(EDITOR'S NOTE: Take this article with a grain of salt. I wrote this before considering the possibility of the alternative "god-narrative" structure and my extensive investigations into the 16 Common Plot Patterns of American film. As such, the two films analyzed here represent only loose examples of the Reconciled Rivals story type.)
If you ask me my opinion on the best western ever made, I would say Sergio Leone's 1966 classic The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. On the other hand, if you asked me what is the coolest western ever made, I would say Sergio Leone's 1968 follow-up Once Upon a Time in the West. However, even though West may have been a “cooler” film, it falls far short of its predecessor, even though it was made by the same filmmaker, in the same period, in the same genre, and even shares the same PLOT TYPE (The Reconciled Rivals). West has a lot of stand-out features: that haunting harmonica motif, Henry Fonda's out-of-character turn as a psychotic villain, and some of the most quotable dialogue ever found in the genre; but in terms of plot and structure, it seems to lack many of the qualities which made The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly so great – especially in its late second and third act. If they are basically the same film, with the same plot type, helmed by the same master of the genre, why did West score only an in-field double while Ugly was a home run? If everything seemed to be going so right for Leone on his follow-up, why did it not match or even exceed the success of his previous film?
If you ask me my opinion on the best western ever made, I would say Sergio Leone's 1966 classic The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. On the other hand, if you asked me what is the coolest western ever made, I would say Sergio Leone's 1968 follow-up Once Upon a Time in the West. However, even though West may have been a “cooler” film, it falls far short of its predecessor, even though it was made by the same filmmaker, in the same period, in the same genre, and even shares the same PLOT TYPE (The Reconciled Rivals). West has a lot of stand-out features: that haunting harmonica motif, Henry Fonda's out-of-character turn as a psychotic villain, and some of the most quotable dialogue ever found in the genre; but in terms of plot and structure, it seems to lack many of the qualities which made The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly so great – especially in its late second and third act. If they are basically the same film, with the same plot type, helmed by the same master of the genre, why did West score only an in-field double while Ugly was a home run? If everything seemed to be going so right for Leone on his follow-up, why did it not match or even exceed the success of his previous film?
It
all comes down to a simple mistake in structure in terms of plot
type. Both Ugly and
West fall into the
same category of plot: the Reconciled Rivals. As a refresher, the
Reconciled Rivals is a story where:
“Two characters, one or both of them protagonists, come into a personality conflict. The plot develops as the two are forced into a situation where they must work together to achieve a mutually-desired goal. Obstacles and complications test their ability to cooperate, forcing the characters to overcome their inter-personal conflict in order to succeed.”
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
is a perfect example of this. It features dual protagonists, one the
hero Blondie (Clint Eastwood), and the other the antihero Tuco (Elli
Wallach). Though these two characters dislike each other, even openly
wish to kill each other, they must unite their efforts and work
together to reach a mutually desired goal, opposed by a single
antagonist (Lee Van Cleef).
Once Upon a Time in the West
upsets the balance of this classic structure by attempting to throw
something extra into the mix. While Ugly
is a traditional two-way Reconciled Rivals, West is
a rarely-seen attempt at a THREE-WAY version of the same plot type.
That's right, Once Upon a Time in the West is
a story with THREE protagonists. There is the Harmonica Man (Charles
Bronson), Jill McBain (Claudia Cardinale), and then Cheyenne (Jason
Robards). (Do not be foolish enough to assume that Harmonica is the
sole protagonist simply because he is the most charismatic character
or is played by the biggest star. Just as you should not assume the
same about Blondie. Protagonist status is decided by which character
takes the actions which advance the plot and develop the Story
Spine.)
The addition of a third protagonist
complicates West's
narrative development threefold. While Ugly had
only the relationship between Blondie and Tuco to deal with, as well
as their mutual relationship with the antagonist Angel Eyes, West
must take the time to establish
and develop three
individual relationships between Harmonica & Jill, Jill &
Cheyenne, and then Cheyenne & Harmonica... as well as the three
separate relationships each have with the antagonist Frank
(Henry Fonda). West
does quite well at getting all these relationships up and running,
but the unfortunate side effect is that this takes up half of the
movie's run time to do so. The second and third acts then become
compressed for time, and are thus not allowed the amount of
development or number of dramatic turning points that The
Good, the Bad, and the Ugly has
in spades. This becomes most noticeable at each film's climax. Both
films end in shootouts, but West's
climax does not deliver even close to the same amount of tension or
emotional release as found in Ugly
due to its significantly smaller amount of dramatic buildup to the
event.
West's plot development is
further hampered by the fact that its three protagonists are not
unified in their action. In The Good, the Bad, and the
Ugly, both Blondie and Tuco want
to accomplish the same thing: to find the buried Confederate gold. In
West, all three
protagonists pursue their own individual goals. Harmonica
wants to kill Frank. Jill wants to honor her murdered husband by
fulfilling his lifelong dream. And Cheyenne... well, it is never
exactly clear what Cheyenne wants. The only thing that connects these
separate lines and encourages all three characters to work together
is their mutual antagonistic relationship to Frank. Because of this,
Once Upon a Time in the West
actually operates as three different plot types operating (and
conflicting with each other) within the same film. Harmonica's line
follows the Vengeance Narrative. Jill's line is a Small Man/Woman
Rises. Cheyenne follows a Taking on the Mantle. This creates a muddy
and confused second act. In fact, to find any clarity in the film's
final act, the film must wrap up Jill and Cheyenne's storylines early
to give the third act to Harmonica and Frank alone. (The turning
point that begins the third act actually occurs very late. The third
act takes up only eighteen minutes in the nearly three-hour film,
beginning after Jill and Cheyenne's conflicts have been resolved.)
The conclusion? Once Upon
a Time in the West may have been
a far stronger film in terms of plot and structure if it had
eliminated one of its protagonists. Its story may have reached
success equal to, or even greater than The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
if it had been the story of simply Harmonica/Jill,
Harmonica/Cheyenne, or Jill/Cheyenne, united in a common goal against
Frank. This would have given the narrative far better focus and
allowed much more time to develop the main conflict.
West
also loses clarity points due to a bit of antagonist confusion. Frank
is obviously the meanest, most despicable character in the story, but
for much of the film he is acting only as the henchman of railroad
tycoon Morton (Gabriele
Ferzetti). Frank's acts of violence are done under Morton's
supervision, often by Morton's orders. This confuses the audience
over who exactly is at the top of the antagonist food chain and adds
ambiguity to the main conflict. It also adds yet another independent
inter-character relationship (the Frank/Morton relationship) to a
narrative that is already overstuffed. Compare this to the simple
clarity found in the force of antagonism in The
Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.
There is only one man opposing Blondie and Tuco: Angel Eyes. It is
crystal clear to the audience that Angel Eyes is the apex predator of
the story and the only serious force to be reckoned with.
Despite
all this, The
Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
has its own flaws that keep it from being a perfect film. The first
is the film's misplaced inciting incident. If you look at the point
which the inciting incident is expected to occur in most films
(generally after the first 1/8 of the film's total run time) we are
given the moment when Blondie breaks off his partnership with Tuco
and leaves him in the desert. This event may incite Tuco's hatred for
Blondie, but the blood feud between the former partners is not the
focus of the narrative, nor does it establish the protagonists' main
story goal. Ugly
is
the story of two men working together to find a stockpile of
Confederate gold. This means the Story Spine does not begin until the
protagonists learn of the gold's existence, an event the storytellers
have mistakenly placed at the end of the first act. Blondie and
Tuco's murderous rivalry is merely extended setup material. In fact,
one could walk into the film an hour late and still be able to follow
the film without missing out on anything terribly important.
Ugly's
second major flaw comes from execution of character. As a Reconciled
Rivals, Blondie and Tuco are supposed to be co-protagonists, equal
actors in the eyes of the story. However, even though the script
gives Tuco equal screentime and narrative weight, even going so far
as to provide material intended to make the audience feel sympathy
for Tuco, the audience never accepts Tuco as Blondie's narrative
equal. In the audience's eyes he remains nothing but an important
supporting character. The primary reason for this is that unlike
Blondie, Tuco is... never
anything but a total dirtbag.
Tuco is supposed to be a co-protagonist. However, to be accepted by the audience as a protagonist, a character must meet three
qualifications: 1. The character must be humanly relateable. 2. The
character must be worthy of the audience's interest. 3. The character
must be worthy of the audience's respect.
Tuco, unlike Blondie, falls short in the third qualification.
Therefore, he never takes on full protagonist status in the eyes of
the audience, and is always Blondie's lesser. Therefore, his scenes
lack the same kind of audience appeal as those of his rival.
No comments:
Post a Comment