Unforgiven

Besides John Wayne, I think everyone would agree that Clint Eastwood is the biggest and best western movie actor out there. From his roles in “Fistful of Dollars” through to “Pale Rider,” Eastwood has done so many memorable roles in the western genre, while also making a name of himself as a great director.

However his best, most personal work as both an actor and director can be seen in the dark and serious western classic, “Unforgiven,” released in 1992, Eastwood’s tribute and finale to the western, which tells the myths and legends found inside the genre, and shows violence in a very realistic way.

The film starts in the town of Big Whiskey. A prostitute has her face cut by a cowboy, who took exclusion to her making fun of his manhood. The towns Sheriff “Little” Bill, played by Gene Hackman, a man of strict authority and cruel violence, lets the man and his partner go, only after they say to pay the prostitutes’ pimp seven ponies for damaging his “merchandise.”

Livid at Little Bill’s choice, the rest of the prostitutes get all of their money and post everywhere that a bounty of $1000 has been put on the head of their friends’ enemy and his partner.

William Munny (Clint Eastwood), an infamous murderer who has changed his ways thanks to the help of his late wife, is approached by enthusiastic young youth, the Schofiled Kid (Jaimz Woolvett), to help him take on the enemies. With his wife died, his pigs dying of fever and two young children to feed, Munny agrees, convincing his old friend Ned Logan, played by Morgan Freeman, to join them.

Meanwhile, the overconfident British gunslinger called English Bob, played by Richard Harris, has just entered Big Whisky to claim the money for his own.

Matthew Pejkovic said in his review, “David Webb Peoples’ screenplay offers a fresh perspective to a world full of many mythical figures, especially that of the gunslinger. Long time Eastwood cinematographer Jack N. Green provides dark, vibrant images which compliments the films pensive tone. Set design, costumes and editing are also great.”

Even though many westerns worship violence, “Unforgiven” is anti-violence. Pejkovic said, “Each disturbing kill is enhanced by anguished cries of mercy, and are often followed by tragic repercussions. The influence of alcohol towards violence is also explored, as all of Munny’s infamous killing sprees were done when drunk, the demon drink no doubt giving rise to his murderous rage.”

Eastwood gives a great performance as Munny, maybe the western genre’s darkest and most difficult character. Throughout the film, the audience is told of Munny’s well-known killing sprees, which include the murder of women and children. At first, it is hard to believe that such an old, broken down man could be responsible for such murders. However, during the film’s final scenes, the Munny from the past reappears from the darkest of his head in a tense, riveting piece of cinema.

Gene Hackman’s overbearing screen role is put to good use, while Morgan Freeman and Richard Harris give solid supporting roles.

Like all the westerns I have reviewed this month, you have to see this one. It is an absolute must. Seeing how westerns don’t really come out as much anymore, it’s nice to see this one to come out at a time when westerns are not so common. This one should not be skipped over.

Thank you for joining in on “Clint Eastwood Western Month” and I’m sorry again for posting this late, as I had a busy day today. I hope everyone enjoyed my reviews, and I hope all of you check these films out.

Stay tuned next month for a nice little friendly month of great movie reviews.

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Now we have come to the last, and undeniably the best, of Sergio Leone’s “Dollars Trilogy,” “The Good, the bad and the Ugly,” released in 1966.

Eric Henderson started his review out by saying, “It seems inconceivable now that spaghetti westerns, specifically those served up by Sergio Leone, were once considered to be somehow less faithful to the western tradition than Hollywood’s crippled efforts of the same time period (look no further than the musical that Leone’s star Clint Eastwood made a few years down the road: Paint Your Wagon). The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, shorn of nearly 20 minutes for its original American release, is surely one of the most compelling validations of the western genre’s most elemental touchstones: the quiet stoicism of men who were islands unto themselves, the necessity of according respect to that unforgiving nightmare that is the Land, and the malleable but unquestionably unbreakable divisions between good and evil.”

Clint Eastwood’s Man with No Name may have a hidden (postmodern) dishonest streak in his race against Lee Van Cleef’s “Bad” and Eli Wallach’s “Ugly” to find $200,000 worth of buried gold, but, as Henderson notes, “the scene where Eastwood covers a dying Civil War soldier with his trench coat confirms that there’s really nowhere near as much room for debating his moral alignment as there was even in the later work of John Ford.” Maybe those who saw the movie during its original release were finding the ethical clearness that was “respectable” westerns and didn’t expect Leone’s uncontrolled movie richness. Henderson noted, “The director’s uniquely impassioned and architectural Italian sensibilities turned the American Southwest—or, rather, whatever portion of Spain his producers decided would suffice—into a dreamlike terrain of bombed-out ghost towns that still invariably host cathartic shoot-outs, amphitheater-shaped graveyards that seem nearly a mile in diameter, and wide vistas that alternate with extreme close-ups without nary a medium-shot buffer in sight.”

Now we can’t forget the amazing score of Ennio Morricone that you’re never really sure are simply background music and not simply powering the action on the screen, like how Henderson puts it, “as when a Confederate P.O.W. band plays accompaniment to a prolonged beating or when desert birds seem to be whistling along to the signature fourth-inversion riff.” He sometimes sacrifices clarity for effect (as Henderson points out, “when Wallach’s motormouth inexplicably goes all tacitly Van Cleef for one compelling scene as he “shops” for a new gun), but Leone’s cinema, now fully embraced by cinephiles and fanboys alike, is practically a genre unto itself.” However, his harmony with Eastwood’s main character – and, as Henderson describes, “thereby, the cowboy mythos in toto” – as a scoundrel, conflicted nonbeliever puts him in the same sublimate level of directors who, like Ford or Huston, simply tried to live out their own legends.

If you haven’t seen this movie, why are you reading this review? Go out and watch this film, like you should do with all great films. Especially with the famous line, “When you have to shoot, shoot. Don’t talk.” This is another one of my all time favorite Westerns. I give this a high recommendation for those who are fans of Eastwood and Westerns. You will absolutely love this one, I promise. With three of the greatest actors, how could you go wrong?

Now we have finished Leone’s “Dollars Trilogy.” Stay tuned next week for the conclusion of “Clint Eastwood Western Month.” I also want to apologize for posting this late. I completely forgot that today was Friday.

For A Few Dollars More

Here is a magnificently slippery, sweaty, hairy, bloody and violent Western. This is an absolute joy.

“For a Few Dollars More,” released in 1967, like every single huge and corny Westerns Hollywood used to make, is filled with problems and not story. Roger Ebert noted in his review, “Plots were dangerous because if a kid went out to get some popcorn he might miss something.”

Westerns had problems, instantly noticeable. Ebert put it, “The man in the black hat strikes a match on the suspenders of a tough guy at the bar. Two gunmen face each other at each end of a long alley.”

“For a Few Dollars More” has so much of that, but it’s on a larger, more exaggerated way, it that’s possible. Ebert said, “Shoot-outs aren't over in a few minutes like they were in "High Noon."” They are always remembered.

Ebert admitted, “This is a sequel to "A Fistful of Dollars," which I didn't see but wish I had.” Both films were shot in Italy, with English-speaking actors as the stars and Italians in small parts with dubbed dialog.

Clint Eastwood, as The Man With No Name, is fearsome: He chews and spits out a handful of cigars.

The great Lee Van Cleef, as Colonel Mortimer, looks like a noticeably tired Clarke Gable. He carries an arsenal with him. After a famous fight where they shoot each other’s hats to shreds, Eastwood and Van Cleef team up to collect the reward for the desperado Indio, played by Gian Maria Volonte.

The rest of the film is one giant old Western cliché after another. They aren’t done well, but they’re over-done well, and every problem is stretched out to that you can enjoy it.

As a sequel, this one might be better. I really like this one a lot because of how the Western genre is played out in this one, and Clint Eastwood as The Man With No Name is just as dreadful as ever. See this one because this is one that you shouldn’t skip.

I would also like to apologize for posting this late, as I worked really late tonight. Look out next week when I look at the last and absolute best of “Leone’s Dollars Trilogy” in “Clint Eastwood Western Month.”

A Fistful of Dollars

For this month, I will be dedicating it to another set of Westerns, but this time it will be ones that star Clint Eastwood. Let’s kick it off with the first of Sergio Leone’s “Dollars” Trilogy, “A Fistful of Dollars,” released in 1964.

This film was a remake of Kurosawa’s 1961 classic, “Yojimbo,” and was an Italian made Western, filmed in Spain, which started the trilogy of the so-called Spaghetti Westerns. Clint Eastwood plays “The Man With No Name,” the first of the three films made with the same theme.

Eastwood was on TV in the “Rawhide” series and took the opportunity to fly to Europe to make these films when both James Coburn and then Charles Brosnon were offered the role by director Sergio Leone, but wanted more than the $15,000 offered. The films became popular in Europe when Eastwood became a huge actor, and three years later, United Artists bought all three of the “Dollars Trilogy” and showed them with great success in U.S.A.

The film has no message, but where violence is shown by the hero being as unethical as the villains. This type of behavior changed the way Westerns were made. It’s an entertaining film, violence and everything, its only problems being the poor dubbing and Leone didn’t perfect all his moves in a clear way. Dennis Schwartz said in his review, “Yet this film, not as rewarding as his others in this series, still has the style of the director's later works, plus the same themes of graphic violence, a laconic hero, and the thrill of gunfights galore.”

Eastwood arrives in the dusty Mexican border town of San Miguel, where visitors don’t arrive without wanting something illegal. An old bell-ringer tells the visitor that in this town, people either get rich or die. Eastwood, while riding on his mule, is shot at by the gunmen of the Baxter clan. He soon is told by the bartender Silvanito, played by Pepe Calvo, that there are two gangs in town fighting: the Baxters and the Rojos. They control the gun-fighting and liquor business, and are at a disagreement. The Baxters include: Sheriff John Baxter (Wolfgang Lukschy), his smart business-minded wife Consuela (Margarita Lozano) and their dumb son Antonio (Bruno Cartenuto). The enemies are the Rojo brothers: Ramon (Gian Maria Volenté), Esteban (Sieghardt Rupp) and Benito (Antonio Prieto). The most trusted gunman of the crew is Chico (Brega). Both parties have many guns, but the Rojo family is the stronger family. Eastwood decides he’s smart enough to play them off one against the other, and try to get as much of the money he can from both families. He hires himself out with the Rojos, and to earn the money he kills the gunmen who shot at him. Schwartz noted, “Clint chomps at the end of his cigar without smoking it, says little, wears a Mexican poncho, and is always with his trusted .45s.” He makes an impressive person, as he’s tall, bearded, and intimidating.

Eastwood sees the possibility of the money coming his way when he sees Ramon Rojo and his brothers kill a Mexican cavalry unit for their gold. He steals two cavalry corpses and tells each family to look out for one another, and thereby makes them start a shooting war. This ends up with lots of corpses for the coffin maker in town. Schwartz noted, “But this scene was shot in a shoddy way, as it was hard to comprehend that the two gangs were so stupid that they would so easily believe that the stiffs they were fighting over were real.”

Eastwood does a good thing by rescuing the beautiful Marisol, played by Koch, who is being held prisoner by Ramon. He kills the Rojo gunmen guarding her and she’s free to go back to her son and husband. For this, he gets tortured by Ramon, but escapes to witness the Rojo brothers burn down the Baxter house and kill everyone. Then, Eastwood returns to get involved in a shootout with the Rojos, saving Ramon for last. Finally, he rides off with the money, instead of with the pretty girl.

In this Western, there’s some humor behind all the staged violence and there’s also a passable Ennio Morricone’s score to increase the type of melodrama. What makes this Western film famous is that is gives a historical purpose as the start of a new way in making Westerns with heroes are not always that good.

This movie is a classic that everyone should check out. If you haven’t seen it yet, go out and see it, as it is a must, especially if you’re a fan of Westerns or Eastwood. Definitely don’t skip this one.

Stay tuned next week for the next in the “Dollars Trilogy” in “Clint Eastwood Western Month.”