Spaghetti western comedy that tries too hard
352267
I will admit up front that I am not the biggest fan of spaghetti western comedies. I prefer gritty serious ones but I still find some charm a few of the comedy types including Trinity films and Ben and Charlie.

Franco Nero is a Russian Prince who finds out about the name of a Mexican bandit that knows the location of some gold. He finds the Mexican (played by Eli Wallach, famous for The Good the Bad and the Ugly) in prison he holds the information until Nero gets him out of jail. Along for the ride is a red-headed Irish girl who wants fame on taking pictures of the Mexican revolution.

I decided to buy this because of the all-star cast (and for the fact I collect almost anything released by Wild East entertainment). I mean we have Django and Tuco in the same film! The problem with the film however isn't the cast but the fact that it tries to hard to be funny. Other comedy westerns just let it happen where here the dialogue tries too hard to say "hey, this is funny....laugh!". Despite the fact that the film lacks many true laughs shouldn't stop people from seeing this film. It is a nice curiosity piece and it's also great to see Franco Nero and Eli Wallach on screen together. It's too bad the film didn't turn out as good as the Franco Nero / Tomas Milian western Companeros which had some great comedy moments.

The Wild East DVD is great as usual. It's in anamorphic widescreen and for the first time in America we get the full UNCUT version of the film. All previous version released in the U.S. were cut down to 93 minutes. This version contains additional 17 minutes. This uncut footage was never dubbed into English so this footage is presented on the DVD in Italian with English subtitles. A great interview with Eli Wallach on the DVD is worth the purchase alone. Also included are two additional title sequences including the International one with the title Long Live Your Death as well as the American animated title sequence which includes a horse shacking it's behind at the screen (!?!?!).
1776116
Will Ferell and John C. Reilly really complement each other so well, it's good to see them together in a movie. Perhaps they starred together in this movie after the success of 'Taladega Nights'. But while 'Taladega' is one of the great movies, 'Step Brothers' is so-so. Unless you're a die-hard fan of Ferrell's college slap-stick, you'll probably be wondering how many times saying the f-word is a joke - not to set a moralistic precedent, but just saying that word constantly is hardly a joke in itself - when done for the thousandth time.

The behaviour of the two 'step brothers' Dale (Reilly) and Brennan (Ferrell) is more than childish, it's so over the top it stops being funny and starts being absurd.

Not that there isn't anything to like about this film, there is. Heaps of the jokes are funny, and even if some of the other characters are bland, Brennan's younger brother Derek adds a bit of spice to the mix. A bit. But more often than not you're left wondering 'why is a 40-year old man acting like a two year old'? Is it comedy or desperation?
2248368
Here are some insanely outrageous cheesefests that should satisfy any B flick lover's cravings.  With the huge success of Conan and the Beastmaster I guess it's only natural that the Cannon Group get their fingers in the pie.  These films are both Italian productions.  Hey, why not?  After all, the Italians had the market cornered on sword and sandal flicks back in the day.  Writer/Director "Lewis Coates"(American companies insisted on Italian directors to use more American sounding pseudonyms) is actually Luigi Cozzi, who as everyone knows, directed the box office smashes Starcrash and everyone's favorite exploding chest flick, Contamination.  Both movies look like they were shot at the same time, and actually feel more like a three hour film than two seperate ones.  The first film starts with some poppycock about astronomy, then has Zeus creating our hero to shift the good/evil balance.  Hercules falls in love however and goes after his love who has been kidnapped by the evil King Minos.  Minos constantly rants about the power of science over that of the gods even though he's constantly using supernatural means to do his deeds.  Not to mention that he wants Herc's girl as a sacrifice to a phoenix fire-god.  On his quest Hercules flexes, bends swords, fights giant windup toys, battles stock footage, punches everyone, throws styrofoam boulders, throws a grizzly bear into outer space, breaks swords on his shins, grows huge, seperates Africa from Europe, and refuses the advances of two women(one of them Sybil Danning!)  How noble.  Once Minos is defeated and his chick saved, Zeus kinda just plucks him into outer space and turns him into a flexing constellation, storing him for further use.  In the second film, Zeus releases him from his suspended flex pose to retrieve seven thunderbolts(they're actually lightning bolts, not that you really give a crap) stolen by renegade gods, Poseidon, Hera and Aphrodite.  These gods resurrect the evil King Minos who's still using magic whilst flapping his gums about the power of science.  Once again Hercules flexes, punches alot of folks, fights slime people and a guy in a makeshift Chewbacca outfit, doesn't hit on either of the two chix who would gladly have him, turns huge again, and transforms into an animated gorilla for some unknown reason to fight the final battle.  Classic.  Cozzi's imagination clearly exceeds his budget, but that's part of the magic of these films.  Both films have tons of scenes in outer space with characters standing on rocky sets which are supposed to be the moon(Mythology tells us the gods hung out on Mount Olympus, but they hang out on the moon in the first film.  By the second film they're supposed to be on Olympus, but it still looks an awful lot like the moon to me.)  Also lots of superimposed shots of the actors on top of the earth.  There are constant scenes of flashing lights and animation accompanied by BLIP! PING! BOINK!-type sound effects that sound like they came from a 60s sci-fi film or an Atari game.  Cozzi has no shame at all as he lifts scenes from Conan, Clash of the Titans(the scene where Herc faces the gorgon is identical to Perseus' in Clash!), and The Beastmaster.  The entire opening credits of the second film directly ripoff the credit sequence from Superman 2, with the blue credits in outer space floating into the screen intercut with scenes from the first film!  The second film goes a bit overboard with animation, even including a fight that could have come straight from a Ralph Bakshi movie.  Lou is a fantastic Hercules(eat your heart out, Sorbo!).  He's no Olivier, but do you really need to be for this kind of film?  I don't think there's a single actor in the world who looks more like a Hercules than Lou Ferrigno.  I love these two films, love em to death.  They're weird, wacky, silly and 100% fun.  Peter Jackson can keep his sillyass gazillion dollar hobbits.  I'll take Hercules.
1347799
Three hippies and a brother run away from a bad scene in a lawless town.  They meet Charlie Manson in the desert, who turns them onto some peyote.  The trip turns into a bummer and Charlie Manson turns cruel.

 Only the names were changed, baby. There are four refugees and one requisite Bad Guy in FOUR OF THE APOCALYPSE, a rambling yet entertaining spaghetti western from the Italian Lucio Fulci, who is best known for directing such Italian horror classics as A LIZARD IN A WOMAN'S SKIN and DON'T TORTURE A DUCKLING.

 The Manson reference comes from something Tomas Milian, who plays the evil Chaco, said. (All bad guys in Italian westerns never have a last name, or much of a first name, either.)  Milian said he took a make-up cue from Charles Manson, who had notoriously carved a swastika in his forehead, and drew a blood red cross beneath each eye.  Constrained by time and driven by Method, it seemed the thing to do, and it works.

  Chaco is a brutal character, and he's involved in a couple of grisly scenes, cut from the original English release, that have been restored with subtitles on the dvd.  The scenes may have been a little much for audiences in 1975, but they're unlikely to raise many eyebrows three decades on.  A little skin flayed here, a little cannibalism there.  Been there, done that, excuse me while I stifle a yawn.

  The characters in FOTA, a gambler (Fabio Testi), a prostitute (Lynne Frederick), a town drunk (Michael J Pollard), a mentally challenged mortuary assistant (Harry Baird) and a few plot points may have been ripped from current headlines, but the movie also borrowed heavily, with attribution, from the works of Bret Harte.  Most of act three, which is by far the strongest and most coherent section of the movie, is taken directly from Harte's "Luck of the Roaring Camp."

  FOTA is cobbled together and not all the pieces fit.  As Milian tells us, he was available for only six days of filming, so his character sort of drifts in and out of the movie without undue rhyme or reason.

  I liked FOUR OF THE APOCALYPSE, even though I feel compelled to admit, sheepishly, that it's not a very good movie.  The plot is all over the place and the climatic revenge theme should have been torn down and rebuilt from scratch. On the other hand, the acting was a notch above that found in most spaghetti westerns and I found myself involved with and caring about the characters.  Also, from the parched deserts to the snowy mining camp, this movie looked good.  With reservations, a moderately strong recommendation.
4057037
Three stars is overly generous for this film but I felt it had its heart in the right place. The worst of its many sins is that it takes itself too seriously, unlike director Paul Bright's more outlandish action fantasy  "Aaron albeit a Sex Hero." This is a rental not a keeper unless you have a special feeling for low budget comedy about religious intolerance.
4369150
{3.5 stars}

SWEETWATER is a nicely-done noirish parody of the old spaghetti western. Plot-wise, there aren't a lot of big surprises, but it keeps your attention and incorporates steady humor without turning into a complete slapstick joke. Best of all are the very colorful cast of characters: Crazy charlatan cult leader; beautiful, now-married former prostitute who's out to settle down and lead a quiet, simple life; unstable yet nobly maverick sheriff; perverted clothier; and a whole bunch of sheep who contribute a great deal to the story (really, they do).

Intelligently simple entertainment/nothing to be taken too seriously. Great performances by Ed Harris (sheriff) and January Jones (former prostitute).
1884193
I enjoy the spaghetti westerns. I saw lots of what Clint Eastwood's movies would build on. But as far as acting or plausible plot....forget it
880102
For those of you rating this 5 stars, you are putting this up there with "The Wild Bunch", "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly", among others. Even the most ardent western / spaghetti western fan would not do this.

There is one non-stop annoyance in this and that is Rod Steiger's rendition of a Mexican. It's very, very bad. I do it better. His attire doesn't fit the part either. A revolutionary peasant Mexican in a Fedora hat? I mean it's just not quite right.

For those that give a dang about proper prop selection, you will not be liking the considerable amount of anachronistic mistakes they make with their firearms. One example is the MG-42 (Maschinengewehr 42) that gets used. That machine gun came out in 1942. The film is set during the Mexican Revolution, which started around 1910. There are other mistakes.

Slow plodding movie, a few other funky things. Yes, it is watchable. But nowhere near classic.
75285
Comedy and Mafia are rarely two words that go well together. especially where villains are the good guys. There are exceptions of course like Steve Martin's wonderful "My Blue Heaven", and "The Freshman" starring Matthew Broderick but "The Whole Nine Yards" Seems to portray people who are manipulative, violent, coldhearted and cruel as "lovable wacky guys who just happen to live on the wrong side of the tracks". and to me this is rather alarming as there have been more of these portrayals in hollywood lately.
Don't get me wrong, there are true lovable scoundrels abound in fiction but Bruce Willis is NOT one of them. Amanda Peet's 'sweet' assassin-wanabe character almost worked up until the very end of the film where she too, became infected with the filmwriters disturbing fascination for domination over their fellow man.
True, you can't have a black comedy without people suffering horrible fates, sometimes worse than death, that's the black part.  But good comedy relates to the viewer, black, white, or blue, that everything works out in the end, the villains get their just deserts for being villains, and the heroes get their just deserts for putting up with the villains.
Instead, the villains through use of physical force, bullying, and manipulation, get the upper hand, and the wimpy character played by Matthew Perry gets true love and a meager slice of the mob money.
Ok, so I may be your typical "American Moviegoer" who doesn't like to see a bad ending and want everything to be Disneyfied. Pardon my french but "Au Contrair", I was one of the very few who considered Aliens three to be a masterpiece BECAUSE everyone died, it was a fitting end for all the characters in that world because it was a dark world, and a HORROR movie and I would expect such a dismal point of view going into the film. At the end of "The whole nine yards" I was *REALLY* hoping that an FBI investigator tapped Bruce and Amanda's shoulder while they were celebrating their victory, but alas, I feel like I am being told that jerks who push people around CAN and DO win, even in movies.
In short, if you're really itching for a good comedy, don't scratch it with this movie, you'll get infected with poisonous views, sick morals, and will end up with a turned stomach.
1346826
I watched the DVD of this last night, and I've been mulling over my feelings about it today, on and off.  I feel a bit split down the middle about it. Ok, my initial reactions when viewing this was that it was a travesty, in Hazzard terms. The main thing that's wrong with it is the change in tone of the attitudes and depiction of *some* of the characters. Bo and Luke were always clean cut well meaning boys. They may not have been mensa candidates, but they had their smarts. The problem with this film and the previous film is that they are depicted almost like morons. I thought the casting of the two leads was ok though, better than the previous movie. The next problem is Uncle Jesse. Willie Nelson looks the part and is an OK substitute for Denver Pyle, but that's it. The fact that he isn't an actor really shows and he's patently unable to embelish the character with any of the warmth that Denver brought. Uncle Jesse never told any crude jokes in the original series either. It really lowers the tone, if you have to have crude jokes and swearing at least limit it to just Bo and Luke, leave Uncle Jesse out of it. Uncle Jesse was the heart and soul of the Dukes Of Hazzard, he was the Obi-Wan of the series. Right on to the other cast members, I thought they were OK, you're never going to find replacements for Sorrell Booke and James Best, but I thought Christopher Macdonald did quite a good job of Boss, better than Burt Reynolds anyhow. The actor that played Rosco was an interesting choice, OK I suppose, but no James Best. The girl that played Daisy, she was a bit on the thin side, but I still would.

Apart from the crudeness and some of the jokes I thought the story line was OK. It still felt like the Dukes of Hazzard in this sense. SO despite these misgivings, I wouldn't mind seeing another film with this cast.

I'm not a prude by any stretch, and  I like films like Animal House and Porkys or American Pie. It's just watching that kind of humor transplanted into a beloved family franchise like this is a bitter pill to swallow.

3 stars for being an improvement on the last film, but must try harder for the next.
662786
I hear by fully admitt that I love Italian westerns!  I have an extensive video collection of them, plus a very large library of books based on them.  What does that mean?  Nothing except I know my Italian wessterns.  SLEDGE is an American film company trying to cash in on the Italian western craze.  This wasn't new back then, Eastwood came back to America and made Hang'em High and Burt Lnadcaster's Lawman was made here too all of which were copies of the Italian formula.  SLEDGE tried to go one step further and go to Europe and made an authenic Italian western by Americans.  If that doesn't make much sense then you now know the problem with this movie.  It is too much of a downer even for Italians who loved the down beat plots such as The Great Silence.  Vic Marrow the tv actor and first/only time director knows his Italian westerns but his heavy handed scenes put off the viewer.  Garner is totally unlikeable here.  The hero of an Italian western could be a bad as_, but they usually had  some quirk that balanced out their personality so that the viewer liked them.  Not here you never like Garner and that is hard to do with a TV western icon such as him.  The very depressing ending of this movie leaves a bitter taste in your mouth.  The Great Silence is known for its tragic and very gut wrenching ending but it has a style of sadness that SLEDGE never gets.  As for the music, again it is copy of Italian soundtracks that does quite fit.  Maybe that is what it the main problem is the elements of this western don't fit well together.  Sometimes when you copy of a painting or drawing the images aren't quite right and the least bit of incorrection stands out and mars the picture. SLEDGE is an oddity of the Italian western period that was dying when this came out.
206963
Not bad late 60's Italian-made, English-dubbed Western.  Has the distinction of starring Steve Reeves in, what I believe is, his only western.  The story gives him a chance to strip his shirt off.  The story is about two brothers who are framed for some crime and sent to the notorious Yuma prison, where the younger brother is murdered by the guards.  After a prison uprising the prisoners escape and Reeves vows vengeance on the guards and the guys that framed him.  OK and not overly bloody, like later spaghetti westerns.  I still prefer Reeves sword-and-sandal films.  The DVD is very good quality, has some OK extras, and recommended for fans of the genre.
1848996
You always hope to get Pulp Fiction when watching a subsequent Tarantino movie, but you always end up strangely dissatisfied. Django Unchained ("the 'D' is silent") is a plodding homage to the spaghetti westerns of yore that doesn't really get cooking until an hour in. There we go through the rabbit hole into a fantasy freakshow of toothless varmints, idyllic plantations, a coolly delicious villain, and, the best part, an unrecognizable Samuel L. Jackson as an impish Uncle Tom, who plays the same character in every movie, whether he's a superspy or a Jedi Knight, but his trash-talking street persona works here to great a effect.  The shootout(s) at the end are worth the wait, although it would have been more satisfying to just have one...but Tarantino just had to one-up Margaret Mitchell with a few sticks of dynamite.  One strange thing...it's still a white man who unchains Django, and in the end, it's a sell-out who ends up the real villain.  It's almost like Tarantino, for all his outward negrophilia, still believes in the white man's burden.
4674717
I popped this disc out with 20 minutes left to go, unable to bear the ludicrous turns of plot. This film started out well enough, with a gritty Western atmosphere and plenty of loud, smoky gunplay as Jeff Bridges' Wild Bill Hickok shoots down men by the roomful. Bridges is a scruffy, perpetually hungover and somehow likable Wild Bill Hickok. He chews the scenery like an out-of-control rock star. It's fun at first, but ultimately his character is hard to care for. That's important, because from the get-go, you know what's coming for Wild Bill at the end. For that reason, the filmmakers' biggest challenge was to make you care for ol' Bill. But Bridges and the scriptwriters fall wide of the mark. (In contrast, Keith Carradine sets the world-weary gunfighter bar high with his portrayal of W.B. in "Deadwood.") Sure, Bridges's Wild Bill is humorous and quirky, but his character does so many outrageous, over-the-top things -- punching, insulting, and generally running roughshod over folks -- that you can't help but think "Oh, he's askin' for it" or "No real gunfighter would do that!" The real Hickock was shot in the back of the head by Jack McCall, an no-account drifter who had lost to Hickok in cards. The Jack McCall of this film, however, is out to avenge his mother, a former lover of Hickok's who, her son thinks, was cruelly abandoned by the gunslinger turned professional gambler. But it gets even better: McCall -- SPOILERS AHEAD -- pays a motley crew of lowlifes a sum of one thousand dollars (today worth about, what, a million?) to kill Hickok. They catch him by surprise while he's -- get this -- coupling with Calamity Jane on top of a poker table. (For me, that's when the movie jumped the shark.) But then the bad guys, instead of killing Hickok right there on the spot (which is usually what hired killers do) force him and other residences of his hotel to play poker. Why they did this I never did find out, because that's when the screening of "Wild Bill" was cut short by the eject button. --MellowMonk.com
1746294
Death Rides a Horse is a revenge spaghetti Western. As a child, young Bill hides in his ranch house and witnesses the rape and killing of his mother, as well as the murder of his father and older sister by a vicious gang of Mexicans. Emblazoned in his memory are details of each gang member  a pierced ear, a tattooed chest, a scarred forehead. When the house is set on fire, Bill is rescued by an unseen stranger. Now, 15 years later, Bill (John Phillip Law) has become a fast gun with a thirst for vengeance.

Ryan (Lee Van Cleef) has just been released from prison for a crime he was framed for. Like Bill, Ryan is obsessed with seeking justice for his years behind bars.

Director Giulio Petroni tells these parallel tales of vengeance with full spaghetti-Western treatment, including lots of violence, anti-hero short on words, long on action, and a score by Ennio Morricone. The pace is slow, building suspense by switching back and forth between events in the past and the present. Van Cleef, who had appeared for years as a bad guy in Hollywood films, is given a chance to show some real acting ability, though its hard not to wonder how Clint Eastwood would have played the role. Luigi Pistilli is excellent as a bandit leader turned politician. Director Petroni draws on the zoom lens a bit too much to make a dramatic point, but its repeated use wears thin and becomes tiresome, drawing more attention to cinematic technique than to story development.

The opening scene is brutal and unrelenting, setting the tone for what is to follow. Later scenes don't quite come up to that level of horror, but nonetheless depict torture, agonizing killings, and sadism.

Bonus materials on the Blu-ray release include audio commentary, and original theatrical trailer.
892943
This film is advertised as being in Italian with English subtitles. This is wrong. One can click the film to indicate that the language should be English. One can also get English subtitles for the hearing impaired. There is no funny movements when English is used, such as lips still moving after the speech is finished.
I was hoping that the film would be as good as the Clint Eastwood Spaghetti westerns. It has many of the elements of this genre - the long staring without speech, the dress of the men, how they speak, constant frowning, the hero being beat up, and the music - but it is not as good. I was put off by the hero smiling a couple of time, Clint never smiled. Nevertheless, I liked it. There was lots of action.
The story is about two bounty hunters. One is interested in human rights. The other is only interested in money, and he murders people. The villain in the film transports poor Mexicans into the US to work for a cheaper price than the Americans.
4625240
The first hour of "Casino" (1995) represents Martin Scorsese at his best  a mini-masterpiece of cinematic bravado depicting the inner workings of a Las Vegas pleasure palace. Unfortunately, once you get past the dazzling semi-documentary introduction, the remaining two hours become a tired self-parody of the director's earlier crime films. Robert De Niro, Joe Pesci and Sharon Stone cannot redeem a disappointingly melodramatic script by Scorsese and Nicholas Pileggi. In the end, the ambitious yet overlong "Casino" fails to pay off.

OVERALL RATING: **