Skip to comments.
Top 10 Best Westerns of All Time:
clinteastwood.org ^
| 9/11/04
| staff
Posted on 12/29/2004 3:00:15 PM PST by pissant
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140, 141-160, 161-180, 181-192 last
To: mysto
I know. The author wasn't referring to the whole of the Leone/Eastwood series, just the "Dollars" series (of which there are only two).
To: fish hawk
Yeah the man in the wilderness was good but he went way too far in the series of spin offs from that flick.....
182
posted on
12/30/2004 12:54:44 PM PST
by
Squantos
(Be polite. Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet. ©)
To: Mr. Mojo
The Good, The Bad And The Ugly is considered the third movie in the Dollars "trilogy." The were all part of the same series of movies filmed by Leone in Italy and Spain, one right after the other.
183
posted on
12/30/2004 12:56:10 PM PST
by
mysto
To: mysto
Actually, it's not. The "Dollars" series starred Gian Maria Volonté (as "Ramon" in
A Fistful of Dollars and "Indio" in
For a Few Dollars More). He was absent from the third and final flick (
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly .....which didn't contain the word "Dollars" in the title anyway).
The "Dollars" series comprised only the first two of the Leone/Eastwood trilogy.
To: Mr. Mojo
The three films have been called the "Dollarstrilogy" by fans, even though they are 3 distinct films. When you talk about the "Dollars series," you have to include The Good, The Bad And The Ugly as an extension of the same series of spaghetti westerns. Same lead actor, same director, same shooting locations. The only difference was that Eli Wallach was in the 3rd film and Leone had a bigger budget to work with. Just because the 3rd film doesn't have "Dollars" in its name doesn't mean it wasn't part of the trilogy. And so what if Volonte wasn't in all 3... Eastwood was. And Lee Van Cleef was only in the last 2...
185
posted on
12/30/2004 1:18:56 PM PST
by
mysto
To: mysto
Just because the 3rd film doesn't have "Dollars" in its name doesn't mean it wasn't part of the trilogy. It was indeed part of the Leone/Eastood trilogy; it just wasn't one of the two "Dollars" movies.
To: Mr. Mojo
It was indeed part of the Leone/Eastood trilogy
The trilogy is what is unofficially referred to by fans as the "Dollars trilogy." All 3 movies are considered to be part of the same series of spaghetti westerns. If you don't believe me, Google search "dollars trilogy" and see how many hits you get.
(geez, why are we arguing about this? This is like Clinton trying to argue what the meaning of "is" is...)
187
posted on
12/30/2004 1:32:26 PM PST
by
mysto
To: pissant
:), That is exactly what my response would have said.
Becky
To: mysto
All 3 movies are considered to be part of the same series of spaghetti westerns. For the 4th time, I know. I'm telling you that the "Dollars series" is a series within the trilogy.
geez, why are we arguing about this?
lol.....good question.
To: Future Snake Eater
I really like Tombstone too:) It has so many quotable line.
"Peach of a hand"
Why Johnny Ringo, you look like someone walked all over your grave"
I'm your huckleberry
You tell em I'm coming, and hell's coming with me.
You're an Oak Wyatt.
I better stop:)
To: pissant
re: Red Sun
I could also have worded it more nicely.
Cheers
191
posted on
12/30/2004 7:05:50 PM PST
by
McGarrett
(Book'em Danno)
To: pissant
Gosh, I just remembered - Django.
That's one freaking awesome movie!
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140, 141-160, 161-180, 181-192 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson