Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Is it the same character?
In the "Dollars" Trilogy, Eastwood plays a character with the same mannerisms, wearing the same poncho, lambskin vest and hat, and sporting a silver rattlesnake-shaped plate on the handle of his gun. The question whether the intention was to portray the same individual character in all three films is debatable, but many fans believe that the last film in the trilogy, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly is a prequel of sorts to the earlier two, since it is set during the American Civil War and before the period thought of as the "Wild West.' Furthermore, Eastwood's character gradually acquires the clothing that he wears throughout the other films in the series, getting his hat, vest and other clothing from the assassin "Angel-Eyes" and taking his signature serape from an anonymous, dying soldier, in exchange for his duster. It can also be noted that the actor portraying the undertaker from the first film shows up in the second as someone Eastwood's character is familiar with. Whether this points to the old man playing the same person or not is unknown as many of the same actors played roles in the three films of characters who were obviously unrelated (such as Lee Van Cleef, who appeared in both For a Few Dollars More and The Good, the Bad and the Ugly as different characters). An expanded version of the movie soundtrack from The Good, the Bad and the Ugly released in 2004 featured a previously unreleased piece titled Il Bandito Monco, i.e. the "The Bandit Monco" (Monco is the nickname of Eastwood's character in the preceding movie and means "one handed" in Italian), lending support to the theory that Eastwood is intended to portray the same character in the three movies. Another interesting note is that towards the end of the first film, one of The Man With No Name's hands is badly injured in a torture scene, and is never shown to totally heal: this might be a connection to the second movie, in most of which he uses only one hand, the other one being saved for shooting only. However, Christopher Frayling has pointed out in his Leone biography, Sergio Leone: Something To Do With Death, that the three films were not intended by Leone or his various script collaborators to be seen as a history of the exact same individual and that it was United Artists, not the filmmakers, who came up with the idea of specifically linking the three films together as a series by referring to the Eastwood character as The Man With No Name in all advertising materials for the movies.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_with_No_Name

In A Fistful of Dollars he goes by the name of Joe.

In For a Few Dollars More his name is Monco.

In The Good, the Bad and the Ugly he is known as Blondie.

The speculation is this....Does the character goes by different allias names in each film?

Plausible.

If we go by a timeline of events. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly happen first...then Fistful of Dollars was next...and it all culminates in For a Few Dollars More.

The injuries to Blondie were much more severe than that of Joe. The sunburn to the face left a noticeble mark. Even if they heal later.

Ordered "Four of the Apocalypse" from amazon, heard it's awesomely violent.

Amazlingly violent? the spaghetti western? In it's day (the 60's) i bet it was but compared to todays standards it's nothing over the top.

Ennio Morricone some of the best music from the films

Originally posted by Remindme
Amazlingly violent? the spaghetti western? In it's day (the 60's) i bet it was but compared to todays standards it's nothing over the top.

Ennio Morricone some of the best music from the films

It released in 75. In regard to westerns of that era it was considered very violent by comparison.

Originally posted by Mark Question
Ordered "Four of the Apocalypse" from amazon, heard it's awesomely violent.

Fulci's spaghetti westerns are always good (in the genre) Try Massacre Time it's campy but fun.

If you want a real bloody spaghetti western look for "Blindman".

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Fulci's spaghetti westerns are always good (in the genre) Try Massacre Time it's campy but fun.

If you want a real bloody spaghetti western look for "Blindman".

Will do.

Spaghetti westerns are great, the Dollar trilogy is awesome and the best Spaghetti western is The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, the final duel is breathtaking.