Cheap The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (DVD) (Sergio Leone) Price

Related Products

Customer Reviews of The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

The Quintessential Spaghetti Western
It is said that between 1964 and 1975, there were no fewer than three hundred Italian-made (though shot in Spain) so-called "spaghetti westerns." Most of them were shot on budgets that wouldn't even begin to cover the cost of catering on most of today's big-budget Hollywood extravaganzas. And, truth be told, most of them weren't very good, or loaded with sadistic violence. But director Sergio Leone, though he loathed the term "spaghetti western", was different. His trilogy of films, known as the Dollars trilogy, helped establish him internationally as a filmmaker, and also put Clint Eastwood, known up until then only as Rowdy Yates on TV's "Rawhide", on the map as a worldwide heavyweight actor. The first two films were 1964's A FISTFUL OF DOLLARS and 1965's FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE, both of which were released in America in 1967. The final film of this trilogy, made in 1966 but released in the US at the end of 1967, was the mercurial THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY. Apart from being the best film in this bizarre but fascinating trilogy, it is almost certainly the quintessential movie of the widely misunderstood spaghetti western genre. <
> <
>Eastwood reprises his role as the Man With No Name, who has come across information from a dying Civil War soldier about a $200,000 fortune located in some deserted cemetery. The problem is, of course, that Eastwood has only gleaned PART of this information, while a Mexican bandido (Eli Wallach, in a wild extension of his role in the 1960 western masterpiece THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN) has got the other piece of the puzzle. The two men form an uneasy alliance, and are also joined by the sadistic Angel Eyes (Lee Van Cleef, in an extension of his role in FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE). Their trek across the badlands of the Southwest involves much mistrust, Civil War violence, and a number of one-liners of the "There are two kinds of people in this world" variety. Everything comes to a head in that cemetery, and the result is a spine-tingling face-off between the three men, one of the single greatest of its type ever put on the big screen. <
> <
>In contrast to the mere $100,000 spent on A FISTFUL OF DOLLARS and the $400,000 spent on FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE, Leone lavished $1.2 million on THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY, and every little red cent shows up on the screen here. Leone doesn't miss a trick, as he and cinematographer Tonino Delli Colli juxtapose wide-open landscapes (albeit landscapes broiling under the heat of the sun and the Civil War) with extreme close-ups, especially in the climactic cemetery sequence. The contrast between Eastwood's seemingly disinterested Man With No Name, Van Cleef's sadistic bounty hunter, and Wallach's half-crazed bandido is a study in extremes, of course, but one where Leone clearly has firm control in this film's three hour proceedings. <
> <
>But what really seals the deal on THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY is the intense music score of Ennio Morricone, one of the single greatest scores ever composed for any film, western or otherwise. Its celebrated main theme is undoubtedly known to all who have ever seen the film; and the Ecstasy Of Gold and Trio musical cues at the end are extremely powerful stuff even today. This partnership of Leone and Morricone, formed in the first two "Dollars" films, would reach its apex with the magisterial 1969 western epic ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST (which is Leone's true masterpice). <
> <
>Very lengthy, often blackly funny, flamboyant, and undoubtedly violent, THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY remains an important and complex film of a peculiar genre, and one that remains hugely influential almost forty years after it was first released.

---

Best Western Ever Made
Clint Eastwood is awesome in this moveie. If you like movies that aren't associated with Disney, National Lampoon or Vincent Gallo, you should love this movie. The cinamatography is great, the acting is superb, and the climax and finale are perfect. The only complaint anyone should have about this movie is that it is a little long and does seem to drag its feet a little.

---

Legendary film gets the hack treatment
This is without question the most appalling example of film restoration that I've ever encountered. It is a textbook example of how work of this kind should NOT be approached. <
> <
>Firstly, there is the look of the film itself. It is radically different from the original prints that used to circulate prior to 2003, a semblance of which can be found in earlier DVD releases. Although the colors here do possess a degree of vibrancy, the overall look is washed-out and is not true to the original picture. But even more distressing is the misuse of audio. I do not understand why film studios feel the need to convert an original mono soundtrack into surround sound. If it is an attempt to attract a younger audience, it is bound to fail since it's unlikely that such a demographic would be interested in a film from 1966. And if it's aimed at an older and supposedly more discerning audience, surely they'd value the integrity of the original soundtrack over an artificallly created one. <
> <
>Even more than the picture, the sound mix violates the spirit of the original. Furthermore, some of the technical people involved in the restoration decided to "play god" and RE-RECORD PARTS OF THE SOUNDTRACK! Now, regardless of whether you feel that it now sounds "better", the point is that the director's vision should always be preserved. To completely trash the original soundtrack is cultural vandalism of the highest order and this is particularly noticeable in the sound of the gunshots which Leone spent many hours perfecting. These are now completely gone, replaced with more modern sounding effects which further negates the charm of the original. <
> <
>There is also a noticable difference in how the music appears in the overall mix. Possibly more than any other selection of films, the music in Leone's play a central if not the central role. It's integral to the entire film and yet on this DVD, it sits way back in the mix, reduced to the incidental. <
> <
>Film restoration is a tricky thing. Sometimes it works, sometimes it's a disaster. The important thing, though, is that the director's vision should be preserved as closely as possible which is clearly not the case here. I'd recommend everyone reading this to try and see an earlier print of the film and judge the differences for themselves. The Good, The Bad and The Ugly is one of my five favorite films and it's hugely disappointing to see it mauled in such a way. I'd hope that in any future restoration attempts, more cultured individuals who genuinely care about the film are involved rather than crass technical people who would like to think they have Leone's talent but really are little more than clueless hacks with little imagination or even interest in the art of cinema.