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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The spaghetti western, though still based in the American west and involving cowboys as the main characters, is quite a different version of film than the classic western. The main difference between the spaghetti western and the classic western is the level of violence. In classic westerns, while all cowboys carry guns they only kill when they feel they must. The Cowboy does not make loud, violent threats in the classic western; rather he speaks with conviction and calmness and he never gets too emotional. In a classic western, the cowboy is clean-shaven and clean cut and always respectful. The cowboys in classic westerns 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 most basic differences between the two types of westerns is the names given to cowboys in spaghetti westerns. In The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly the main characters are Tuco, Blondie, and Angel Eyes.
ReplyDeleteWithin all these differences spaghetti westerns make certain arguments about culture. The spaghetti westerns seem to argue that Americans are ruthless and bloodthirsty, as Navajo Joe is so violent that at some points it can be difficult to watch, such as in the end of the film 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 kills 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 job title seems to argue 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.
I never knew the difference of a classic Western or spaghetti western, thank you for making it simple for me to understand.
DeleteWell explained. Schools in western Australia change genre blending in English & the difference has made this concept very clear.
DeleteGreat article thanks for the summarized explanation
ReplyDeleteI am 80 years old and grew up in West Texas and other Southwestern states in the 1940s and 1950s When I was growing up, I spent a lot of time with my Grandfather. When his friends came over, I would sit and listen to the old men talk. I knew a lot of people who were adults in 1900.
ReplyDeleteI can tell you that the spaghetti western was, for the most part, closer to what the real West was like than the Hollywood Westerns. No, it wasn't that way all the time, everywhere, but often enough.
Agree,And the spaghetti western Movie sets are much more realistic.
Delete