ViewGuide

Created Jul 21, 2008 03:34AM PST • Edited Jul 21, 2008 03:34AM PST

1. Quality

2. Summary

   Great 4.0

   The Spaghetti Western trilogy begins with a ruthless and intricate film in “Dollars”. Clint Eastwood shows even in his first film performance that he was destined to own the Western genre, and Leone’s hallmarks (starkly beautiful vistas, memorable Morricone score) are all present. A fantastic debut for any director and star, but in this case historic, and a film that lives up to and exceeds expectations.

4. Acting

   Very Good 3.5

   Eastwood is the main focus, and he holds your gaze throughout. His glare is frightening enough through the screen! The supporting cast are incredibly poorly dubbed, but Gian Maria Volonte is the standout, his Ramon a strong and in-control villain.

5. Male Stars Great 4.0

   Clint Eastwood’s first starring role (after the television series Rawhide) was in “Dollars”, but watching his performance, you would not have thought this. Eastwood inhabits the “Man With No Name” with intensity and an air of mystery, only hinting at his past and keeping his dialogue down to a minimum, enfusing his performance with strength with only his expressions. His performance alone is worth watching, if only to see how he went on to become such a famous actor and director from this auspicious start.

6. Female Stars Very Good 3.5

7. Female Costars Good 3.0

   There are only two female characters within the narrative; Baxter’s wife and Marisol, the woman at the centre of the "Man"’s plans later in the film. They represent two very different variations on female characters, and as such provide a surprise. Baxter’s wife is in control, a woman who is really the mastermind behind her husband’s motivations, and Marisol is the damsel in distress, but her story does not take the normal path, and provides the film’s most interesting scene in the latter half. Whilst the only two women present, the two actresses inhibit different roles from the norm in the ’60s, and as a consequence present Leone as a storyteller who is not afraid to buck convention.

8. Male Costars Great 4.0

   The male supporting cast are fantastic here, many just providing evil glares and the odd line, but a few stand out and present themselves as interesting characters. The Rojos brothers, one of the two groups of antagonists, are led by Ramon (Gian Maria Volonte), a ruthless and intelligent man who makes sure to aim for his opponent’s heart. This is the most interesting supporting performance; Ramon is a perfect foil for Eastwood’s sharp-shooting American, and Volonte does well even through the pitiful dubbing to present a character who exudes menace and could seemingly do whatever he wants to do to whoever he wants to do it! The barkeep and coffin maker are the conscience and comic-relief respectively, but both actors hold their own to Eastwood (again, particularly well despite their performances being butchered by the dubbing).

10. Film

    Very Good 3.5

    The story, told in book and Japanese film form, is a strong one, and Sergio Leone skilfully directs the twists and turns. Leone shows here that the Old West could be perfectly recreated in Europe, and his aim to make the setting as realistic as possible gives the film most of its strength. The music, by Ennio Morricone, is fantastic, and his work on The Good, The Bad and The Ugly all too often overshadows his creativity in the other two films. Leone was, however, someone who praised visual over aural, and as a consequence the dubbing is laughably bad, with most of the European actors’ performances suffering as a result.

11. Direction Great 4.0

    Sergio Leone always said his influence for these films was John Ford, and in fitting the story to the screen, he emulates his famous predecessor. The manipulation and scheming of the protagonist merges so well with the music and visuals that it sometimes appears that composer and director were working adjacently to fit everything together! A fantastic effort for a first big film, and the beginning of a stretch of hits that has cemented him as one of the all-time greats.

12. Play Barely OK 2.0

    This is where “Dollars” fails; the dubbing of the majority of the cast (with the exception of Eastwood) is downright awful. Thankfully the dialogue itself is good enough to push through this, but it is hard at first to not get distracted by this, and throughout the film you’ll find yourself growing irritated, as you can clearly see the actors were saying their lines in English, and yet the sound never, EVER matches!

13. Music Great 4.0

    Ennio Morricione produces here his first landmark score of a lifetime, and in the whistles, calls and guitars, you are transported to the Old West. Quite how the man managed to marry the score so well with his friend’s vision is amazing to consider; particularly when many of the standout moments in the film are scored so perfectly. This score should be listened to, as it not only is just as good as TG, TB &TU’s score, but it also features many of the same elements that can be traced into “For A Few Dollars More” and beyond.

14. Visuals Great 4.0

    For a 21st century film lover, a film made in the 1960’s can be hard to watch, mostly because we can’t take the awful attempts at sets and blue screens we find. “Dollars” is filmed on location and on a set that looks like it had been transported wholesale through time, such is the detail. The fact that you are watching the story unfold in a setting that really appears to be the Old West is testament to Leone’s direction, and it truly engages you in the narrative when you watch Eastwood ride up and down steep hills in pursuit of a roving party on horseback, because you know nothing has been faked!

15. Content

16. Edge

    Risqué 1.8

    Really only the violence in the film that adds any edge, and even then the 15 certificate is quite harsh, given the paint-like appearance of blood and the lack of splatter even from a mini-gun at one point!

17. Sex Innocent 1.0

18. Violence Fierce 2.4

19. Rudeness Salty 2.0

21. Reality

    Glib 1.9

    Many of the events are plausible, not least that one man can manipulate two warring groups against one another. However, the film’s plausibility relies upon one character’s arrogance toward the end, and the scene in question, whilst great to watch, does rely a little too much on one character’s luck and another’s self-assurance!

22. Circumstantial Glib 1.9

23. Biological Glib 1.9

24. Physical Glib 1.9