Western Retrospective: Once Upon a Time in the West

Hi, this is Dan Gilbazan, and you're listening

to the GeekCast Radio Network. Hello and welcome

to episode 241 of the Cinema Geeks. I am one

of your Cinema Geeks Optimist Solo, and joining

me as usual is the Comic Concierge. Hello, Dan.

Hey, how are you doing? i'm doing well we're

back in the old west so it's a it's a fun place

to be it's a fun little adventure to go on so

i'm excited to talk about the last of our spaghetti

westerns here with once upon a time in the west

from 1968 from sergio leone so it's uh it's going

to be an intriguing A discussion, I think, and

that you kind of let off last episode by stating

that you had seen this before and it was ranked

pretty high on on your list of films. So kind

of what were you looking forward to this time

around and how long had it been since you've

seen this? It's been quite a while, like the

it's probably been five, seven years or so around

that time, like, you know, it's been it's been

a good time since I've seen it. And I was just

interested to return it, and especially after.

And watching the, you know, the Man With No Dollars

trilogy, as we're referring to it, just to see,

like, does that impact my overall viewing of

it? Does it change at all? How much do I remember?

Because, you know, it's been such a long time.

So I was happy to revisit it. And, you know,

all these certain things still stuck with me.

You know the opening Henry Fonda's performance

those were certainly there but there were seriously

a good amount about the plot that I have forgotten

throughout the year so it was a great rewatch

because honestly there was a good amount about

it that I that I've forgotten so it was I definitely

think it helped even cement my overall enjoyment

of the movie even more. Okay, interesting. Absolutely.

This is a blind spot for me. So this is a first

time watch. So we'll get into our thoughts here

in a second. But before we do that, Dan's going

to lay the foundation and give you guys all the

facts about Once Upon a Time in the West. And

then we'll come back and give you guys our thoughts

on the movie overall. Let me tell you a fairy

tale, as Once Upon a Time in the West, directed

by Sergio Leone, starring Henry Fonda, Charles

Bronson, Claudia Cardenal, and Jason Robards,

is the next film in our Western Retrospective.

In Once Upon a Time in the West, the story unfolds

slowly and deliberately, beginning with the famously

tense opening at a lonely train station, where

three gunmen wait near silence before being killed

by a mysterious stranger known only as Harmonica.

played by Charles Bronson. From there, the narrative

shifts to the massacre of the McBain family at

their desert homestead, Sweetwater, land that

is strategically vital because it sits on the

only reliable water source for the expanding

railroad. The killings are carried out by the

ruthless outlaw, Frank, who is secretly employed

by the ailing railroad tycoon, Morton, to eliminate

obstacles in the path of their progress. Jill

McBain, the new bride of the murder patriarch,

arrives from New Orleans expecting a fresh start,

only to find herself alone in a hostile frontier

and suddenly the owner of immensely valuable

land. Meanwhile, Cheyenne, a charismatic bandit

falsely blamed for the massacre, forms an uneasy

alliance with Harmonica, both men circling Jill

and Stillwater for their own reasons. As the

railroad advances, Frank begins to see opportunity

to seize power for himself, trying to claim Stillwater

outright. Harmonica's motivations remain cryptic

until the film's final climax, when it's revealed

through a haunting flashback that as a child,

he was forced by Frank to support his brother

standing on his shoulders with a noose around

his neck, while Frank cruelly placed a harmonica

in his mouth as he watched his brother slowly

hang. The trauma fuels Harmonica's relentless

pursuit. The film... builds to a final duel between

Harmonica and Frank, where Harmonica finally

kills him, completing his long -delayed revenge.

At the same time, Cheyenne, who's grown protective

of Jill, helps secure her claim to Stillwater,

but it's revealed to be mortally wounded, dying

quietly after the conflict is resolved. In the

end, Harmonica disappears without a word. His

purpose fulfilled. while Jill stands behind,

serving water to the railroad workers as the

town begins to take shape around her. The closing

moments emphasize the larger theme. The old west

of lone gunmen and vengeance is fading, replaced

by industry, community, in the march of civilization.

When Henry Fonda first showed up on set, he actually

brought brown contact lenses to hide his famous

blue eyes. He assumed that he would be making

the villain more convincing. But Sergio Leone

immediately said no. He wanted those clear blue

eyes because audiences trusted him. Seeing that

familiar good guy face commit brutal acts made

the character far more disturbing. And eventually,

Fonda agreed. Ennio Morricone, of course, did

the iconic score for the Man With No Name trilogy,

returned again for this film, but he actually

did the score in advance, and Leone played the

music while on set during shooting. It helped

actors match the tone and rhythm of each scene,

especially for that iconic entrance. The newly

wordless opening took days to shoot, even though

it's mostly men just standing around and waiting.

Leone obsessed over tiny details, like the rhythm

of the dripping of water drops, or the timing

of the buzzing of the fly. At one point, crew

members reportedly thought he had gone just too

far, but the scene became one of the most iconic

openings ever filmed. The film had a split reaction

depending upon where it was released. In Europe,

it was a major success, both critically and commercially.

In the U .S., the reception was much colder.

The film was cut down significantly, though,

for the U .S. release, which hurt narrative flow,

and many American critics found it too slow,

too long, and overly stylized, especially compared

to more traditional westerns. It underperformed

initially in the U .S., though it was not a total

failure. Like a lot of The Only's work, the film's

reputation grew dramatically over the years.

Critics began to appreciate its visual storytelling

and thematic depth, and its pacing was seen as

a benefit. Not a flaw. But where do Kevin and

I stand? Back to us to discuss. All right, thanks

for laying the stage here for us. I'm just going

to try to find a way to use the words like stage

and different things that are Western -related

throughout this conversation. But Once Upon a

Time in the West, like we said, is 1968. Dan

just gave you all the facts, so now we're back

here to give you guys our opinions. Dan kind

of obviously let... some of it out that he was

a big fan of this prior. And I know you said

that this cemented your enjoyment of the film

overall. What was different for you this time

around watching it in conjunction with the man

with no dollars trilogy and Django, et cetera,

as well as like the other Westerns we've watched

kind of leading up to this. So I know, you know,

last week I, I made a reference to the, you know,

wrestling for wrestling. And I did that. the

week before and i said i wasn't going to do that

again and i'm not i was just i was just i was

just trying to circumvent expectations which

i think is something that leone does with this

right from the start um like i think that's something

that i noticed even more with this right because

you think about um the man with no dollar trilogy

and one of the most iconic elements of that one

of the most um important vital parts of that

one thing we brought up brought up a lot was

how much the score plays a part of that film

and you think of something like star wars and

how much like that is part of the film from beginning

to end when you get what's upon a time in the

west and it opens up and you know it's the same

composer i think you're expecting it to begin

with a similar type of vibe a similar type of

score but it honestly the score is pretty silent

in the beginning once the actual movie begins.

It's a lot of sound effects. It's very quiet.

It's very, just you hear the moving of a chair,

the buzzing of a fly, things like that. And I

think that was certainly purposeful. I think

that was just setting the stage to let you know

that this is going to be different than maybe

what you expect. And then, of course, you have

perhaps the biggest act against expectations,

which I don't know if today's audience maybe

even fully can contemplate or understand, which

is the performance of Henry Fonda, because at

this time, you know, he was like the Tom Hanks

of his day, right? Like he was seen as like the

ultimate good guy, the guy from 12 Angry Men,

Grapes of Wrath. He was seen as that type of

hero. You can't even think of another villain

role that he was in. And right from the start,

they make him the ultimate villain. They do that

right away with no punches pulled, which I could

imagine was rather shocking for a lot of people,

which may be, I think, maybe why, as I mentioned

in Just the Facts, for a lot of American audiences,

there was a little bit of mixed reaction and

possibly because of that. It may have made a

good amount of people upset seeing Henry Fonda

do something like that. Killing a child. You

don't see it per se, but it's obviously very

heavily hinted at. And I think that's something

you see throughout, him playing against those

expectations. It's not the only thing he does,

but I think it's a big part of something I noticed

this time around, comparing it to what we watched.

We mentioned how with the Spaghetti Westerns,

we're seeing how these characters are a bit more

morally gray. Although we kind of questioned

that maybe that's... a bit more put on than people

make it out to be, especially when looking at

something like The Searchers. But I think noticing

just how different the score is and how just

different the film is altogether compared to

what maybe people expect compared to what came

before is something I was able to appreciate

having that knowledge compared to my previous

experience. as a first -time watcher and you

know obviously compared to what we see in l with

django you obviously had an issue with you weren't

a fan of some of the violence there i know you

were looking for more of those classic standoffs

we got a little bit here what were you was your

overall impression of uh once upon a time in

the west so i was definitely looking forward

to this um like i said the only thing that i

had seen i guess there's a this is a trilogy

and i had seen once upon a time in america once

you know way back when i couldn't tell you anything

about it right now because i was literally probably

like 14 when i saw it or 15 or something like

that but um so i was intrigued to to get to this

one and then maybe to eventually re -watch that

one as well but um yeah i wasn't sure what to

think going into this because obviously i'd seen

some of sergio leone's films but there's this

movie was a blind spot but also a lot of the

performers in it were blind spots for me as well

I don't have a lot of exposure to Henry Fonda,

Jason Robards, and Charles Bronson. I have not

seen Grapes of Wrath. I have not seen On Golden

Pond. So when it comes to Henry Fonda, I just

haven't seen a lot from him overall. I think

the only other film that I had seen that he did

was... Oh, I'm trying to think. Was he in...

12 Anger Men? 12 Anger Men. Yes, 12 Anger Men.

I've seen him in that. But otherwise, I think

this is only the second film I've seen from Henry

Fonda, as crazy as that may sound. And then Jason

Robards, yes, I've seen his later work from Philadelphia,

The Enemy Within, Crimson Tide, Enemy of the

State, some of that stuff. But I didn't see anything

from this era from Jason Robards. And Charles

Bronson, I don't think I had ever seen anything

he had done. before, which is kind of crazy to

me. I know all their names. I know who they are.

I know their reputation and things of that nature.

They all represented a time where I hadn't seen

a lot of those films. It was interesting to get

a chance to see all of them and clear up that

blind spot, not just for the movie, but some

of their main roles over their time as well.

I was definitely intrigued. I think this one

for me... I guess I'm similar to not, I shouldn't

say similar, but Roger Ebert had like a about

face with this film, right? Like the first time

he saw this, he gave it like a two and a half

star. And he said that it was a little bit overly

long and that the plot was kind of convoluted

and not clear until like the second hour and

a little hard to follow and stuff like that.

And then like later on would go on to be saying

like, it's like one of the best films. best westerns

best you know like a film you have to see etc

so like he completely changed i didn't feel quite

like he did on the first watch but i did find

on the very first watch that there was some like

i was struggling with a few things as far as

like following what was going on and like understanding

it i don't need a second watch to figure it out

like all i needed was just a little more time

to process it all and then it kind of all fell

into place and i got it but i could definitely

see like on a first watch how this would be like

a little um not difficult to follow but a little

confusing at times but i could see like instantly

on a second watch how that would all just work

fine like there's just some spots of it where

you're like wait what's going on like how what

is that like i thought this was this and like

different things where they kind of like are

keeping things close to the vest or just not

being explicit with it but i i feel like as you

wrestle with it more and as you think about it

more like all of the choices ultimately do make

sense um so like overall i thought it was very

interesting obviously there's some callbacks

to what we saw with the good the bad and the

ugly right like the good the bad and the ugly

is talking about three different individuals

one's the good one's the bad one's the ugly and

like the poster of this one which i hadn't read

until just now literally says like there were

three men in her life one to take her one to

love her and one to kill her so like we have

the similar dynamic where there's three different

main men involved in the film that are having

different motives and different ways that they're

going about things so obviously that's kind of

like a little bit of a callback and then you

do get a lot of the aspects that we've seen with

Sergio Leone before with like the close -ups

the you know the long pauses the building up

of the tension the like staying with a shot until

it's almost uncomfortable for the viewer or it

is uncomfortable for the viewer specifically

so like those things are there we get some of

the nice like landscape that we expect from a

sick western film We get some of the shootouts.

We get all of that. What I appreciated, I think,

in this one even more is it seemed like from

a movie mechanic standpoint, everything was smoother.

I realize we're dealing with English actors now

and things like that. And it was filmed in the

US and all of that. So that kind of helps with

the lack of dubbing and the different things.

But it seems like the best of what we... I'm

trying to find a way to frame this. When you

think about what a classic Western is, I feel

like if somebody has an idea in their head of

what the classic Western is, and then you go

and show them Stagecoach, or you go and show

them the Man With No Name trilogy, there may

be a little disconnect from what the image they

had in the head and then what they see. They're

like, oh, some of this is a little crazy, this,

that, and the other. I feel like this fully encompasses

what I expect the vision in somebody's head when

they think the phrase classic Western. Like it

just has all of the stuff. It flows well. The

mechanics are there. Like it gives you the scenery.

It gives you the gunfights. It gives you like

all of the things that in your mind you expect

from a Western. So like it's almost like a total

package for me when it comes to a lot of that.

And I do like the fact that even though there's

these three men. like i view this as jill's movie

in a way like i feel like she is like this is

her movie and it may not be completely obvious

on the surface why that is but like everything

does revolve around her and her actions and what

she has and what and how she like decides to

do things and so i think that was like a clever

way to kind of like I don't know if subverts

the right word, but like it was a clever way

to kind of like. Package the story overall, so

like I think a lot of things work well on this,

and the more time I spend thinking about it,

the more everything works. Yeah, I could. I'm

thinking of some of those scenes that might have

be kind of confusing. I'm guessing perhaps when

you see Frank, which I think is just a great

name for a villain because it's so plain because

it's like. frank it's just yeah it's just you

think of all these crazy names that we've we've

get for all these different characters are always

like you know so creative and it's like yeah

he's frank that's just his name which is great

which is i don't know i just i love that but

you know you have that scene of course where

he's he's in the bar after they do the auction

he's walking out and you start seeing all of

his guys slowly maneuver and start turning on

him was like one of the scenes that started to

was like i remember the first time i saw that

that was a scene where i was like wait why and

then charles ronson's character harmonica saves

him and i'm like wait why would he just not let

him die and it starts making sense by the end

of why he wouldn't let that happen but i was

curious if that was like one of the sequences

where things started to be a little bit confusing

i think there was like three or four times where

at first i was like just trying to get my bearings

and some of that may have been just like me not

being a hundred percent tuned in to like you

have expectations you have what you think's happening

then you have what's really happening and then

you're trying to put like stuff together so i

think right from the beginning obviously the

foundation of the the first sequence and kind

of where we start with the plot is a frame job

right like one party is trying to frame another

party that they're doing something and i think

like the way that that is initially the way i

initially saw that was a little confusing because

i'm like at first i didn't know cheyenne was

the name of a person yes like i was like is that

a gang is that a person are we talking about

the native american tribe like what i was a little

confused on that and then there's like some different

things that at times didn't make sense to me

like there was one moment where frank goes to

they just call him harmonica right so frank is

talking to harmonica and he's like who are you

and i'm like well he's the guy that you tried

to kill in the beginning of the movie like don't

you know who he is you sent three people to kill

him but then like but as i thought about it more

it's like he knew somebody was causing him problems

it didn't mean that he knew who it was right

so like it's it's just like how i like read it

the first as the first couple scenes were happening

and as some of those things happened and I'm

like wait that it didn't fit with like the picture

I was drawing in my head but like that was on

me because I was drawing the wrong picture not

necessarily like on the movie I was just like

you know you clearly know this guy because you

sent three people to kill him but then if I think

about it more like maybe you didn't you're just

trying to kill like a mysterious figure that's

causing you problems so like I get that part

right and then there's some different sequences

like there's a sequence where Frank is is going

to you know go he finds out that you know jill

is in existence and that's going to be like a

wrinkle in his plan so they need to like they

agree that he needs to go eliminate her basically

and then like nobody tries to do anything to

stop him and then he gets her but doesn't kill

her and i know there's different things that

go around that but it was like i was trying to

like follow the different characters motivations

and i was still confused like is cheyenne good

is cheyenne bad is cheyenne in the middle yeah

is you know like how does this dynamic work between

the three it seems like jill knows all of them

because she's completely comfortable with all

of them being in her house and like talking to

them like they were long lost like uh friends

from another life but like the more you think

about it like you realize like she's doing all

of these things for a reason like she's befriending

one of them because she sees as you know maybe

as a protector she's tolerating one because she

sees like she's playing the long game and she

knows that like she needs to be strategic with

how she handles this relationship but when you're

first watching it you're like why why is she

acting like all of these people like or high

school buddies that all of a sudden are back

in the scene and they're just totally okay walking

through her house so like there was just like

little things like that that i was like trying

to piece together as a first time watch and i

think once you see it all unfold and you're able

to like put all the pieces together and connect

the dots Like, on a second watch, none of those

things would be issues. Yeah, I can understand

that. Because even going back, and I forgot about

that scene with Jill and Frank, and I was like,

wait. That's where you learn that she was a prostitute

in New Orleans. It's like, does your husband

know? And I was like, wait, did she? And you

can tell that obviously she's certainly trying

to, I don't know, trick is the right word, but

basically. try to convince basically use her

gifts as she's learned throughout the years to

try to maybe get frank on her side or you know

what she needs to do and then that's when we

get that whole auction piece but right um but

i you mentioned go ahead but no go ahead go ahead

but you mentioned like how like you know this

is a bit of an upgrade or like how it it all

comes together and i do think you see obviously

you know after the success of previous films

leone has he certainly has a bigger budget here

and it's on the screen but it's also it's not

like to the point you see that with a lot of

films you know that i know there's that that

um podcast playing check where a lot of directors

get they have success and they get all this money

and then they have a movie that kind of flops

because they have too too much you know they

can't handle it but i think it's just it's like

having, when you have a really good phone and

then you get that upgrade that has everything

that the other one did, but it's just faster

and cleaner and more efficient. And I feel like

that was this because everything just looked

better in a way, like the town. They did it in

a way though, that still preserved the grit of

the old one. Yeah. It looked better, but also

bad. Like more expansive, I should say. Like

it felt like you. But it also made sense because

when you see the kind of theme it's going for,

because this is Once Upon a Time in the West,

because we're seeing kind of the West being conquered

by the end. You know, we're seeing the kind of

the story of the West meeting its end. So it

would make sense that we're seeing these towns

kind of come together, that it's more... um it's

becoming more civilized in in some manner um

i do like there's and there's a lot of great

humor in this too where they're in the bar that

that bar scene which is also great when we meet

um cheyenne uh and um who at first speaking of

being confused i also thought he was part of

frank's game because they make that comment about

how they have like they have the same jacket

and i'm like wait is that so that's i could i

could understand like there's a little it leaves

a lot to the vest and you kind of have to figure

things out so right um so i could i could understand

like there it it definitely requires patience

but anyways that that scene where they go through

all that and the other bar keep talking about

new orleans and he's like i would never go there

this the the city's too crazy after he has this

like huge fight with within this within the when

his bar and whatnot but right um so i but it

was also you didn't have necessarily like a huge

comedic character like a taco taco or whatever

right what everyone felt very much more like

a complete person like everyone had different

you had harmonica with his because obviously

the only loves his different gadgets that he

attaches to people but what did you think of

that you know we you've seen that with a few

dollars more we had that uneasy partnership and

we get that here again with harmonica and cheyenne

how did you feel like that compared to to that

film and and how it developed and how it was

executed It was interesting to me because generally

what I feel like happens in both Westerns and

in mob films is generally when you have that

dynamic where there's really no vested interest

long term. It's a short play, right? They're

partnering for a short term. thing and there's

no like reason for them to be loyal or friends

with each other past that and so typically what

you get in these genres is that there's this

always this like tension over hanging everything

that at any second these guys could turn on each

other right like you especially see that in mob

films like where you know like no relationship

is secure and at any minute somebody could turn

on somebody and just have them have them killed

right like that happens a lot in mob films and

i feel like that's some of the dynamic that we've

seen in some of these westerns where these like

weird like odd couple relationships are always

kind of like dangling on the brink of somebody

turning on each other i think you got that a

lot with the man with no name trilogy etc and

it's interesting in here because i never felt

really that tension outside of that bar sequence

where we're first introduced them after that

I never felt that there was tension between those

two characters in that, in that manner, like

maybe how they're going to go about things and,

and some of that, but I never felt like one of

them was going to turn on each other. I never

felt like there was some ulterior motive. It

was like very easy to connect the dots that like,

these two are both interested in this outcome.

They know that they're both working towards that

and they don't have something. There was no like

plot device that was causing. an extra level

of tension between those two characters which

you would think would not work because you think

you would need that tension but it was almost

like a breath of fresh air to me to see like

they both understand each other agree with each

other and are just working towards the same goal

and that's that's all there is to it that doesn't

need to be complex yeah yeah it's it's nice sometimes

just having competent characters it's like they

understand and there's also they have you know

even though Cheyenne clearly has some immorality

about him. They have some, a bit of a moral code

because he's like, this is, you know, I'm going

to stick to my word. But I think where the conflict

becomes, it's like, well, who's getting chill

in a way that becomes more of the, it doesn't

ever get like, I think overly melodramatic either.

Cause he didn't, you know, you don't get scenes

with them pressing their love with that love

with that each other or anything like that. But

I do think you get a, What's interesting, I think,

is you get so much of a different take on Jason

Robards' character Cheyenne. Because you do see

a different side to him. He does seem more like

a human character. When he first goes into that

bar, if anything, my memory is like, wait, does

he become the villain? Because he feels like

that. Oh, he's going to be that villain character.

And he also shows a lot of like... I think out

of all the characters, he has the most, I don't

know, like restrain or refrain or maturity or

whatever. Like, even when it comes to Jill, it's

like, he already understands the dynamic. He

already understands what's going to happen. He's

already come to terms with it and accepted it.

Like he, it's like, he's not allowing that to

be like another source of tension or drama because

he's like already. in like in tune with things

enough and smart enough to just like realize

like this is what it is and like i'm i may not

be like what the outcome i want but i understand

what's happening and i'm not gonna fight it because

that's the way it is and it was like it was interesting

to see that because he definitely comes across

in that first sequence of this guy's about to

be like a jerk this guy's about to be someone

that's not going to deal well with harmonica

they definitely have some some tension there

in that sequence and you don't know how that

relationship is going to be and it was it was

interesting to see how that evolves where they

could have blurred the line a lot more between

the three as far as like who's good who's bad

like going back to the good the bad and the ugly

right like who which who's playing what role

like they could have made that a lot more gray

area but it was pretty cut and dry like frank's

bad cheyenne has a bad his like bad past maybe

but is generally down like peel that all away

and he's a good person and then harmonica is

a good person that has some baggage that he's

dealing with like there wasn't like a lot there

wasn't as much of the anti -hero gray aspects

that we've seen in some of the other films as

in this film i didn't see it as much no i i think

Maybe with Cheyenne's character you could argue

because he's more of an outlaw. But his actions

in this film are... We don't see any of that.

That's obviously just implied because we hear

all that commotion and everything and then he

walks in with the chains. But yeah, we don't

see much of it. And the only people he seems

to bring harm to are those that seemingly deserve

it for what we can see. And like you mentioned,

Harmonica... for again like seems to have uh

a righteous cause for vengeance although we don't

know that until until the very end so i was curious

on the opening sequence i wanted to get your

take on this so obviously we have like a very

prolonged i don't know if it was 15 minutes or

20 minutes or however long it is but we have

this very drawn out sequence on the train station

with these three mercenaries or three of frank's

men or whatever you want to call it that are

disguised as cheyenne's men that are waiting

for harmonica to get off the train um and you

know we have them waiting patiently i guess there

was a genuine desire for leonie to have this

film move like at real time almost but then they

realized that like that would make this a very

long movie so they had to call some audibles

in different ways but you can tell that that

was the uh motive or the desire when you're watching

this first sequence right like it's definitely

like very much like we're waiting for the train

like you get that feeling as an audience which

is which is hats off to him for pulling it off

like you definitely get the like this is what

it would feel like if we were sitting there waiting

for this train um to come to the station that's

like not even hardly a station and all of these

different things and you know we get introduced

to like three characters that it makes you feel

like they're going to be important it's almost

like what's the film with the more modern film?

Was it, uh, the other guys are two guns or whatever,

where the, where they just like kill off the

two, like people like immediately that are like

on the poster and everything. I can't remember

which film does that recently. It was like the

other guys with, uh, well, the other guys does

that with, um, rock and Samuel L. Jackson. Yeah.

So we know we've seen that. And it almost like

feels like that. Like, like we're getting really

set up and they're really doing a lot of time.

Like, painting the picture of what in developing

these three characters only to like immediately

kill them off spoiler alert for a 1968 film but

it was interesting because you do like they spent

a lot of time and you're like oh I'm getting

to know this guy this guy's kind of a jerk this

guy's kind of like a cool guy you know we get

Pompey Pompey from the man who shot Liberty Valance

coming in to play like one of those guys yeah

which was interesting yeah and when he strode

yeah when he's playing Stoney here and getting

the water dripped on his hat which was I guess

like all uh, happened in real life and they were

going to move. And he was like, no, I want to

stay here because it's going to make me look

that much cooler that I don't care that water's

dripping on me. And then they're like, well,

now you got to drink it out of the hat. I don't

know how that all worked, but anyways, so we're

getting all that in it. Talk about like the ability

to make your audience uncomfortable. I wanted

to scream at the TV set when they're dealing

with the one guy with the fly. I'm like, no human

being would act like this guy is acting. Why

is this guy okay with the fly on him? And why

is he doing the world's most pathetic attempt

to blow the fly off versus killing this fly?

I'm like, this is driving me batshit insane.

And I guess they smothered this guy in jam or

something and put all over his face and then

had a jar of flies that they were letting out

right next to him in hopes that one would land

on him. and like the amount of restraint that

he has as this fly just continues to land and

crawl on him like i wouldn't be able to do that

for two seconds and that was even like an episode

of fear factor you know this this this show this

this movie yeah right so what did you think of

this whole opening scene i guess the original

plan for leonie is he wanted clint eastwood van

cleef and eli wallach to be those three gunmen

oh wow so talk about like that that's what made

me think of that other event where you have like

three very well -known names and then they all

get killed off immediately but i guess there

was like some sort of scheduling conflict with

eastwood that made it so he couldn't do it so

like they just scrapped the whole idea but like

wouldn't that have been crazy yeah that would

have been nuts so um i look like i was actually

before i the first time i watched this um i knew

it was coming so that kind of helped because

like one of the first like this was back in 2008

when i first started listening to podcasts it

was um It was the Digigodge or something like

that. When this came out on Blu -ray, and they're

like, oh, you have to watch this, and they talked

about the opening. So I knew it was coming, so

that was helpful. So I couldn't imagine what

it's like when you don't know it's coming and

you have this prolonged opening. But I did really

love it. I know it sounds kind of pretentious

because it's like, why would you love the scene

of people not doing anything for this long period

of time? But I do think it is very... like it's

it has so much atmosphere to it and like i mentioned

comparing it to what came before it just like

oh and i'm like i don't know if that's what his

mindset was but i do think it has that effect

so it also adds to harmonica's like your vision

of that character because he's not just killing

three like no names he's killing three people

that you've like already been yes you don't know

their names and you don't know like their backstory

but like we've spent like a whole bunch of time

building them up as like these personas. And

then he like kills them all. And I think it,

it makes that way more like, yeah, especially

more weight. And obviously in, you know, the

Woody Strode is not Clint Eastwood, but he's

a notable actor. He was in some big films. So

you see that sometimes with like, you know, some

TV shows like the walking dead would do that

where they would have like a guest star come

on. and it's a notable star from other shows

so you think oh this guy's gonna be on here for

a little bit but then they end up dying that

episode so it's like the opposite of the red

shirts from star trek exactly exactly it's like

doing the opposite that we do with that we know

those folks are gonna die they set these guys

up as people that weren't going to and then like

mowed them down so i thought that whole opening

sequence was was definitely interesting i read

a piece of trivia dan and i have to ask you because

i don't think it's true and it's making me want

to re -watch the movie because i swear i i There's

a trivia on IMDb that said Frank and Cheyenne

never share a scene or screen time together.

That's not true, is it? I guess Frank's not in

the auction when Cheyenne comes through with

the ransom for $5 ,000. I was thinking when he

came down the stairs that Frank was in that room,

but that's one of Frank's men doing the bidding.

Is it true that they never share a scene? because

you think about that scene when harmonica kills

him like he technically is like in the house

so he's like not far away when that shootout

occurs when his men turn up when frank's men

turn on him um cheyenne is like off doing the

uh on the um what about the train scene that's

what i was thinking he was when he was crawling

on the train on the top and stuff was frank inside

or was it just the other guy and did they ever

actually share the scene like he was never inside

the train was he when frank was no he wasn't

no he wasn't i know it's funny now i need to

watch it again and see but i don't think they

do because coming out of the movie you feel like

those three share multiple sequences together

the whole time yeah and like crazy it says that

they never did so like that is bananas to me

um that that if that's true so they certainly

like have seen the impact of each other's actions

right no i don't think they actually are you

know maybe they're the same person and we just

don't know yeah it's definitely interesting um

i have a couple different questions for you we

haven't talked about the character of mr morton

played by gabrielle frisetti who is the uh the

guy on the train that's kind of funding everything

that has the i can't remember which he has a

disability based on a medical condition i just

don't remember what it was like tuberculosis

or i don't know what it was i think so yeah something

of that nature even almost seemed like aspects

of not polio because he wasn't an iron lung but

certainly yeah he he had kind of like the same

similar thing that like tiny tim did and his

ability to move around and stuff like that what

did you think of that like how his character

and that plot line like works within the rest

of the movie and the scenes that involved him

and everything else I thought it was an interesting

touch, too, because it does show you the idea

of like the idea of power and where does power

come from, especially in the West? You know,

is it the gun? Is it the is it you know, is it

the dollar? And kind of see it's kind of a little

bit of both, because obviously Frank had his

power, but we saw that taken away from him. And

then also just ultimately. the real world may

be the ultimate power so then you have this individual

who by ultimately now by all standards of a western

has no power because he has a disability he's

not someone who's going to have a shootout or

anything like that you see that with frank as

well i think it also helps like cement frank

even though you don't really after killing a

child it's hard to like make him even more evil

but like you know when you're attacking a handicapped

kid. But then at the same time, he's also not

a good person. He's just as bad as Frank is in

a lot of ways. You mentioned how when it comes

to the heroes here, there's no gray morals with

them compared to what we've seen before. I think

really it's the villains in a way. the antagonist

perhaps where there's more dimension which may

be his character one of the better examples of

that I mean there is but then like you said there's

never a doubt that Frank's bad that's true he

kills kids from the beginning and you're like

well this guy's bad There's nothing that he's

going to do the entire rest of the movie that's

going to redeem whatever he just did that I saw.

Yeah. So Frank certainly is bad. I was thinking

more so with Morton. Yeah, I get that. There's

no dimension of him regarding him being a moral

citizen, but in the sense of it's a different

type of evil. He's not the... He's like the other

side. He's the same face of the coin of Frank,

but a different type of evil. His destruction

comes indirectly rather than directly. And it's

interesting, too, because obviously you get the

situation where, you know, you talked about the

dollar or the gun and which one's more powerful

and does lead to like a feud then between those

two where they're where they're turning on each

other and things of that nature, which. Obviously,

it's kind of cool how he does it, you know, gets

dealt into the card game and deals everybody

money and like offers them to, you know, I'll

go kill Frank. And then the I do question, though,

the fact that he's going to send them all out

in broad daylight. And that's how we're going

to put this hit out on Frank versus, you know.

i don't know just shooting him in the back when

he's like not expecting it or maybe going out

at night i don't know i felt like there was a

lot of different ways that we could have executed

that better on mr morton's part but maybe he

wasn't thinking clearly at that point to be fair

to be fair he was behind a clock so it was a

little hard to see him and yeah that there and

they i guess they were running on a short timeline

right because they're yeah land getting sold

so that's true what did you think of the dynamic

then because you talked about it in the beginning

then we obviously get that sequence where they

are out to kill frank they seem like they have

the ability to do that yes it's in broad daylight

but he's hiding and he's poking his gun through

and it seems like they're going to be successful

until harmonica gets involved what did you make

of that whole sequence and how harmonica's character

basically allows frank to not get killed just

because he wants to be the one to do it himself

yeah honestly that when it like it when it's

happening i'm not like I'm not really sure what

is fully happening in here. Is it simply because,

like, Harmonica has this morality where it's

like he doesn't want to see someone get killed

like that. Like, he's like, no, well, I don't,

you know, this is wrong. Like, he shouldn't be,

you know, this is people taking the law in their

own hand or whatever it may be. Or does he need

Frank? Are they using Frank for something? That

was my thought. Like, do they have plans for

him? I wasn't really sure at the time, like,

why exactly this was happening. I'm like, it

doesn't really necessarily make that sense. And

you see, like, the frustration that Jill has

with him. It's like, why are you saving him?

And he's like, he has that line. It's like, you

know, not letting, I forget exactly the wording,

but basically not letting somebody else kill

him isn't the same thing as saving him. So you

get some hint there that there's maybe more to

it. But, yeah, at first I'm a little bit confused

regarding, like, why. they aren't just letting

him die and my thought is maybe there is more

maybe they need him alive for some reason was

my my initial thought right and also at that

point we don't understand the whole story right

like i don't yeah they haven't revealed the flashbacks

and things no you're so like it it's a weird

dynamic as you're watching it because you're

not 100 understanding what's happening and what's

going down as far as how it goes down so it's

interesting um Obviously, Frank tries to make

him a deal and things of that nature and offers

him some money. I thought that was a clever scene

with him putting the coin in the cup and all

of that kind of stuff. Some cool little Western

feel to that as well. Obviously, then we get

the flashback and we get the history of Frank

and Harmonica here towards the end as we lead

to a showdown that... It doesn't feel like it's

at the right number of paces away, but that's

besides the point. What did you feel of the whole

flashback and that whole sequence outside of,

I will say, a very nitpicky thing, but I felt

like they got maybe the award for the worst casting

of a child that's supposed to be somebody else

when they grow up. That child looked nothing

like Charles Bronson to me. like in any way shape

or form but what did you think of like the whole

flashback and then kind of that reveal and how

that all played out towards the end yeah i mentioned

how like i forgot like a lot of the plot i didn't

like remember and it was it was coming back to

me that was part of it too like i forgot all

about that sequence i'm like i'm like yeah why

did they call call him harmonica i couldn't remember

or like you know who was he so that i i liked

how that all played out and um and overall i

i do just love the only he's like his visual

language it's interesting like just the way he

shoots and obviously with the man with no name

trilogy the man with no dollars trilogy like

we know that like he wasn't shooting with sound

like the sound was added after and i feel like

that's very evident in the way like he wanted

to make sure all the story was told within what

you can see and i think he carries over that

a little bit and i mentioned it within just the

facts but what was interesting is that they actually

had um ernie marconi score made before this was

done so they were actually playing it as they

were shooting it um so like that's to me is interesting

and i well actually kind of curious like more

people don't do that i guess right like because

it's you get to it's you know it's like uh dancing

to the music in a way like you're performing

to it uh so i i feel like that that helps have

this allows this movie to have that rhythm to

it And perhaps the pacing wasn't there in the

sense of how far apart they were. But how it

builds up, obviously, we get that vision throughout

the film of him seeing what is Frank. We don't

know at first when we first see it. There's a

brief flashback a few times where there's someone

walking in the distance. And then it comes more

and more. And then eventually we see it's Frank.

Then the whole scene. comes together and yeah

i do agree does not does not look like uh charles

boston now maybe you know maybe he just looks

different as a kid because that that's possible

i guess um maybe you know maybe it was a cousin

or something i don't i don't know but it certainly

was you know helps put bring it all together

for sure um also kind of shows you just like

how evil Frank is. It reminds me of this is going

to be the most random comparison if like professional

wrestling comparisons to these movies wasn't

random enough. This is even more so. But the

line from the Street Fighter movie that M. Bison

has, it's like, you know, something in the line

of me destroying your town was everything to

you. For me, it was just a Tuesday. And I guess

for Frank, you would think like putting harmonica

in someone's mouth as your requiring them to

hold their you know their brother up on their

shoulders would be something that we would maybe

connect the dots but i guess that was something

he just did a lot so um but it just so yeah i

i thought it worked well when i was curious what

you thought i thought it all worked well i thought

it helped solidify a lot of things i think my

only like little tiny quibble was i thought him

stuffing the harmonica into frank's mouth and

then frank letting it stay there was kind of

odd because typically that only works if you

have like some other time like a gag or something

like he could spit the harmonica out like he

doesn't have to hold it there in his teeth like

there was nothing like so that like one little

one little detail touch i was like why are you

letting it stay in your mouth like yeah you're

not tied up in any way shape or form like just

spit it out like um but that was a minor detail

that was certainly a stylistic choice for sure

right i'm like i get why you wanted to do that

but then he kept it in his mouth like for no

reason um so i know this movie sometimes gets

like the the thought process of like it does

like the lord of the rings thing like the the

return of the king where it's like you think

it's ending and then they do a little bit more

and then you think it's ending and they do a

little bit more like i've read that a couple

times so obviously we have a couple different

times where it could be ending and it's not how

do you feel like the extra sequence then we get

with cheyenne and harmonica works then after

that as now all of a sudden it kind of hit me

out of the left field that like cheyenne was

hurt i didn't realize that was a thing um maybe

i missed it and like wasn't paying attention

we don't know i think it's purposely comes out

of surprise like he does suddenly get sick and

maybe like there were like sniffles or things

like that that i'm like wait when did he catch

a cold like that's where i'm like i don't remember

that at all and i'm like oh he he got shot in

the gut uh what did you think though not just

of that part but also like so they have two different

segments together right like they have the segment

where they're in the house with jill yeah and

all of that kind of like crystallizes and he's

predicting that you know harmonica is going to

leave and not stay with her and he's you know

kind of basically saying like you know i know

you're not interested in me even though i would

do anything for you or i love you or all that

he doesn't have to say that you kind of get that

feeling and like there's that whole sequence

with the three of them in the house and then

we also get the sequence then with uh harmonica

and cheyenne as he's you know dying and things

of that nature how did you feel both of those

worked and do you think they were necessary for

and added some stuff to you know for the ending

of how this film kind of culminates i think it's

certainly the the scene of them like together

and them separating is important for sure because

i think it it shows it leads to you know jill

like them going away from jail them kind of going

on their own and then jill like you said like

she's not with anyone she's her own person then

you see her bringing water to like the railroad

and as the town is built and i think i like that

to me cements i mean what this movie is saying

what is leading towards as we're seeing the conclusion

of what the west was as now that's are eventually

leading to the wild west being tamed so i do

think that that sequence of them going through

that and again we get a lot into cheyenne's like

mindset just he's the most self -assured person

i think i've ever seen in the film he's like

i know this is like you know he understands people

in ways that most don't and he's kind of comfortable

with it and so and maybe a little bit too self

-assuring in the sense of, like, you mentioned

how there's no conflict. We mentioned with that,

it's almost like they, you know, they remove

that opportunity so no one feels bad. So perhaps

you could argue that that's an issue, but I think

ultimately it's just trying to get to the grander

point. Going to the death sequence of, like,

him actually dying, it does feel like it, if

anything, that is one sequence where it maybe

stretches the believability. a good bit i mean

the harmonica in the mouth is one thing because

it's like you know it's poetic it works you know

in that sense but it that seems like it's like

okay like putting this all together just just

you think back and you think did he just realize

this there's just so many questions that go into

it like as a moment it's like it's shocking and

it's like oh my that this is actually happening

but then like the more you think about it the

more i'm like well this There's so much here

that makes me wonder about his actions. He didn't

try to save himself at all. Maybe he just realized

where he got shot at the time. The West is realizing

there's nothing that could happen. Maybe that's

why he made the speech he did. There's a lot

of ways to go with it. Do you think they just

were struggling with what to do with that character

at the end? They know Harmonica's going to ride

off into the sunset. And they know Frank's dead.

Do you think they were just struggling to be

like, what do we do with Cheyenne? I think it's

a possibility, because him going back to jail

isn't necessarily great. Him staying with Jill,

I think, isn't great for her character, per se.

And it maybe even ends the film in a weird place.

So perhaps. I think it's not the strongest part

of the film, in the sense of how it lays out.

If anything, I think. perhaps it could have been

you mentioned how frank and him uh never had

a scene together maybe like them having a scene

and him being killed by frank would have right

on something and not to rewrite the film but

i don't know it's it it's a choice for sure it's

not something that hugely impacts my overall

viewpoint of the film but it's also something

that legitimately i forgot happened all together

so i think that kind of tells you how much it

stays with you or how much I think it is vital

to the overall narrative or what the film is

trying to say. I think also it would have worked

if we would have just seen maybe they had a moment

earlier in the film where we see that he does

get injured but then it's kind of played off

as if it's no big deal and we somehow forget

about it and then it kind of comes back and we

can connect the dots on our own that maybe that

works better but I think it also makes it a little

more jarring that we didn't know this existed

and so it's like really like all of a sudden

it's like wait a second what like what happened

to him like when did he get shot like when did

he get hurt well he was fighting that morton

guy i thought that morton guy was dead like yeah

like just and you're all of a sudden it's like

trying to like play catch up when it the movie's

like trying to like fade off into the sunset

and you're like wait like now i have a lot more

questions so like i feel like they could have

had something earlier like an injury that he

kind of plays off and we think it's okay and

then it's like oh shoot that was more serious

than he was letting on because he for whatever

reasons like and him getting killed and him getting

killed by morton could be saying something that

i'm missing like i couldn't i know i didn't you

know consider that part too but yeah overall

i yeah it was a choice but you know sometimes

you go a certain direction and it was you know

it was fine i guess yeah Anything else that you

haven't got to say about this film as far as

something you really liked? Anything else that

you had a problem with that we didn't touch on?

I did want to talk, just one quick transition

that I loved. I talked about, like, I really

loved Henry Fonda in this performance. Like you

said, his character is super, super evil. But

one of my favorite, like, visual pieces within

this is, like, his introduction and when we see

him and he... you know, he shoots this kid and

then we get this awesome transition of that happening.

And then like it transitions into the steam engine

and like the blowing of the, you know, of the

smoke and like that, the way that looks, I think

is fantastic. And also I think is great foreshadowing

into, you know, both Frank as well as where the

movie is heading as well. So I thought like that

is one of my favorite pieces of this film. One,

I didn't remember happening, but as I was seeing

it, it's certainly having, background knowledge

of what happened I could pay attention to more

of those pieces so I did the visuals itself and

those transitions I thought I noticed a lot more

on this rewatch so I think to something that

really works for Frank's character in this because

there's so much like there's a lot of close -ups

there's a lot of different things we have the

dirt of the West and stuff like that I've never

cared really about anybody's eye color But the

fact that he has like these blue piercing, like

blue eyes, like works so well. I guess he showed

up for something like early on with brown contact

lenses in because he thought he was being in

a Western and he thought he needed to have brown

eyes and the blue eyes wouldn't work. Yeah. And

like Leone was like, get those out. I want your

blue eyes. And like, that was such a smart choice

because it is like. i don't know it's almost

like they glow they're so blue compared to everything

that's brown in here and it's also not necessarily

like fitting what you expect the villain to look

like in a way not that blue eyes matter one way

or another if you're a bad guy or a good guy

but like the way it's filmed it's almost like

i don't know like it subverts something in my

mind of what i'm expecting out of the villain

in a way on it fauna just has such a forgiving

face and then yeah knowing just and which works

for so many of his iconic roles you know that

obviously hopefully maybe we can do maybe we'll

do a henry fonda marathon or something like that

um i don't know but uh but yeah that that was

his his his presence both in the sense of history

that he has and just his overall look i think

a big parts of why his characters such as stand

out but yeah yeah do you sorry i had one more

question for you did do you view this i kind

of said it in the beginning and i you know i

didn't give you a chance to respond whose film

do you view this as do you think this is jill's

film or do you think this is just like an ensemble

film or like how do you kind of see all that

i feel that's a good question i do think part

of it is jill's film in the sense of so much

of it is surrounding her like every character

is she's like the magnet that is like everyone

is attracted towards But I feel like ultimately,

if you're asking me whose film it is, I feel

like it's Harmonica's in a way. He's the character

we open up with. He's the character we first

see. He's the character whose revenge we're following

for the most part. And he is the one that has

that arc. Jill certainly, I think, is vital within

that story. But I think the story we're seeing,

per se... I don't know, but ultimately maybe,

maybe it's more not her film, but maybe it's

more like the feeling that the film revolves

around her, like around her, around her land,

around the choices she's making with these three

gentlemen. Like she might not get enough. Yeah,

go ahead. I think you can make the argument for

all of them. Honestly, I think that's why it

works so well is because like you could, you

know, it's one of those, it's a really true ensemble

in the sense of depending upon. You can make

an argument for, you can make an argument. It's

Frank's film. We can make an argument in Cheyenne.

Cause like we mentioned, he, he provides the

most dimension as a character. Right. We see.

So I think there's pieces of it, I think, but

like you, you make a valid point in the sense

of Jill is the one that, well, she's the one

character that everyone has a scene with. So,

and, and without her, without her character.

This movie doesn't work. And it generally is,

as far as the title, Once Upon a Time in the

West, her land is the crux of all of this, the

overall statement. And the site for how this

is changing from the Wild West to a city, so

to speak, or a town, or however you want to phrase

it. It's an interesting thing for debate, for

sure, as far as that goes. Any other? thoughts

on Once Upon a Time in the West, Dan? There's

probably more we could talk about. It's an almost

three -hour film. We could probably talk about

it for that long. I'm happy we were able to go

through the Spaghetti Western section, but we're

going to take a little bit of a left turn for

our next section. You want to get into what we're

doing next? Yeah, just my final thought on Once

Upon a Time in the West. you're good i just had

one other thought that that's i guess maybe somewhat

minor um but the only other thought that i had

that at first was kind of hard for me to wrestle

with that i didn't get a chance it just didn't

come up and naturally in our discussion was we

talked about the fact that you know obviously

frank is killing children but we didn't necessarily

mention that like he kills jill's husband and

three children yeah yeah and i don't know if

i was 100 okay with her reaction to all of that

like not that i'm not okay with it i i expected

some bigger form of i don't know emotional outburst

or catharsis or some reaction from her yeah i

get that she didn't necessarily maybe like wasn't

as big on her husband maybe as you would expect,

but those were still her three kids. Well, they

weren't her kids. Oh, they weren't her kids?

No. I was confused in the beginning. I don't

know if you caught in the beginning when she's

like, go meet your mom, and his son says, well,

my mom died whatever before, so this was... Makes

way more sense now. She didn't know any of the

kids. She only knew him. I was way thrown off.

I was like, no mom in their right mind. sees

their three children die and doesn't like have

a freaking meltdown no yeah so they weren't they

weren't they weren't her kids she their mom previously

had tried second watch all of this stuff makes

more sense to me now yeah yeah all right so that

was my final thought but go ahead and get into

where we're going next Yeah, so we're going to,

you know, we talked about three films with The

Good, The Bad, and The Mammon with No Dollars

trilogy, which we're going to try to make that

stick. But we're going to get into our remakes

versus the original block. So for our next three

episodes for the Western Retrospective, because,

you know, Westerns, we've... There's a bunch

of Westerns where they've had the original, and

then we've had a more modern remake. We picked

three, and we're going to go through them. The

first one we're going to take a look at is the

original 310 to Yuma from 1957. And then its

remake from 2007, directed by James Mangold with,

you know, Russell Crowe and, of course, Batman

himself. And why am I forgetting his name? My

goodness, Christian Bale. It's been a while.

I feel like I haven't seen Christian Bale in

forever in something. That's why I'm forgetting

his name. But so, yeah, we're going to get an

opportunity for the next few. to take a look

at two films from two different timeframes, but,

you know, the original and the remake, starting

with 310 to Yuma. What's your experience with

either? Have you seen the original or the remake

for 310 to Yuma? I've definitely seen the remake.

So I definitely saw the 2007 film with Russell

Crowe and Christian Bale. I'm trying to remember

where I ranked that on my movie list of 2007.

I'll have to go back before we record the next

episode and find out what my original opinion

of that was. But I have not seen the original.

What about your experience with these two? I

have seen the remake like you. Yeah, I remember

really liking it. I remember thinking like, because...

i forget like that was like a time where we did

see a little bit of uptick of like some more

westerns come out and that being really good

and it being like actually this is really good

it came out like in august i think that year

and most people thought like oh this is kind

of this is gonna work but actually really like

in that film so it but it's probably been you

know i don't think i've seen it since that first

you know it's been 10 11 years since i've saw

that and i've never seen the original so I don't

know how much they compare I don't know you know

how similar they are so I'm really curious to

see and like which one we end up liking better

and it's especially because we've been spending

so much time in the past seeing some more modern

stars although it really hurts me that like 2007

is like 19 years ago so that that just hurts

But, you know, still seeing some actors that,

you know, we are more familiar with, with a Russell

Crowe and a Christian Bale. Although Peter Fonda

is in that too. You know, he's a classic actor.

So out of, I'm curious, because we're doing three

sets of these, right? Like over this block, we

have three different sets of originals and remakes.

Out of all of those, have you seen all of the

remakes, all three of the remakes of the ones

we're talking about? So we're doing 310 to Yuma.

I've seen that remake. True Grit, I have seen

that. I actually saw that in theaters when I

did the AMC Best Picture Showcase that year.

And the Magnificent Seven remake? I don't know.

I don't think I have. That's the one with Denzel

and Chris Pratt. I don't think I have seen that,

actually. So that will be a first -time watch

for me. I have seen the original of that, but

I have not seen the original True Grit either.

so i've seen all i've seen all three of the remakes

of these but i've seen none of the originals

because that's how i rolled back in the uh whatever

early 2000s when all these were coming out i

guess but uh so i'm interested now and like knowing

that i've seen the the remakes going back now

and watching the original first and then re -watching

the remake um to see like if my opinion changes

on on those films or not is going to be definitely

uh something that i find intriguing i think so

i'm looking forward to this block and then seeing

how it all kind of like pairs up when you watch

them back to back will be will be fun yeah definitely

so but yeah so it'll start next week and if you're

looking for them to stream they're unfortunately

not streaming for free and actually i think 310

to yuma is like on the lion's gate streaming

service which i didn't know was a thing that

existed um but uh or amc so if you have amc it's

on that um but the uh The original doesn't seem

to be, but you can rent it on different platforms.

But looking forward to checking that out next

week and doing some comparisons and getting opportunity

to do two movies in one. So that should be fun.

Yeah, absolutely. So if you want to keep in touch

with us or anything else we're doing, you can

search out Dan at Comic Concierge on most platforms.

You can search me out at Optimus Solo. or the

show Cinema Geeks or Cinema Geek Cast. You can

find all of that, as well as checking out the

website that hosts most of our content, geekcastradio

.com, for all kinds of different geeky content.

But that does it for this episode. Tune in next

time for another chance to listen to more of

The Cinema Geeks.