Duck, You Sucker

1972 "Two daredevils battle for a fortune in gold, and it will take an army to stop them!"
7.6| 2h37m| PG| en| More Info
Released: 30 June 1972 Released
Producted By: Rafran Cinematografica
Country: Spain
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

At the beginning of the 1913 Mexican Revolution, greedy bandit Juan Miranda and idealist John H. Mallory, an Irish Republican Army explosives expert on the lam from the British, fall in with a band of revolutionaries plotting to strike a national bank. When it turns out that the government has been using the bank as a hiding place for illegally detained political prisoners -- who are freed by the blast -- Miranda becomes a revolutionary hero against his will.

... View More
Stream Online

Stream with Prime Video

Director

Producted By

Rafran Cinematografica

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Jim Mullen Tate (TheFearmakers) It's always funny and ironic when a big budget film centers on another country's revolution which would lead to big or small budget movies with beloved high paid movie stars never being allowed to be made there. Still, there is always that "progressive" 6th grade mentality when dealing with perfect yet scruffy rebels verses the shiny yet formidable capitalists... Capitalism is, by the way, what makes Hollywood run; even imported stuff like this... There's no art without money... That aside, Duck, You Sucker is an uncomfortable viewing with two great actors, Rod Steiger and James Coburn, both who can go wonderfully over-the-top but here trying for the Clint Eastwood/Charles Bronson less-is-more style that worked previously under director Sergio Leone's artful direction. But here it seems awkward and restrained. The opening sequence in a stagecoach full of society people who are way too obvious and conceited to be anything more than representations of why we should back the seemingly humble revolutionaries, forcing us to pity the initially quiet and meet Steiger's Juan, until he shows his true colors that in any other movie would be that of a likeable villain. Leaving Duck, You Sucker with no real antagonists, just antagonistic and cliche stereotypes of people not nearly as rich as the Hollywood and Manhattan elites. The soundtrack has been panned in every review, and that is should. "Shaaaaaaaaaaw Sha Shaaaaaaaw" is sung throughout and almost seems like a practical joke within an otherwise grungy motif where a more edgy score is needed, and would fit. But the biggest problem with this class-envy "War Western" is it takes too much time to tell a story that could easily fit under an hour and a half. This movie is just plain bad. Liberalism is a part of most Hollywood movies even dating back to the 1930's but when that aspect is preachy and overdone, it might as well be propaganda or promotion for a, as mentioned in the beginning, world where art would not be allowed.
eerr-85689 It's the must underrated movie i've ever seen The reason could be the terrible title or overused genre. Overall it's such a great journey driven by outstanding cast,director,and composer
Mr-Fusion "Duck, You Sucker" is a Leone movie and I freely admit that I was expecting something akin to the Dollars Trilogy (both of them came packaged in the Sergio Leone Anthology, so it's not too big a stretch). Which is nowhere near the case, and that suits me just fine. But it is bogged down by a solemn vibe, and even though revolvers are (mostly) traded in for explosions, you start to miss the larger-than-life presences of van Cleef, Eastwood and Wallach after awhile. I was on board with the revolutionary politics of the thing, but the pacing is all off.I do like Rod Steiger and James Coburn, both wielding iffy accents (although Steiger seems a bit more at home with his). And there were moments of great poignancy, particularly in the cave and the final scene. Between the pacing, the uneven tone and Morricone's score (very "Butch Cassidy"), it's not my favorite. But there's chemistry between the two leads.6/10
ironhorse_iv Made after the success of the 'The Dollars trilogy', (1964's A Fistful of Dollars, 1965's For a Few Dollars More and 1966'sThe Good, the Bad and the Ugly) and a few years after one- off success of 1968's 'Once Upon a Time in the West', 'Duck! You Sucker!' was director Sergio Leone's last Spaghetti western. It was, as well, one of his most overlooked films. I think, one of the reasons why this movie didn't really shine and became an overnight success, was because, of the odd title. Known as 'Giu La Testa'(Keep your head down') in Italy, the title didn't really translate well with the American audience. For me, 'Duck! You Sucker!' sounds more like a Blaxploitation movie, than a Spaghetti Western. It's sound too cartoony. Because of that, I really didn't like the title. I'm one of those critics; that agrees with the studio. They should had retitling the film. They should had changed it to 'A Fistful of Dynamite'. That title works so much better, because how much this story, remind us, of Leone's older films, while, also giving us, something new. Better yet, I would rather see the movie be call, by its French title, 'Once Upon a Time in a Revolution', because it match so well with Sergio Leone's other 'Once Upon a Time' films. Though, all of those 'Once' films, widely differ in location, character and time periods, the recurrent themes of time and memory, plays a big part of these films. Not only that, Leone's style alters sharply here. It's here, where you see his bitter metamorphosis from Spaghetti Western to gritty post-modern Polizieschi crime drama. In scope, Sergio knew, times were indeed changing. Audience weren't as interested in Westerns, anymore. Sergio was able to show, with this Zapata film, in a metaphor way. He shows that the 19th century, primitive frontier life was indeed dying, to make way, for the 20th century, complex, and post-industrial revolution life. The way, he use weapons like dynamite, trains, machine guns, and tanks as a metaphor to bring the end of western is haunting. It's scary, when you think, deep around it. After all, a lot of his dark imagery here, remind us, way too much of massive World Wars imagery that later would come alive. Still, it wasn't that dark, there were a lot of cool, bloodless action moments, extreme close-ups, semi smart dialogue, great epic scope in cinematography, and funny moments to make it, a more rounded picture. Also, the moody soundtrack by composter Ennio Morricone was beautiful and simply wonderful to listen to. It match the film, so well. Set during the Mexico Revolution of the 1910s, the film tells the story of Juan Miranda (Rod Steiger), an amoral Mexican outlaw, and John Mallory (James Coburn), an ex-Irish Republican revolutionary, trying to rob a bank, only to find themselves, accidentally and involuntarily becoming heroes of the Revolution. I love the allegory that Leone is using with these two main protagonists. Miranda is the old, Mexican bandit unaware that his era is almost over. And then we have Mallory as the 20th Century bandit, unaware where his love for technology is going to take him. While, it's might be hard to cheer, for two main characters who are technically murderers, rapist, and terrorists. At least, the movie gives them, enough positive depth and character development to overlook their dark side and faults. However, it's hard to understand what motivates them to do what, they do, since both Mallory and Miranda hates revolutions. Despite that, both actors in this movie were amazing in their roles. James Coburn is able to show how haunted, his character was, with his past, while also dreaming of living the American Dream. I love the scene where he was in the pub, looking at the mirror at his betrayer. Very moving. Then you got Rod Steiger, who pretty much seem like a real-life Mexican bandit. Despite the fact that he is playing off, a carbon copy of the Tuco's buffoon type character from 1966's 'The Good, the Bad and the Ugly'. He was still able to pull this off with his strict method acting. After all, the character was originally written for actor, Eli Wallach, instead of him. Lucky for him, Eli Wallach drop out, during the early stages of production. That wasn't the only time, he got lucky. The studio save him, a second time, when Leone wanted to replace him, with Wallach, after they butt-heads over Steiger demands on Leone to film his scenes with natural sound. Once again, Steiger won out, and Wallach was cause to subsequently sued, when Wallach had to dropped out of the other project when Leone promise him, the role. While, Steiger and Leone didn't get along, I thought, personally, that he had great screen chemistry with his co-star, James Coburn. Both, seem to work best with each other. However, other than them. Most of the supporting characters were very bland and underdeveloped. Another conflict, I had with the movie is the pacing. Like, any other of Sergio Leone's movies, this movie also suffers from a long seat. It was slow and tedious, at parts. 157 is a lot of minutes sit through. I know, not all U.S versions of this movie has that long of a run-time, but most modern DVDs has this same copy, in which I watch this film. All, I know, about the other copies, is that it's 22 minutes, shorter with awkward editing. The ending is also disappointing. Without spoiling it, it's bittersweet, at best, but also a bit anti-climax. Overall: I wouldn't call this my favorite Leone film, but it's still worth checking out. There's just something very appealing about it. Check it out, if you want. Just note, it does have problems.