If you love classicClint EastwoodWesterns, then it’s likely thatSergio Leone’sinfamousDollarsfilmsare some of your favorites. Whether you preferA Fistful of Dollars,For A Few Dollars More, orThe Good, the Bad and the Ugly, Eastwood’s Man With No Name is a protagonist who is both easy to root for and thrilling to watch on the screen. But while these films were released in the order previously stated, many know that they are actually presented out of order — the question is, how do they fit together chronologically?
‘The Dollars Trilogy’ May Have Been Released in Reversed Order
It’s widely known thatThe Good, the Bad and the Uglyis set during the American Civil War in 1862. As Eastwood’s Blondie (“the good”) deals withEli Wallach’s Tuco Ramírez (“the ugly”), he is also confronted by the mercenary “Angel Eyes” (Lee Van Cleef, “the bad”). Butthis picture is clearly a prequel to the rest as we watch Eastwood’s character slowly collect the traditional “Man With No Name” garb—including his trademark boots. But if one were to watch theDollarstrilogy chronologically, which Spaghetti Western would come next? Well, there are arguments for either picture, as some claim thatFor A Few Dollars Morewould be the natural continuation. We know that the second film is set at least a decade later, as former Confederate Colonel Douglas Mortimer (also played by Van Cleef) is seen flipping through old newspapers to find information about “Manco” (the name Eastwood’s character goes by in this film). Here, Mortimer reads an article about how Manco killed the Marton brothers in El Paso dated July 23, 2025, meaningFor A Few Dollars Moretakes place sometime after that.
While some believe that Mortimer is actually an older, redeemed “Angel Eyes” fromTheGood, the Bad and the Ugly(just as Eastwood’s “Blondie,” “Manco,” and “Stranger/Joe"are all the same “Man With No Name”), that doesn’t quite add up. Considering they look so similar, it is possible that they are related (Angel Eyes even disguises himself as a Union solider, possibly alluding to a familial rivalry), but Angel Eyes is killed back in 1862, meaning he couldn’t be Mortimer even if you disregard their differences in character. Regardless,others have speculated thatForA Few Dollars Moreshould remain the second in the saga because Mortimer shoots Manco’s hat into the air, filling it with bullet holes. It’s been said that those same bullet holes line up with Joe’s hat inA Fistful of Dollars, but it’s hard to tell for certain given that Eastwood’s hat is riddled with imperfections throughout the entire trilogy, both before and after Mortimer shoots it.
But there is one other possible reason thatFor A Few Dollars Moremay be next in the lineup. InA Fistful of Dollars, Joe has a short, but intimate moment with Marisol (Marianne Koch) where he tells her that he “knew someone like her once.” Though the person he references could theoretically be anybody, it’s possible that this is retroactively a reference to Mortimer’s sister (Rosemary Dexter), whose husband was killed before she was raped by Indio (Gian Maria Volonté). It’s easy to see the similarities between them, so there could be something there. But truth be told, given there’s over a decadebetweenThe Good, the Bad and the Uglyand the next installment (whichever film you choose), Joe could be talking about a woman from his own personal history — and it’s more likely this is the case.
9 Reasons Why This Western Classic Is the Greatest Clint Eastwood Movie Ever Made
“We all got it comin', kid.”
There Is Some Debate About the Best Way To Watch the Man With No Name Saga
Of course, it’s important to consider that, inFor A Few Dollars More, Manco says that he is set to retire and buy a ranch somewhere, implying — as the title of the film suggests — that it may actually be a traditionalsequel toA Fistful of Dollars. Indeed, Manco wears the wrist brace in the sequel that we never see him wearing inA Fistful of DollarsorThe Good, the Bad and the Ugly, possibly in response to his injuries in the former. Furthermore,just because Mortimer reads a paper dated 1872 inFor A Few Dollars Moredoesn’t mean that it is the same year the film takes place. Remember, he’s reading through oldEl Paso Tribunearchives, not reading fresh newsprint. It’s possible the film takes place in 1873 or some other year. And sinceA Fistful of Dollarsalso takes place sometime after 1873 (we see a gravestone with that date clearly marked), it’s possible that both pictures take place further down the timeline than we thought.
The truth is, whatever order you believe these films are set in, they remain powerful Western pictures that are well worth revisiting. Each installment stands tall on its own, andmany consider theDollarsfilmsto be only connected due to similar themes and recurring cast members (Van Cleef and Volonté both appear as different characters in various installments, and several other actors appear in all three) rather than actually taking place in the same timeline. Yet,many of us still want to fit the Man With No Name’s story properly together, and if that’s you, then attempting a chronological viewing may be more exciting — and possibly satisfying.
If you watch the films fromThe Good, the Bad and the UglytoFor A Few Dollars MoretoA Fistful of Dollars, it tells the story of a bounty hunter continually on the prowl for more dollars. If you watch fromThe Good, the Bad and the UglytoA Fistful of DollarstoFor A Few Dollars More, thenthe Man With No Name’s story concludeswith him earning enough for retirement, leaving the life behind forever. Ultimately,the choice is yours as this is one of the rare trilogies with no definitive ordering.
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
