On this day, 12 May, in 1965, Cineriz released A Pistol for Ringo.
I know what you’re thinking, “Another Spaghetti Western?!” Well, yes. There are a lot of great Spaghetti Westerns, and this one is among the best. It was made shortly after A Fistful of Dollars by Duccio Tessari, who had worked on that script.
It doesn’t have quite the same feel as the earlier film. But then, neither did Sergio Leone’s later films. A Pistol for Ringo comes off more like For a Few Dollars More — but as a comedy.
Duccio Tessari
I don’t think there is any doubt that Leone was the greater director. But equally, Tessari was the better writer and storyteller. I often feel that Leone gets lost in his own obsessions. Like the long rape scene at the beginning of A Fistful of Dynamite I’m not sure what the point is even supposed to be much less what it is.
What’s more, Leone’s sense of humor rarely elicits a laugh whereas Tessari effortlessly produces belly-laughs. At the same time, his films are every bit as gritty.
In A Pistol for Ringo, the title character is extremely charming. He is also a complete psychopath who loves putting people in situations where he can kill them “in self-defense.” In one scene at the beginning, he’s playing hopscotch with some kids right before gunning four men down.
And there’s no “out-drawing” others. He just kills them before they even go for their guns. And thank God! Only an idiot would try to “out-draw” someone.
There’s one other way that Duccio Tessari is better than Sergio Leone: he directed a lot more films! He made films of various genres — including one blaxploitation film (Three Tough Guys). And he still managed to make more westerns!
I admire Leone’s work. But they are often ponderous. Tessari made entertaining films and managed to be quite innovative, even if relatively few outside Italy know it. Here is an English-language version of A Pistol for Ringo. It is dubbed, no matter what language you choose. But it is easier to find good Italian-language prints.
Other 12 Map Anniversaries
Filmmakers:
- Edward Halperin (1898-1981): Producer of White Zombie and Supernatural.
- Wilfrid Hyde-White (1903-1991): Actor in Chamber of Horrors and on the second season of Buck Rogers in the 25th Century.
- Jesús Franco (1930-2013): Writer-director of films like Count Dracula and Oasis of the Zombies.
- Gabriel Byrne (1950-): Actor in so much, including the very funny End of Days.
- Ving Rhames (1959-): Actor known for The People Under the Stairs, Pulp Fiction, and more.
- Emilio Estevez (1962-): Actor and director known for Maximum Overdrive and Rated X.
- Deborah Kara Unger (1966-): Actor known for Crash and Silent Hill.
- Malin Akerman (1978-): Actor in The Final Girls and Watchmen.
Films:
- Cobra Woman (1944): A woman is kidnapped by her grandmother to resolve a royal dispute on Cobra Island.
- Jail Bait (1954): Ed Wood’s most straightforward film; it’s quite watchable with a clever ending.
- Day of the Triffids (1963): Meteor shower turns plants violent.
- 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968): Astronauts go to Jupiter to look for ancient aliens.
- Frankenstein and the Monster from Hell (1973): One of the two Hammer Frankenstein films not worth watching.
- Earth Girls Are Easy (1988): Two young women save three male space aliens.
- Hell High (1989): High school-based slasher.
- Night Visitor (1989): Satanists are killing prostitutes.
- The Return of the Swamp Thing (1989): Jim Wynorski’s excellent sequel to the Wes Craven original.
- Battlefield Earth (2000): Humans enslaved by space aliens fight back.
- The Grudge 3 (2009): The evil comes to Chicago.
- S Darko (2009): More time travel adventures.
A Pistol for Ringo (1965) poster via Wikipedia under Fair Use
I’m curious about this one — I’ll never NOT be curious about a movie with a Morricone score. So it’s on my list.
But when are you going to get to the greatest Italian Cinema Auteur of all time? OF ALL TIME, I SAY! Here; I will help you: https://librarydvdlove.substack.com/p/la-strada
Ha! When I was a teen, I loved Fellini. I hardly think of him these days. As I’ve gotten older, I focus on stories. He too often gets lost in his own nonsense. Compare him to Vittorio De Sica. His best work provides an engaging story. And he shows that it doesn’t have to be a classic story. I think Fellini is best when he had a story to tell, but that isn’t what people like about him. To me, Hell would be sitting in a movie theater with cans of Fulci films but only having 8.5 on a loop!
But the lack of a compelling story is almost what defines the great “art” directors. Truffaut and Godard are almost unwatchable when they aren’t making genre films.
The thing is, making a story that isn’t terrific (man gets bike stolen, steals bike) into a great movie takes an incredible amount of thought, passion, empathy. No wonder De Sica turned to silly movies after that amazing stretch of heartbreaking ones. If you actually give a f**k about the stories you’re telling and the characters you’re telling them about, sad movies have got to be a massive emotional drain.
You seem to label “art” directors as a negative thing. I’d argue, pretentious empty directors are bad! But directors trying to do decent movies about recognizable humans aren’t bad. I’d rather watch most Altman over most cheesy horror directors. I’d rather watch ANY cheesy horror directors over Paul Thomas Anderson, though.
I think I add scare quotes because it’s all art. And what gets folded under “art film” is often very weird. I think it is more something that critics are supposed to tell us we should like. But is Altman an art director? Some of my favorite of his films are genre. And many horror films cross over into art. Let Us Prey is definitely an art film as it is largely a one-sided conversation between Satan and God. It’s also one of the bloodiest films you’ll see. And one of the sweetest romances. It has it all!
Or consider Power of the Dog. It’s a western. But it is as artistic and thoughtful as any film you’ll ever see. I still haven’t gotten over just how great that film is. Now Jane Campion is considered an art director. But that’s my point! Is The Piano an art film? Seems like softcore porn to me! I’m fine with that. But I don’t know that calling it an art film is anything but a kind of justification to allow normal people to feel good about watching Holly Hunter and Harvey Keitel naked for an hour or so.
Oh! I think I understand. You’re not putting down “art” movies, you’re just saying that the definition of what’s “artistic” and what’s not is largely a distinction made by shallow critics. You’ll get no disagreement from me there!
I think that something made strictly to entertain its audience, if it’s done very well, is absolutely an artistic achievement. No less than a great three-minute pop song. How many people write/perform songs for a living and never come up with anything half as good as Nick Lowe’s “Cruel To Be Kind” or Juice Newton’s “Queen Of Hearts”? Of course entertainment is art. Giving genre movie fans something they can appreciate is art.
There are movies which are purely commercial product where it’s a stretch to call them artistic in any way… I’m thinking of stuff like Hallmark Christmas movies and such. But even there you might have one individual performer doing their damndest to bring something to a role. So it all depends.
By the way, I basically thought of “Power of the Dog” as more of a horror movie than a Western, if we’re putting labels on things. It’s horror in the Edgar Allan Poe sense where a creepy murder happens, not the modern sense where serial killers or diabolical supernatural forces are involved. A guy slowly realizing he’s been poisoned is VERY Poe.
That’s a great observation of Dog. Maybe that’s why I love it so much. Of course, it is (in a broad sense) a revenge story. But the fact that it is also about a boy protecting his mother nails it for me. I see the world as being so unjust. And civilization has done damn little to help and often does much to hurt. So justice is really important to me.
On the “art” issue, it is so hard to tell. I think often films are called “art” more because of style. As I’ve noted before, Let Us Prey is a deep film. But it also uses gallons of blood so people don’t think much about it.
A think a good example of the distinction is found in the Graham Greene novel Monsignor Quixote. It’s an art novel and a road comedy. Of course, it’s Graham Greene. Not everyone is able to pull that off. But I like it when I’m edified and entertained.
No doubt about the injustice. It is hard to take. More of it going around, these days…
It’s hard for me to say why some things are called art. Critics play a role. But so do audiences. If critics had worshipped 8.5 but nobody saw it or swooned over it, those critics would have stopped fellating Fellini or been unread if they did.
A thing that frustrates me now is I DO see occasional good little movies about recognizable humans, and some critics DO write about them… and then those articles get no clicks and the critics shut up about those movies, and the filmmakers have trouble getting funding in the future. Are You There God, It’s Me, Margaret was a really honorable adaptation of a beloved book and it disappeared. Good Luck To You, Leo Grande had stunning acting — absolutely powerhouse, brilliant — and it disappeared. Even something big-budget like Ron Howard’s Thirteen Lives, about the Thailand cave rescue. That movie kicked Apollo 13’s ass, and it was ignored.
If there’s no hope for conventional movies with box-office stars (Rachel McAdams, Emma Thompson, Viggo Mortensen, respectively), appearing in more interesting films than 99.9% of what’s out there…
…then what hope is there for the best new horror movies, either? Things like Glory Hole, or Late Night With the Devil, or The Feast (environmental parable all in Welsh, too gory for my taste, but great story/acting and the gore won’t bother you).
Seriously… I don’t know how people can discover these things. The streaming algorithms won’t steer them to these movies. Nobody reads blogs. Sometimes library employees put on a shelf their favorite unknown things, sometimes people check them out, but that’s a drop in the bucket.
End of rant, I guess. You’ve been at this longer than me. We try to praise the movies we like and maybe one person watches them because of it. More likely, somebody watches them because of a shitty more popular site, looks for more info on the movie, and finds our site. We’re getting the readers who are willing to click through 10 pages of Google “more results” to find ours.
(Search “Hobson’s Choice library dvd” on Google, and you’ll get my essay about 100th down. Search it on DuckDuckGo and you’ll get it 8th. Speaking of a good movie about justice…)
This is all very true. What I find even more annoying is how short films are ignored. I’ve been wanting to start a part of this site just for them. I think a big part of the problem is just that too many films are made. Far too many resources go into them. So there just isn’t enough viewer bandwidth. And I really hate the fact that mostly people just go to see films that are advertised. In the modern world, there’s no reason for this. It’s one of the bad aspects of us being a social species. We want to see what everyone else is watching. But that really doesn’t work in a globalized society. But there are options. I’ve been recently attending #FrightClub showings. I know you do the same with Wonkette. And I’ve been shocked how much I like it. I recently had the experience of posting a reference to an obscure film that related to a scene we were watching, only to see 3-4 other people make the same connection. I found my tribe! It also gets me to watch more recent relatively obscure films. But our society is not set up for this! We live in a world where people can be their authentic selves more than ever. And so much pressure is put on people to conform in ways they aren’t even aware of!
I find that most people who read this website come here to find answers to questions no one is talking about. Or they are looking for someone who will defend a film they like but everyone else hates. Or the other way around. I like to think of myself as a cheerleader for obscure films. But yeah, few people read us and those who do aren’t looking for recs!
That’s great you found that! I’m super-jealous!
I like the Wonkette people, but most of the time, the movies they’re watching are just Bad. Feel-good movies for aging liberals. 80’s/90’s nostalgia (The Jerk? Wayne’s World? Really?) Or soulless garbage about how being kind to others fixes the world.
They had Kind Hearts & Coronets, and people were appalled that the main character murdered eight Alec Guinnesses to inherit a fortune. Of course he did! That’s why it’s great! Or people were upset that Bogart in Maltese Falcon was a heartless d**k. Seriously, you can’t even handle 1940s/50s movies with any nuance? Jesus. Just go watch Barbie or Wicked again. (They watched both of those.)
I do like the people, and some WILL get my references to weirder things. But for the most part, it’s shell-shocked liberals wanting emotional comfort food, the movie choices are vastly disappointing.
So I’m very jealous you found a better version! Even if it’s not a genre I generally go for. (I’ve had Good Boy sitting in my “checked out from library” pile for two weeks because I don’t want to watch it.)
I still pick and choose. They did a Zombieland double feature over the weekend. With my current situation, I couldn’t really attend. But I wouldn’t have done it anyway. I’ve always hated the second one and I’ve turned against the first one. I didn’t want to be the guy bitching about how overdone most of it is now and how politically toxic the second one is. But knowing them, I suspect I wouldn’t have been alone. But the thing about FrightClub is that it is very targeted. The people are all liberal. It’s on Bsky, after all. But mostly, people don’t talk politics. Just the same, problematic issues do come up. I don’t think there’s a film more than 10 years old that doesn’t have at least a few cringe moments. And people do point that stuff out!
What is this about Good Boy? There is a 2025 film that I don’t know anything about. But there’s also a bizarre 2022 European film that looks at least interesting.
The 2025 Good Boy is about a man who faces nasty horror-movie forces, and his dog senses them before he does, and tries to warn him. That’s my understanding from Wiki.
It’s not a bad idea for a movie. But I’ll bet it’s grim as hell. Think of all the funny things you could do with that concept! You could have the dog being completely annoyed that its dipshit owners weren’t getting the hint. “What is it, Rex, do you want to go outside?” No, you dumbass, there’s demons in the closet!
Or, have the dog be this sweet-looking cutie who gets passed from owner to owner, while the owners don’t realize… THE DOG IS IN CAHOOTS WITH THE SOUL-EATING DEMONS. Like the “haunted house keeps killing people” thing, except it’s Haunted Hound.
Nah, this one’s probably just grim. But I’Il get around to trying it.
I’m with you on Zombieland. When I watched it again I didn’t like it much.
I generally participate in the Wonkette ones whether I like the movie or not, because you can generally make some fun comments about ANY movie, and at the end of the movie I link to some related post I’ve done, and get a handful of readers that way. (They do Lake Placid, I link to Q: The Winged Serpent, etc.) And the people are very nice.
One thing I learned fast, though. You can make fun comments about this or that goofy thing in the movie… but you DON’T make fun of the movie itself. Which, I agree with! Somebody is enjoying the movie (or many are), maybe they have sentimental memories of when/where they saw it. Why be a jerk and shit on that? Nobody forced you to watch it and nobody asked for you to be a Movie Critic offering yer Opinions. It’s people chilling out and half of them are buzzed/stoned, trying to relax in these very dark days. Don’t be a jerk about people liking The Jerk.
I mean, Carl Reiner is possibly even WORSE as a director than Mel Brooks… which is a high bar to clear… but there’s no useful reason to say so when people are trying to chill out at a movie!
The dog going from owner to owner isn’t all that far from The Thing. The sweet looking dog is evil! I read recently that the dog in the film had that disturbing stare because it was extremely attached to its owner/trainer. So they just needed to place the owner where they wanted the dog to stare. I do like the idea of an evil dog because usually, they are just the first around to notice the evil. Kind of tired.
The Wonkette social rules seem to be the same with FrightClub. This has always been an issue for me and many others about MST3K. It’s simple from my perspective. No work of art is ever perfect. And I think any artist will be willing to laugh at themselves and short-cuts they had to take. The problem is when someone claims that the filmmakers not having enough money to reshoot a scene means they are just incompetent and didn’t realize there was a problem. And this really bugs me! They almost always go after low-budget films where more compromises are necessary. And this often moves toward hating all old movies because the available techniques were more limited.
There was one film where the MST3K gang mocked a film because a character who died was suddenly live in the background of another scene. That’s fine. But clearly, the editor found that it was necessary to change the places of those scenes. None of the filmmakers were unaware of the problem. They just decided that the error was less of a problem than keeping the the scripted story order. Similarly, in my article about The Last Man on Earth, I went though all the “errors” in the film but almost all of them are just choices. Most were them flipping the film to make driving scenes match. And flipping means that they had to go to the lab and have it done. So clearly: not an error; a choice!
Anyway, people on FrightClub will tease the film for problems, but it is never, “This film sucks!” I think such people should really reflect on why they are watching!