A Fistful of Fingers

I find this so much funnier than a lot of other people seem to give it credit for. If you want a Zucker/Abrahams-style comedy spoofing spaghetti westerns, but made with pretty much no money, that's exactly what Fistful of Fingers offers.

I've spent a few years lamenting how Edgar Wright has moved away from comedy, too, all the while ignoring what could well be his silliest movie. It's made on such a budget that some might not even consider it a proper movie, but I don't care. It's funny. It made me laugh more than I was expecting.

Wright's wheelhouse is comedy, so much so I'd say this might well be a better film (or at least a more satisfying watch) than either Baby Driver or Last Night in Soho. The last 10 years has been grim for anyone who likes this filmmaker's sense of humour. At least his Sparks documentary was pretty funny, but that was mostly because Sparks are a funny duo.

Edgar, just make comedies again. You're funny. You bring out the best in Simon Pegg and Nick Frost. The Cornetto trilogy movies are still ones I think about often. I haven't seen Scott Pilgrim from ages, but I reckon I'd still enjoy it if watched again today. The guy is helming a more serious/accurate adaptation of Stephen King's The Running Man next (purportedly more in line with the book than the Schwarzenegger film that very loosely adapted it), and I just have to ask... why. Why, why, why.

Wright ignoring the comedy genre would be like David Lean deciding to stop making epics, or David Lynch moving away from surrealism, or Scorsese suddenly making nothing but sci-fi/fantasy movies for no good reason. This filmmaker has moved so far out of his wheelhouse and I'm just baffled why he's apparently got no desire to go back.

Got off-topic there. I'll just reiterate: if you like Wright's other parodies, and you enjoy spaghetti westerns, and you don't mind films with low budgets, watch Fistful of Fingers.

Edgar Wright's first film is... not good, pretty bad in fact.

'A Fistful of Fingers' does work in small doses, though all in all it's rather limp. The early stages, the opening 25 minutes or so, are solid if hit-and-miss, unfortunately the rest is heavy in the miss department. There are some mildly amusing bits, the Clint Eastwood/'A Fistful of Dollars' schtick is decent but quickly runs dry.

There isn't much to talk about regarding the cast, they give alright performances I guess - Graham Low sticks out most, as you'd expect. The film coulda done without the Native American stuff, which is not only lazy and rather unsavoury. The, unexpected, animated bit was cool though.

The best part of this film? The poster. Noice.

Graham Low is the Man With No Name and Oli van der Vijver is the Lee Van Cleef character in Edgar Low's first feature film.

As you might guess from the title, it's a burlesque of the Sergio Leone/Clint Eastwood westerns, with a sketch of a pot and a lot of actors of whom you've never heard doing a mediocre job. There are plenty of juvenile gags, and it gives the impression of a bunch of amateurs who really liked MONTY PYTHON AND THE HOLY GRAIL and figured they could do the same for westerns.

I was disappointed, in part because, while the flow of gags never stopped, each one was offered as if it was hilarious. When you've got that rat-a-tat pacing, you need to offer a gag and then move on to the next.

Im currently studying film, and am more than aware of how difficult it is to make a semblance of a good movie on your own. Its amazing what Edgar Wright managed to do with this film, and a clear sign that this man would do amazing things if he had the right resources. Even though some of the jokes in this film don't land, those that do are solid and creative. It gets way too silly in its second half and loses its way in the story and comedy just a little, but overall its a very impressive first effort by a masterful future director.

5.5/10

"The greatest western ever made...in Somerset"

Edgar Wright's official directorial debut, because for some mysterious reason his high school "Dead Right" doesn't count, is a parody of the spaghetti westerns, with an obvious emphasis on Leone, Eastwood, and even Morricone's music. The film is low(no)budget and the actors are amateur kids, as is the author himself, but you can already see all the elements that characterize his future masterpieces. From his trademark parody stories, through completely wacky characters and silly dialogues, to specific directing and editing, and refined sense of rhythm and detail. The humor is very reminiscent of Monty Python and, although it has some good and original jokes, it is mostly worn out and forced, but when you take into account the age, (in)experience and budget of the author, this film is astonishingly good.

7/10