend: those who can add, and those who can't.
stanton
Bounty Killer
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2965



View Profile
« Reply #17 on: December 23, 2011, 02:32:08 AM »

Yes, Joe works strictly for cash, and for that the ending is in the light of the next 2 films slightly disappointing. Here Leone has probably chickened out, at least I view the ending as a concession towards old movie conventions, and I assume Leone would have made it different if FOD would have been made after FaFDM.
We don't know how much money he gave the holy family, but I always assumed  he gave them all he had, at least there is nothing which indicates clearly that he has no money left when he leaves. The directing implies that he leaves hoe he came. With his mule and his clothing.

FOD created a new type of hero, which was so extremely different that many called him an anti-hero (which he not really is), but it needed one more film to give this then cynic attitude full reign.

Logged

Smokey
Bandido
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 59


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: December 23, 2011, 07:02:34 AM »

Is this the scene?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppZuqec9lq0

Logged
drinkanddestroy
Global Moderator
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8387

trust a man who wears both a belt and suspenders?


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: December 23, 2011, 07:15:22 AM »


Indeed it is Afro

and by the time Joe had gotten from the prison to San Miguel, his horse had turned into a mule, his poncho had been cut in half, and the screen had gone from 2:35:1 to 4:3  Grin (actually, I guess the whole movie was cut to 4:3 to be shown in fullscreen on tv, eh?)

« Last Edit: December 23, 2011, 07:24:23 AM by drinkanddestroy » Logged

There are three types of people in the world, my friend: those who can add, and those who can't.
stanton
Bounty Killer
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2965



View Profile
« Reply #20 on: December 23, 2011, 09:47:43 AM »

And it was indeed directed by Monte Hellman. Maybe he did it by purpose so bad that he hoped they wouldn't use it.

Logged

Cusser
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1558


Remember, I always see the job through !


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: December 23, 2011, 07:02:23 PM »

Of course he was going to return the bank's money.  With that reward, plus bounties, he'd be rich anyway.  If he turned n the gang for bounty, and din't have their loot, that would raise lots of questions.

Logged
Stern
Road Apple
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


View Profile WWW
« Reply #22 on: December 26, 2011, 01:46:24 PM »

Maybe two remarks from a different point of view: Not only Joe is working for a fistful of dollars, but also Leone with his budget of 100 T USD. To a small extent is Joe the early autobiographical portrait of himself. Also the Dollar trilogy is to some extent the story of his raising budget (to 1.3 M USD), bur Leone uses it only to build more and more destructed scenes and to end in GBU in a dead town: in a cemetery. To the second: there may be another opening, but this opening is the opening of Leones carrier. The well, Joe is drinking of in the beginning is the presumption of Sweetwater (no one else uses it; no one uses the well in the middle of the town). Chico in the beginning returns even in the end of his carrier, in America as Chicken Joe. The desert of San Miguel returns periodically and you can continue for dozens.

Logged
UNKNOWN Next to Arch Stanton
Chicken Thief
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 40


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: February 04, 2012, 04:54:48 PM »

The new scene was used before the credits so it could be used selectively. BTW, was it used during the initial airing n 1975 or 1977?

Logged
cigar joe
Moderator
Bounty Killer
*****
Online Online

Posts: 12728


easy come easy go


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: February 05, 2012, 04:22:48 AM »

1975 and I was appalled 

Logged

"When you feel that rope tighten on your neck you can feel the devil bite your ass"!
drinkanddestroy
Global Moderator
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8387

trust a man who wears both a belt and suspenders?


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: February 05, 2012, 08:52:09 AM »

I find it funny how passionately the old timers hate that opening  Grin Grin

of course, that opening is bullshit. But considering that it aired ONE TIME, was so pathetic it was never taken seriously, and actually serves as a reminder of just how revolutionary FOD was (even a decade after its release!) I find it amusing in a certain way. Of course, I wouldn't want it as part of the movie and never even think about it (until someone posts about it here), but I'm glad we have it as an extra on the dvd. For all those reasons, i find it hilarious that some of y'all would wish we didn't even have a copy of it.

On the other hand, many of those same folks have no problem with the fact that the studio cut out 17 minutes that Leone had intended be in GBU (or was it 14?) The Master had intended that be part of the movie, and studio execs had shamefully removed it. I am very happy I never saw those versions (as the only versions of Leone movies I have ever seen are the one son the latest edition dvd's).

I know that those parts that were cut were generally not all that important to the plot (with the one exception of the scene of Angel Eyes in the destroyed Confederate fort, which I absolutely believe should have been left in). But still, I want to see the version the Master intended, period.

Of course, the matter of that "alternate opening scene" of FOD and the matter of the cut scenes of GBU ar 2 completely unrelated issues; I'm just mentioning it cuz I find it amusing that many people here get an ulcer whenever that "alternate opening of FOD" is mentioned, but are totally cool with the version of GBU that was available in the US until '03. I understand that that is the version you grew up with, but it would bother me much more knowing that there are 17 minutes of a movie that Leone intended to be in there that I couldn't see for years; than the fact that the first time a movie was shown on tv, it had an "alternate opening" that I knew was fake and never aired again. If you could roll back time, would you choose to

A) have always had the version of GBU Leone intended you see;

or

B) have not had to endure the trauma of seeing a fake opening one time?

From some of the reactions here, I think of many of y'all will take B, which I find preposterous  Grin Grin Grin


(All I know is that I would accept a thousand fake openings to FOD [as long as I knew they were fakes, of course] if I'd have the ability to see the additional 45 minutes or so of OUATIA that Leone had intended be in the definitive version of the movie. I am really hoping that Leone's children and the others involved in the upcoming restoration do a good job. If all goes well and we'll indeed have the version of OUATIA [about 4:35] that Leone intended, I will be the happiest man alive. I know this all has nothing to do with the topic here, but for me, everything in life gets back to OUATIA, specifically getting ahold of that definitive 4:35 version. [Once that is done, then we'll turn our attention to the 6-10 hours of footage that Frayling says Leone shot]  Wink )


Logged

There are three types of people in the world, my friend: those who can add, and those who can't.
stanton
Bounty Killer
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2965



View Profile
« Reply #26 on: February 05, 2012, 09:13:00 AM »

And who exactly is on the other hand, many of those same folks who have no problem with the fact that the studio cut out 17 minutes that Leone had intended be in GBU (or was it 14?).

Or who of us iyo will really take B, which you then will find preposterous?

Logged

cigar joe
Moderator
Bounty Killer
*****
Online Online

Posts: 12728


easy come easy go


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: February 05, 2012, 03:59:26 PM »

I find it funny how passionately the old timers hate that opening  Grin Grin

of course, that opening is bullshit. But considering that it aired ONE TIME, was so pathetic it was never taken seriously, and actually serves as a reminder of just how revolutionary FOD was (even a decade after its release!) I find it amusing in a certain way. Of course, I wouldn't want it as part of the movie and never even think about it (until someone posts about it here), but I'm glad we have it as an extra on the dvd. For all those reasons, i find it hilarious that some of y'all would wish we didn't even have a copy of it.

On the other hand, many of those same folks have no problem with the fact that the studio cut out 17 minutes that Leone had intended be in GBU (or was it 14?) The Master had intended that be part of the movie, and studio execs had shamefully removed it. I am very happy I never saw those versions (as the only versions of Leone movies I have ever seen are the one son the latest edition dvd's).

I know that those parts that were cut were generally not all that important to the plot (with the one exception of the scene of Angel Eyes in the destroyed Confederate fort, which I absolutely believe should have been left in). But still, I want to see the version the Master intended, period.

Of course, the matter of that "alternate opening scene" of FOD and the matter of the cut scenes of GBU ar 2 completely unrelated issues; I'm just mentioning it cuz I find it amusing that many people here get an ulcer whenever that "alternate opening of FOD" is mentioned, but are totally cool with the version of GBU that was available in the US until '03. I understand that that is the version you grew up with, but it would bother me much more knowing that there are 17 minutes of a movie that Leone intended to be in there that I couldn't see for years; than the fact that the first time a movie was shown on tv, it had an "alternate opening" that I knew was fake and never aired again. If you could roll back time, would you choose to

A) have always had the version of GBU Leone intended you see;

or

B) have not had to endure the trauma of seeing a fake opening one time?

From some of the reactions here, I think of many of y'all will take B, which I find preposterous  Grin Grin Grin




(All I know is that I would accept a thousand fake openings to FOD [as long as I knew they were fakes, of course] if I'd have the ability to see the additional 45 minutes or so of OUATIA that Leone had intended be in the definitive version of the movie. I am really hoping that Leone's children and the others involved in the upcoming restoration do a good job. If all goes well and we'll indeed have the version of OUATIA [about 4:35] that Leone intended, I will be the happiest man alive. I know this all has nothing to do with the topic here, but for me, everything in life gets back to OUATIA, specifically getting ahold of that definitive 4:35 version. [Once that is done, then we'll turn our attention to the 6-10 hours of footage that Frayling says Leone shot]  Wink )



The difference is, I never knew about the cut 17 minutes until I first read Fraylings Spaghetti Western Book, and finally saw them when the DVD with them added as extra features came out.

Logged

"When you feel that rope tighten on your neck you can feel the devil bite your ass"!
drinkanddestroy
Global Moderator
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8387

trust a man who wears both a belt and suspenders?


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: February 05, 2012, 04:30:30 PM »

And who exactly is on the other hand, many of those same folks who have no problem with the fact that the studio cut out 17 minutes that Leone had intended be in GBU (or was it 14?).

Or who of us iyo will really take B, which you then will find preposterous?

people like you and cigar joe seem to have little problem with (most of) the scenes that were cut from GBU -- there were some that you are even unhappy were restored. Nothing like the way cigar joe (and some others) whines about that alternate opening  Wink

Logged

There are three types of people in the world, my friend: those who can add, and those who can't.
Dirty Rat
Gunslinger
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 279


Just like the greasy rat that you are.......


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: February 06, 2012, 02:50:06 AM »

I agree that the "alternate opening" is hilarious because it is so bad.
Perhaps the funniest thing is that the plonker that produced it (or directed it, I cannot remember) reckoned that he once bumped into Clint who claimed that he had once seen it on tv in a hotel room and hadn't realised that it wasn't him it was so good!!!!!!!!!
He is a funny or not very well man   Undecided

Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  



Visit FISTFUL-OF-LEONE.COM

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.033 seconds with 19 queries.