Best movie sequel

[evil_twin]

[ QUOTE ]
What was The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly a sequel to?

[/ QUOTE ]

It was the last in the Fistful of Dollars trilogy. The first being A Fistful of Dollars and the second For a Few Dollars More.

[imported_The Vibesman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What was The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly a sequel to?

[/ QUOTE ]

It was the last in the Fistful of Dollars trilogy. The first being A Fistful of Dollars and the second For a Few Dollars More.

[/ QUOTE ]

But it's not a sequel any more than For A Few Dollars More is. The characters are different. This seems somewhat akin to calling "Snatch" a sequel to "Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels."

[evil_twin]

[ QUOTE ]
But it's not a sequel any more than For A Few Dollars More is. The characters are different. This seems somewhat akin to calling "Snatch" a sequel to "Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels."

[/ QUOTE ]

It was billed as a sequel at the time. It's sold as a trilogy of all three now. If you check the various Serigo Leone fan sites they all call it "The Fist Full of Dollars" trilogy.

[imported_The Vibesman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But it's not a sequel any more than For A Few Dollars More is. The characters are different. This seems somewhat akin to calling "Snatch" a sequel to "Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels."

[/ QUOTE ]

It was billed as a sequel at the time. It's sold as a trilogy of all three now. If you check the various Serigo Leone fan sites they all call it "The Fist Full of Dollars" trilogy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't care how a studio chooses to market a package. I know Leone's three films with Eastwood are often referred to as "The Dollars Trilogy," because it's simple. I've seen all three films about a thousand times each. They are often looked upon as being part of a package because they share so much thematically and stylistically. They are not a continuation of the same story or characters from previous films.

se·quel (skwl) KEY

NOUN:

Something that follows; a continuation.
A literary, dramatic, or cinematic work whose narrative continues that of a preexisting work.
A result or consequence. See Synonyms at effect.

I'm not trying to nit-pick here; for example, someone else mentioned that prequels are not technically sequels, and while that's true, I would include prequels in a poll like this (tho not Temple of Doom, as that movie doesn't hold a candle to Raiders). I don't see any reason why James Bond movies since Dr No couldn't be included.

But I don't see how you can just throw in movies by the same director with the same stars that don't share any common characters (except for Eastwood's abstract character, and there is no reason to believe he's playing the same character in all the films.)

Not that it matters, as Godfather II should win this in a walk.

[diebitter]

[ QUOTE ]

But I don't see how you can just throw in movies by the same director with the same stars that don't share any common characters (except for Eastwood's abstract character, and there is no reason to believe he's playing the same character in all the films.)



[/ QUOTE ]
I've already commented on this earlier in the thread. I believe the Clinet Eastwood character is the same character in all three films, as he wears the distinctive poncho in all three films.

But there's lots of arguments about this, and I'm aware that this is still argued over, so really it's not a matter of fact either way, but a matter of opinion.

[evil_twin]

[ QUOTE ]
I've already commented on this earlier in the thread. I believe the Clinet Eastwood character is the same character in all three films, as he wears the distinctive poncho in all three films.

[/ QUOTE ]

On IMDB, Clints character is called Joe in A FistFul of Dollars and The Good, the Bad, the Ugly. However, in For a Few Dollars more he's called Monco. How reliable this information is is unknown. It's hard not to think of him as the same character throughout the three films though.

[imported_The Vibesman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've already commented on this earlier in the thread. I believe the Clinet Eastwood character is the same character in all three films, as he wears the distinctive poncho in all three films.

[/ QUOTE ]

On IMDB, Clints character is called Joe in A FistFul of Dollars and The Good, the Bad, the Ugly. However, in For a Few Dollars more he's called Monco. How reliable this information is is unknown. It's hard not to think of him as the same character throughout the three films though.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's interesting. I've heard him referred to as "The Man With No Name" and the shorter "Blondie" but never as Joe or Monco.

I think it's apparent he isn't the same character, otherwise he would wonder why the Lee Van Cleef character in TGTB&TU looks the same as his partner from For A Few Dollars More. Also, he makes a ton of cash at the end of Few Dollars More from the bounties on Indio and his gang...what happened to that cash at the beginning of TGTB&TU? He's broke again, scamming a few grand at a time with Tuco.

[MonkeeMan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But it's not a sequel any more than For A Few Dollars More is. The characters are different. This seems somewhat akin to calling "Snatch" a sequel to "Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels."

[/ QUOTE ]

It was billed as a sequel at the time. It's sold as a trilogy of all three now. If you check the various Serigo Leone fan sites they all call it "The Fist Full of Dollars" trilogy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I always thought of them as "the man with no name" trilogy.

[mrkilla]

Usually most People would call it that, they are sequels as per the director, they took place at the same time (back drop of the civil war) in the same place [Out West] and with the same main Charcter, the man with no name. Blondie was the Nick name used by Tuco only. He never says his name , so if someone called him Joe, or Ringo or Harry it didnt matter it was names given to him by someone else he never gave his name thus, the man with no name.

He is always the "good" or perceived as Good and wearing the same outfit

[imported_The Vibesman]

Somebody is going to have to point to where Sergio Leone called these "sequels," or where he stated that Eastwood is playing the same character in all three, before I believe it. Not saying it's not true, I haven't read enough interviews with Leone. But it would surprise me. I think it's obvious from watching the movies that they are completely disconnected stories. That's all.