Review of For a Few Dollars More (1965) by George B — 10 Sep 2010

The second entry in The Man With No Name Trilogy is For A Few Dollars More. It is better than A Fistful, but I wouldn't say by much. That's fine because I enjoy A Fistful, but it still left me a little disappointed. I was expecting more. That said, I certainly loved seeing all of Sergio Leoene's trademarks shine. The close-ups, the zoom-ins, the zoom-outs, Ennio Morricone's classic score, etc. The music is amazing in these movies. The acting is good too. Of course, being a film from the 60's there is bound to be occasional cheesiness. Like the terrible dubbing of the little boy in the first movie, the bright red blood that looks like ketchup and so on. It's expected, so I don't let that take away from my experience.

I really enjoyed the characters in the story. Clint Eastwood returns as the man with no name, and this time around he has a new nickname, Monco. Piripero the coffinmaker was my favorite character from the first movie and he makes an all too brief return as the Old Prophet (played by Josef Egger). Even though his time is short, he manages to get the most laughs in the entire film. Maybe because his scene was the only scene played for laughs. My other favorite character from A Fistful, besides Eastwood's and Egger's was Jose Calvo as Silvanito the innkeeper. Unfortunately, I didn't see him. I was slightly bummed, but it didn't bother me. The new character that our lead befriends is an excellent replacement. I'm talking about Lee Van Cleef who plays a bounty hunter named Col. Mortimer.

The story is a considerable step up from the first. The man with no name and Col. Mortimer are both after the same wanted man, Indio. Indio has a $10,000 bounty on his head, plus each member of his gang has a bounty on theirs as well. So added up, those guys are worth a lifetime's work for the time the story takes place in. Who happens to be played by Gian Maria Volonte, who also played the lead villain in the first movie. A part of me said "what the fuck was the director thinking?" The other part said "that was a cleverly deceptive idea." In the end I didn't know what to think. I still think recycling actors is a bad idea, but somehow it worked in this movie. Now if he was someone I recognized easily like Brad Pitt, it would bug the shit out of me for the entire film, but he's not, so it didn't.

Each actor brings something special and unique to their characters and in the end, it elevated the story. Speaking of the story, as Indio's gang was planning the bank robbery I found myself thinking about how these kinds of bank robbery and heist films are the oldest in the book, but they are still made today (Inception, The Town, etc.), and can still be as original as the very first one. It's been said a number of times that there are no new ideas left in the movie industry, and I believe that. It's just nice to see that some directors can make new use of old stories. Well after seeing the progress made from A Fistful of Dollars to For A Few Dollars More, I cannot wait to see The Good, The Bad and The Ugly.