For a Few Dollars More

I have resolved the dilemma of whether A Fistful of Dollars or For a Few Dollars is better because I consider the second film to be more mature. Leone had already found his style by that point and he had refined his collaboration with Ennio Morricone to the point that there isn't much to criticize about the direction and overall filmmaking craftsmanship of the film. Sergio Leone's merit is in revitalizing the dying western genre by tarnishing it, lightening it with comedic elements, creatively working with genre stereotypes, and imprinting characters on previously interchangeable supporting roles. In short, he made it more entertaining. On the other hand, his early westerns have issues in their screenplays. When you look at the motivation of his heroes and their thought processes, you have a collection of unique idiots in front of you. If the main villain Callaway possessed ideas such as releasing his prisoners to eliminate members of his gang, he probably wouldn't have survived puberty. Leone simply made undemanding B-grade movies for the mass audience and, unfortunately for him, he had ambitions to move toward more serious filmmaking statements and more serious genres, which happened with his legendary film Once Upon a Time in America. That says something about the film industry and its viewers, not about Sergio Leone. Overall impression: 65%. (12/10/2011)

The year 1965 was a turning point in world cinema. A year after his gun-slinging western debut, Sergio Leone added a few more bucks on top, embarking on a long line of “übermovies". Admittedly in the shadow of the two following movies, but even so it is a simply perfect piece. Ennio is also at his creating zenith and what his music manages to do with a scene that is already perfect is simply amazing. For instance, the “watch" duel in the ruins of the church... To help things, the casting is simply wonderful. The central duo needs no mention, but it would be a sin not to highlight Gian Maria Volanté in the role of El India. This is simply one of those MUST SEE pictures. Adios. (03/02/2008)

Sergio Leone had a great gift. After just a few minutes of the usual silence, he takes the cigar out of his mouth and I tremble, hoping that the paths of the two gunmen finally cross. And when it happens, and the motivations of the characters start adding fuel to the fire, I must shockingly admit that if any of the director's epics come close to the legendary Once Upon a Time in the West in terms of quality, it's these few dollars more. The symbiosis of image and Ennio Morricone's music doesn't quite reach perfection yet, but it's damn close. (28/08/2016)

A memory: I’m about 13-14 years old and I’m resting on the sofa after a hearty lunch. Dad is watching a western on TV and I have half an eye on it too. Then that melody of the pocket watch began to chime and totally captivated me. I couldn’t get it out of my head for like ten years... For a few dollars more is a story about Lee Van Cleef’s Colonel Mortimer than about Clint’s Monk with the snappy lines, but they are given more or less the same amount of room. Leone raises his standard, develops the main characters more and offers a higher quality plot. Really, really good. (06/09/2009)

Everything that was good about the first installment is here twice over. The stuffiness on screen is almost unbreathable, the villain here has definitely crossed the point of no return. The film mops the floor with the standards of previous westerns, drowning in anachronisms, drug taking, we’re witnesses to suicide and rape. The two protagonists are all the more fascinating for it, maintaining their rules, credos, and self-respect in such a world. Paradoxically, there is something of the essence of freedom in such a dirty and disillusioned film, as if suggesting that only a completely broken world can offer the ultimate possibility of self-realization; see further post-apocalyptic works, zombie films, etc. (08/07/2021)