Add a Review

  • Col. Douglas Mortimer (Lee Van Cleef) and Monco (Clint Eastwood) are both bounty hunters. They're both after the bank robber El Indio (Gian Maria Volonté) for his bounty. They decide to join forces to bring El Indio and his gang of robbers down.

    Lee Van Cleef makes this a superior spaghetti western. He's not only as good as Clint. In many ways, he plays a superior character. His character has secrets. He has mysteries. Clint is playing a much more simpler character. For me, this is superior to 'A Fistful of Dollars' in the trilogy. The story is more iconic, cleaner. The characters have more depth.
  • Exceptional performances by three heavyweight actors, Gian Maria Volonte and Lee Van Cleef - both of whom, it's a shame, did not have all that many more opportunities to shine in quality films after this one - and Clint Eastwood, along with taut direction, editing, cinematography and gripping and unique music (by the great Ennio Morricone), make this movie a real standout. (The music's almost a major character in this film, in fact.) Stylistically iconic, this Sergio Leone opus has an endlessly fascinating and spellbinding story that surprises to the end. Plus, we really come to like the co-heroes, Van Cleef and Eastwood - we want to befriend them and emulate them. Volonte was priceless as a demonic villain - his facial expressions rich with narcissism and a strange kind of violence-fueled euphoria no one else has ever matched in film history, for my money. Though he clashed with director Leone and purportedly did not like the Western genre, Volonte's performance rises above the film's genre and could be favorably compared to the best portrayed villains of other more mainstream movies. Volonte brought a realism to his character and an intensity you don't see in many films. But so did Van Cleef, whose work in this film is incredible. You'd have thought other movie makers would have rushed to cast Van Cleef in important roles after this film, but no. Very strange. Though some might question the wanton violence in this film, the truth is that the real wild west was even more violent and the violence often much more capricious and random. Like all great artistic works, this film never grows old for me. I am always drawn to watch it again and again for it is of such a depth and complexity that it only reveals more of itself with each viewing.
  • Italian director Sergio Leone changed the face of the Western genre in 1964 when he introduced what would be known as the "Spaghetti Western" with the brilliant "Per un Pugno di Dollari" ("A Fistful of Dollars"). Not only the films looked grittier, violent and realistic; the characters in Leone's westerns became complex men with complex and obscure moral codes, very far away from the classic clear moral opposites of previous westerns. "Per Qualche Dollaro in più" ("For a few dollars more"), is the epitome of all this. It is a powerful, raw and ruthless masterpiece that transcended its genre and became one of the best movies of all-time.

    "For a Few Dollars More", the second in the so-called "Dollars trilogy" (a group of films by Leone with the same style), is the story of two different yet very similar men, Manco (Clint Eastwood) and the Colonel Douglas Mortimer (Lee Van Cleef) are two bounty hunters who are after the criminal named "El Indio" (Gian Maria Volontè). An unlikely alliance occurs between the two lone wolves as they decide to cooperate and divide the reward, but are these two killers after "Indio" for the same reason?

    Written by Fulvio Morsella and Sergio Leone himself, the film's main characteristic is the complex moral code the main characters follow. They are no longer the perfect clean heroes of classic westerns, both Manco and the Colonel have well-developed attitudes, motivations and purposes; they are neither completely good nor completely bad, they are just real. The story unfolds with a fine pace and good rhythm, it is probably the best structured of the "Trilogy" and the easiest to follow. It is also the one that represents the elements of the Spaghetti Western style the best.

    Stylistically, the film follows closely the conventions established by Leone's previous film but it takes them to the next level. The excellent use of minimalistic cinematography and the superb musical score by Ennio Morricone complement Leone's realistic vision of Westerns and completely redefined the genre's conventions. "For a Few Dollars More" is a violent tale of two hunters, and visually the film transmits the same emotions the characters feel. No more myths, the Westerns never felt this real.

    Clint Eastwood's super performance as Manco is very important for the success of the film, as he is the one that takes the audience through this brave new world, however, the star of the film is Lee Van Cleef as Colonel Mortimer. In one of his best performances ever, Van Cleef manages to be both menacing and interesting, giving life to Leone's brilliant script with great talent. Gian Maria Volontè as Indio complements the two big talents as the crazed criminal with a dark past, he is the perfect counterpart of the two lone wolves.

    "Per qualche dollaro in più" is a near flawless movie, as every piece of the puzzle falls into the right place to create a marvelous and unforgettable picture. It's only minor problem may be the dubbing, but fortunately, it still is superior to the one heard in other Italian productions of the same time and it doesn't hurt the film.

    Fans will always argue about which of the three films of the "trilogy" is the best, and while personally I prefer "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" over this one, it is just a matter of personal taste as this film is as perfect as that one. A real classic that changed the face of Western as we knew it. 10/10
  • Just for the record I happen to love all three films. For a Few Dollard More is an amazing film though perhaps not as influential as The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. There is one improvement over that film though, and that is the writing of Clint Eastwood's character, more developed and more compelling. A Fistful of Dollars is also great because of everything that makes TGTBATU and FAFDM so good, but I do consider the other two more influential on the genre and also Akira Kurosawa's Yojimbo, which used the film as its inspiration, to be the superior film. Back to A Few Dollars More, the stylised visuals are stunning to look at, the scenery is the very definition of epic and the cinematography sweeps. Ennio Morricone's score is both elegiac and operatic in tone and the story of greed and revenge that focuses mainly on the pursuit of bandit Indio draws you right in and never lets go. The dialogue is peppered with grit and dark humour, which is well-balanced with neither over-powering the other, while Leone's direction is superb. Clint Eastwood plays his more developed character with immense charisma, Lee Van Cleef is suitably vengeful and again Gian Maria Volonte snarls convincingly. Overall, a wonderful film. 10/10 Bethany Cox
  • As the second of the three films legendary filmmaker Sergio Leone collaborated on with Clint Eastwood (not to mention his first with Lee Van Cleef and his second with 'Fistful' actor Gian Maria Volonte), For a Few Dollars More gets well earned respect from the fans of the director and the groundbreaking star. And yet, occasionally there are those who'll not even know this film from Leone and Clint exists since it does sometimes get under the shadow of their two most infamous works, Fistful of Dollars (which for the most part introduced Clint and Leone to the public's awareness) and The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (which solidified Clint as a Western icon and gave Leone a similar status for film buffs). But taken as a film unto itself, aside from its place in the trilogy, this is a Western that simply delivers the goods, and it does so with a spectacular marriage of style and substance.

    The story begins by introducing our two (anti) heroes, bounty hunters Douglas Mortimer (Cleef), former Colonel, and Monco (Eastwood), a drifter. They both set their sights on the leader of a gang of bandits named Indio (Volonte), who is plotting to go after over a million locked in a bank in El Paso. At first, Monco and Mortimer seem like their after Indio for the same reason- reward money- though there seems to be more than each man counted on with him and his gang.

    From the opening scenes with Cleef and Eastwood, to the scenes in El Paso, and then into the set pieces in the stone ruins in the Mexico desert(s), For a Few Dollars More displays the utmost skill by Leone in his storytelling, as well as in his use of the camera. Using Fistful's camera-man Massimo Dallamano, Leone does what he does best in his spaghetti westerns- he creates a perfectly in sync mood with his characters: each look in a scene, whether it's intense waiting for guns to be drawn, or just regular conversation, the look of the film draws the viewer in without over-doing it. Some points are made bold or repetitious (like Ennio Morricone's score, that keeps its whistling theme and serene watch theme completely in check), though it's not done to any degree of annoyance or by accident.

    In fact, that's what makes his westerns such fun, is that you take them seriously as films, yet he always reminds you that it's all in the 'movie-world' just by the way Mortimer or Monco strikes up a match. As for the actors themselves, Eastwood and Cleef are total pros in this genre, so ever line of dialog comes out naturally, and the supporting actors (however dubbed over from original Italian) all contribute great notes as well. At the least, it can appeal to a new generation of kids looking back to older movies, which may look at this and consider it more modernly crafted than a John Ford oldie. A+
  • For a Few Dollars More (1965) is the best Clint Eastwood Western movie and one of my favorite personal classic western flicks ever! It is my third favorite in "The Man with No Name" Trilogy. I grew up watching this film and it was the first Clint Eastwood western movie I ever saw, I fall immediately in love with it and I just love this movie. It is Sergio Leone's best western film of all time my favorite. It is entraining and brilliant western flick with a great original epic story, great cast and the acting is fantastic. You have a great shoot outs, the music score is original epic. I always enjoy this film. It is my favorite Eastwood western movie.

    In my opinion It is Sergio Leone and Clint Eastwood's classic film that they ever made together. Westerns like this film doesn't exit this days anymore. I have enjoyed For a Few Dollars More a lot. I love this one to death. The film is very entertained, is not boring and It has a good plot and story to tell. The characters, the action shooting sequences are just amazing and awesome. Sergio Leone does what he wanted to do with the film, and become one of the greatest epic classic western movies. I love this movie to death and it is my favorite film! There are other western films that Clint Eastwood made and directed but this one will be one of his best films in the history ever.

    The first film was more about one hero but in this film there are two heroes. The bullets, the shooting is outstanding. The gun fights are awesome. This is a Western that simply delivers the goods, and it does so with a spectacular marriage of style and substance. From the opening scenes with Cleef and Eastwood, to the scenes in El Paso, and then into the set pieces in the stone ruins in the Mexico desert, For a Few Dollars More displays the utmost skill by Leone in his storytelling, as well as in his use of the camera.

    The film is intelligent when Col. Douglas Mortimer suggested that the way to break the gang will be easy with one man from the inside of the gang (Monco) , because his younger. The story telling from El Indio about a carpenter who made a big closet were the safe was hiding in it was just plain brilliant.Monco breaks one of Indio's friends out of prison and is admitted to the gang, to prove his loyalty was awesome. The watch that Indio opens during the gun fight scenes and when the song stops by the watch he draw his gun and shoot anyone in the gun fight with him that was so awesome. The last showdown between Col. Douglas Mortimer and El Indio when the song stopped was TERRIFIC!

    Why I love this movie? Simply because of Clint Eastwood and Lee Van Cleef. I love Lee Van Cleef so much in here because he plays the good guy, he kills bunch of outlaws whit his riffle. He befriends Monco and he kills El Inido on the end. He doesn't split the reward with Monco , but he lets him have it, the money on a honest way. Clint Eastwood as Monco did a fantastic job in one of his best performances as Bounty Killer Monco. He also kills bunch of outlaws, he also shoot Mortimer's hat, he never shoots an Innocent or unarmed person, that is why I love this actor and his character so much. Gian Maria Volonté did a good job on another style he also never shoot unarmed person, he only did that once for a women he fall in love. Mortimer's sister, on the end of the film it was reveled why Col. Douglas Mortimer was hunting El Indio and his gang. He was doing it for both: Justice and Revenge, while Monco just wanted to get money and become rich, but he changed his mind after he saw how Indio is evil and cruel person. The gun fight between Col. Douglas Mortimer and Juan Wild - The Hunchback ( Klaus Kinski) in the bar was fantastic! How Col. Douglas Mortimer killed him. I love this film to death I love it! Sergio Leone did a fantastic job directing this awesome flick in fact I think it is his masterpiece. The film that changed the western movies today and I love the music score from Ennio Morricone. The dialogue and the script was amazing, the weapons used in this film are awesome and they are used well. Action is plenty in the film.

    What else do you want in an spaghetti Western film like this at all?! The fact is this is the greatest western ever made in the history. I love this film to death! It is my third favorite film in the Dollars trilogy. This movie is a perfect 10 it is my personal favorite western movie.
  • Leone's 'A Fistful Of Dollars' is a bona fide western classic, but amazingly he managed to top himself with this "sequel". Yeah, I know it isn't REALLY a sequel. In fact Leone's "Dollars" trilogy actually have no connection with each other, and Eastwood's so-called "Man With No Name" actually has many! (In this movie Monco, in the previous one Joe). Most people seem go for 'The Good, The Bad And The Ugly' as the best of the three movies, but I think 'For A Few Dollars More' just beats it. Anyway, there's no argument that they are three brilliant films, Eastwood is super cool in all of them, Leone is on top form, particularly in this one, and Ennio Morricone's scores are amazing stuff. 'For A Few Dollars More' is helped enormously by Lee Van Cleef playing Colonel Mortimer, and the scenes between him and Eastwood, and the ones between him and Klaus Kinski are pure gold. This is not only one of the best westerns ever made, but one of the best movies of any genre released in the 1960s. It was also a highly influential one. I can't imagine Peckinpah's 'The Wild Bunch' for example existing without Leone. Words fail me praising movies as brilliant as this one. All I can say is WATCH IT NOW. Or if you've already seen it WATCH IT AGAIN!
  • This movie is the second best western i have ever seen with The Good, The Bad, The Ugly being first. I disagree with someone who wrote that this movie is not as good as A Fistful of Dollars. This movie is way better than a fistful of dollars. The reason is (as i pointed out in my other post) is that Clint's role or character is better when he has a good supporting member because it gives Clint's character more depth as well as throw a wild card into the mix. Lee van clef is excellent in his role, i still have him labeled as the bad but it was surprising to see him play a good guy in this one. Both bounty hunters have their own styles which meshes really good on the screen. Gian had more depth to this one which played perfectly into Lee Van Clefs character. In a fistful of dollars Gian didn't have much depth at all and some of the characters were annoying. I like how leone tied all of the characters into each other in this one, having all of their stories somehow play a role in the other ones. If you haven't seen this movie i suggest you watch Leone's films in chronological order with A fistful of dollars first, this one second, and finish it off with the good the bad the ugly. You'll be glad you did.
  • "For a Few Dollars More" has become the template for which most Spaghetti Westerns derive.

    As Leone went along, his films got more daring and complex, exploring new ideas and raising not only the bar for Spaghetti Westerns (which, contrary to popular belief, were around before "A Fistful of Dollars") but for Westerns in general. However, this exploration at times affected the quality of his films. Leone was a popcorn director - a visual stylist who always entertained first and maybe provoked a thought or two second. However, his films were never think pieces so when he tried to integrate depth into his films the results became uneven.

    "For a Few Dollars More" is his best film because it catches Leone in his most transitional period. At once the film is more complex and stylized than "A Fistful..." and more tight and efficient than "The Good, the Bad and The Ugly" (which is almost on par with "For a Few..."). The revenge sub-plot involving Colonel Mortimer is more compelling than the similar one in Leone's "Once Upon a Time in the West" because Mortimer is more developed as a character than the Harmonica Player (which is not to insult the great Charles Bronson).

    And hell, it has Lee Van Cleef as one of the biggest bad-asses of all time. The mere presence of Colonel Douglas Mortimer elevates the film to a new level. He steals the film from "Manco" completely. And Van Cleef's theft of the film is what makes it a cut above "A Fistful...". As a character, "The Man With No Name" (who in actuality has three: Joe, Manco and Blondie) isn't very interesting and there always needs to be a counterpoint to play off of him. That's why "A Fistful..." isn't nearly as good as this film or "The Good..." (which had the great Eli Wallach in one of the best scenery munching performances ever).

    So in closing, "For a Few..." is a tight masterpiece of fluff Western entertainment. It's mean, violent and immoral, just the way any good Spaghetti Western should be.
  • "For a Few Dollars More" is the middle film of Sergio Leone's classic western trilogy starring a then upstart Clint Eastwood. Sandwiched between "A Fistful of Dollars" and the finale, "The Good, the Bad, & the Ugly." This film provides further insight into Eastwood's "Man with No Name."

    Eastwood is a bounty killer who is in search of the feared bandit known as El Indio. Colonel Douglas Mortimer (played by Lee Van Cleef) is in a similar position, and the two cross paths many times in their pursuits of El Indio. The premise has similarities to that of the first, and in fact won't be all that surprising to most younger viewers. But at the time, the various plot turns and twists were unique and revolutionary.

    The pace is both a pro and con at the same time. Unlike modern films, the usual western showdown scenes unfold very deliberately. Rather than simultaneously begin and end in a furious volley of bullets, the encounters are set up slowly. On the bright side, this gives both the characters and the viewers an opportunity to fully appreciate the choices made and the consequences that will follow. From a negative perspective (not mine), one might say that the gunfights are plain slow, and the action is too sparse. While I enjoyed the change of pace, I also understand why some will say otherwise. Others portions of "More" can hang with any western sequences ever put on film. Highlighting the action is a robbery scene, the creativity of which ranks with any modern heist out of "The Score" or "The Italian Job."

    This trilogy catapulted Clint Eastwood to Hollywood fame, and one can see his star-making charisma ooze through the screen. Blending stoicism and machismo wonderfully, Eastwood produces the epitome of the tough and arrogant loner cowboy. In a role that could easily have been overshadowed, Van Cleef holds his own against Eastwood. His character was probably similar to Eastwood's in his youth, but Van Cleef accurately reflects the wisdom that would likely come with his character's age. The motley crew of baddies is filled with men who completely look their parts. That's about all that is asked of them, and they deliver.

    The cinematography of "More" follows in the groundbreaking footsteps of "Fistful." While one might not notice anything revolutionary now, at the time shots like that had scarcely been seen. Shots like the low-angles utilized prior to a few shootouts, as well as the framing of space are all now staples of cinematic westerns, and they originated here.

    Ennio Morricone's score is also a classic. Whether serving as epic background music for sweeping crane shots or providing aural cues during action sequences, the music is always appropriate and often the best part of the film.

    Bottom Line: While it might not seem as great now, so much of this movie was groundbreaking and remains classic that it merits 8 of 10.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    "For A Few Dollars More" sees the return of the Stranger, the Man With No Name, but this time he has a defined profession, as a bounty hunter… He is searching for a drug-addicted murderer, known as El Indio…

    The film opens with another bounty hunter, Colonel Mortimer (Lee Van Cleef) arriving in the town of Tucumcari and with great coolness and precision killing one of his list of wanted men as the suspect attempts to flee… Mortimer then goes to the saloon where he encounters No Name, who is calmly dispatching four men at a saloon… No Name walks, in a leisurely manner, to the sheriff's office to collect the bounty on their heads… Having established their mutual aims and equal talents, the two men decide to team up in pursuit of El Indio… The murderer is portrayed as infinitely more evil than the two conscience-free professionals: he has a positive relish for killing…

    EI Indio is planning to rob the bank at El Paso, so the bounty hunters meet up there in order to waylay him… During the discussion that leads up to the showdown, it is revealed in flashback that Mortimer has a personal score to settle with the villain… Nothing is revealed about No Name's past in this conversation, and typically in keeping with the characterization, No Name infiltrates El Indio's gang…

    This continuing challenge to the Western myth of the perfect hero and the irredeemably evil villain was spelled out in words at the beginning of the film: 'Where life had no value, death, sometimes, had its price.'

    Within this mayhem, Leone tried to stick to his new morality. 'I wanted to show that most heroes do what they do for money. I also wanted to prove that bad guys can sometimes have their good side. Al Capone, for instance, had a certain kind of humanity.'
  • Excellent fun with sadistic humor from Leone. Eastwood's best performance in a Leone film. Van Cleef is good in a role similar to Chuck Bronson's in "Once Upon a Time in the West". He is menacing and sympathetic, whereas in "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" he is just campy and all "bad guy" (but still fun). What makes both performances so memorable I think is that Van Cleef seems to be in touch with Leone's dark humor, where Eastwood is used as a straight man. Volonte is also excellent in the bandito role Leone used (an example of a standard European character type who reminds the audience of earthiness and the basic ignorance and greed of man). A much better film than most people who've seen it on a Saturday afternoon on TV probably realize -- you have to see these movies in the theater to get the full hit.
  • Sergio Leone's sophomore film in his Spaghetti Western trilogy and is a major step up from A Fistful of Dollars. This was a film that didn't appeal to me, the first time I have watched it but as I watch it more and more along with others within the trilogy, I start to see the great things about this film. For A Few Dollars More is much more bigger and a much more better written film than it's predecessor.

    For A Few Dollars More was written by both Leone and Luciano Vincenzoni. Both have written a story that is engaging and this is due to a plot with much bigger stakes, and rewards, and also much better written characters. This film fleshes out the characters much more than it's predecessors, taking it's time to show each person's agenda and their personalities, yet Leone and Vincenzoni still has kept the unpredictability that was found in the first film. Oddly enough, even though Eastwood's character is the main star, the film's emotional significance was much more apparent on Mortimer and El Indio. Their back story is the reason that I care about these characters, it tells us why they are who they are. For A Few Dollars More's script has it's humor pumped up in comparison to the first film and I felt that this work. It actually gives the film much more character and helps not make the tone of the film too negative.

    Sergio Leone has created a film that is much more cinematic and traditional in comparison to the first film but at the same time not trading off the uniqueness of the first film, which was the slow building tension and the close ups of people's faces focusing on their reactions and the emotional facial acting by the actors. This film does increase the beat of the film, with editing that moves the film along at a pace that keeps us on our toes. Leone has definitely have gained much more confidence going towards this film as the film doesn't feel as indulgent as the first and seemed to show much more enjoyment with the story than the first film. This film's budget was much higher than the first film which allowed him to create settings that feel real and lively.

    Massimo Dallamano is back as the cinematographer of this film. The film looks much better than the first film and this may be due to the increase in budget and shot at better locations or it could be due to Dallamano and Leone has a much better understanding of what they want for this film. The film still retains that style from the first film with close ups that take it's time to move things along but it's much more improved here as they have used different angles and techniques in constructing these shots, allowing them to feel fresh. Dallamano has the camera move in this film much more than the first. The first film has it's shots set up in a way that doesn't require the camera to move or zoom into anything. This movement makes the film move faster and exciting.

    Ennio Morricone comes back to do the score for this film and it's just as great as the first one. The score here sounds much more fuller and dramatic, this may be due to a much larger story and much more characters focused on. Morricone's score here may not be as memorable as the first or third film but it definitely fits with what is shown on screen and it doesn't feel recycled. The film's score feels fast and upbeat, which sound great in moments of the film that have characters riding their horses on the beautiful backdrops. Morricone also has a much lighter and smaller track that plays during the build up of climax, the music that comes from the lockets. It sounds beautiful and it connects with the emotional weight during these situations.

    The film's cast is much bigger in this film and the film is now shared with three characters rather than a main focus on Eastwood. Clint Eastwood is great here as expected but not as memorable as A Fistful of Dollars. Lee Van Cleef brings something different to the film which gives the film much more personality. Leone loves to have actors banter in his films and it's definitely apparent here with the focus on the friendship on both Eastwood and Cleef's characters. Both actors work well together and it's a shame that this isn't the case for the next film. Gian Maria Volonte is back for this film as the antagonist, this time his character is much better written and his acting is much more effective but it may not appeal to everyone as he has increased the dramatics in this film in comparison to the first film.

    For A Few Dollars More is a much better constructed film than A Fistful of Dollars with a bigger and better story and improvements on the acting and photography. The film is great to watch on its own and does not require to watch the first or third film to understand but if you have seen the other films you get to pick up on the small things that Leone has put in this film.
  • hall89520 February 2015
    The Man with No Name is back and this time he's got company. On the trail of the diabolical El Indio, a most wanted fugitive, our hero crosses paths with Colonel Douglas Mortimer. Mortimer is also after El Indio. After some manly posturing in which The Man with No Name and Mortimer shoot each other's hats the two decide to team up to go after El Indio and his gang. El Indio is currently targeting the Bank of El Paso, supposedly an impenetrable institution in which there is a safe containing almost a million dollars. The pair of bounty hunters plan to infiltrate the gang before the robbery and, if all goes according to plan, take down El Indio with ease. Of course, when does anything ever go according to plan? There will inevitably be complications. And when there are complications in a Western that can only mean one thing. Shootouts. Lots and lots of shootouts.

    The movie has a simple but reasonably engaging story with a few interesting characters. But the movie really fails to spark to life. The pacing is laborious, there are way too many times in this movie where absolutely nothing of any importance is happening. And even the shootouts, where you would expect the movie to shine, get dragged out to the point interest starts to wane. Once again Clint Eastwood does a fine job playing the ever-stoic Man with No Name. Lee Van Cleef brings a little much-needed personality to the role of Mortimer. And Gian Maria Volonté certainly makes for a convincingly detestable villain as El Indio. But despite the credible performances of the three main players the movie still disappoints. The rest of the cast makes very little impact, El Indio's mostly faceless gang making little impression. There's not enough going on with the story to really grab you. A couple of bounty hunters go after a bad guy. Some people shoot at each other now and again. That's about it. The movie ultimately tries to introduce some different motivation for why some of the characters do the things they do. But by then it's too late, you're really just waiting for the movie to end by that point. With some tighter pacing, some sharper action, this could have been a movie which really worked. As it is it's a bit of a letdown. Certainly not The Man with No Name's greatest adventure.
  • Completely defying the tried & tested Hollywood formula and introducing his own style of narration that was more character driven, glamorized violence & also added a new dimension of moral ambiguity into its characters' psyche, thus bringing both heroes & villains very much on the same level, Sergio Leone presented a whole new outlook of the Wild West in A Fistful of Dollars but with this second chapter, he further accelerates the inevitable rebirth of the western genre.

    The second installment of Leone's Dollars trilogy is quite an improvement over its predecessor in almost all departments of filmmaking & gradually portrays the developing maturity in Leone's craftsmanship. Starring Clint Eastwood as a bounty hunter looking for a number of wanted suspects, who later partners with another bounty hunter looking for the same guys & make a deal of splitting the reward but in the end when it comes down to final showdown, one of them shows their real motive behind the hunt.

    Featuring an improved direction from Sergio Leone, For A Few Dollars More presents the director in more control of his artistry & has a much stronger script to muster ahead with. The scope of camera-work, the precision of editing & overall production design also get their upgrades plus the performances from the recurring cast turn out to be better than the previous film with Clint Eastwood & new addition of Lee Van Cleef impressing the most.

    On an overall scale, For A Few Dollars More is another huge step towards placing the coffin on traditional westerns & presents a significant evolution of every single aspect of its making when compared with A Fistful of Dollars. Ennio Morricone's music also leaves a bigger mark than before & it's exciting to observe how seamlessly it accompanies the drama. A rare sequel that improves upon the original, For A Few Dollars More is absolutely recommended.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Without doubt among the best of the western genre, Clint Eastwood and Sergio Leone's Man With No Name trilogy, the unofficial launch of the "spaggetti western" subgenre, rewrote the rules, using the intangibles of cinematography, Ennio Morricone's haunting scores, and settings to extract engaging storytelling despite the less-than-flawless dubbing of character voices and the cheesy sound effects (the overused gunshot sound is straight out of Warner Brothers cartoons). Combined with exciting shootouts, Leone's trilogy made movie history and remains compelling cinema.

    Arguably the best of the Leone trilogy is this second installment, a sequel to A Fistful of Dollars. Contrary to the nickname, Clint Eastwood's character does indeed have a name - identified as Joe in Fistful, here he is identified as Monco. And he also has an equally ruthless and skilled rival in Colonel Douglas Mortimer (Lee Van Cleef in his finest performance). Indeed, the theme of the film is the rivalry of the two bounty hunters turning to mutual respect and eventually to teamwork, shown in the climatic showdown with the villianous Indio, a brutal killer (perhaps a bit too brutal for the film's own good) with whom Mortimer has a score to settle, a score that becomes clear in the haunting chimes of the watches owned by both Mortimer and Indio.

    Pairing Eastwood and Van Cleef was a good idea even before shooting began, and pairing Joe Monco (The Man With No Name) with Douglas Mortimer proves it with the superb chemistry between the two bounty killers, a chemistry that elevates an engaging story to true masterwork.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    The film begins as you see Lee Van Cleef tracking down and killing wanted men. He is so cold, calculating and non-emotional that he is perhaps one of the creepiest heroes in Westerns. Then, the action switches to Eastwood--doing pretty much the same thing, though with a bit more bravado and a little less menace. Both men are bounty hunters and apparently are nearly unstoppable. Then, the film switches to a prison break, where "El Loco" is being extracted as his gang wipes out almost everyone in the prison.

    Well, El Loco has a $10,000 bounty and each of his men have bounties as well, so both Van Cleef and Eastwood head to El Paso, as they assume his gang can't resist attacking the richest bank in the West. However, shortly after our bounty hunters arrive, they discover the other is there for the same reason. So, instead of killing each other (which it sure looks like they might do), they decide to team up and split the reward money. However, down deep they both seem pretty foolish as they seem to want to take on the murderous gang alone and not split the money! The plan is for Eastwood to infiltrate the gang while Van Cleef attacks. This seems reasonable, as one of the gang members (the ever-handsome Klaus Kinski) knows Van Cleef. To infiltrate them, Eastwood "stretches the law a bit" by breaking one of El Loco's buddy's out of prison. Because they seem to trust him, Eastwood is sent with a few guys to divert the El Paso authorities to a fake robbery in another town. Eastwood does this but then kills the gang members with him. You see, Eastwood doesn't want the sheriff and his men on hand to get the reward! Unfortunately, the robbery does NOT occur the way Van Cleef and Easatwood reason it would, and El Loco and the surviving gang members escape with the money. It's actually nice to see this because up until now, the two have looked invincible. So, Eastwood re-joins the gang and Van Cleef follows. Once again, it seems very uncertain if these two really are a team or out to trick the other out of the reward. It's obvious that Eastwood's sole motivator is money, whereas Van Cleef's is only revealed at the end of the film.

    Eastwood AND Van Cleef both infiltrate the gang (after Van Cleef kills Kinski to prevent him from talking). All seems to be going well and the two guys are waiting for their chance to pick them off one by one and return the stolen money to El Paso. However, it turns out that the incredibly sadistic El Loco is quite the schemer and knows the two are bounty hunters. So, the gang beats the stuffing out of the duo (though only a short time later they look just fine!) and tie them up and place a guard on them. However, El Loco is a major jerk and plans on killing off most of the gang and keeping the money for himself. So, he arranges for Eastwood and Van Cleef's escape (this is a really DUMB plan and a big shortcoming in the story). He reasons that the gang and the bounty hunters will wipe each other out as El Loco and his friend escape with the dough.

    Unfortunately for El Loco, the gang is quickly wiped out and he is face-to-face with Van Cleef at the end of the film. Van Cleef shoots him but the wound is not fatal and El Loco's shot knocks away Van Cleef's gun! This leads to El Loco's trademark--he has a shoot out with his opponent which is to begin the second his pocket watch stops playing music. Well, just before the music stops, Eastwood shows up and saves Van Cleef's life--allowing him to retrieve his gun. It turns out Van Cleef had an identical watch to El Loco's because many years earlier El Loco had murdered Van Cleef's sister and brother-in-law! So, Eastwood being a cool guy and all, lets Van Cleef have the honor of killing El Loco in the gun fight. Van Cleef is so thrilled that Eastwood gave him a chance for revenge that he decides that he doesn't want the money and tells Eastwood he can have all the reward money. The final shot is of Eastwood stacking up all the MANY bodies and figuring how much money he will have earned. The dollar amount isn't quite right and he quickly spins around to waste the one surviving bad guy who just came out of hiding--telling Van Cleef he must have either miscounted or forgot to kill one of them!

    Now that I've given a pretty thorough overview of the film, let's talk about what I liked. The music is classic spaghetti Western music--over-the-top and really, really cool! The villains are pure evil and fun to watch. The good guys are also pretty scary and fun to watch. But what I liked most about the film was its sense of humor (despite being a very violent film). The scene where Eastwood is talking to the crazy old man in the shack is wonderful and so are several little vignettes spaced throughout the film. The not-quite-a-prequel to this film, A FIST FULL OF DOLLARS was based on Kurosawa's Yogimbo and Sanjuro--and in this film, humor was also occasionally used to break the violence and tension extremely well.

    One final note is about the performances of Klaus Kinski and Van Cleef. I was absolutely amazed at Kinski's facial expressions--as he was able to make his face tick violently when he was scared. This was amazing and I doubt many people could do this. As for Van Cleef, I really think he stole the show in the film despite Eastwood being so strongly associated with the film. He was truly menacing and the focal point for much of the film.
  • This is the second movie in Sergio Leone's trilogy, sandwiched between "For a Fistful of Dollars" and the classic "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly"...Eastwood (Man with No Name) and Lee Van Cleef (Colonel Douglas Mortimer) are two bounty killers who eventually team up to go after Indio and his gang of bandits...

    If you don't like Spaghetti Westerns or don't "get" Spaghetti Westerns, then this movie is NOT for you, but if you do, there are many great lines, great scenes and great showdowns in "For a Few Dollars More"...And the best part of this movie, as is with most Leone movies, is the music by Ennio Morricone...

    The scores from this movie, "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly" and "Once Upon a Time in The West" are three of Morricone's best (in my humble opinion) and music from the soundtrack of "A Few Dollars More" can be found on a cd called "The Legendary Italian Western Volume 2", by Ennio Morricone, where there are 31 tracks from several movies...Or there are many, many other cds where you can find spaghetti western music, just do a search on "Ennio Morricone, spaghetti western music"...
  • "For a Few Dollars More," the middle installment of the iconic Sergio Leone/Clint Eastwood "Dollars" trilogy, is the most brutal of all three films. Throughout the movie, ruthless bounty hunters, all of who seem to have no respect for human life, often perform cold-blooded murders. The bounty hunters use the "wild west" as a free range: they track, they kill, and they collect.

    One of these bounty hunters happens to be The Man with No Name (Eastwood), who returns to us now after his introduction in "A Fistful of Dollars," which was the first movie of the trilogy. (An interesting observation is that the "man with no name" actually does have a name in each installment -- here, his name is Manco, but this is a fact that is often forgotten.)

    The Man with No Name/Manco is on a mission to find the criminal Indio (Gian Maria Volonté), whose capture is worth a large sum of money. It is quickly set up that local law enforcement is weak. Sheriffs are cowards. Only the vicious bounty hunters know how to drag in the criminals: dead or alive. Along for the journey is a fellow bounty hunter named Mortimer (Lee Van Cleef), whose own reasons for seeking the man differ from Manco's. At first, the two killers go their own separate ways, and then decide to team up together and improve their chances of finding Indio -- despite the fact that their intentions for his capture are different.

    Not only are the two men's intentions different, but also their methods. Mortimer is a ruthless, cold-blooded murderer whose self-confidence is revealed through his barbaric actions. Manco, the hero, is less of a murderer and more of a law enforcer. Leone quickly sets this up through a sequence of shots: Mortimer's introduction, for example, begins with his search for a criminal, which finally comes to a finish as Mortimer confronts the man (who is hiding in a brothel). His foe manages to escape through a window, leaping onto a horse and galloping away through town. The images that follow reveal an insight into Mortimer's own self-confidence and startlingly calm nature.

    Manco's appearance is even more dramatic. He tracks down his own victim, and corners him in a saloon, only to see three cowboys appear out of nowhere and block off all exits. In one quick motion he swings around and fires three successive shots, each bullet finding its target.

    Here it is established that Manco is an underdog; therefore, our story's hero. He isn't as ruthless as Mortimer (who mercilessly picks his prey off from a distance) and his actions are somewhat admirable. The cowboys who tried to kill him were the bad guys. Manco was the good guy.

    Its lesser admirers often describe the film as being "too long". It's true that the film contains some unnecessary scenes, and these are often dragged out for dramatic effect -- but that is the point. The movie, directed by one of cinema's most ambitious and visionary directors (Sergio Leone, 1929 - 1989), is all about long passages of close-ups and wide-lense shots. Along with its predecessor and particularly its sequel, the "Dollars" trilogy revolutionized the derogatory "spaghetti western" description. In the years to come, Hollywood would actually aim to create films similar to the "Dollars" movies -- all of which were inferior. The entire "Dollars" trilogy has such scope, and ambition, that its Hollywood counterparts pale in comparison.

    Leone's direction is magnificent and would later inspire -- of all people -- Quentin Tarantino (whose "Kill Bill" movies owe something to the "Dollars" trilogy). Long, wide lenses and extreme close-ups only accentuate the fear of the men. There is a particular sequence of shots that clips back and forth between Mortimer and a wanted notice pinned to the exterior of a building. Leone slowly builds up the back-and-forth shots until they burst into a pattern of super-speed images, distinctly closed with the sound of gunshots. It's this sort of blazing, distinct style that makes the film so infectious and enjoyable.

    The acting cannot be criticized, although the English dubbing is sometimes rather laughable. Eastwood is one of the only actors whose voice is not dubbed -- but he rarely speaks. His face does all the talking. Lee Van Cleef (who was re-cast by Leone as a separate character in "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly") manages to turn Mortimer into one of the quintessential bad guys of cinema. Although the dubbing can occasionally detract from the flow of scenes and dialogue, the two lead performances by Eastwood and Van Cleef more than compensate for this slight flaw.

    Hollywood was cautious about releasing "Dollars." Eastwood, known for his role in the television series "Rawhide," was the only marketable star. The director was an unknown Italian with no commercial successes. As its predecessor before it, "For a Few Dollars More" was delayed release in the States, where it was deemed "unworthy."

    However, the movie was a huge success in Italy, in particular; Clint Eastwood quickly gained a cult fan base overseas, but it was not until May 1967 -- after the US release of "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" -- that "For a Few Dollars More" and its predecessor would open to critical accolade and deserved celebration in the United States. Now, almost forty years later, it's still a fascinating piece of classic cinema.
  • Xstal19 December 2022
    You're a bounty hunter who always gets his man, you stand your ground, your aim is sound, you have a plan; now El Indio has escaped, the poncho's resolutely draped, you'll take him down and finish off, all of his clan. But in the ointment there's a fly that has appeared, Douglas Mortimer is as resolutely geared, he's a bounty hunter too, carries a grudge he can't eschew, and he's keen to partner up if you volunteer.

    A pair of bounty hunters pool their talents and reasoning to recapture and curtail El Indio and his brutal gang of outlaws and bandits in a breath-taking western that continues to stand the test of time and just gets better and better, with two legends taking the roles of the protagonists.
  • One of my favorite movie lines of all time as spoken by Klaus Kinski upon recognizing Lee Van Cleef in the little cantina as the one who used his (Klaus') cheek to strike his match earlier in the movie. When Kinski ask if he "remember me, amigo," Van Cleef just reply "uh uh." To which he's asked to try that trick again, which prompts Van Cleef to utter another one of my all time lines - "I generally don't smoke 'til after I've eaten; why don't you come back in five minutes." Just typing this brings smiles to my face. I've been a Lee Van Cleef fan since High Noon (with Robert Wilke) and Kansas City Confidential (with Jack Elam and Neville Brand!) and this was/is the movie that made him a star. Granted it didn't last for long, but he did have his 15 minutes. This is my favorite Spaghetti Western, it was also my first (didn't see "Fistful" until much later - and Good, Bad, Ugly was a major disappointment - I wanted Van Cleef to play the same role). And the music, especially the pipe organ, just blows my mind. Highly enjoyable; think I'll go and watch it again.
  • For his follow up to spaghetti western classic A Fistful of Dollars, director Sergio Leone serves up more of the same, with lots of squinty eyed heroics, cigar chomping and twitchy trigger fingers. This time around, Clint Eastwood's impossibly cool 'man with no name' teams up with fellow bounty killer Col. Douglas Mortimer (Lee Van Cleef) to claim the money on the head of despicable outlaw El Indio (Gian Maria Volontè) and his gang (whose number include Klaus Kinski as an ornery hunchback), who are planning to rob the bank of El Paso.

    With every frame carefully considered, For A Few Dollars More is visually stylish throughout, and boasts an impressive score by the ever reliable Ennio Morricone, making the film a treat for both eyes and ears. The pacing, however, lets the movie down somewhat: at well over two hours, the rather slight story tends to drag at times—not quite as much as Leone's next two over-rated movies perhaps, but enough for my mind to start wandering at times.

    6.5/10, rounded up to 7 for IMDb.
  • Prismark102 June 2019
    Sergio Leone and Clint Eastwood reunite for their second part of the Dollar trilogy.

    The man with no name is actually called Monco, a bounty hunter. Eastwood plays him cool, mean and with his laconic with and stoicism. He is after a big payday and bag the diabolical bandit Indio (Gian Maria Volonte) who has broken out of jail, taken revenge on the man who put him there and now plans to rob a vault in a bank in El Paso.

    Monco reluctantly teams up with another cool but older and deadly bounty hunter. Colonel Douglas Mortimer (Lee Van Cleef.) Monco in the inside with the bandits and the Colonel on the outside. Things do not go initially to plan and the Colonel has another more personal reason to go after Indio.

    Sergio Leone delivers a cunning, violent, tricky, hypnotic classic spaghetti western. Even with the weird dubbing there is black humour and deadly shots.

    The hotel owner with the frustrated wife as he is too short for her but we just would not know it when we first see him. The old man Monco meets who hates trains. The nervy performance from Klaus Kinski. Indio laughing like a maniac just like his 'Wanted' poster. Then there is the music by Ennio Morricone which is wonderfully evocative.

    The teaming of Van Cleef and Eastwood is just magical. Eastwood delivers another performance that would be another step into his legendary status.

    This is a better film than A Fistful of Dollars with a more tighter plot and shorter running time than the third movie, The Good, The Bad and the Ugly.

    I used to watch this film every year as a kid. The BBC would regularly show the trilogy. I viewed it again after so many decades and it has none lost of its magnificence.
  • For a Few Dollars more is definitely the weakest of the Dollars trilogy. Clint Eastwood and Lee Van Cleef make a good team, but it just drags on a bit too long. Plus, Ennio Morricone's score seems a little more grating than normal. Still, though, this is a classic Western and it's worth a watch.
  • This is a typical spaghetti Western, which means it has great music and sound effects, and nothing else going for it. The plot is somewhat better than most Eastwood westerns. Two bounty hunters team up to chase down a gang. And there is an interesting duel involving the chimes on a watch. There, all interest ends. Some characters are like comic book super heroes, but without the explanation of being super heroes. For example, Superman was from Krypton and had super powers because he was an alien. The super powers of the two major characters here makes no sense. For that matter, neither do their characters. We're supposed to accept their vicious behavior, but why? No explanation. I challenge anyone to watch a spaghetti western without the sound, using just subtitles, and I guarantee that person will be bored to death. Great music, lots of meaningless action, ridiculous story lines, poor characters, poor acting, and poor writing.
An error has occured. Please try again.