Fistful
of Dollars
The opening
credits are part of the show, with their Westerned stage names and the terse,
brilliant title.
This is a very
taut line of action you might find in a Randolph Scott Western (The Stranger
Wore a Gun, for example, anticipating Yojimbo). From first to last,
it’s constructed of religious imagery that reflects Leone’s 60/40 plan of sound
and picture in its symbolism and its naturalism. The regality and grandeur of
the one match the plainspoken intimacy of the other, in the proportion of
Morricone’s score (40%) with all the elements of sound, and Leone’s technique
(60%).
There is a
Hitchcockian sleight-of-hand that has structural uses. Joe is in Mrs. Baxter’s
room without her knowledge, she crosses the room and the camera at waist-level
follows her to a close-up of her outstretched hand stopped by his grasping her
wrist, then it tilts up to show his other hand already over her mouth. This is
how the first scene is later amplified as a revealed action, Joe has arrived at
the whitewashed outskirts of the border town, he stops to drink at a well, a
little boy is roaming the empty street, then climbs in a window and is ejected
through the door by a fat ruffian who shoots at the dirt around his feet,
driving him into the arms of his father across the way, who is then beaten,
while a woman looks on from the window. Much later it’s discovered that the
boy’s name is Jesus, the woman is his mother and Ramón Rojo’s captive mistress,
but already it’s the parable of the vintner’s son—the division of the scene
furthers the perception of each aspect.
The two witnesses
of Revelation appear in a Judgement of Solomon, the town is scourged mightily
and freed by the return of the hero (out of One-Eyed Jacks) suitably
armored, after being carried out in a coffin, alive.
He plays the
Rojos, who disguise themselves as a U.S. Army troop to murder and rob a Mexican
Army gold convoy, against Sheriff Baxter (who keeps his badge in his pocket)
and his arms-trading clan, until the latter are destroyed and only Ramón is
left, who “always aims for the heart.”
And humming along
with all this is a memory of Keaton under two flags, Pinter’s The Dwarfs,
etc. So begins Leone’s long study of America (with a side trip to Mexico in Duck,
You Sucker!), in the tradition of Columbus and Vespucci.
Peckinpah derived
a certain view from this (and something from the rotoscoped titles) for The
Wild Bunch, witness the coffinmaker in the final scene here collecting the
bodies, and the influence on Eastwood in High Plains Drifter and Pale
Rider and Unforgiven grows more formidable, in much the same way
Leone’s own style expands upon the perfection he found by modeling a Western
after Kurosawa, that great student of John Ford. Later, all the epic furor in
the symbolism is allowed to permeate the structure along the line of action and
extend it, giving a sense of spaciousness to some degree replacing the speed
and verve of the earlier films, although it’s predominantly a shifting of
dimension. Morricone’s music has longer lines, too, rather than (as here) a
counterpoint of features like a three-ring circus. A vertical compression, a
horizontal expanse, the same visible elements are slightly rearranged. Fistful
of Dollars is fast, very fast, saying much in few frames, because of its
vertical layering of symbolic expression distributed along a linear course
going back and forth like Lönnrot’s labyrinth.
For
a Few Dollars More
The profit of
taming the West. Bad ‘un’s are everywhere with a price on their head. You can
pick and choose, take them as they come.
Manco and Col.
Mortimer do this separately in Tucumcari, combine in El Paso to undo El Indio,
and part ways in Agua Caliente.
Mortimer’s sister
killed herself to avoid El Indio’s rape.
It’s a cash-and-carry
business, you stack the bodies and count the money.
Peckinpah is
near, from the opening shot like the one not filmed at the start of his screenplay
for Ride the High Country to the flashbacks in The Wild Bunch.
El Indio, the
laughing bandit.
The
Good, the Bad and the Ugly
The screenplay
adopts a supremely ironical position toward the American Civil War identical
with that of Becker’s Touchez pas au grisbi and Hodges’ Get Carter
toward World War II (and see also Brian G. Hutton’s Kelly’s Heroes),
characterizing it as a criminal conflict of rival gangs. Furthermore, the
character of Blondie is loosely adapted from Twain’s Murel (in Life on the
Mississippi, Chapter XXIX, cf. Paul Bogart’s Skin Game and
Pollack’s The Scalphunters).
Angel Eyes is a
personification of Union depredations, the first commanding officer rails at
his treatment of prisoners (the second is stymied at a bridge until Blondie and
Tuco blow it up to gain passage), prefiguring Lincoln’s view of Reconstruction,
which also figures in the Confederate prisoners’ song (an image from Verdi’s Nabucco)
under duress to cover a beating. The essence of the story is a search for
Confederate gold, hidden in a grave next to a battlefield.
The speed,
vitality and precision of Leone’s technique were a shocking surprise, hence his
many years of stigmatization as a “spaghetti Western” director. It’s hard to
compare his vivacious compositions of action, camera movement, music and
editing to anyone else’s, though the range of his citations is vast and minute
and extends from Griffith to Lean and just about everything in between. It
might have sufficed merely to have realized his vision of the North American
continent in the Spanish badlands, but he did so via the creation of a
sweet new style.
Once
Upon a Time in the West
The vast
proportions are set up so as to provide an adequate realization of two images,
one of which is a flashback.
The railroad
magnate (Gabriele Ferzetti) has a dream of seeing the
Opposed to his
roughshod tyranny, or rather that of his hired gunmen (whose job is to “clear
the track of obstacles”), is a man (Charles Bronson) whom the chiefest of these
once made stand under a noose, supporting his brother, whose neck was in it
(this is the scene at the end of The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, with a
difference). The villain (Henry Fonda) thought it was comical, in a Roman sort
of way, to stick a harmonica in the boy’s mouth, so he could play while his
brother tottered and dangled.
The railroad
does, of course, go through, but minus the appurtenances, and this is seen in a
mighty panoramic shot at the close. Earlier, a long shot of a wagon on a dusty
trail pans 180° to reveal
An important
secondary theme has the railroad’s hirelings misdirecting the law toward the
notorious outlaw Cheyenne (Jason Robards) and his gang for their own slaughter
of a rancher and his family on the very day the man’s wife (Claudia Cardinale)
arrives in town.
Duck,
You Sucker (A Fistful of Dynamite)
“I make
Westerns,” says John Ford with utter contempt for snobs in the critical
establishment. So do the Italian directors of the New Wave, so many inept
twirlers of pasta for our critics. In consequence, we have the despicable
history of this film, which was mutilated to varying degrees in its first
twenty-five years, and only now perhaps approaches a decent cut eight years
further on.
The primary
structure, more and more evident throughout, is Lawrence of Arabia. An
initial quotation from Mao Tse-Tung on revolution as an act of violence (as distinct
from a movie or a literary citation) is said to appear in two slightly
different forms, according to the restoration (one has it white on black in
pieces following one another, more succinctly). The Brechtian resolve of this
is more remarkable in that the subject of this film is the Mexican Revolution.
The title is a
joke on
The main structural device is the pivotal close-up, the underpinnings include The Wild Bunch. Thematic material is
later developed in Once Upon a Time in America (particularly traitors in
high places).
Once
Upon a Time in America
The film takes
place in two parts, across a divide of decades. The first part (which has an
interesting division of its own) ends in 1933, the second begins and ends
thirty-five years later.
Boys grow up in
teeming New York to be gangsters, until their leader, Max (James Woods)
conceives the ambition (he calls it a “dream”) of robbing a Federal Reserve
bank. His partner Noodles (Robert De Niro) turns him in, the caper is suicidal.
The gang is all but rubbed out, Max included, and Noodles shuffles off to
Buffalo without, however, the suitcase holding the gang’s money, which
mysteriously has been replaced with newspapers.
More than thirty
years later, Max returns to New York on a summons from an unknown party, visits
a crypt in memory of the gang bearing a plaque naming him as the benefactor who
erected it, and on the plaque is the key to the railroad-station locker where
the suitcase had been kept. Inside the locker, he finds a suitcase full of
money with a note on one of the wrappers, ADVANCE PAYMENT FOR YOUR NEXT JOB. He
goes to a party at the home of Secretary of Commerce Bailey, who is Max and
wants Noodles to kill him, he’s under indictment, the syndicate want him
silenced. For Noodles, Max is dead and buried, he wishes him well and departs,
only to see Max disappear a short while later outside his estate, ingested by a
passing garbage truck (a Felliniesque invention with red taillights and a
grinding maw).
The incredible
thing is that, after the disastrous American release of Gił la testa,
Leone should once again have consigned his film to an American distributor
without guarantees against mutilation. In fact, the American cut reduced Once
Upon a Time in America by forty percent and rendered it all but senseless,
outdoing even the ravages of RKO on The Magnificent Ambersons. Until the
facts come out, this will doubtless be seen by Newsweek as yet another
case of artistic self-destruction. Nevertheless, American critics distinguished
themselves in this instance by spotting the devastation at once. Vincent Canby
was fooled by the initial release of Apocalypse Now, he was not to be
trifled with again, and eloquently described the studio rescension of Once
Upon a Time in America as “a long, inscrutable trailer.” And twenty years
later, with a four-hour version available, the definitive cut is still in
question, the Italians having nearly ten extra minutes (a reel, in silent
nomenclature), or perhaps forty, amid reports that Leone himself omitted
valuable material on release.
Welles was asked
what he thought of The Citizen Kane Book, in which Pauline Kael argued
that he had stolen credit for the work from Herman J. Mankiewicz and John
Houseman. Welles just smiled.
It hardly begins
to enumerate the possibilities of significance in Once Upon a Time in
America merely to suggest a root of inspiration in Leone’s experience with Gił
la testa, but the work as cut in America was a laughingstock or worse, and
here there is the crypt with its telltale signature, the boy watching through a
peephole as a girl practices her dancing lesson, the final meeting with the big
shot—and the similarity to Coppola’s ęstheticism in The Godfather—yet
the sense of the New Hollywood (which began with the corporate takeovers of the
Seventies) can be felt, and without diminishing the work it seems fair to educe
a response from it which will be instantly recognizable to anyone who has ever
undergone the experience of seeing work butchered that is the product of years,
it’s a lacerating humiliation that, especially in the case of a director like
Leone who made so few films, can only be deeply injurious. It was one thing to
belittle his masterpieces as “spaghetti Westerns,” but to set upon them with an
editing table was really too much, hence (if the close reading here proposed be
given its due weight) this address to the studio bosses from an heir of
Stroheim and Welles.
The main
structural considerations draw from John Ford’s The Man Who Shot Liberty
Valance and Robert Altman’s McCabe and Mrs. Miller. If you add to this
an epic dimensionality incorporating a memory effect in flashback, you have a
very fair idea of the new invention Leone has achieved. Merely the fusing of
Ford and Altman in this way stands as a remarkable bearing upon the question.
If Altman’s film
is grasped (it has not been grasped this way) as the Van Gogh myth analyzed,
there is a beautiful contrapuntal expression with Ford. However, to this
central line of thought is added the parallel from Francis Ford Coppola’s The
Godfather in its capacity of symbolic understanding (cf. Becker’s Touchez
pas au grisbi, Hodges’ Get Carter). This makes for an exceedingly
sharp satire of delusion and critique, “print the legend”. The
irreconcilability of these two perfectly comprehensible lines is perhaps the
succeeding point.
A generally
painstaking technique reveals the classical Leone in the showdown treatment of
Noodles and his cup of coffee in the office (The Maltese Falcon), the
discovery by camera movement of the palatial Miami Beach hotel behind the
sunbathers (The Good, the Bad and the Ugly), as well as a Fellini touch
in the last shots before the coda, among many instances of photographic realism
and scenic evocation on unwonted ground, not previously covered by this
director.