Once Upon a Time in the West, For a Fistful of Dollars, Dr. Strangelove, The Human Condition (Japanese trilogy), Bullitt. That should set you up for a few good evenings.
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly was the third one in the trilogy. It’s definitely a fantastic film, and all three of them are worth watching. However, the third one is a bit more of an epic. The first one is more approachable as an entry into the spaghetti western genre, both in themes and runtime.
Ho-ly-shit. I feel like that lady that had only seen the first part of The Sound of Music, and thought the boy was a mailman.
I thought, because “A Fistful of Dollars” starts so abruptly and “The Good, The Bad and the Ugly” has a proper introduction of the nameless gunslinger, the chronology was backwards, but yep, you’re right and I’ve been a fool for years! Years I say!
Then again, time is not linear so I guess it didn’t matter :)
What’s worse: I first got “A fistful of dollars”, then checked the first 10 minutes and thought:" this can’t be the first one, they haven’t introduced the characters", so I got the last one, and watched it first. And for the longest of times that was how I thought the trilogy was sorted…
Once Upon a Time in the West, For a Fistful of Dollars, Dr. Strangelove, The Human Condition (Japanese trilogy), Bullitt. That should set you up for a few good evenings.
I would advice watching first the Good, the bad and the ugly, before watching the sequels. Fantastic cinematography!
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly was the third one in the trilogy. It’s definitely a fantastic film, and all three of them are worth watching. However, the third one is a bit more of an epic. The first one is more approachable as an entry into the spaghetti western genre, both in themes and runtime.
Ho-ly-shit. I feel like that lady that had only seen the first part of The Sound of Music, and thought the boy was a mailman.
I thought, because “A Fistful of Dollars” starts so abruptly and “The Good, The Bad and the Ugly” has a proper introduction of the nameless gunslinger, the chronology was backwards, but yep, you’re right and I’ve been a fool for years! Years I say!
Then again, time is not linear so I guess it didn’t matter :)
Hey, a Pulp Fiction approach to it could work. 😄
What’s worse: I first got “A fistful of dollars”, then checked the first 10 minutes and thought:" this can’t be the first one, they haven’t introduced the characters", so I got the last one, and watched it first. And for the longest of times that was how I thought the trilogy was sorted…