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

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

Stars: Clint Eastwood, Eli Wallach, Lee van Cleef

Director: Sergio Leone

Oscar History: No nominations

Snap Judgment Ranking: 5/5 stars

Each month, as part of our 2023 Saturdays with the Stars series, we are looking at the Golden Age western, and the stars who made it one of the most enduring legacies of Classical Hollywood.  This month, our focus is on Clint Eastwood: click here to learn more about Mr. Eastwood (and why I picked him), and click here for other Saturdays with the Stars articles.

While the "Dollars Trilogy" had done extremely well in Europe, it wasn't released in the United States until 1967, and it was then released in rapid succession (all three in one year).  Keep in mind, despite his time on Rawhide, at this point Eastwood was still an unknown to large swaths of the American audience, certainly when it came to the movies.  That changed with the release of these films.  Though they were greeted poorly by critics, audiences ate them up, and Eastwood was marked as one of the top box office draws of 1967.  The films' success (particularly our picture today) led Eastwood to try to push his stardom, and he was able to with a series of box office successes including Hang Em High, Coogan's Bluff, and Where Eagles Dare.  He also had the noted box office bomb (and to date, his only musical) Paint Your Wagon, which we're sadly not going to have time to watch but I'm desperate to see eventually as we've got a lot of ground to cover with Eastwood in the next two weeks.  But first, let's finish out the "Dollars Trilogy" with the celebrated western The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.

(Spoilers Ahead) At nearly three hours, the movie stretches a lot of time, but it's honestly a series of short stories about three men: Blondie (aka the Good, aka Eastwood), Tuco (aka the Ugly, aka Wallach), and Angel Eyes (aka The Bad, aka van Cleef).  The three of them represent honor in the form of Blondie, treachery in the form of Tuco, and evil in the form of Angel Eyes.  All three men cross paths on their way to the same treasure-there is $200,000 in gold buried in a Civil War graveyard.  The only problem is-Tuco is the only person who knows what the name of the cemetery is, and Blondie's the only person who knows the name of the gravestone where it's buried.  They therefore form an uneasy alliance, and cross paths with Angel Eyes.  Tuco, under torture, tells Angel Eyes the name of the cemetery and that Blondie knows the name of the gravestone, but they both escape, and in a moment of trust, Tuco & Blondie tell their secrets...after which Tuco quickly betrays Blondie and runs after the gold by himself.  The problem is, Blondie smartly didn't tell him the actual name of the gravestone.  This leads to a standoff between the three men, where Angel Eyes is killed by Blondie, and Tuco stands there with an unloaded weapon (not realizing Blondie had taken out the bullets).  In the end, Tuco & Blondie find the gold, but before they can part, Tuco (in a callback to the beginning of the film), is strung up on a noose, and from a distance, Blondie shoots him down.  The film ends with Blondie riding into the sunset with his pile of gold, while Tuco runs after him, his hands bound, with no horse, and no way of transporting his riches.

The movie is masterfully-handled by Leone.  I was already a fan of his before I started watching the "Dollars" trilogy, as he made what is certainly my favorite western (and on some days, my go to answer for "what is your favorite movie?") Once Upon a Time in the West.  After watching this, I'm convinced he's the best director to never win an Oscar nomination.  The film is technically marvelous, with expansive, gorgeous cinematography, an impressive recurring score from Ennio Morricone, and marvelous editing, sound work, & art direction (this is admittedly more location scouting than production design, but the scene where Eli Wallach runs through the graveyards, joyfully thinking he's won the gold, is a testament to how important it is to use actual sets or locations rather than CGI it's so awe-inspiring from the sheer size).  The final hour of the movie (it's long, but I didn't feel it), is about as good as a movie can get, with the film working toward the inevitable standoff between these three men, with only one able to win.

In many ways, this would mirror the ending of Once Upon a Time in the West, except this one has more room for comedy than that picture (the ending of that one is grander, which if you've only seen The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly you'll look at me with skeptical eyes, as this is a pretty elevated finale).  The three title actors are all splendid.  We talked a lot about Lee van Cleef last week, but I'm so thankful that he was given a chance at stardom in the Italian cinema, because he's now had two classic turns, here as a villainous baddie who in his opening scenes kills a family out of some sort of warped sense of duty (it's hard not to think that the Coen Brothers had him in mind with Anton Chigurh).  Eastwood continues to impress.  The actor frequently gets criticized for being a relatively limited actor, but, if we're honest-so was Cary Grant, and he still had a laundry list of classic performances.  The main goal of a movie star is to pick roles they'll do well in and sell the movie, and this is splendid, with him playing the man-with-no-name as a snarky, omnipotent being.  But best of the three is Wallach.  His Tuco is funny, scene-stealing, and in some of his best moments (like the running through the graveyard) some of the finest work of Wallach's career.  A triumph, and what a treat to get to watch all three of these movies for the first time.