A Westerns Legend Played Two Completely Different Characters In Clint Eastwood's Dollars Trilogy, And It Led To One Of The Genre's Best Ever Villains

Bringing back one of the stars of the second film in the Dollars Trilogy to play an entirely different character in The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly led to the birth of a Western legend and one of the genre’s best-ever villains. Directed by Sergio Leone, the Dollars Trilogy consists of three critically acclaimed Westerns, all with Clint Eastwood as the star: Fistful of Dollars, For a Few Dollars More, and easily the most famous of them all, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. Each played a role in transforming Clint Eastwood into an icon of the genre. However, he wasn’t the only one to develop a larger-than-life reputation as a result of the films’ success.

The Dollars Trilogy brought international attention to several of its most consequential players, not the least of which being the movies’ director, Sergio Leone. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly also offers a career-best performance for Eli Wallach, who left a lasting impression with his portrayal of “the Ugly,” Tuco. There’s also the matter of Lee Van Cleef, who went from a supporting actor to the headlining attraction of several 1970s Westerns in the aftermath of the movies, and that can be attributed to not just one – but two – characters he played in Eastwood’s Spaghetti Westerns.

Lee Van Cleef’s Two Roles In The Dollars Trilogy Explained

Lee Van Cleef Plays A Hero In One Movie And The Villain In Another

Lee Van Cleef is among the principal cast in two Man With No Name movies, For a Few Dollars More and The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. In the former, Van Cleef plays Mortimer, who essentially serves as a co-protagonist to Eastwood’s character. Although Eastwood is the real star of the 1965 Western, it’s Van Cleef’s Mortimer who drives the movie’s revenge plot. The film follows Mortimer’s efforts to avenge the death of his sister, who died at the hands of the unapologetically wicked Indio. Eastwood’s Manco (the Man With No Name) sets out to help Mortimer fulfill his goal.

Eastwood and Van Cleef have an entirely different dynamic in the final film in the Dollars Trilogy. Once again, the Sergio Leone-directed Spaghetti Western employs a sadistic, merciless killer as its primary antagonist, but reverses Van Cleef’s role in the story by making him the villain. As “the Bad” mentioned in the title, Van Cleef plays the gunslinger nicknamed “Angel Eyes,” who will stop at nothing to get his hands on the cache of stolen money hidden in the grave of “Bill Carson.”

Van Cleef Highlights How Loosely Connected The Movies Are

The fact that Van Cleef plays two different characters can help clear up some of the confusion regarding the connections between the three Clint Eastwood-Sergio Leone films. Considering that the three movies have been consistently referred to as a “trilogy” for years and involve Eastwood playing basically identical, gunslinger drifters across all three movies can lead to the impression that they’re all based in the same continuity. However, Van Cleef playing two different characters underscores the idea that the movies aren’t a trilogy in the traditional sense.

Angel Eyes (Lee Van Cleef) squinting in the desert before their climactic duel in The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

This 1967 Lee Van Cleef Western Is The Perfect Movie To Watch After Clint Eastwood’s Dollars Trilogy

A 1968 Western starring “Bad” actor Lee Van Cleef makes for the perfect follow-up to the classic genre favorite, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.

From the looks of things, Clint Eastwood essentially does play the same character, but each story appears to be set in its own continuity, which explains how it makes sense for Van Cleef to appear as Angel Eyes in The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly and Mortimer in For a Few Dollars More, and for other actors with much smaller roles to be recast as different characters as well.

Lee Van Cleef’s Angel Eyes Is An Iconic Movie Villain

Angel Eyes Is One Of The Western Genre’s Best Villains

A still from The Good The Bad And The Ugly of Angel Eyes, titled 'The Bad.

Considering that Lee Van Cleef had already played a prominent, heroic character in For a Few Dollars More, it would have made sense for Sergio Leone to look to someone else for the role of The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. However, the decision to reuse Van Cleef played off brilliantly. As good as he was in playing the hardened gunslinger with a tragic past, Van Cleef was able to deliver an even more memorable performance as Angel Eyes. His opening scene, which shows questioning an old man before murdering his whole family instantly creates a truly sinister image for the character.

His lack of morals is perfectly complemented by his spectacular skills with a gun and shrewdness, as these elements combine to make Angel Eyes the definitive Western villain.

The movie never attempted to portray Van Cleef as a nuanced character or provide a backstory that explains his actions; rather, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly holds nothing back in its portrayal of Angel Eyes’ capacity for evil. His lack of morals is perfectly complemented by his spectacular skills with a gun and shrewdness, as these elements combine to make Angel Eyes the definitive Western villain.