|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
got to be FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
got to be FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE That was my first thought as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was thinking the Harry Palmer trilogy but didn't Intrada recently do FUNERAL IN BERLIN?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
got to be FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE That was my first thought as well. That would not be a trilogy "of sorts"; it's a trilogy.
|
|
|
|
|
No...Harry Palmer is a trilogy. Eastwood's character is those three films has a different name in each one, and in the last film, Lee van Cleef plays a villain who is completely unrelated (though he looks the same) to the protagonist he played in the previous film. Any lumping of those three films into a "trilogy" is pure marketing based on their similarities of style. But in terms of story elements it just doesn't make sense. Yavar
|
|
|
|
|
I'm going to go WAY out on a limb and say On Her Majesty's Secret Service. It is the middle film of the Bond vs. Blofeld trilogy (You Only Live Twice, OHMSS, Diamonds Are Forever).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Another slightly likely contender might be Alfred Newman's "Nevada Smith," if one counts the 1975 TV movie as the "third part" of the "trilogy." Anyway, whatever it is, I'll be curious to see/hear it. I certainly wouldn't mind if it turned out to be "El Dorado" or "For a Few Dollars More" - or indeed, any other 60s score, which, of course, it will be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So what's the first part of the trilogy? The Carpetbaggers? That's how I viewed it - even though "Nevada Smith" takes place before "The Carpetbaggers," it was the second film made featuring the character, so you could, technically, view it as the second in a sort-of-trilogy (though again, only if one also decides to count the 1975 TV movie with Cliff Potts, Lorne Greene, and Adam West).
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think it's Nevada Smith but this here Newmaniac would FLIP OUT if it was! I wonder if Mr. Tibbs is the best guess so far... Yavar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|