我還是按著進(jìn)度，一個(gè)星期一部地往下看電影，最近是連著三個(gè)星期的美刀三部曲，上星期終于到了最后一部的《黃金三鏢客》，也是三部曲中在IMDB評分最高的一部，最長的一部，鏢客最多的一部，場面最壯觀的一部，也是融入得更多的一部。Clint Eastwood還是扮演著他的快槍手，依然不知道他的名字，不過這部片里好歹算是按上了一個(gè)名號，叫The Good。第二部中的神槍手成了The Bad，其實(shí)那長相真還挺像壞人的。新加了一個(gè)人物，The Ugly，其實(shí)也不算太丑，不過比起Clint Eastwood來還是有些差距。三位鏢客依次入場，然后開始整場電影。

在影片的開始階段，三位鏢客其實(shí)沒有太過明顯的善惡之分。The Ugly也許殺人放火，作奸犯科，但影片中并沒有這些情節(jié)的直接表述。The Bad也只不過是個(gè)替人消災(zāi)的殺手，只是有時(shí)候會有點(diǎn)心狠手辣。The Good并沒有想象中的那么好，因?yàn)樗屯ň兞钌系姆溉藗兟?lián)手，賺取賞金。這是亂世中的三名鏢客，就像The Ugly在教堂遇到他弟弟時(shí)說得那樣，“在我們那個(gè)村子，只有兩個(gè)職業(yè)能喂飽自己，一個(gè)是作牧師，一個(gè)就是作強(qiáng)盜。我只是選擇了一種更為艱難的方式?！闭龤鈩C然的弟弟慢慢低下他沒有價(jià)值的高貴的頭顱，卻可能還沉浸在宗教之中，不懂得生活的疾苦。

The Ugly和The Good的關(guān)系令人興奮，他們都是數(shù)一數(shù)二的大鏢客，他們都是有機(jī)會置對方于死地，他們都曾用根上吊繩玩弄對方于鼓掌。他們其實(shí)卻是一對歡喜冤家，他們在爭斗過程中慢慢增加了友誼。雖然The Good早就已經(jīng)看出了The Ugly的奸詐，但是他知道對方比自己活得更苦，是生活讓他變成這樣。在The Good的心中，一種憐惜之情油然而生，所以到最后，他還是和The Ugly言歸于好。

影片的主題是到了影片中段開始得到升華的，The Ugly第一次有機(jī)會干掉The Good的時(shí)候，卻被北軍的大炮打破了自己的計(jì)劃。然后，隨著鏢客們的身影進(jìn)一步靠近戰(zhàn)爭，我們可以看到倒在地上的一具具尸體，隨著戰(zhàn)線撤離的無辜群眾，還有不明不白的戰(zhàn)爭。The Good和The Ugly穿著南軍的軍服，架著馬車去尋找寶藏，中途遇上了一群穿著灰色制服的軍隊(duì)，The Good和The Ugly不慌不忙，正和友軍打招呼。對方卻撣掉了自己身上的泥土，露出了深藍(lán)色的軍服。南軍和北軍的差別似乎就在這一層皮，拖下這層皮，誰都不是誰的對手，誰都和誰沒有深仇大恨，卻依然要戰(zhàn)斗。

在北軍的戰(zhàn)俘營，時(shí)?？梢月牭胶铣獔F(tuán)的演出，還有音樂的伴奏。樂團(tuán)成員都是南軍的戰(zhàn)俘，北軍的看守舒適地坐在木椅上，享受著他的安寧，還不時(shí)地要求樂團(tuán)，“More Feeling”。樂團(tuán)成員無奈地想表達(dá)出更多得感情，卻熱淚盈眶。南北戰(zhàn)爭中有好的將領(lǐng)，真正想要生活的人，但他們卻被執(zhí)政者的指揮棒攪亂頭腦。執(zhí)政者堅(jiān)定地告訴他們必須戰(zhàn)斗，他們就只能這樣了。

The Good、The Bad和The Ugly在影片的最后有一場決斗。三角戰(zhàn)，三個(gè)人站成等要三角形，目的是拔槍殺死另外兩個(gè)。這讓我想起一道筆試題，有A，B，C三個(gè)槍手，A的命中率是 100%，B是50%，C是30%，開槍順序是BCA，問B先朝誰開槍，或是朝天開槍，存活的幾率比較大。The Ugly找到傷心山墓地的時(shí)候，像個(gè)孩子一般在墳?zāi)归g跑動，像女生一般有力地?cái)[動著雙手。The Ugly越跑越快，周圍的背景開始模糊。The Ugly已經(jīng)看到了拿到那筆錢以后的日子，享受世外桃源般的日子。For Much More Money。

賽爾喬·萊翁的不朽名作。 　　——BBC4 　　萊翁將自己的想象生動的展現(xiàn)在大銀幕上，這就是藝術(shù)。 　　——《芝加哥太陽報(bào)》 　　一部完美至極的意大利西部片。

　　意大利西部片宗師瑟吉?dú)W·萊昂內(nèi)執(zhí)導(dǎo)的鏢客電影三部曲的完結(jié)篇，由克林特·伊斯特伍德、李·范·克里夫和伊萊·沃勒克分飾英文片名所指的好人、壞人和丑惡之人。三人在美國南北戰(zhàn)爭期間趁著政局混亂，打算謀奪一批屬于南方政府的財(cái)富，但每個(gè)人只知道一部分藏金的細(xì)節(jié)，必須聯(lián)合 起來才可以取得全部的錢。 　　于是三人既互相利用又勾心斗角，產(chǎn)生不少有趣的笑料和張力十足的戲劇性對峙。本片制作嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)，氣派十足，具有同類娛樂片所有吸引人的元素，主角的演出和顏尼歐莫利克奈的配樂均令人難忘。 　　這是『鏢客三部曲：荒野大鏢客（1964）、黃昏雙鏢客（1965）、黃金三鏢客（1966）』的終曲，也是薩吉?dú)W里昂西部作品中，被后世公認(rèn)成就最高的電影?！虹S客三部曲』非但讓原本死寂的西部電影重新復(fù)活（西部片始自1903年『火車大劫案』）；把年已34、終日碌碌的克林伊斯威特捧紅；讓同班同學(xué)顏尼歐莫瑞克奈變成舉世聞名的配樂大師。導(dǎo)演更創(chuàng)下許多先例，包括發(fā)展出所謂『通心面西部片』（意式西部片）； 主角非好人，甚至不是帥哥；對話精簡，運(yùn)用大量動作特寫蘊(yùn)釀氣氛；而黃沙、落日、身影、口哨更成為西部片的代表。 　　當(dāng)然，意式西部片還有許多傳奇，開山祖師薩吉?dú)W里昂是意大利人，拍片地點(diǎn)是西班牙，而原本計(jì)劃是要拍給意大利人看，沒想到引起美國觀眾狂熱回響。而他三部曲之一『荒野大鏢客』，非但是處女成名作，其實(shí)更是黑澤明的『大鏢客』的『西部版』，根本就是臨摩之作！ 　　雖然全片加長后長達(dá)三小時(shí)，且西部片無法像東方武術(shù)，可發(fā)展出精彩的打斗場面，槍戰(zhàn)全在一瞬間解決，于是整體氣氛的掌握、劇情及對人性的描寫，就成為成功西部片必備的要素。本片三個(gè)小時(shí)中，透過好人、壞人與丑鬼反射出來的人性，以及幾場重要經(jīng)典戲，均不是后來那些『大打一場、主角永不受傷』的動作片，或者只重打斗毫無內(nèi)容的電影可比擬。這也是近40年后，本片仍能名列影史前30名內(nèi)的原因，值得推薦與收藏。

攝影機(jī)在空曠的西部大地上一掃而過，緊接著鏡頭滑落在一張過曬、孤絕的臉上。一個(gè)從遠(yuǎn)景切換到臉部的大特寫鏡頭，意在揭示此地并不是真正的空曠，而是被一個(gè)近在咫尺的亡命之徒占據(jù)著。

在電影的開篇，賽爾喬·萊翁內(nèi)就為《黃金三鏢客》貫徹了一個(gè)鏡頭準(zhǔn)則：眼見不一定為實(shí)，內(nèi)容的呈現(xiàn)受制于畫面的邊框。在影片中的一些重要時(shí)刻，鏡頭以外、人物看不見的地方，為萊翁內(nèi)提供了創(chuàng)作的自由，他的鏡頭也成為我們獲得意外發(fā)現(xiàn)的入口，而這些意外往往不能以常理度之。

例如有一次，人們沒有一開始就注意到聯(lián)邦軍隊(duì)的巨大營地，而是在一次偶然間發(fā)現(xiàn)了它。還有一次在墓地里，一個(gè)本該在一英里之外就能被發(fā)現(xiàn)的人，卻顯得像是憑空出現(xiàn)的。男人們走在大街上，視野全然，但是周圍卻沒有人擊中他們，或許是因?yàn)閮蓳苋瞬⒉辉谕粋€(gè)畫面里。

萊翁內(nèi)不關(guān)心實(shí)際如何或是華而不實(shí)的東西，他致力于以個(gè)人化的藝術(shù)風(fēng)格變廢為寶，在陳詞濫調(diào)的西部片廢墟上建造他的偉大電影?！痘囊按箸S客》（1964）和《黃昏雙鏢客》（1965）上映不久以后，在1967年底，本片在美國上映，觀眾知道他們會喜歡它，但是他們知道為什么嗎？

我是坐在東方劇院包廂的前排看完本片的，其寬銀幕是觀看萊翁內(nèi)作品的理想選擇。記得我反應(yīng)激烈，彼時(shí)我不過是個(gè)剛成為影評人不到一年的菜鳥，尚不具有跟隨本心而非審慎的智慧。回顧我的舊評，我意識到我在描述一部四星電影，卻只給它打了三星，或許因?yàn)樗且徊俊巴ㄐ姆凼轿鞑科?，所以不能成為藝術(shù)。

但它確實(shí)是藝術(shù)，是萊翁內(nèi)運(yùn)用想象力將其描繪在寬銀幕上的藝術(shù)，它是如此的生動，以至于我們忽略了它只是一部小成本制作的事實(shí)——克林特·伊斯特伍德當(dāng)時(shí)是好萊塢的棄子；預(yù)算限制造成的一系列錯(cuò)誤（大鏢客的預(yù)算只有200000美元）；沒有太多的對話，因?yàn)橐砸粜泶媾湟舾?jié)約成本。甚至還有為了讓影片看起來更美國化的無用嘗試。我從評論家格倫·埃里克森那里得知，萊翁內(nèi)在大鏢客時(shí)期被稱作“鮑伯·羅伯森”，作曲家恩尼奧·莫里康內(nèi)被稱作“丹·薩維奧”，他那孤獨(dú)、傷感的配樂是影片不可或缺的部分。甚至伊斯特伍德的角色，那個(gè)著名的“無名客”，也是宣發(fā)的產(chǎn)物。實(shí)際上，他在第一部電影中的名字是喬，第二部是“曼科”，第三部則是“布蘭迪”。

或許是它的異域風(fēng)味，尤其是像《黃金三鏢客》這樣氣質(zhì)獨(dú)特的杰作，使得“通心粉式西部片”區(qū)別于傳統(tǒng)的西部。與套路的好萊塢模式不同，這些片子里的演員都是西班牙附近地區(qū)的人——這些人必須經(jīng)過長時(shí)間的暴曬。想象一下，一個(gè)無腿的乞丐用胳膊把自己推進(jìn)酒吧，并大喊：“給我來杯威士忌！”

約翰·福特在莫紐門特谷地制作了無數(shù)偉大的電影，那個(gè)地方就是他的靈感源泉。但是萊翁內(nèi)電影中危機(jī)四伏的西班牙風(fēng)貌卻給人以新鮮感，帶著一絲怪異。在此之前，我們從未見過這些沙漠。約翰·韋恩也從未去過那里。萊翁內(nèi)的故事是一種高于現(xiàn)實(shí)的夢想，一切都比生活更宏大、更激進(jìn)、更殘酷、更戲劇化。

萊翁內(nèi)的故事更多的是以畫面而非文字來敘述。來看看墓地里那場精彩的對峙戲。據(jù)說一筆財(cái)寶被埋在某個(gè)墳?zāi)估?，三個(gè)人聚集于此，都想得到它。三位演員分別是克林特·伊斯特伍德（好），李·范·克里夫（壞），埃里·瓦拉赫（丑）【譯注：《黃金三鏢客》英文名直譯過來即為《好·壞·丑》】。每個(gè)人都用槍指著另一個(gè)人，誰都不敢輕舉妄動，否則一損俱損。除非其中兩人聯(lián)合起來對付第三個(gè)人，并在后者開槍前打死他。但是聯(lián)合哪兩個(gè)，誰又是剩下那個(gè)？

萊翁內(nèi)著重刻畫了這一非理性的場景，從細(xì)節(jié)入手，先是長鏡頭，緊接著是諸如槍支、臉、眼睛、大量汗水以及蒼蠅的特寫。他似乎在考驗(yàn)自己，就是為了看看他能將這種懸念維持多久?；蛘哒f它算是懸念嗎？它或許完全是一種風(fēng)格化的嘗試，由導(dǎo)演蓄意為之，意在聚焦于它本身。如果你能品出其中戲仿之魄力，那么你就能理解萊翁內(nèi)的表達(dá)方式。這不是一個(gè)故事，而是一次對技巧的頌揚(yáng)。

第一次跟萊翁內(nèi)合作時(shí)，伊斯特伍德34歲，如今他已經(jīng)是此中權(quán)威。一個(gè)事實(shí)是，他出身電視劇演員，曾經(jīng)擔(dān)綱主演了《皮鞭》。那時(shí)候，一個(gè)普通電影觀眾的想法是，不值得花錢去電影院觀看能在電視上免費(fèi)看到的演員。伊斯特伍德戰(zhàn)勝了厄運(yùn)，但不是任何人都能做到的——也不是和任何導(dǎo)演都能做到的。談及與萊翁內(nèi)的合作，他的解釋是他想做電影，而好萊塢將他拒之門外。

事實(shí)如此，但是伊斯特伍德本人也成為一位重要的導(dǎo)演，甚至他肯定也感覺到萊翁內(nèi)不僅僅是一個(gè)普通的意大利通俗片導(dǎo)演，還是一個(gè)充滿激情的人。萊翁內(nèi)和伊斯特伍德一起創(chuàng)造出來的“無名客”，其分量不單單超越了某個(gè)電視明星，也超越了某個(gè)電影明星——一個(gè)從不需要解釋，單單憑他的靴子、手指和眼睛就足以填滿整個(gè)屏幕的人。

我懷疑伊斯特伍德的對白是否有埃里·瓦拉赫（飾圖科）的十分之一?！盁o名客”從不說話；圖科則滔滔不絕。圖科的表現(xiàn)是瓦拉赫一次創(chuàng)造性的發(fā)揮，他極力避免讓角色陷入荒謬的境地，轉(zhuǎn)而使之顯得絕望而恐懼。當(dāng)他扮起丑角時(shí)，我們感到此舉是他有意為之，而非本性如此。作為一位有著長期舞臺表演經(jīng)驗(yàn)的老戲骨，瓦拉赫認(rèn)真對待這個(gè)“低檔”角色并發(fā)掘出其背后的深度。

“天使眼”李·范·克里夫出生于新澤西，參演過53部電影以及無數(shù)電視節(jié)目，其中許多都是西部片（他的電影成名作是《正午》，片中他飾演幫派的一員）。影片中他那瞇縫的雙眼，流露出一種瘋狂的癡迷。

此三人都在尋覓內(nèi)戰(zhàn)中失落的黃金，其藏匿信息分散在三人之間（一個(gè)只知道墓地而不知道墓碑名字，另一個(gè)只知道墓碑名字而不知道墓地）。所以他們在找到墳?zāi)怪皶喟矡o事，但是接下來則很可能是一場互相殘殺。

在其180分鐘的修復(fù)版中，情節(jié)并不復(fù)雜，但是這并不是說萊翁內(nèi)缺少構(gòu)思。它有涉及多人的室外槍戰(zhàn)戲。有串通好的騙局，伊斯特伍德將瓦拉赫飾演的通緝犯上交以賺取賞金，在后者快要被絞死的千鈞一發(fā)之際，伊斯特伍德用他精湛的槍法擊斷了繩子。有一組宏偉的沙漠鏡頭，期間伊斯特伍德將瓦拉赫一個(gè)人拋棄在沙漠中，然后瓦拉赫又對伊斯特伍德做了同樣的事情，太陽像《貪婪》里的一個(gè)場景那樣燃燒著。還有一輛失控的幽靈貨車，里面裝滿了死人。

此外，令人驚喜的是影片有一組極具野心的內(nèi)戰(zhàn)鏡頭，堪稱戲中戲，以一位聯(lián)邦軍的中尉（阿爾多·久弗瑞飾）為著眼點(diǎn)，帶起整個(gè)戰(zhàn)爭場面的刻畫，此人關(guān)于自己的酗酒頗有一番說辭：戰(zhàn)斗前不喝酒的指揮官不是好指揮官，喝酒贏得勝利。他的臨終遺言則是：“你能讓我多活一會兒嗎？我想聽到好消息?！?/p>

賽爾喬·萊翁內(nèi)（1929-1989）是一位頗有遠(yuǎn)見和雄心的導(dǎo)演，雖則他也善于經(jīng)營自己，正如他一手創(chuàng)造了“通心粉式西部片”。格倫·埃里克森寫了關(guān)于三部曲的文章（載于www.DVDtalk.com），提到萊翁內(nèi)喜歡夸大自己的履歷，比如他宣稱自己是羅伯特·奧爾德里奇《天火焚城錄》（1962）一片的助理導(dǎo)演，而事實(shí)上他只呆了一天即被解雇。萊翁內(nèi)在1961年制作了一部已遭遺忘的羅馬帝國史詩片，同年緊接著又根據(jù)黑澤明的《用心棒》翻拍了《荒野大鏢客》，如此看來格斯·范·桑特對《驚魂記》的逐幀翻拍（《98驚魂記》）早有先例。

作為一位雄心勃勃的導(dǎo)演，萊翁內(nèi)拍出了兩部無可置疑的杰作——《西部往事》（1968）和《美國往事》（1984）。在其生涯暮年，好萊塢因擔(dān)心他的影片過長，竟犯罪般地將《美國往事》從227分鐘刪減到139分鐘。《黃金三鏢客》也被刪減了19分鐘。不過所幸他的未刪減版影片都以DVD的形式保存了下來，而時(shí)間證明了他有多么出色。

原文：

A vast empty Western landscape. The camera pans across it. Then the shot slides onto a sunburned, desperate face. The long shot has become a closeup without a cut, revealing that the landscape was not empty but occupied by a desperado very close to us.

In these opening frames, Sergio Leone established a rule that he follows throughout "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly." The rule is that the ability to see is limited by the sides of the frame. At important moments in the film, what the camera cannot see, the characters cannot see, and that gives Leone the freedom to surprise us with entrances that cannot be explained by the practical geography of his shots.

There is a moment, for example, when men do not notice a vast encampment of the Union Army until they stumble upon it. And a moment in a cemetery when a man materializes out of thin air even though he should have been visible for a mile. And the way men walk down a street in full view and nobody is able to shoot them, maybe because they are not in the same frame with them.

Leone cares not at all about the practical or the plausible, and builds his great film on the rubbish of Western movie cliches, using style to elevate dreck into art. When the movie opened in America in late 1967, not long after its predecessors "A Fistful of Dollars" (1964) and "For a Few Dollars More" (1965), audiences knew they liked it, but did they know why?

I saw it sitting in the front row of the balcony of the Oriental Theatre, whose vast wide screen was ideal for Leone's operatic compositions. I responded strongly, but had been a movie critic less than a year, and did not always have the wisdom to value instinct over prudence. Looking up my old review, I see I described a four-star movie but only gave it three stars, perhaps because it was a "spaghetti Western" and so could not be art.

But art it is, summoned out of the imagination of Leone and painted on the wide screen so vividly that we forget what marginal productions these films were--that Clint Eastwood was a Hollywood reject, that budgetary restraints ($200,000 for "Fistful") caused gaping continuity errors, that there wasn't a lot of dialogue because it was easier to shoot silent and fill the soundtrack with music and effects. There was even a pathetic attempt to make the films seem more American; I learn from the critic Glenn Erickson that Leone was credited as "Bob Robertson" in the early prints of "Fistful," and composer Ennio Morricone, whose lonely, mournful scores are inseparable from the films, was "Dan Savio." Even Eastwood's character, the famous Man With No Name, was an invention of the publicists; he was called Joe in the first movie, Manco in the second, and Blondie in the third.

Perhaps it is the subtly foreign flavor of the spaghetti trilogy, and especially the masterpiece "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly," that suggests the films come from a different universe than traditional Westerns. Instead of tame Hollywood extras from central casting, we get locals who must have been hired near the Spanish locations--men who look long-weathered by work and the sun. Consider the legless beggar who uses his arms to propel himself into a saloon, shouting, "Hand me down a whiskey!"

John Ford made Monument Valley the home turf of his Western characters, and he made great films there, but there is something new and strange about Leone's menacing Spanish vistas. We haven't seen these deserts before. John Wayne has never been here. Leone's stories are a heightened dream in which everything is bigger, starker, more brutal, more dramatic, than life.

Leone tells the story more with pictures than words. Examine the masterful scene in the cemetery. A fortune in gold is said to be buried in one of the graves, and three men have assembled, all hoping to get it. The actors are Clint Eastwood (the Good), Lee Van Cleef (the Bad), and Eli Wallach (the Ugly). Each man points a pistol at the other. If one shoots, they all shoot, and all die. Unless two decide to shoot the third man before he can shoot either one of them. But which two, and which third?

Leone draws this scene out beyond all reason, beginning in long shot and working in to closeups of firearms, faces, eyes, and lots of sweat and flies. He seems to be testing himself, to see how long he can maintain the suspense. Or is it even suspense, really? It may be entirely an exercise in style, a deliberate manipulation by the director, intended to draw attention to itself. If you savor the boldness with which Leone flirts with parody, you understand his method. This is not a story, but a celebration of bold gestures.

Eastwood, 34 when he first worked with Leone, already carried unquestioned authority. Much is made of the fact that he came from television, that he starred in "Rawhide," that in those days it was thought that a movie audience wouldn't pay to see an actor it could watch for free. Eastwood overcame that jinx, but not any actor could have done it--and not with any director. He says he took the roles with Leone because he wanted to make movies and Hollywood wouldn't hire him.

Yes, but Eastwood himself was to become an important director, and even then he must have sensed in Leone not just another purveyor of the Italian sword-and-sandal epics, but a man with passion. Together, Leone and Eastwood made The Man With No Name not simply bigger than a television star, but bigger than a movie star--a man who never needed to explain himself, a man whose boots and fingers and eyes were deemed important enough to fill the whole screen.

I wonder if Eastwood's character has a tenth as much dialogue as Tuco, the Eli Wallach character. The Man With No Name never talks; Tuco never stops. This is one of Wallach's inspired performances, as he sidesteps his character's potential to seem ridiculous, and makes him a desperate, frightened presence. When he makes a clown of himself, we sense it is Tuco's strategy, not his personality. Trained in the Method, a stage veteran, Wallach took this low-rent role seriously and made something evocative out of it.

Lee Van Cleef, as Angel Eyes, was New Jersey-born, already a veteran of 53 films and countless TV shows, many of them Westerns (his first movie credit was "High Noon," where he played a member of the gang). In a movie with a lot of narrowed eyes, he has the narrowest, and they gleam with insane obsession.

All three men are after the fortune in Civil War gold, and the secret of its location is parceled out among them (one knows the cemetery but not the grave, the other knows the name on the tombstone but not the cemetery). So they know that they will remain alive until the grave is found, and then it is likely that each of them will try to kill the others.

In a film that runs 180 minutes in its current restored version, that is not enough plot, but Leone has no shortage of other ideas. There is the opening shootout, involving unrelated characters. There is the con game in which Wallach plays a wanted man, Eastwood turns him in for the reward, and then Eastwood waits until he is about to be hanged and severs the rope with a well-aimed shot. There is the magnificent desert sequence, after Eastwood abandons Wallach in the desert, and then Wallach does the same to Eastwood, and the sun burns down like a scene from "Greed." There is the haunting runaway wagon, filled with dead and dying men.

And, surprisingly, there is an ambitious Civil War sequence, almost a film within a film, featuring a touching performance by Aldo Giuffre as a captain in the Union Army who explains his alcoholism simply: the commander who has the most booze to get his troops drunk before battle is the one who wins. His dying line: "Can you help me live a little more? I expect good news."

Sergio Leone (1929-1989) was a director of boundless vision and ambition, who invented himself almost as he invented the spaghetti Western. Erickson, whose useful essay on the trilogy is at www.DVDtalk.com, notes that Leone hyped his own career "by claiming to be the assistant director on Robert Aldrich's Italian production of 'Sodom and Gomorrah' (1962), even though he was fired after only a day." Leone made a forgotten Roman Empire epic in 1961, and then based "A Fistful of Dollars" so closely on Akira Kurosawa's samurai film "Yojimbo" that perhaps Gus Van Sant's shot-by-shot remake of "Psycho" (1998) was not the first time the technique was tried.

A man with no little ideas, Leone made two other unquestioned masterpieces, "Once Upon a Time in the West" (1968) and "Once Upon a Time in America" (1984). By the end of his career, Hollywood was suspicious of films with long running times, and criminally chopped "America" from 227 minutes to a sometimes incomprehensible 139. Nineteen minutes were cut from the first release of "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly." But uncut versions of all of his films are available on DVD, and gradually it becomes clear how good he really was.

微信公眾號：肅評