The Good, The Bad, and This Review

From the moment that score starts you know you're in for something magical. Like I said in my Scott Pilgrim review, there are only a handful of movies that the opening credits or a title card can get you so pumped, you go into the movie.... socks already blown off, this is one of those.

For those that don't know The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly (or Il buono, il brutto, il cattivo) is a continuation of the loose "Dollars Trilogy" (Fistful of Dollars/Per un pugno di dollari , and For a Few Dollars More/Per qualche dollaro in più ). In this movie Clint Eastwood returns with the mantle of "The Man with No Name" and also the subtitle of The Good, which means you know Eli Wallach and Lee Van Cleef are going to be right basterds bastards.

And bastards they are.

The plot, for a western, is pretty inventive. Instead of stranger riding to town, fighting banditos, riding off to the next town, the movie is full of anti-heroes, parched Spanish desert the movie really establishes Revisionist/Spaghetti westerns that replace John Wayne smacking Pilgrim's in the jaw with the likes of Eastwood snarling around a cigar, shooting up scores of Italian/Spanish extras. This movie instead has Wallach and Eastwood hunting riches in the Civil War dominated West, facing off with bandits, the Yanks, the Rebs, and the fact that they are both ruthless cut throats.

But those two only account for the Good and the Ugly... where's the bad?

Enter Senteza/Angel Eyes Lee Van Cleef, a bounty hunter/mercenary/bad ass. The two meet the one when Joe (The Man with no Name's name) and Tuco (Wallach) after Wallach stupidly insults the union, while the pair is wearing Rebel get up. The three then form an uneasy alliance to go get the money, and all kinds of hell breaks loose.

Frankly, this might be the best western of all time, definitely in the top 5. There are many things about this that make it great, and I don't have enough space to tell you all of them, but I'll start with the Cinematography. Never has miles of sun burned desert looked so damn good. I prefer this kind of western to those other kinds with the sprawling landscapes and gorgeous mountains, so I was in hog heaven watching this movie.

Next is the score, which I touched on before. Ennio Morricone creates a dynamic stylized score, that compliments the harsh landscape, just as well as it compliments the three bastards that are at the heart of this movie.

Finally, The acting.

The Good: Eastwood is typical Eastwood. If you've seen the first two Dollars movies than you know what to expect here. Eastwood snarls, growls, and chomps his cigars the same way as in the first two, luckily that works perfectly. The character of the MWNN demands the level of grittiness and anger that Clint Eastwood brings to the screen, in short he was born for this role.

The Bad: In a part that was meant for Charles Bronson, Von Cleef makes you wonder why Bronson was even considered. Angel Eyes is a bastard ( I know I've used that word a lot, it's just so perfect), and he knows it. Much like an early version of Clint Barton Von Cleef is a sharpshooting sun of a bitch who actually succeeds in making Clint Eastwood come across as the good.

The Ugly: Eli Wallach steals this movie. As a drunk, vicious, murdering, rapist Wallach plays the part so despicable, and so disgusting, you can't help but like him. Wallach shows a level of basterdry that in this movie is peerless, hell for most of cinema he's peerless.

Like I said before, this is an amazing movie and certainly deserves a spot on any top 5 western list, maybe even the top spot.

Dr. Brooklyn says: LIKE this movie (10/10)