DUCK YOU SUCKER! (A FISTFUL OF DYNAMITE)

Italy, 1971, 138 minutes, Colour.
Rod Steiger, James Coburn, Romolo Valli, Maria Monti, Rik Battaglia.
Directed by Sergio Leone.

Director Sergio Leone retains the best laconic irony of his Clint Eastwood westerns and incorporated it into a more serious context and more handsomely mounted film which offers 2h hours of interesting and entertaining action. Set in the Mexican revolution with many parallels with Irish Troubles, the film comes out strongly against aristocratic arrogance. (Rod Steiger plays a would-be robber made hero cleverly, though eccentrically; James Coburn is good as an Irish dynamiter and lilting music frequently counterbalances and distances the violence.) It is a western with a message, but for those who dislike messages, there are many spectacular chases, explosions and battles.

1. The significance of this title and its tone in comparison with the Italian title, Duck, You Sucker, and the use of this phrase in the film?

2. How enjoyable a western was this? How good a western? How well did it use the conventions of the Italian spaghetti western: the picture of Mexican society, the use of desert locations, the amount of violence, the enigmatic characters and behaviour, the close-ups of faces, the use of colour, the use of music with varying themes and varying styles? How effectively were these used?

3. Is this film a well above average film; nearing the classic? Or is it an ordinary film? In terms of issues, presentation, style?

4. What has this film in common with the western styles of American films? How does it compare?

5. Comment on the structure of the film and its effectiveness: starting with the individual Juan, opening to his family, society, revolution, Mexico, and the vastness of this world movement at the turn of the century? The varying incidents, the interrelationships of Juan and John, the flashbacks to the Irish revolution and their inter-weaving in the Mexican revolution? The gradual build-up of action and spectacle? Were these well integrated into an effective film?

6. How important was the revolutionary background for the film? What attitude toward revolution did the film have? The initial criticism of society, sympathy for Juan and his poverty, the Irish backgrounds and their sympathy for Sean, the Mexican situation on a grander scale, the President of Mexico and his oppression, the rightness of assassinations and revolutionary activities, compared with the oppression and the firing squads etc.? What impact did this have on audiences? What attitude towards revolution did the audience have towards the end?


7. How accurate and just was the picture of Mexican society? The long opening with the people in the carriage, the President and his henchmen, Juan's watching the firing squads, the later firing squads, the picture of life in the town, the people who joined the revolution? Was revolution credible in such a society? Juan was sceptical about the ultimate effect of revolution. He said there was really no change. Was he right?

8. How much did the film rely on audience response to heroism? To Juan's heroism and to Sean's? To the questions of life and death? To the people who were killed and executed? To the emotional impact of death? Of the urge to vengeance?

9. How important for setting the tone was the initial coach-ride and the humiliation of Juan? Comment on the visual presentation of this, the food, attitudes, talk, close-ups on eyes and mouths, food? Audience response to the reversal of the situation and the humiliation of society?

10. What ironic comment was made by Juan and his family using the coach for their own snobbish purposes?

11. The initial impact of Sean and his blowing-up of the coach in answer to the shooting of his tyres? What impact did Sean make as a person? His assurance? His revolutionary I.R.A. background? The link with Juan by name? His escaping from Juan and yet his later using him in the city? The bonds between the two as they grew in the revolution? Sean's skill as an explosive expert and audience response to this?

12. The importance for the film of the siege at the bank - how well was it filmed, how exciting and interesting? The reality for the revolution in liberating prisoners? The impact on Juan's life that made him a hero? (preparation for this in the train ride, the murder of the soldier the doctor's help for him?) The reality of the revolution in comparison with the farcical dream of having the bank and the gold?

13. The impact on Juan of being a hero? His dissatisfaction with it? His wanting to live with his family and sons? The importance of the siege at the bridge - how well filmed and exciting? And the harrowing experience of the deaths of the children?

14. The ironic comment of the firing squad, the doctor's betrayal, the memories of the I.R.A.. and the effect on Juan?

15. The anti-climax in Juan's being rescued from the firing squad?

16. How fitting a culmination for the film was the spectacular train crash, the doctor remaining a hero. Sean being a hero, Juan also? The sadness of Sean's death by the German officers?

17. The ultimate judgement on heroes?


18. How important were the flashbacks on Sean and the tone that they gave to the film - colour, scenery, music?