What it says on the tin. Would you say it is worth it? Does it add anything extra, does it become too long or what do you think? :)
From what I remember the new bits were dubbed more recently when the actors are old. So the voices sound different, which is jarring. But it's an interesting watch if you like the film enough. I wouldn't say it makes the film better.
What it says on the tin. Would you say it is worth it? Does it add anything extra, does it become too long or what do you think? :)
From what I remember the new bits were dubbed more recently when the actors are old. So the voices sound different, which is jarring. But it's an interesting watch if you like the film enough. I wouldn't say it makes the film better.
You're right about the dubbing by Eastwood & Wallach but the Lee Van Cleef impersonator was pretty good.
What it says on the tin. Would you say it is worth it? Does it add anything extra, does it become too long or what do you think? :)
From what I remember the new bits were dubbed more recently when the actors are old. So the voices sound different, which is jarring. But it's an interesting watch if you like the film enough. I wouldn't say it makes the film better.
You're right about the dubbing by Eastwood & Wallach but the Lee Van Cleef impersonator was pretty good.
Yeah, I didn't notice a problem with Van Cleef. It was mainly Wallach that sounded different.
I just watched the remastered version this past weekend. I really liked it. Eastwood REALLY sounds different when he and Angel Eyes are 'camping' and the 6 guys Angel Eyes has tailing them get called out by Blondie. It just happens. Clint sounds really different in the 2000's than the 1960's. The guy who imitated Van Cleef did the best he could.
Overall, I really liked the new version. They are both good and worth seeing. You can stream the remastered version on STARZ right now. Not sure I'd buy it unless it came with a really good 'remaking' of documentary .
I heard there was a 2 minute scene of Angel Eyes torturing Tuco that they wanted to include - but the footage was just too damaged to restore. That's too bad.
Just watched the entire Dollars Trilogy. My favorite, by a HAIR, is FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE. The protagonists are just more relatable. IMO. And the Civil War scenes in GBU seem kinda phony. Now - that's just a hair splitting way to pick a favorite. They are BOTH supremely awesome films.
I just watched the trilogy as well, and my favourite is also "For a Few Dollars More" for the reason you mentioned. I think "The Good"... is a bit too long but it still has a lot of redeeming qualities. A great trilogy. :)
What it says on the tin. Would you say it is worth it? Does it add anything extra, does it become too long or what do you think? :)
Yeah. The extended edition features scenes of Leone trying to turn Eastwood into an expressive actor. He was wise to give up on this particular project after about a day of effort, and instead work with what he had
The original was overly-long already and had long pointless sequences I would have cut out entirely, like the whole army battle thing. Watching an extended version, for me, is going in the wrong direction. It’s a good enough film in the original version.
Can't find a movie or TV show? Login to create it.
Reply by JustinJackFlash
on March 29, 2020 at 6:43 AM
From what I remember the new bits were dubbed more recently when the actors are old. So the voices sound different, which is jarring. But it's an interesting watch if you like the film enough. I wouldn't say it makes the film better.
Reply by DonGable
on March 29, 2020 at 6:56 AM
Thank you, sir. I'll just stick with the original. :)
Reply by tmdb82469342
on March 29, 2020 at 8:26 AM
You're right about the dubbing by Eastwood & Wallach but the Lee Van Cleef impersonator was pretty good.
Reply by JustinJackFlash
on March 29, 2020 at 10:29 AM
Yeah, I didn't notice a problem with Van Cleef. It was mainly Wallach that sounded different.
Reply by tmdb24547891
on March 30, 2020 at 2:31 AM
the nitpicking about sound remastering and re releases need to come to a halt, jackal
Reply by censorshipsucks06
on March 31, 2020 at 7:30 PM
I just watched the remastered version this past weekend. I really liked it. Eastwood REALLY sounds different when he and Angel Eyes are 'camping' and the 6 guys Angel Eyes has tailing them get called out by Blondie. It just happens. Clint sounds really different in the 2000's than the 1960's. The guy who imitated Van Cleef did the best he could.
Overall, I really liked the new version. They are both good and worth seeing. You can stream the remastered version on STARZ right now. Not sure I'd buy it unless it came with a really good 'remaking' of documentary .
I heard there was a 2 minute scene of Angel Eyes torturing Tuco that they wanted to include - but the footage was just too damaged to restore. That's too bad.
Just watched the entire Dollars Trilogy. My favorite, by a HAIR, is FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE. The protagonists are just more relatable. IMO. And the Civil War scenes in GBU seem kinda phony. Now - that's just a hair splitting way to pick a favorite. They are BOTH supremely awesome films.
Reply by DonGable
on April 1, 2020 at 2:21 AM
I just watched the trilogy as well, and my favourite is also "For a Few Dollars More" for the reason you mentioned. I think "The Good"... is a bit too long but it still has a lot of redeeming qualities. A great trilogy. :)
Reply by sukhisoo
on January 19, 2022 at 8:40 AM
While the new scenes are worth seeing, it is obvious why they got cut. A movie that is essentially too long drags on even longer.
Reply by catmydogs
on January 23, 2022 at 1:56 AM
The original was overly-long already and had long pointless sequences I would have cut out entirely, like the whole army battle thing. Watching an extended version, for me, is going in the wrong direction. It’s a good enough film in the original version.