A Fistful of Dynamite

Sergio Leone knows how to play with the viewer... it starts off as a typical spaghetti western with distinctive main characters and a bank to be robbed, but over time it grows into something quite close to a drama with elements of an adventure film. Originally there is a very simply arranged relationship between John and Juan, then it gets a third dimension, and then a revolution, reflections on betrayal, cruelty, throwing Bakunin into the mud, and retrospectives all make their way into the western plot; in short, it all gets complicated and we are definitely not watching a simple film. Leone's designations are more than clear, there is perfect work with the eyes of the actors, plenty of details, a great camera, and perfect music by Master Morricone. All this gives the film a special lightness with which it balances on the border of comedy, cheapness, tragedy and seriousness. (23/07/2006)

"A revolution? Seems to me the revolutions are all over the world. You know, they're like the crops." A picture with two extremely different halves. While the first half rides on an adventurous wave in The Good, The Bad and The Ugly style, the second half becomes rather serious all of a sudden. Almost as if Sergio was getting ready for Once Upon a Time in America. But both halves are just perfect, no doubt about that. But I can’t help myself feeling that they don’t go very well together. Otherwise, the classic elements of Leone’s pictures are here and again in masterful quality. From Morricone’s perfect music to the not so clear-cut characters of the protagonists. Coburn’s character’s flashbacks worked particularly well. The one with cuts to the scene by the wall, gradually increasing the tension, is absolute genius and significantly stands out against the rest of the movie (which you don’t often find in Leone’s movies). In comparison with Leone’s other movies, I would give this 4*, but in comparison with other movies, I can’t possibly give this any less than the full five stars. I’m not going to underrate this movie just because, in comparison to Leone, all other directors are nobodies. (23/07/2006)

At first, I frowned a bit at the unknown Leone, but after a surprisingly tired traditional opening episode, I started to smile happily. It could be said that instead of the usual unforgettable dark hero in the foreground (Eastwood in the dollars trilogy, De Niro in Once Upon a Time in America, everyone in Once Upon a Time in the West), this time it relies on a buddy duo of likable guys, but in the second half Coburn shines brilliantly and thanks to ingeniously shot flashbacks, he presents another great Western character with a psychological trace in the soul. There is no need to overly idealize Dynamite just because it belongs to the divine Sergio, similarly to The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, the pace is surprisingly unbalanced. Nevertheless, I was once again convinced that Leone will remain an immortal giant. Even though the undeniable Ennio does a considerable amount of work for him, as usual. (22/07/2006)

Sergio Leone started as a B-movie director and remained one for most of his career, with the exception of his most famous film, Once Upon a Time in America. By B-movie director, I mean someone who works with a limited budget and adjusts their work accordingly. Additionally, a director who doesn't primarily aim to win awards at festivals, but rather thinks of the audience first. Leone works with typical genre props and situations but uses them in his own way. He innovates and, above all, moves the film from a simple gunslinger showdown to a social conflict in a country torn apart by social injustice and civil war. Leone belonged to the Italian left wing, which dominated Italian cinema in the 1970s. Even in the first scene from the stagecoach, the meticulous shots of the camera on the cynical wealthy, their mouths stuffed with food, arrogant gestures, and especially their condescending dialogues reveal whose side his sympathies are on. The film is not only about the emerging friendship of two men who are completely different in character and origin but also about the effort to establish a more just society in a country ruled by dictatorship and oppression. Leone's B-movie roots allow him to lighten up his film with humorous exaggeration and a number of adventurous elements that help sell the theme to a wider audience of moviegoers. Despite the very good craftsmanship, the film is not perfect and meticulously thought out. Leone neglects some significant moments and the logic of the plot lags. For example, it is surprising that both protagonists manage to get into a heavily guarded military transport that is carrying the provincial boss and his money to safety. Or another situation when a fierce battle is raging and both of them come face to face with their archenemy, at that moment the battle miraculously calms down, they probably have a cigarette and coffee, and when the western confrontation is over, the battle starts again in full force. For a military history enthusiast, it is also amazing how Leone resolved the issue of uniforms and military equipment. He simply took the equipment of the Italian army from World War II and put it in his film. Although Leone does not mention the exact date in which his story takes place, it is clear from the logic of what is seen that it is set at the turn of the years 1913-1914, during the rule of the dictator Huerta, not least because in the middle of 1914, the Mexican federal army ceased to exist completely. Naturally, the Mexican army was not motorized at that time and certainly did not have armored vehicles. In terms of acting, James Coburn and Rod Steiger excel in the main roles. Overall impression: 85%. (08/03/2010)

Only a tiny bit worse than Leone's best works and an unjustly neglected (by distributors and audiences) gem. Besides dynamite, these pockets are filled with especially memorable scenes (the stagecoach opening, the bank in Mesa Verde, the bridge, the cave, the breathtaking flashbacks), suspense and typical humor, and the precise direction of one master, along with the music of another and the interplay of Steiger and Coburn, turn it into a perfect spectacle. Some of the monumental shots and crowd scenes make you wonder how great Leone's Leningrad might have looked had it been made. (18/09/2007)

Revolution means confusion. And it raises the question of whether it's appropriate to fault the incoherence of a film about a conflict as incoherent as the Mexican Revolution. Leone tries to use all the directorial attributes he has acquired to benefit an ambitious historical fresco, and then crams in some stylization as well (the character of James Coburn, the lanky demon with the droopy wrists and explosive-laden cape!) with a drastic and moving account of a conflict escalating into genocide. At certain points I felt like I was on Schindler's List here. The huge scene with the execution pits will freeze even the most hardened, if only because it is purely illustrative and foreshadowing. Giant panoramas of arid Mexican landscapes are then interspersed with extreme close-ups of the greasy postures of the uppity bourgeoisie. The fluctuating pacing is a problem; the film feels as if each episode is completely disconnected from the others, and the intimate sequences are quite theoretically and a bit driven unnecessarily into blood. However, the more grandiose and less genre-muddled sequences (especially in the first half of the film) are still breathtaking spectacle. Maybe because of the fact of how many films do you know that deal with the Mexican Revolution? (15/07/2021)