Yeah, sometimes I’m just boring.
1. Il Buono, il brutto, il cattivo (The Good, the Bad and the Ugly) (Sergio Leone, 1966, Italy)
Blondie, Tuco and Angel-Eyes are looking for hidden treasure during the US Civil War. They know different parts of its location, so they need to work together, but are not really built for that.
So, here we are again. After 20 years and five of these lists, it is still quite clear to me what is my favorite movie of all time. Yes, I do question this choice every time, and, yes, I do come to the same conclusion that while my tastes have definitely changed during this period (for example, only about quarter of the movies in the original 2005 list are still on it, although this is partly due to many, many movies being released in the last 20 years and me having seen a lot of older movies within that time period as well), I do still love this movie more than any other.
Whenever I spend time trying to figure out why this is, there’s a multitude of potential aspects to look at. The reason I’ve mentioned in previous editions of this list, is that it sort of grew with me, with additional footage added to the movie to give the characters more depth. But, if you look at the list now and the list back in 2005, you can see that much of what has changed is my interests becoming more woke. Yes, there’s that word.
So, is this movie woke? Sort of. Not really, but apparently enough. I mean, all good art is woke. That’s actually what makes art good. Sure, you can be technically proficient and make something beautiful, but in order to make something lasting, you need to have that extra level of being able to bring a point of view to the world to learn from. Sure, Mona Lisa is probably the most famous piece of art in existence (I don’t know, but you get my point), but I get nothing out of it. It’s just a woman sitting down with mysterious smile. Take something like “Raatajat rahanalaiset” (there’s several translations, but the one I like the most is “Under the Yoke”) or “Taistelevat metsot” (translated as “The Fighting Capercaillies”). Please do image search them. These are two paintings that have been very influential in the Finnish culture. They are about topics that were important in the 19th century when they were made and are still very important, because while things do change, certain things remain pretty much the same. Sure, you could argue that the latter of these is just a depiction of nature (which it was supposed to be), but as such it can also be seen as a symbol of our (meaning Finns) strong connection to nature and our forests (and there have been interpretations of the image depicting our struggles with foreign powers). I will always find myself gravitating towards something that carries meaning like that.
So, what is The Good, the Bad and the Ugly about then? Well, according to me…
It is anti-war. There’s an extended scene of Blondie and Tuco having to cross a river, but there’s a problem: The two sides of the war are having daily battles over the bridge at that point. There’s no subtlety here. There’s a drunk high-ranking officers explaining the stupidity of the situation, as every day many, many men would die over an important strategic resource, but no progress was ever gained. So, war is destructive and pointless. The men behind it are impotent to fix the situation.
Related to that, the movie has an emphasis of violence, but it doesn’t really glorify that either. The men are very good at it, but the movie doesn’t linger on it. It’s explosive and quick with destructive results. The men do it mostly because of greed and sometimes for revenge, not anything more than that. The violence in the movie is hardly justified.
It also understands that poverty is destructive. Tuco explains to his priest brother that he is what he is, because there was no other choice. Their family was just too poor to allow for any other career path besides banditry. You do what you need to survive, so perhaps we should make sure people don’t have to go this far just to live and many probably die, because Tuco is clearly quite competent at all of this despite being somewhat bumbling at times.
Which leads us to how it opposes religious hierarchy. Tuco’s brother hides behind his priesthood to criticize Tuco, but Tuco sees the situation quite differently. To him, his brother chose the easy way out. He left the family behind to serve god, which basically means nothing to Tuco (and to me). I wonder whether people picked up on this in 60s Italy?
Finally, while the three men are depicted as cool (to varying degrees), they are not glorified. The name of the movie and the titles propose that there is a good guy here and that it is Blondie, but that’s only relative. He betrays Tuco, kills a lot of people and leaves others to die. At least he isn’t Angel-Eyes, who takes over a POW camp in order to torture people to find the treasure, but that isn’t really a very high bar. During the climactic Mexican stand-off, it’s Blondie who remains cool throughout, but that’s not because he is that much more colder than the other two, it’s because he cheated. The trio is toxic, but each member has a different level of toxicity.
So yes, in its own way, it is woke. There, I just tarnished the best movie of all time to some of you, but made it much more interesting to others, who might have avoided it for whatever reason.
On the other hand, if we are talking about wokeness, I can’t exactly just forget that Eli Wallach, a son of Polish Jews, is wearing a brownface here. Part of me wants to say that blackface doesn’t exactly have the same history in Europe as it does in the US and based on his movies, we know very well that Sergio Leone was not up on American culture quite in the way he thought he was. At the same time, I do have to acknowledge that blackface actually has a much longer history in Europe. While it started back in Italy in the renaissance, it wasn’t racist back then. That came later largely from American influences, but we can’t fully blame those influences, as European performers used similar racial caricatures before the American minstrel tradition even started. So, Leone probably should have known.
Of course, the question now becomes whether Tuco is a caricature. Given Leone’s limited understanding of American culture, this is hard to say. I would like the give the movie the benefit of the doubt, but on the other hand, I’ve just told you that this is my favorite movie of all time, so am I just making excuses for it, because I want to protect it? Maybe, but if Tuco is a caricature, what are the qualities he is exaggerating? Sure, he is an outlandish character, but I don’t think his quirks are racially motivated.
This is also one of those movies that wasn’t really critical hit upon release. Now it’s seen as a classic and not only within the genre. The movie itself has become iconic. Its one of those movies you steal from, because they just did it so well.
Part of me would like to find a new favorite movie, but I don’t want to be disingenious either. I guess in a way it’s also nice that there’s this one constant in these lists.
But here’s something different: Is Blondie on hero’s journey, while Tuco is on heroine’s journey? Blondie is trying to rid himself of Tuco, while Tuco is trying to rebuild a network. Blondie’s cooperation with Tuco is forced, while Tuco is similarly forced, he also finds a gang and attempts to reconnect with his brother (although that doesn’t work out).
And according to Gail Carriger, who wrote the (or more like a) book on the topic of heroine’s journey, this is the key difference between the two paths: hero’s are essentially alone, while heroines find help. Even at the end Blondie actively breaks his ties to Tuco by fake hanging him, even though there is no need to do so. It’s just a message to Tuco to keep the distance between them.
The three have a common history in some form, as they clearly all know each other and Blondie works with Tuco early in the movie to defraud the government out of bounty money, but we never dwell into this any further, because there is no real need to. Tuco’s and Blondie’s partnership is clearly just pragmatic, as they don’t really like each other. They do somewhat grow closer later in the movie, but this is only a small, but important, step from willing to let someone die for money to letting them have a chance to live.
There is an old theory that this movie is actually a prequel to the other two movies in the dollars trilogy. While this is bullshit (as the whole trilogy thing was an afterthought for marketing purposes), it would explain certain things. Blondie is not interested in working with anyone in the other two movies either. He just keeps his distance to even those who are willing to help him, as few as they are.
Finally, I like how Leone does more with less. There isn’t much story here, but he uses everything there is to it’s full potential. There isn’t much dialogue, but we learn everything we need to know about the characters based on few choice actions. There isn’t much to look at, but using the right cinematography techniques, we get to enjoy the beauty of this harsh environment.