It was a heck of a coup for Dynamite Entertainment when they got rising star Christos Gage to kick off their new monthly series based on the iconic western character The Man With No Name. Six issues later, Gage has finished his first arc and is riding off into the sunset. But unlike the enigmatic Blondie, we’ve convinced him to sit down and answer some questions first.
Blog@: Are we to understand that, come the end of the story, Blondie has given up all of his treasure from the end of The Good, The Bad & The Ugly, or just a sizable chunk?
Christos Gage: I don’t think he gave it all up. But the sheer amount of it was causing him more trouble than it was worth, so he lightened his load. He probably kept enough to keep him in cigarillos for a while.
Blog@: Will you be revisiting this character again anytime soon? The next couple arcs have been announced already, but the series has been widely regarded as a success for Dynamite.
CG: You never know. I have a pretty full plate, so there are no immediate plans, but I certainly have other story ideas. It’s a matter of timing and me recharging my Western batteries a bit.
Blog@: This arc really felt like it could fit well as another one of the movies. The general sense of chaos in the last couple of chapters, particularly, gave that feeling that you had in all the Man With No Name films that he had “some plan” in the back of his head, even if it appeared to make no sense in application. Was that intentional?
CG: Definitely, and I’m glad to hear it came through!
Blog@: So–can you walk us through what motivated that particular ending for The Ghost? Will his story be told elsewhere?
CG: I liked the idea that this feared, almost mystical figure was actually a dirty, scrawny, flea-ridden mountain man who essentially lived in the hills and did nothing but shoot anything that moved. To be that good at something, you have to practice it to the exclusion of all else, and he did. In his own way, he was as devoted to his calling as the monks. I have no plans to tell his story further, but again, never say never.
Blog@: Was the bone-in-the-serape always in the cards, from the moment you introduced that relic? It fit really seamlessly in.
CG: Yeah, it was always part of the plan.
Blog@: Have you been to any conventions or signings, to get a sense of how fans–particularly older fans who have seen the movies over and over–are feeling about the book?
CG: At Wizard World Texas, a lot of people brought it to me to sign. They seemed to like it, and the reviews have been largely positive. So I’m pleased about that…that’s the audience the book was aimed at, and who we knew would be hardest to please!
Blog@: Not only were you taking on the first arc of this series, but sequelizing one of the greatest films of all time. Did you feel, going in, that this story just had to be told, or was it more of an editorial thing to tie the first arc into the films directly?
CG: No, it was a matter of choice. I just always wondered what happened to all that money and where Blondie rode to after the end of The Good, The Bad & The Ugly, and I figured others might have wondered too. I also wanted to pick up on The Good, The Bad & The Ugly’s exploration of the Civil War–not the battles themselves, but more of what was going on at its periphery.
Blog@: It’s interesting to me that Father Ramirez tends to be such a pushover–he voices concern and objection to a lot of the things that Blondie (or others) want to do, but then very quickly flips and does what he needs to do. How did you approach making his character believable with that as part of the makeup?
CG: To me, Ramirez was not so much arguing with Blondie as with himself. I was intrigued by the character in the film and the implication that, in his youth, he was as much of a rogue and a violent man as Tuco…that he could have easily ended up like his brother. The difference is that Father Ramirez wants to be a better man. He works at it. He wants to be redeemed.
Blog@: I was a bit surprised to see Father Ramirez make it out of this one–as often as not, Blondie’s friends seem to buy the farm by the time all’s said and done. Do you know if you, or Dynamite, have any plans to see him again?
CG: Nothing specific from me, but the possibility is always there!
Blog@: I know that, going in, you were acutely aware of the pressure on you in terms of working with a character like this. Having completed the arc, what are your thoughts on working with such an icon?
CG: In a lot of ways it’s the most challenging thing I’ve done in terms of using an established character. It’s not like there have been multiple interpretations of him the way there have been, say, James Bond, so it’s a lot easier to mess up. It’s tough, but rewarding as well. I guess the final judgment has to come from the readers. I hope they enjoyed it.
