The Good, the Bad and the Ugly Journal #3

Of the categories given, I chose to research and go behind the scenes on the acting that occurred within the film. First off, the acting in this Western was well done for the most part and resembled the type of acting we saw in both “My Darling Clementine” and “Once Upon a Time in the West”. The three main characters portrayed within the film, “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly”, were Blondie the Good (Eastwood), Angel Eyes the Bad (Cleef), and Tuco the ugly (Wallach). In this film, these three characters all demonstrate different backgrounds and characteristics through their actions and emotions. I chose to talk about acting because this film wouldn’t have been nearly as effective without great acting.
To begin, in my opinion, these three actors were chosen for this film for various reasons. First, they all fit their parts almost perfectly. Starting with “the Good”, Clint Eastwood plays his part flawlessly; he meshes the attributes of a typical western hero with those of his own unique character. I would compare him to Harmonica from “Once Upon a Time in the West”. He is smart and soft-spoken yet extremely mysterious. Besides playing the so called “good guy” in this film, according to rottentomatoes.com, Eastwood has stared in numerous Westerns on other films as the tough guy/anti hero. Two of his most famous were when he played Inspector 'Dirty' Harry Callahan in “the Dirty Harry series” and the Man with No Name in Sergio Leone's “Spaghetti Westerns”. Ironically, in this Western, Eastwood’s character had no name either. Also according to rottentomatoes.com, Eastwood seems to be an extremely versatile actor. After working in acting for so many years, Eastwood has built up quit the stage presence.
The second most notable actor in the film was my personal favorite, to watch. Tuco (Wallach) or “the Ugly”, was a great character because not only was he sneaky, untrustworthy, and ugly, he provided lots of comic relief in the film. In my opinion they chose Eli Wallach to play this part and to be in this film solely because of his personality. Every time he spoke in the film it seemed to provoke laughter. He also was an extremely shifty character, which keep the audiences attention on his actions. Although I couldn’t imagine Wallaach as much of a versatile actor beyond actions or comedies, he has played a wide variety of roles in over a hundred films and TV shows. According to IMDB.com, he received an Emmy for a drama film in 1966 along with may other nominations. Wallach’s behavior on the set would indicate that he was a crazy character in real life when in fact he was described as being rather low key off the set during the films production.
Lastly we come to Angel Eyes (Cleef) or “the Bad”. Lee Van Cleef played a very tough role within the film. He played a greedy Union leader with a darker less sophisticated side. Cleef was most likely chosen for this film because of his eerie character. Even though at first we barely saw him, his face was one that you wouldn’t forget. He played a more mysterious character like Eastwood, but much more cold and ruthless. In the past, Cleef has played primarily the part of the bad guy and really didn’t seem to be that versatile of an actor. In his case he seemed more stereotyped, because throughout his career his primary movies were all Westerns. During the films production, Cleef was actually working on multiple westerns. The fact that this film only had three major characters made it essential for the acting to be superb. Without great acting no one would have been able to sit through three hours of Western.