Davor_Blazevic_1959
Joined Jul 2005
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews41
Davor_Blazevic_1959's rating
Much like John Ford's "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance" (1962) ranks among my favourite classic westerns, "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" (1966), directed by Italian director Sergio Leone, ranks among my favourite Italian Spaghetti westerns, as well as among any other epigonic westerns, also jokingly, often contemptuously, definitely gastronomically called Paella, Sauerkraut, Borscht, Ramen... westerns. It easily takes the best movie top spot.
First of all, it came at the suitable time in my life, still the tender age of 9, but in a, then, safe environment on the outskirts of Sarajevo, where in the year of local distribution of the film (1968) I lived. I was already allowed to attend cinema shows with my peers only; i.e., without the company of grown ups. In addition to Disney's animated and live-action features, as well as true-life adventure documentaries, rerun of the all black-and-white, older Charlie Chaplin's and Laurel & Hardy's (Stanlio & Olio) comedies as well as Johnny Weissmuller's Tarzan's African escapades, westerns were the favourite film genre of my early childhood (and remained among my favourites even to my advanced adulthood, nowadays senior citizenship). It's probably easy to understand why. Western, mostly taking place in the wide open, often insufficiently explored, ergo exciting areas, is the simplest paradigm of constant opposition between good and bad/evil (virtues and vices), here exemplified already in the title, "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly", where the Ugly is added not only for the sake of nuancing between the other two; i.e., adding "colour" in otherwise only a "black-and-white" confrontation. This simplification is further explicated and enforced by numerous, often humorous instances of "two kinds of" (people, spurs...) in the film story itself.
From the initial controversial, often lukewarm, sometimes even negative reception, as years and decades passed by film has been more often and then almost exclusively praised, ultimately glorified as a real masterpiece. And rightly so! If not for other reasons than for impressively orchestrated the main three characters ensemble, accompanied with able support cast adding a collection of colourful supporting characters, then for Leone's signature filming style, mixing the extreme face close-ups and the sweeping long shots, coordinating camera and character movements to match the music, often imitating the natural sounds, precomposed by Leone's regular collaborator, master film composer, Ennio Morricone, demystifying the nostalgia for the Old West, as well as the American Civil (and, for that matter, any other) War, by emphasizing violence and cruelty, greed and stupidity... just to mention a few, already described elsewhere numerous times before.
Film begins in the waste land of the Wild West, where, each one in his own story, we first meet the fugitive Mexican bandit Tuco (Eli Wallach), whose episode, in which he survives clash with the three bounty hunters upon his trail, ends with a stop shot of him entitled "the ugly". The ruthless mercenary "Angel Eyes" (Lee Van Cleef), who, when paid, always follows his job through, is also characterized by the title in the last frame of his opening story, a stop shot of him reads "the bad". Finally, the bounty hunter (not quite the Man With No Name, but to be more precise) "Blondie" (Clint Eastwood) enters the scene, who first rescues Tuco from another group of three bounty hunters, and then hands him over to the local authorities in exchange for a reward. But it's only a ruse, because Blondie will save Tuco just before the execution of the death sentence by hanging. The two outlaws share the prize and decide to do it all again. After another successful con, Blondie abandons Tuco and leaves him in the desert. While Tuco calls him names and threatens to kill him, Blondie ponders: "Such ingratitude, after all the times I've saved your life." A stop frame of him then reads "the good". Tuco swears revenge, so he captures Blondie at the first opportunity and banishes him to the desert. There, they both run into a dying officer of the soon to be defeated Southern Confederacy, who reveals to them the secret of $200,000.00 in golden coins hidden in a cemetery. The cruel Angel Eyes is also searching for this treasure...
In the further course of the story, the alliances between the three title characters shift, as and when it suits them. All three heroes turn out to be anti-heroes, who kill solely for personal gain.
Finally, rewatching "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" is as pleasing as-if not more than-any earlier watching, because it's one of those precious movies where you enjoy knowing what's next and remembering clever, often humorous, even sarcastic dialogues and replicas, but also always discover something new, that had escaped your attention before, so it easily deserves its top rating 10+.
( S-p-o-i-l-e-r-s warning: Do not read further if you want to avoid the s-p-o-i-l-e-r-s ! ) In an amusing twist my high-school colleague Drazen explains that the Good one is "good" because in the course of the film he kills 11 men, while the Bad one is "bad" (as in weak, inferior, rather than as in evil) because he kills only 3 men and loses the direct (though critically rigged) confrontation and his life in a triple showdown. At the same time, the in-between Ugly (nasty, rather than unsightly) one "scores" the number of killings between the other two; i.e., 6 fatal victims of his shooting!
First of all, it came at the suitable time in my life, still the tender age of 9, but in a, then, safe environment on the outskirts of Sarajevo, where in the year of local distribution of the film (1968) I lived. I was already allowed to attend cinema shows with my peers only; i.e., without the company of grown ups. In addition to Disney's animated and live-action features, as well as true-life adventure documentaries, rerun of the all black-and-white, older Charlie Chaplin's and Laurel & Hardy's (Stanlio & Olio) comedies as well as Johnny Weissmuller's Tarzan's African escapades, westerns were the favourite film genre of my early childhood (and remained among my favourites even to my advanced adulthood, nowadays senior citizenship). It's probably easy to understand why. Western, mostly taking place in the wide open, often insufficiently explored, ergo exciting areas, is the simplest paradigm of constant opposition between good and bad/evil (virtues and vices), here exemplified already in the title, "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly", where the Ugly is added not only for the sake of nuancing between the other two; i.e., adding "colour" in otherwise only a "black-and-white" confrontation. This simplification is further explicated and enforced by numerous, often humorous instances of "two kinds of" (people, spurs...) in the film story itself.
From the initial controversial, often lukewarm, sometimes even negative reception, as years and decades passed by film has been more often and then almost exclusively praised, ultimately glorified as a real masterpiece. And rightly so! If not for other reasons than for impressively orchestrated the main three characters ensemble, accompanied with able support cast adding a collection of colourful supporting characters, then for Leone's signature filming style, mixing the extreme face close-ups and the sweeping long shots, coordinating camera and character movements to match the music, often imitating the natural sounds, precomposed by Leone's regular collaborator, master film composer, Ennio Morricone, demystifying the nostalgia for the Old West, as well as the American Civil (and, for that matter, any other) War, by emphasizing violence and cruelty, greed and stupidity... just to mention a few, already described elsewhere numerous times before.
Film begins in the waste land of the Wild West, where, each one in his own story, we first meet the fugitive Mexican bandit Tuco (Eli Wallach), whose episode, in which he survives clash with the three bounty hunters upon his trail, ends with a stop shot of him entitled "the ugly". The ruthless mercenary "Angel Eyes" (Lee Van Cleef), who, when paid, always follows his job through, is also characterized by the title in the last frame of his opening story, a stop shot of him reads "the bad". Finally, the bounty hunter (not quite the Man With No Name, but to be more precise) "Blondie" (Clint Eastwood) enters the scene, who first rescues Tuco from another group of three bounty hunters, and then hands him over to the local authorities in exchange for a reward. But it's only a ruse, because Blondie will save Tuco just before the execution of the death sentence by hanging. The two outlaws share the prize and decide to do it all again. After another successful con, Blondie abandons Tuco and leaves him in the desert. While Tuco calls him names and threatens to kill him, Blondie ponders: "Such ingratitude, after all the times I've saved your life." A stop frame of him then reads "the good". Tuco swears revenge, so he captures Blondie at the first opportunity and banishes him to the desert. There, they both run into a dying officer of the soon to be defeated Southern Confederacy, who reveals to them the secret of $200,000.00 in golden coins hidden in a cemetery. The cruel Angel Eyes is also searching for this treasure...
In the further course of the story, the alliances between the three title characters shift, as and when it suits them. All three heroes turn out to be anti-heroes, who kill solely for personal gain.
Finally, rewatching "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" is as pleasing as-if not more than-any earlier watching, because it's one of those precious movies where you enjoy knowing what's next and remembering clever, often humorous, even sarcastic dialogues and replicas, but also always discover something new, that had escaped your attention before, so it easily deserves its top rating 10+.
( S-p-o-i-l-e-r-s warning: Do not read further if you want to avoid the s-p-o-i-l-e-r-s ! ) In an amusing twist my high-school colleague Drazen explains that the Good one is "good" because in the course of the film he kills 11 men, while the Bad one is "bad" (as in weak, inferior, rather than as in evil) because he kills only 3 men and loses the direct (though critically rigged) confrontation and his life in a triple showdown. At the same time, the in-between Ugly (nasty, rather than unsightly) one "scores" the number of killings between the other two; i.e., 6 fatal victims of his shooting!
Although not his best, Croatian director's Rajko Grlic's 12th feature-length film, announced as his final one (?), "It All Ends Here" ("Svemu dodje kraj") (2024), provides an exciting and believable story, thoroughly immersed in contemporary Croatian reality. Well-connected powerful people and their henchmen, corrupt politicians, sleazy lawyers who live on the scraps of other people's destroyed lives, unscrupulously playing with their leftovers, including their final act, death, these are all characters introduced to us daily via media. Real-life characters continue their lives here, in the movie, under their new fictional names. Written in collaboration between Grlic and the novelist Ante Tomic, "It All Ends Here" is an adaptation of Miroslav Krleza's (who is considered the greatest Croatian writer of the 20th century) novel "On the Edge of Reason," having its plot transferred from the year of 1938, when it was published, to the present day.
Despite not sticking up fully to established and strict genre rules (the film wavers between a political thriller and a crime story, between a love drama and a satire), but rather resorting to somewhat more down-to-earth exchange in love and/or adulterous relationships and clichéd, therefore popular didacticism elsewhere in the story, film will undoubtedly find a positive recognition among viewers sufficiently traumatized by the exact or similar everyday life in Croatia and beyond. Therefore, although with slightly reduced artistic pretensions, but this time with a clearly increased, genre-channeled appetite of a commentator on social happenings, the film functions quite sufficiently as an exhaust valve for the accumulated frustrations of (not only) the domestic audiences, especially with (for this author quite) an unexpected but by no means unwelcome (...omitting the spoiler making noun...) ending. The regional representative cast responded convincingly to challenges placed in the screenplay.
Despite not sticking up fully to established and strict genre rules (the film wavers between a political thriller and a crime story, between a love drama and a satire), but rather resorting to somewhat more down-to-earth exchange in love and/or adulterous relationships and clichéd, therefore popular didacticism elsewhere in the story, film will undoubtedly find a positive recognition among viewers sufficiently traumatized by the exact or similar everyday life in Croatia and beyond. Therefore, although with slightly reduced artistic pretensions, but this time with a clearly increased, genre-channeled appetite of a commentator on social happenings, the film functions quite sufficiently as an exhaust valve for the accumulated frustrations of (not only) the domestic audiences, especially with (for this author quite) an unexpected but by no means unwelcome (...omitting the spoiler making noun...) ending. The regional representative cast responded convincingly to challenges placed in the screenplay.
»The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance« (1962) wins a top spot among my favourite classic westerns. The first shots of the film take us to Shinbone, a border town in an unnamed Western state, and the arrival of Senator Rans Stoddard and his wife Hallie. The funeral of local small rancher Tom Doniphon brings them, after many years, back to the town where the senator began his career, becoming known as "the man" from the title line. In an interview with a young reporter and editor-in-chief of a local newspaper covering this occasion, hence in the accompanying retrospective, he tells a never-before-told story: the real truth about the early trigger of his sudden local popularity and the consequent lightning-fast rise on the political ladder... Avoiding the main spoiler, let it be only known that subsequent to hearing that far unknown, history changing facts, the editor-in-chief, to Ranse's surprise, theatrically tore up his reporter's notes, giving the following explanation, "when the legend becomes fact, print the legend." Thus uncompromising, legend goes on and, in the last scene on the train, thankful for the railroad's courtesies Ranse continues to be honoured with the answer that will force him to swallow lumps in his throat for the rest of his days and beyond, "Nothing's too good for the man who shot Liberty Valance!"
What is most interesting is that it was exactly Ford who has, in his rich oeuvre, often (but by no means exclusively) directed Westerns (or as he liked to introduce himself: "My name is John Ford and I make Westerns .") and built many of these myths and legends, but here, towards the end of his directorial career, he relativizes them.
Unfortunately, in the present world filled with overdependence on technology (that makes us conformists), intolerance to the hardships and inconveniences of nature, reduction of warm feelings and empathy as well as increased insensitivity among people... especially newer generations are becoming less exposed to the good stuff of the past, including John Ford's movies. Ford knew how to choose a perfect scenario or bring a less perfect one to perfection, and, although himself somewhat withdrawn and distanced, infused such a scenario with emotions and sentiment. Often he filled them with humour and the joy of life, but also wisdom and humanism, making them deeply woven into what a man actually is and thus engraved in the minds of generations of movie goers. Nowadays, somehow we have all forgotten the importance of such films that go beyond their simple purpose of being just a forgettable pastime, and the film "The Man Who Killed Liberty Valance" is exactly such a film that, seasoned with Ford's beautiful aesthetics, has an added value in itself and then for the culture and civilization which produced it.
Not even a decade after the golden age of Hollywood films, Ford warns of the danger that politics destroys the beauty in people, it erases the legend, while, in fact, the legend and the storytelling are more important to people than a purely political narrative. Here, and especially here, for the umpteenth time we experience the phenomenon of the western, the miracle of that once most popular genre, which does not reflect our lives in any obvious way (neither in the manner or content, nor in the location or scenography), and yet, though hard to believe, it appears as if in itself it keeps some kind of a core to each one of them (our lives). Furthermore, the action in the film is so universal that despite the fact that it is a complete fabrication, not based on a real place and events, it seems as if we are watching a documentary presentation of historical events. And whenever a film portrays a historically important time, whether real or imaginable, it is very interesting to experience that cinematic meta-moment prophetically dedicated to events that will only happen, once or repeatedly, thus reversing sentimentality for the past, a nostalgia, and advancing it to the predictable future. Included here are depictions of a free press, town meetings, territorial conventions and statehood debates, subjecting politics to interest lobbies and corruption, violence in elections... foreseeing their future recurrences and anticipating nostalgia for them.
The acting contributions are very worth mentioning. Despite his shorter screen time, thanks to his usual commanding presence John Wayne skilfully brings about the pivotal role of Tom Doniphon, while both main opponents show versatility of their onscreen persona at times of temptation: Lee Marvin as infamous outlaw, tough and mean Liberty Valance, shows weakness when, subsequent to his failed attempt to get nominated for the regional delegate to the upcoming statehood convention at the territorial capital, he resorts to excessive vandalism and then drowns his frustration in alcohol, while James Stewart as Ransom "Ranse" Stoddard, at first, after Valance bullies him in the restaurant, begins practicing with an old gun, and then responds to Valance's gunfight challenge when his attempts to bring Valance to justice through the law fail. Outstanding in supporting roles are Vera Miles (who, sadly, missed an earlier opportunity to join Jimmy Stewart in another magnum opus, Alfred Hitchcock's "Vertigo," due to her real-life pregnancy at the time) as the not-meant-to-be Tom's, eventually Ranse's wife Hallie Stoddard, Edmond O'Brien as Dutton Peabody, founder, owner, editor of the local free press (the Shinbone Star), uncompromising "old servant of the public weal", waiting for his "shining hour" ... yet to come," who, also, "sweeps out the place", Woody Strode as Pompey, Tom Doniphon's hired hand, John Carradine as Maj. Cassius Starbuckle, speaker on behalf of the cattle barons at the territorial convention, Strother Martin and Lee Van Cleef as Floyd and Reese, Valance's myrmidons, Andy Devine as the fearful Sheriff Link Appleyard, looking only for the ways not to have beef with the criminals but rather a free beef on his plate, and some more, all benefiting from Ford's unique way of handling actors, bringing out the best in them, as many acknowledged subsequently.
What is most interesting is that it was exactly Ford who has, in his rich oeuvre, often (but by no means exclusively) directed Westerns (or as he liked to introduce himself: "My name is John Ford and I make Westerns .") and built many of these myths and legends, but here, towards the end of his directorial career, he relativizes them.
Unfortunately, in the present world filled with overdependence on technology (that makes us conformists), intolerance to the hardships and inconveniences of nature, reduction of warm feelings and empathy as well as increased insensitivity among people... especially newer generations are becoming less exposed to the good stuff of the past, including John Ford's movies. Ford knew how to choose a perfect scenario or bring a less perfect one to perfection, and, although himself somewhat withdrawn and distanced, infused such a scenario with emotions and sentiment. Often he filled them with humour and the joy of life, but also wisdom and humanism, making them deeply woven into what a man actually is and thus engraved in the minds of generations of movie goers. Nowadays, somehow we have all forgotten the importance of such films that go beyond their simple purpose of being just a forgettable pastime, and the film "The Man Who Killed Liberty Valance" is exactly such a film that, seasoned with Ford's beautiful aesthetics, has an added value in itself and then for the culture and civilization which produced it.
Not even a decade after the golden age of Hollywood films, Ford warns of the danger that politics destroys the beauty in people, it erases the legend, while, in fact, the legend and the storytelling are more important to people than a purely political narrative. Here, and especially here, for the umpteenth time we experience the phenomenon of the western, the miracle of that once most popular genre, which does not reflect our lives in any obvious way (neither in the manner or content, nor in the location or scenography), and yet, though hard to believe, it appears as if in itself it keeps some kind of a core to each one of them (our lives). Furthermore, the action in the film is so universal that despite the fact that it is a complete fabrication, not based on a real place and events, it seems as if we are watching a documentary presentation of historical events. And whenever a film portrays a historically important time, whether real or imaginable, it is very interesting to experience that cinematic meta-moment prophetically dedicated to events that will only happen, once or repeatedly, thus reversing sentimentality for the past, a nostalgia, and advancing it to the predictable future. Included here are depictions of a free press, town meetings, territorial conventions and statehood debates, subjecting politics to interest lobbies and corruption, violence in elections... foreseeing their future recurrences and anticipating nostalgia for them.
The acting contributions are very worth mentioning. Despite his shorter screen time, thanks to his usual commanding presence John Wayne skilfully brings about the pivotal role of Tom Doniphon, while both main opponents show versatility of their onscreen persona at times of temptation: Lee Marvin as infamous outlaw, tough and mean Liberty Valance, shows weakness when, subsequent to his failed attempt to get nominated for the regional delegate to the upcoming statehood convention at the territorial capital, he resorts to excessive vandalism and then drowns his frustration in alcohol, while James Stewart as Ransom "Ranse" Stoddard, at first, after Valance bullies him in the restaurant, begins practicing with an old gun, and then responds to Valance's gunfight challenge when his attempts to bring Valance to justice through the law fail. Outstanding in supporting roles are Vera Miles (who, sadly, missed an earlier opportunity to join Jimmy Stewart in another magnum opus, Alfred Hitchcock's "Vertigo," due to her real-life pregnancy at the time) as the not-meant-to-be Tom's, eventually Ranse's wife Hallie Stoddard, Edmond O'Brien as Dutton Peabody, founder, owner, editor of the local free press (the Shinbone Star), uncompromising "old servant of the public weal", waiting for his "shining hour" ... yet to come," who, also, "sweeps out the place", Woody Strode as Pompey, Tom Doniphon's hired hand, John Carradine as Maj. Cassius Starbuckle, speaker on behalf of the cattle barons at the territorial convention, Strother Martin and Lee Van Cleef as Floyd and Reese, Valance's myrmidons, Andy Devine as the fearful Sheriff Link Appleyard, looking only for the ways not to have beef with the criminals but rather a free beef on his plate, and some more, all benefiting from Ford's unique way of handling actors, bringing out the best in them, as many acknowledged subsequently.