The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (1966)

The final film of Sergio Leone's "Man With No Name Trilogy" stars Clint Eastwood (the good), Lee Van Cleef (the bad), and Eli Wallach (the ugly). This epic spaghetti western takes place during the American Civil War as the three main characters are searching for buried Confederate gold. Unlike previous Leone westerns, this is less of a shoot-'em-up and has a lot more character development. While there is plenty of shooting, this is less of the focus here. The plot also addresses the absurdity of war. Overall, this film covers a lot even for a three hour movie. It occasionally tries to do a little too much and cover too much, but it's easily the best of the series.

As previously mentioned, the stars of this film are Eastwood, Van Cleef, and Wallach. While this film isn't dialogue-intensive and the roles aren't terribly demanding, this is a pretty well-acted film and required a lot more from the actors than previous Leone westerns. Wallach probably has more screen time than even Eastwood and he does a superb job blending in a little comedy in an otherwise serious role. Wallach's character is the only one where his backstory is explored as well.

While spaghetti westerns are generally poorly-received by critics, this managed to get pretty good reviews when it came out and almost all positive reviews today mainly because this is a great film. While it has its fair share of faults, the last 30 minutes or so are outstanding. The Mexican Standoff scene at the end is brilliant despite the fact that the majority of the scene nothing happens, the camera just cuts to the different actors faces over and over. Like previous Leone films, the score here, by Ennio Morricone, is brilliant. This score is particularly well-done. This film is an absolute must-see for any western fan.

85/100
B

UP NEXT: Probably the last horror film that interests me, The Exorcist.

That's not that bad.

I might just have to watch this one.

cdurbfan22 wrote:

That's not that bad.

I might just have to watch this one.

Not that bad? 85 is great.
If you want a western go for it. It's rated R for some reason but it's probably only PG-13 level violence at the most. Back in the 60s they were way harsher. They don't even really swear in here. When people get shot in old movies there's no blood so even though a lot of people get shot you don't really see any blood. It's about as violent as little boys running around playing cowboys and Indians.

*There's some close-ups that have blood and what not, but it's nothing compared to a modern movie.

I give it an 85



Good Movie



Never could figure out the R rating



I have seen worse

gs78 wrote:

I give it an 85



Good Movie

So we agree?