This film would be one of Leone's greats.... - Giù la testa (1972) Discussion

[–] ldmax 16 years ago

I agree. Eli Wallach, as Tuco, is one of the finest performances ever filmed. Eli portraying Juan would have elevated Duck, You Sucker to another level.

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] monkey_smuggla 16 years ago

I think it's good as it is and Eli Wallach would have been to similar to tuco...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PECQV2DrEKU

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] humphreybogart1941 16 years ago

I had always wondered about this, and have come to the conclusion that Eli would have come off as just Tuco on another adventure. Steiger does something else entirely. Juan may not be anywhere near as flamboyant as Tuco, but he is much more in tune with his environment. With this film, Leone set out to embrace his political feelings, and to move away from the "Dollars" trilogy. If Eli Wallach had come on board, I fear that the film would have lost some of its impact as the second part of the "Once Upon A Time" Trilogy.

reply

[–] sockscats 16 years ago

"With this film, Leone set out to embrace his political feelings, and to move away from the "Dollars" trilogy."

I agree with this poster. This film was several years after the eastwood trilogy was made why would he just want to bring back the same actors? This is different! Juan is not tuco. James colburn is not the same character eastwood played.

I would rather appreciate this film on it's own as yet another leone classic. His 5 westerns are the equal of almost any director.

reply

[–] LightningLad 16 years ago

Tuco rules. When he gives the bottle back to the guy he just robbed, it's a moment that's touching without being cheap. Without Tuco, the movie would be...well, I guess For a Few Dollars More lol

reply

[–] m-slovak79 16 years ago

overall i agree with the OP.

cause i think it's ultimately Rod Steiger (not bad acting, it's just he dont have the 'screen presence' to carry the film. (i.e. he's semi boring at times)) that dulled down the film and prevented it from being above average (or maybe great).

as is, i give the film a 6/10 (not a bad film but it's not really a film i would go out of my way to watch again on DVD)... it dont have the 'magic' like pretty much the other 4 popular (TGTBTU,OUATITW,FAFDM,AFOD) Leone films do.

also, i disagree with the OP about this comment here... "I watched The Good, The Bad and The Ugly after this film and felt that Wallach's performance was by far better than Van Cleef's and Eastwood's."

i disagree with the 'BY FAR' part... cause even though Wallach was great and helped the film alot i do feel all three actors where great (Eastwood/Van Cleef/Wallach, all three of which i think are strong enough to make there own Western's as a lead character) which ultimately makes the film great along with Ennio Morricone's music score which truly adds alot to those films!, it helps capture the moment really well cause in my opinion there aint to many films out there that are helped 'alot' from music, but the Leone 'Western' films are.

@ docrock23 ... i do think you have a legitimate point about "Eli would have just repeated his role." though. ;) , but even that would have still carried the film to another level.

p.s. im only 29 years old (born in 1979)

---
My Vote History ... http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=11026826
---

reply

[–] kadajawi 12 years ago

Usually I love what Morricone adds to the films, but if I ever have to hear shum shum shum shum again I can't guarantee for anything. Every time I heard it it kicked me out of the movie, much more than Steiger's performance, which is not too bad.

reply

[–] spira84 16 years ago

I disagree, first because i think Rod Steiger did absolutely great.
second, because i think Eli's image would be too connected with Tuco. It would be difficult to see Juan rather than Tuco.

"Oh! there're frogs falling from the sky!"
Magnolia - 10/10

reply

[–] brianwhite5 8 years ago

I agree spira84 although I get the feeling the Juan's character was an almost stonewall copy of Tuco's (not as over the top) It was still a fantastic performance by Steiger and a great film.

reply

[–] shaggy61 16 years ago

Both Steiger and Wallach are wildly miscast (New York Jewish actors playing Mexicans) and they give very similar performances-- hammy, cartoonish, over the top. And they both work brilliantly. Their characters are not based on real Mexicans, they're riffs on the stereotypical Frito-Bandito Mexicans of old Westerns that Leone grew up on. But he turns them into protagonists instead of villains. They're still pretty villainous, but they turn out to be more complex than we first thought and we end up caring for them. It turns the old stereotypes on their heads and challenges our assumptions about good and evil.

reply

[–] stephen-morton 15 years ago

I agree shaggy61. Both give great performances that are really different and unique. Personally, I loved Rod Steiger in this movie--I thought his accents and mannerisms were really effective. I thought James Cobirn's accent felt more fake, personally, and I think on balance I liked his character less. Overall excellent film, though I think its politics keep it from being as good as the rest of Leone's oeuvre.

reply

[–] shaggy61 15 years ago

People are still unclear what the movie's politics are, given the discussion on the other threads. Some people interpret it as anti-revolutionary, saying the message is keep your head down and don't get involved. But in a revolution it's impossible not to be drawn in. The movie is critical of revolutions for treating the peasantry as pawns, but it's certainly not pro-establishment.
It's all vague because the spokesman for "the people," Juan (who gives the cynical speech about revolutions) is a shameless manipulator and greedhead himself. His one virtue is that he's out for mere money instead of power, and like Tuco, he can be talked (or tricked) into doing something altruistic once in a while.

reply

[–] gwargh 15 years ago

That's why Rod Steiger's Juan is so great though... he's unlikable, even downright detestable, when he's supposed to be that way, but he's goofy and forgivable when he needs to be too. You see him sitting and listening to fancily-dressed people expressing their class hatred and you believe he's just a poor guy who feels ashamed to speak up for himself, but then once he robs them all, you wonder how you could have taken him for anything but a scumbag. And still, he delivers a pretty good spiel on the *beep* of revolutions. I don't think it would have worked half as well if it was Eli Wallach making Toshiro Mifune-esque faces for two and a half hours. This film works better with characters than archetypes.

reply

[–] habde 15 years ago

Keeping your head down generally sums up most of the politics, I think.
The quote by Mao Zedong had been immensely popular among university students, and many of them had it as posters on their walls. Leone takes that quote, which was familiar to most of his audience and he says "I don't quite buy it."
A lot of Italian filmmakers were making movies about revolutions and such with political messages, and Leone was SICK of it; this was one of the things that ruined westerns for him.
Leone said that they could make all the fashionably socialist films they wanted (and they were in fashion), but his heart would be with the anarchist like Tucco, Cheyenne, or Juan. These are the characters that have a known familial background, which serves to connect us more to them. Tucco visits his brother and talks about his parents, Cheyenne talks about his mother, and we see how important Juan's family is to him.
I totally agree that you can get confused looking for some "political message," but that's the way he wanted it. I don't think I would have loved this movie as much if he gave what he saw as a definite answer to the world's problems.

reply

[–] onepotato2 15 years ago

I agree shaggy61. Both give great performances that are really different and unique. Personally, I loved Rod Steiger in this movie--I thought his accents and mannerisms were really effective. I thought James Cobirn's accent felt more fake, personally, and I think on balance I liked his character less.
by - stephen-morton on Thu Jun 4 2009 13:05:02
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And I agree with you. When I saw Steiger on the screen I thought "Aw Hell no!" (He's a massive ham) but he subtler here than ever. Coburn with that 70s Marlboro man/Playgirl haircut and horrible accent, are a total distraction taking me out of the movie. Juan was far more interesting than John.

(and Leone accusing Steiger of being 'indulgent' really takes the cake.)

Also, the catchphrase/title 'Duck, You Sucker' should have been eliminated the minute it was thought up.

reply

[–] armagezon 15 years ago

I agree...

reply

[–] habde 15 years ago

I don't agree with this... firstly because you say "WOULD BE one of Leone's greats" rather than "would be even better." I'd definitely say this is one of his greats, right along side Good-Bad-Ugly and Once upon a Time in the West.

Now I can get to the Wallach/Steiger debate... I know that they wanted Wallach to play Juan, but the studio wanted a bigger name. I think Wallach would have been great, but I still think Steiger's performance was great. I really do think he fit into the part very well. I think I'd be thinking Tucco while watching the movie if he was in it, though, and he might come off as too money-crazed.
Really, it's hard to tell if it would have been better in that alternate universe where studios don't care if the actor is well-known.

Now, let me pose another question:

WHAT IF JASON ROBARDS (CHEYENNE) HAD PLAYED SEAN INSTEAD OF JAMES COBURN, AS WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED?

reply