Für ein paar Dollar mehr

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.

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

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!

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.

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.