How About Now: ‘A Fistful of Dollars’ (1964) is convoluted yet thrilling

In his column “How About Now,” Mason Barrett ’28 reviews classic films through a modern lens.

This review contains spoilers. 

How many Western movies have you watched recently? If you mainly watch new releases, I’d venture to say that you’ve probably struggled to find many Westerns. Although its peak passed long ago, the genre was still responsible for many legendary actors, directors and stories; no one can deny that modern filmmaking has been heavily influenced by the Western genre.

One of the most influential Western directors was Italian filmmaker Sergio Leone, known as “The Father of Spaghetti Westerns,” who invented the Spaghetti Western genre with “A Fistful of Dollars” (1964). The film follows the Man With No Name (Clint Eastwood) to a dangerous town where few survive the power struggle between rival groups the Baxters and the Rojos.

Spaghetti Westerns were more cynical and violent than Hollywood Westerns, which presented the Old West in a more optimal light. The former heavily featured moral ambiguity in their themes and characters.

“A Fistful of Dollars” is hard to analyze for two reasons. Firstly, there is a lot happening at all times. This provides numerous opportunities for Eastwood’s character to manipulate each side into buying his misinformation, but it also makes the film harder to follow. Perhaps someone else would more easily follow the intricacies of the delicate power balance, but I finished the film with the feeling that there were plot points that I missed.

Secondly, the Man With No Name is unreadable. This is a credit to Eastwood’s acting and shows why the actor garnered so much acclaim and fame from the genre. His character’s motivations, intentions and values are all ambiguous throughout the film, supporting the film’s focus on moral ambiguity. Eastwood deceives the audience as much as he tricks the other characters, making it difficult to track his growth over the course of the film, if there is any at all. I wouldn’t say that this detracts from the film though. It can be troubling as a viewer, unsure of how much you can trust the protagonist, but ultimately this is what makes the film a Spaghetti Western; the character exists in a gray area and navigates his way through it with violence.

I particularly loved the staging, composition and camera placement. At the end of an argument between two of the Rojo brothers, Don Miguel (Antonio Prieto) and Esteban (Sieghardt Rupp), the camera pushes back through a window to reveal that Eastwood’s character has been eavesdropping. This shot conveys well-crafted dramatic irony since Esteban was arguing that Don Miguel should allow the former to kill the Man With No Name, who is currently living with them. As a result, the Man With No Name moves to different living quarters. 

This new information was life-saving for the Man With No Name, and reinforces a key idea from Don Miguel: “a man’s life often depends on a mere scrap of information.”

My experience with Westerns is limited, but I did enjoy this film. It’s the first in a trilogy and was followed by “For A Few Dollars More” (1965) and “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly” (1966). The plot is occasionally arduous and Eastwood’s character is extremely guarded. However, the visual storytelling was still incredible and Eastwood’s acting was still intriguing to watch. “A Fistful of Dollars” is a film that draws you in but keeps you working as a viewer.

Editor’s Note: This article is a review and includes subjective thoughts, opinions and critiques.

The post How About Now: ‘A Fistful of Dollars’ (1964) is convoluted yet thrilling appeared first on The Stanford Daily.