3:10 to Yuma

The two versions of 3:10 to Yuma differ greatly from one another. The later version, filmed in 2007, can be considered a revision of the original version, filmed in 1957. For example, in the original version, Dan Evans is a much more masculine character. He is very macho, which is typical of the alpha male cowboy. In the remake of the film, Dan’s character would not be considered the alpha male of the film because he appears as a much weaker man. In comparison to Ben Wade’s character, it is difficult to classify him as the alpha male. Instead, Wade takes on that role in the remake, even though he happens to be the outlaw. In both versions, Wade is playing a psychological game with Dan. He tries to charm Dan’s wife in both versions of the film, though he is much more charming with women in the original than in the remake. In the remake, he is also more aware of Dan’s relationship with his older son. Dan’s son doesn’t seem to have a lot of respect for his father because Dan can barely provide for his family, financially speaking. This is why in the remake Dan begs to take Wade to the train station in Yuma. He’ll get paid for his services, and he is ready to risk his own life in order to make some cash. The remake sends the message that men will do anything for money, which speaks for the time in which the film was made. In today’s society, that is the attitude that people in the United States often demonstrate. Our country is also much more violent today, which the remake shows with the increase of violence. The violence in the remake is at times over the top and totally unnecessary, but it says that our country is violent today and people enjoy seeing more violence in films.

The Unforgiven

The Unforgiven can be considered a revisionist Western film because ideas in the film are different than the ideas that traditional Westerns films present. The portrayal of the alpha male cowboy, Will, is significantly different from the portrayal of alpha male characters in more traditional Westerns. When the Schofield Kid offers Will to split a money reward for killing two men, Will turns to another ex-paid killer, Ned. Throughout the film, Will refuses to continue with the plan to kill the men without his companion by his side. This is not typical behavior of an alpha male, whom we are used to seeing live a life of solitude in films such as The Searchers. Another interesting thing about Ned is that he is African American, which would have made him an inferior “other” in earlier Westerns. In this film, however, he is never inferior to Will. Will also makes decisions guided by his emotions, which we rarely see in the alpha male cowboy. Will is obviously deeply affected by the passing of his wife, and he is emotionally connected to every decision he makes in the film. He has two young children to care for, and part of the reason he accepts the Schofield Kid’s offer is because the money will help support his family. He is always dwelling on his wife’s death, and we can read that emotion on his face. Traditional alpha male cowboys rarely show their emotions, which makes The Unforgiven a revisionist film in that respect.

Johnny Guitar/Two Mules for Sister Sara

In West of Everything, Jane Tompkins says, “Westerns either push women out of the picture completely or assign them roles in which they exist only to serve the needs of men” (Tompkins 39-40). This is certainly not true of Western films that present revisionist ideas about women, such as Johnny Guitar and Two Mules for Sister Sara. For example, Vienna, the lead character in Johnny Guitar, is a business-minded woman in a Western. She has a strong presence from the start of the film. She first appears on screen at the top of the stairs in her saloon when Johnny Guitar comes in to talk with her, establishing her power we see throughout the rest of the film. She is aggressive and strong-minded, and she doesn’t get along well with another woman in the film, Emma Small. The two women hate each other, and when Emma persuades the town to hang Vienna for her involvement with The Dancin’ Kid, Johnny saves her at the last second. Johnny’s presence in Vienna’s life brings her the strength to act as she does throughout the film; however, she still portrays a strong woman and she handles her own confrontation with Emma by killing her at end of the film. Vienna possesses the qualities of an alpha male, such as the ability to shoot, and she even dresses androgynously. Although Johnny Guitar is considered a classic Western, it certainly raises revisionist ideas about women.

Another film that doesn’t push a woman out of the picture is Two Mules for Sister Sara. At the beginning of the film, Hogan, a gunfighter, saves Sara from three men who are trying to rape her. Sara does not display characteristics of classic Western women because she isn’t what Hogan thinks she is. She is posing as a nun involved in the Mexican revolutionary movement against the French; however, she is really a prostitute with knowledge of the French fort. Sara is a smart, tough woman who is wise to play the victim in order to keep Hogan around. Some of her actions definitely cause Hogan to question what kind of a nun she is, because he is surprised to see her smoking a cigar and sneaking a drink of whiskey. It is obvious that she is liberated from men because she is able to successfully pose as a nun throughout the majority of the film. Although she keeps Hogan around for protection, Hogan ends up needing Sara just as much as she needs him at the end of the film. Hogan is clearly attracted to Sara, and they stay together after they successfully help the Mexicans capture the French fort. The way the alpha male cowboy relates to Sara in this film is very different from what we have seen in classical Westerns, which is why this film isn’t classified as such.

Unforgiven

When watching Unforgiven, it is clear that you are not watching a stereotypical western. The clearest indication of this is the alpha male cowboy, Munny. The stereotypical alpha male cowboy is usually ruthless in his struggle to survive, but is also clean cut, and looking for justice. In Unforgiven, Munny is clearly ruthless. However, he is anything but clean cut. He is a pig farmer, and looks like one. He is usually unshaved. In concerns of looking for justice, it is clear that the only reason Munny accepts the job is to get money. This is later proven when he sees the hooker that was cut. He was told that her face was tremendously disfigured, and that she was completely scarred. However, when he sees her, he knows that this was an exaggeration, and that she is only slightly scarred. He realizes that its not justice to kill the people who cut her, but continues anyways. Another way that Munny differs from the typical alpha male is that he is not associated with the law at all, and instead is a former bandit. He also is beaten by the town sheriff, who he in the end kills. This shows Munny’s complete disregard for the law, and his destruction of it. Another way that Munny differs is his alcoholism. While characters like Rooster Cogburn were shown to be alcoholics, and while some characters did frown upon drinking, it was never painted in as terrible a picture as Munny made. Munny made it clear that he could only do the terrible things he had done in this life because he was drunk. This is shown again by how he gets drunk before killing Little Bill and his posy. This view of alcohol paints the picture that it releases the monster, rather than the picture that it was a typical and mostly harmless part of the west, as was shown in many other films.
Another part of how Unforgiven is a revisionist western is shown by Munny’s sidekick. Ned Logan is black, and married to a native American. But, as a sidekick, he is treated as an equal. In The Man who Shot Liberty Valance, Pompey is Doniphon’s sidekick, but is never treated as an equal. He is the person who fetches something, or puts away the horses, but never someone who adds valuable information. In Rooster Cogburn, Wolf is shown in a more positive light as a minority sidekick, but is still a very flat character. He seems simple, never saying anything very insightful. Ned is the complete opposite of these characters. Ned is treated as an equal and a friend by Munny. Ned proves to be a character with actual emotions, shown by the pain he expresses when shooting someone. Although his death didn’t say too much about how race, it does paint a better picture of brutality in the west. In Red River, Dunson buried and said a prayer over the men he killed. In Day of the Outlaw, they make sure to bury Bruhns in respect to him. In Unforgiven, Ned is put on display. This blatent disrespect for a corpse is new to the films we have watched, and paints a picture of a much more brutal west.

Johnny Guitar, Two Mules

In Two Mules for Sister Sara and Johnny Guitar, we are given views of female characters that are stronger than typical portrayals of western women. However, these females are still portrayed as the “other” in the films, and continue to provide men with problems. The first of these problems is the need for being saved. Tompkins believes that westerns portray women as the weaker sex, and that women constantly need to be saved by the alpha male. In Johnny Guitar, we see the classic version of the male saving the female. When she is about to be hung, Johnny manages to swoop in and save the day. This is the typical way of thinking that females are always the people being saved, and bringing challenges upon the alpha male. In Two Mules for Sister Sara, we see a variation on this classic method. In the beginning of the film, Hogan does save Sara from the three rapists. He then also saves her from the French army. This follows the typical damsel in distress, making extra work for the alpha male stereotype. However, this stereotype starts to change when Hogan is shot by the Indians. On the ground, injured, Hogan is in a terrible position. The Indians are in the position to kill him. However, Sara holds up her cross, and one of the Indians is convinced to let them pass. Sara then helps pull the arrow out of Hogan, something he wouldn’t have been able to do on his own. By Sara saving Hogan’s life, the story is going completely away from the stereotype. The fact that both Sara and Hogan saved the other’s life promotes more of a mutually beneficial relationship than the one shown in Johnny Guitar.
Another clear way to show female characters creating a challenge for the alpha male in Johnny Guitar is the way that Johnny is dragged into a fight that he didn’t start at all. He had nothing to do with Vienna’s decision to open the saloon, or her plans to start her own town. Instead, Johnny must wander in to save the day. Johnny plays the knight in shining armor, coming in to finish a battle that he didn’t start. In Two Mules for Sister Sara, we start off with a similar situation. Hogan saves Sara from the French, which is a battle that he had nothing to do with. However, the situation then switches from Hogan helping Sara out in her battle, to Sara helping Hogan out in his. Hogan is trying to bring down the French garrison, and is helped along the way by Sara. She gives him the layouts of the garrison, tells him about the French holiday, finds out what the French are doing at the train station, climbs up the bridge to plant the dynamite, and gets Hogan inside the garrison. All of this help is for a battle that she didn’t start. This is another way that the film promotes much more of a mutually beneficial relationship between the alpha male and the female, compared to the one way relationship in Johnny Guitar.

Red River

In Red River, we see two main male figures, Matt and Dunson. In the beginning of the film, Dunson is clearly marked as the alpha male. However, as the film goes on, this title is questioned. Matt, who began the story, as a strong boy, ends the movie by becoming a strong alpha male. The presence of two alpha males seems new for a western film, but by looking at the actions of Dunson and Matt, it is clear that they both have the skill, ruthlessness, and grit for the title.
The film starts out with Dunson breaking away from the wagon train, leaving his love, and starting a new life. It is clear from the moment that he kills one of the two Mexicans who say the land belongs to their boss that he is both dangerous, and a man to respect. While running the wagon train, he shows the ruthlessness that Matheson describes as making a cowboy hardboiled. Dunson drives his men hard, kills anyone who disobeys him, and embodies the ruthless environment that he lives in. All these things make him the stereotypical alpha male.
When looking at Matt, it is clear that he does not start off as the alpha male. While he does have the talent, shown by him drawing faster than Dunson, he still plays a back seat to him. While he often doesn’t agree with everything Dunson is doing, it is clear that he is not willing to challenge him. Eventually, this starts to change. As the men become more and more restless, and rebelling against Dunson starts to quell up, Matt is forced from the alpha male’ apprentice to the role as the new alpha male. In the starting parts of the film, Matt was shown to be a hard cowboy, but never truly ruthless. This changes when Matt takes over the cattle against Dunson’s wishes. Matt sends an injured Dunson away, and takes his cattle. Matt does this to make sure that the cattle safely get to a place where they can be sold. By committing this ruthless act, Matt shows that he is adapting to his environment, with the goal of surviving in mind. Matt must be ruthless, and this involves going against the man who raised him.

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance

In The Man who Shot Liberty Valance, we are given a view of three male figures. The first, Stoddard, is an aspiring lawyer from the east. He is strong willed, but new to the west, and not built in the mold of the typical cowboy. The next, Doniphon, is a surly, older cowboy. He seems to care for justice and is inclined to doing the right thing, but at the same time is incredibly rough. The last, Liberty Valance, is a despicable, ruthless villain. He seems to lack any morals, and is quick with a gun. When looking at Matheson’s article, we clearly see that Doniphon and Liberty clearly match the hardboiled male belief, while Stoddard is obviously representative of changing times.
According to Matheson, the western setting is similar to a film noir setting. In film noir, the streets are dark and grimy, which reflects the dirty lifestyle that the characters live in. While the visuals in The Man who Shot Liberty Valance don’t quite reflect the ruthless world in which the cowboys live in, the world is still a dark and dangerous place. This is shown early in Stoddard’s flashback, where his stagecoach is robber by Valance. Stoddard witnesses an attempted robbing of an old lady, and is himself left for dead. This harsh world is exemplified by its criminals. Matheson talks about how callous and ruthless the criminals are, which is obvious in Valance. During the shootout scene between Valance and Stoddard, Valance tricks Stoddard, and gets in a quick shot before Stoddard realizes what is happening. This trickery goes along with Matheson’s belief that the best gunfighter might not always win, because it is the ruthless that survives in the harsh environment. In this sense, Matheson is completely correct in her assessment of villains, by how ruthless and merciless Valance is.
In the article, Matheson downplays the heroic nature of the alpha male. Matheson claims that the alpha male can’t always be the knight in shining armor, and must instead be as ruthless as the villains. Using this film, I completely agree with this assessment. Simply by looking at the shootout scene again, we see truth in this argument. Valance played a trick on Stoddard in order to get a cheap shot at him, and gain an advantage. This ruthlessness is expected from criminals. However, Doniphon also gets a cheap shot at Valance. By hiding in the dark, he gives Valance no chance. Doniphon doesn’t challenge him like Stoddard does. Stoddard tried to be honorable rather than ruthless, and that would have resulted in his death.
In the film, I do not believe that Stoddard is an alpha male. This is why he is not hardboiled. Stoddard is an idealist, believing that the west can be contained, and that law will prevail. He is also an idealist when it comes to morals. He challenged Liberty straight up to a fight, even when he knows he may lose. This may make him a good person, but it doesn’t guarantee his survival, like being ruthless would.

Spaghetti Westerns

Spaghetti Westerns differ significantly from the standard American Western. Firstly, Spaghetti Westerns were made by Italian directors and usually filmed in Spain (because the Spanish terrestrial was very similar to that of the United States). The influence of a foreign director also shows us the outside perception on Americans. The characters which play in Spaghetti Westerns have very different personalities than those in American Westerns. They are much more self-centered and revolve their roles around self-interest rather than the well-being of the “whole,” seen in American Westerns. I find this particularly interesting because I am European, and I can see the self-centered personalities in the movie stars that Europeans are known for. the American Westerns, however, display characters with a much more work and time oriented personality who serve to better society’s quality.

The perception of American society, from a foreign point of view, is seen in the most famous Spaghetti Western, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. The impression given by this film is that it was extremely violent. American Westerns do not seem to be as gory or feature so much murder. The plot of the film, the three main characters chasing after the large sum of money, also symbolizes the popular opinion that Americans care solely about money. The goal of getting the money was more important to the characters than anything else. They would do everything within their power (even kill mercilessly) to get to it. The second movie, Navajo Joe, was also radically different from American Westerns because it featured an alpha male who was Native American. This movie also revolved about restless chasing of money, concepts which are very different than what we see conveyed in traditional westerns.

Navajo Joe/ The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly

These two spaghetti westerns differ from the classic western largely in terms of violence, race, and the overall portrayal of the American Western cowboy. In Navajo Joe, the movie starts out with gruesome and violent scalpings. Unlike a traditional western where Native Americans would be doing the scalping, this spaghetti western portrays American cowboys doing the scalpings. They show no mercy or code of honor as they destroy a whole village. Evidently the Italian film makers view white Americans to be just as savage as the white Americans viewed Native Americans to be. The next notable difference was Navajo Joe's use of a gun. In traditional American westerns, Native Americans were never seen using rifles, but bow and arrows and more barbaric means of killing. Navajo Joe not only uses a rifle but has the best shot in the movie. Not long into the movie is Navajo Joe seen as the alpha male. Soon the whole town is relying on his help. This spaghetti western portrays the western townspeople as completely helpless against any bandits. Not even the sheriff could stand up to such bandits. He stated that the townspeople do not even carry guns. This is completely opposite of what a traditional western portrays a western town and its sheriff. Also, the righteousness of the cowboys and Indians is changed in the spaghetti western. Navajo Joe portrays the cowboy as being righteous, fighting for the revenge of his people, while making the lead cowboy seem like a villain. The camera always shows Navajo Joe atop a large hill with righteous music playing. In a classic western, the Indians were always shown as barbaric and mysterious. They were never a main character.

One of the most obvious differences between the classic western and the spaghetti western is the violence. Not only is there a lot more violence in both Navajo Joe and the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, but the violence is much more dramatic. In a typical western gun fight, if someone was shot the camera would simply pan away without long, over-the-top dramatics. In these two spaghetti westerns, especially Navajo Joe, when someone is shot their death is drawn out to show them screaming and falling in agony. The directors of the spaghetti westerns obviously really want to accentuate the killing in their films, as they believe violence is one of the most important aspects of the western. Also in the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly there is a bit of racism. Why does the ugly have to be a Mexican? They portray the Mexican as a dirty cheater who is no match for Blondie (Clint Eastwood). The Ugly is always the one being tied around the rope and depending on Blondie. The last difference I noticed was the music. In the classic western the music seemed much more subtle. In these spaghetti westerns it seemed like there was a lot more instances where there was music for a more dramatic effect. The music itself seemed much more dramatic at times and almost too-western like for the movies. It seemed like the spaghetti westerns took every aspect of the traditional western and multiplied it by five. More violence, more music, more racism.

Spaghetti Westerns

Western films have many sub categories with Classical Westerns being the most notable. Star director John Ford made numerous Classical Western films which became instant classics with one of the most recognizable faces in all of America, John Wayne, as the lead character. Another popular subcategory of Western films is Spaghetti Westerns.

Spaghetti Westerns, named for the primarily Italian directors that made them, were characterized as being low budget films. With the majority of these films being shot in parts of Spain that resembled the American Mountain West, these films were notorious for having more action and being more violent than Classical Westerns.

The most famous of the spaghetti Westerns is the 1966 film The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. This film is dramatically violent with numerous killings. Another spaghetti Western, Navajo Joe, depicts an outlaw Duncan who has massacred an entire Indian village. The brutal violence and heavy action in directors Sergio Leone and Sergio Corbucci’s movies hoped to excite viewers about the Western film again which had become somewhat repetitive. Leone has been quoted as saying that he depicted such violent killings in his films because this was how Cowboys in the West actually were. Spaghetti Westerns were drawing on the violence that had become associated with America during the 1960’s.

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly & Navajo Joe

Spaghetti westerns differ greatly from traditional American western films because they were filmed by Italian directors and provide us with an outside perception of American culture and society. They don’t follow the “classic” Western formula, which generally consisted of townspeople, outlaws or criminals who threaten the townspeople, and heroes who act on behalf of the townspeople and triumph over the outlaws. Whereas in traditional films the alpha male cowboys ultimately act on behalf of the people they are trying to help, the cowboys in spaghetti westerns act on behalf of their own self-interest. Themes that are continually emphasized in spaghetti westerns are greed and violence. As we see in the The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, all three characters are after one thing—$200,000 that is hidden in an unmarked grave in a cemetery. They stop at nothing to get to the grave, killing many people along the way. The “bad” especially displays a great deal more violence than we’ve seen in other villainous characters in traditional westerns. He is hired in the beginning of the film to kill a man after he retrieves information from the man, and before he kills him, the man gives Angel Eyes money to repay the favor to the person who wanted him murdered. Angel Eyes returns to the first man, and after sharing the information with him, murders him as well because he always goes through with something he is paid for. This kind of portrayal of Americans shows that foreigners believed Americans would stop at nothing to get what they wanted, especially if what they wanted was money. Americans acted on behalf of their own self-interest and no action was too violent to commit.

Navajo Joe is also significantly different from traditional Westerns because we see a person who was once an “other” in American films taking on a lead role in a film and becoming an alpha male character. This film focuses on revenge, as we learn that both Joe and the outlaw, Duncan, are both seeking revenge on each other throughout the film. Duncan and his band of outlaws sweep through an entire Indian village and brutality murders all but Joe. They scalp the Indians for cash, even when the sheriff says that he will arrest Duncan because he is now killing innocent Indian tribes as opposed to troublemakers. What we later learn is that Duncan’s father was murdered by Indians when he was a child, which is why he doesn’t stop murdering Indians. Joe is following Duncan and his men because they murdered his village and his woman, and he spoils Duncan’s plan to hold up a train that is carrying half a million dollars. Once again, money is the driving force behind everyone’s actions in the film, even Joe’s. He doesn’t want to protect the townspeople from Duncan unless they are willing to pay him. Both of these films represent greed and the violent crimes that men committed to get what they desired.

Spaghetti

When Watching Navajo Joe and The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, there are clear differences between these and traditional American Westerns. The clearest difference comes from Navajo Joe. The main character, and apparent alpha male, is a native American. This is an immediate departure from American westers, where native americans were basically props in the background. Throughout the film, Joe is mistreated. This starts with Duncan killing everyone in his village. Then, the villages say they don't want to deal with a native american when offered help by Joe. Later on, Joe is tortured by the gang. Throughout the film, the injustices done against Joe are a clear representation of what the Europeans think of the way Americans Native Americans. While American films did not show Native Americans in a sympathetic light, the European films were not afraid to do this. In Navajo joe, we see a lot of the motivation for the characters revolving around money. Duncan is robbing a train to steal money, and Joe asks for $1 for each man he kills. However, this is even clearer in The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly. The film starts out early with Angel Eyes killing for money, even finishing the job for someone who is already dead. Later on, we see Blondie turning in Tuco, only to save him and turn him in again for more money, showing a disregard for justice but great regard for wealth. But, after the story develops a little, all three characters begin to be driven by the gold that the soldiers stole. This is their only goal, and they are completely oblivious to anything else going on. They couldn't even be bothered by a war. The atrocities are only something that slow them down. This represents Sergio Leone believing that America is a ruthless capitalist state. He clearly paints a picture of Americans that only care about money, and are willing to kill for it.

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, Navajo Joe

In our classic western films, there is template in which the film is run. It is very traditional and the alpha male’s actions are pretty similar across the board. In spaghetti westerns, we see how external countries perceive America. These films tend to be much more violent than our original westerns. Navajo Joe is a very different film compared to our original westerns. The plot behind this film is about an Indian seeking revenge on a group of outlaws. This is the first time we have seen an Indian as the main role of a film. Also, Joe successfully becomes the hero in this film because he is hired by the townspeople to protect them from the outlaws. Usually the Indians are the ones the townspeople need protection from. Not the other way around. The townspeople are usually looking to the alpha male cowboy to help keep them safe, but Joe is that role in this film. The townspeople required Joe’s protection and even almost showed a dependency. Indians were shown as more than equals in this movie. They are able to hold their own and demonstrate many of the qualities of an alpha male cowboy. This could exemplify countries beliefs on American Exceptionalism. They believe that we really aren’t independent and need others to help us get by.
In our second film, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, we see another spaghetti western with Clint Eastwood as the main character, “The Good”. The bad and the ugly are both played by non-white characters. We see some aspects of racism between the Tuco and Blondie during this film. The two of them appeared friends in the beginning of the movie, but once Blondie leaves him in the desert the two are now enemies. This constant battling after the issue in the desert demonstrated some of the race wars we had in America at the time. Another aspect of this film is the scene with the soldiers. Clint, Tuco, and Blondie were able to trick soldiers with little to no effort. America’s army took a hit from this rendition because it made them appear to be unorganized and unprofessional.

Spaghetti Westerns

The spaghetti westerns that came out of the 1960s and 70s are able to provide a differing point of view from what we are traditionally used to seeing in classic westerns. The Italian directors such as Sergio Leone and Sergio Corbucci who directed The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly and Navajo Joe, are a departure from the John Fordesque representation of life in the west. Most notably is the Italian directors’ use of violence in their films. When it is shown, the action is brutal and bloody. Gun fights are loud long and seem to always result in a death. The tough guys are always asserting their force on anyone that they see. They burn, punch, shot, and steal. Acts like these often didn’t appear in the classic western. The violence that existed in those films were much more subdued and controlled. Violence only seemed to be used when needed by a John Wayne character whereas the spaghetti western cowboys have an easy trigger finger. With the spaghetti westerns we are seeing what Europeans think and feel about Americans. Culturally this suggest that Americans are viewed as a violence society at the time. They are quick with the gun and lack the ability to properly reason. And it can be seen in the foreign policy that of the United States at the time. The Korean and Vietnam Wars showed the United States preference of force over diplomacy. Both resulted in brutal and bloody wars like what is played out in the spaghetti westerns.

American greed also appears in these two films. Both films are centered on groups seeking to rob seek richest quickly. Navajo Joe shows the outlaws wanting to pull off a big train robbery while The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly Blondie, Tuco, and Angel Eyes all competing for the fortune that was buried in the cemetery. Both films stress on the need for getting rich quick by any means necessary. The Europeans are criticizing the American lust for money. To get that money, unnecessary and brutal force is always used. The classical western doesn’t often compete over money but rather territory or ideas. Money tends to be a secondary issue in the classical western. But in the spaghetti western it is in the forefront suggesting Americans love of money is a very powerful but brutal force. Monetary issues give American’s a negative appearance since they drive individuals to undesirable actions. And actions over money appear all throughout the spaghetti westerns.

Spaghetti Westerns

The spaghetti western, though still based in the American west and involving cowboys as the main characters, is quite a different film than the classic western. The main difference between the types of westerns is the level of violence and action. In classic westerns, while guns are certainly present, the cowboy only kills when he feels he must. The Cowboy does not make loud, violent threats in the classic western; rather the cowboy speaks with conviction and a certain calmness, never getting too emotional. In a classic western, the cowboy is clean-shaven and clean cut and always respectful. The cowboys in classic westerns even have normal names, such as Ethan Edwards and Tom Doniphon. The spaghetti westerns throw this view of the western and the cowboy out of the window. Violence and action are the main ingredients in spaghetti westerns. Cowboys, especially outlaws, kill for what sometimes seems like no reason. For example, in Navajo Joe, Duncan kills a woman and a priest with no provocation. These killings and random acts of violence seem included in the film as shock tactics, which definitely do not occur in classic westerns. In spaghetti westerns, cowboys seem a lot more emotional and trigger-happy. Alpha male cowboys in spaghetti westerns can also be just as unshaven and dirty as outlaws, such as Clint Eastwood in The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly. One of the strangest differences is the names given to cowboys in spaghetti westerns, such as Tuco, Blondie, and Angel Eyes in The Good, the Bad, and The Ugly. Spaghetti westerns certainly do have a different feel to them.
Within all these differences are certain commentaries on culture. The spaghetti westerns seem to say that Americans are ruthless and bloodthirsty, as Navajo Joe is so violent that at some points it can be difficult to watch, like in the end when Joe kills Duncan’s posse and then kills Duncan by throwing a tomahawk at his face. Even in The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly the cowboys use violence unnecessarily, as Angel Eyes killed two people in the beginning of the film and took their money. This brings up another criticism of Americans. Navajo Joe and The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly both have bounty hunters as prominent characters. This seems to suggest that Americans will do anything for money. The spaghetti western seems to suggest that there are some bad aspects of American culture that need some revision.