Read Mixed User Reviews for The Magnificent Seven (2016)

6

The3AcademySinsJul 31, 2018

The Magnificent Seven is a serviceable and at times very enjoyable remake of a classic Western. While it does not hold up to the original in my opinion, they are some good performances and some fun action scenes to entertain you for a while.

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

5

tropicAcesSep 23, 2016

The cast is impressive, but every person besides Denzel Washington is a (distracting) cartoon character. The entire first half of the film is a narrative that does not build to anything, it's just a recruiting and then suddenly they'reThe cast is impressive, but every person besides Denzel Washington is a (distracting) cartoon character. The entire first half of the film is a narrative that does not build to anything, it's just a recruiting and then suddenly they're preparing for the final fight which turns out to be a 45 minute long shoot-em-up of rapidfire edited killings of nameless bad guys. It had potential to be great, but it seemed to settle for "meh, fine."… Expand

6 of 7 users found this helpful61

All this user's reviews

4

analogkid280Sep 23, 2016

M.A.7. Is barely adequate but ultimately brings nothing new to the table over previous versions of this movie. We have seen this Denzel character before in other movies maybe just not this setting but close. The other 6 are problematic withM.A.7. Is barely adequate but ultimately brings nothing new to the table over previous versions of this movie. We have seen this Denzel character before in other movies maybe just not this setting but close. The other 6 are problematic with characters loosing accents at inapropriate times.… Expand

6 of 7 users found this helpful61

All this user's reviews

6

IndiefilmloverSep 25, 2016

If you're looking for a film to just pass the time, you could a lot worse. It's competently made with well orchestrated action sequences, decent performances, and a few memorable lines of dialog. Other than that there is nothing to write homeIf you're looking for a film to just pass the time, you could a lot worse. It's competently made with well orchestrated action sequences, decent performances, and a few memorable lines of dialog. Other than that there is nothing to write home about. As long as you're not expecting the film to be on the level of "The Seven Samurai" and the first "Magnificent 7," you won't be disappointed.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

moviemitch96Sep 25, 2016

As much as it pains me to admit it, to this day I still haven't seen the original in it's entirety (I've caught little glimpses and snippets of it here and there on TV.) Therefore, I went into this remake pretty cold for the most part. AndAs much as it pains me to admit it, to this day I still haven't seen the original in it's entirety (I've caught little glimpses and snippets of it here and there on TV.) Therefore, I went into this remake pretty cold for the most part. And while I can say that it was certainly entertaining in some aspects, story-wise, it was simply lacking in this department. All of the action and shootouts are stuffed into the first and third acts of the film while the entire middle act is spent setting up the final battle and events of the third act, which I didn't appreciate very much. And like I said, while the film managed to remain pretty entertaining for the most part with the shootouts, it eventually all began to feel rather scattershot and choppy in the final battle. Acting was meh. Honestly it felt as though the actors portraying the seven titular protagonists were somewhat wasted and weren't really given their full potential (Denzel Washington, Chris Pratt, Ethan Hawke, etc have all certainly been and can do better.) Overall, it's not without it's fair share of fun moments and action. However, the fact that it's all crammed into the first and third acts of the film that leaves an overly long setup for the rather hollow-feeling middle act as well as the subpar performances from a solid cast with far more potential makes this one questionable. However, if anything, it also makes me feel somewhat compelled to go home and watch the original, which from what I hear unsurprisingly is supposed to be a lot better than this.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

eagleeyevikingApr 16, 2017

Sleek outside but slight inside, Antoine Fuqua's entertaining second remake of 'Seven Samurai' settles for a by-the-numbers Western shoot-em-up storyline instead of expanding upon the two films it remakes, although the cast is impressive andSleek outside but slight inside, Antoine Fuqua's entertaining second remake of 'Seven Samurai' settles for a by-the-numbers Western shoot-em-up storyline instead of expanding upon the two films it remakes, although the cast is impressive and they perform well. 5.5/10… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

4

marc5477Dec 26, 2016

Unnecessary remake. It brings nothing interesting to the table and it a pure money grab. I don't mind remakes if they try to bring something new to the table like good humor or new twists but this one is pretty straight forward and honestly,Unnecessary remake. It brings nothing interesting to the table and it a pure money grab. I don't mind remakes if they try to bring something new to the table like good humor or new twists but this one is pretty straight forward and honestly, there is no reason for it since the original movie was already good. The Seven Samurai remains the best of the pack and if your brain is too weak to enjoy subtitles then even the old 1960 western remake was ok (I forget what its called). Anyway, if you are young and have never seen the originals then this might be an ok film but honestly the bad guys were a weak point in this one. They were not intimidating nor intelligent which really brought down the story. In the original film, the village was facing an indomitable foe since it took place in a time of turmoil. The original foe did not select the village specifically rather the bad guys were more like a wave sweeping the country and that made them much more intimidating that some band of morons who follow a megalomaniac. I would skip it, especially if you have seen the original.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

RatedRexSep 24, 2016

.
"The Seven Samurai", which came out in 1954, is one of the most influential films in cinema history. Its theme has been copied one way or another in many subsequent films. However, the movie itself is vastly overrated. I defy anyone, who.
"The Seven Samurai", which came out in 1954, is one of the most influential films in cinema history. Its theme has been copied one way or another in many subsequent films. However, the movie itself is vastly overrated. I defy anyone, who has never seen it, to view that movie without thinking how grossly outdated the acting, writing and directing is. Moreover, "Seven Samurai" lacks realism and common sense. Plus, the action scenes are some of the worse battles scenes in cinema history. The battle scenes are basically bad guys charging through the streets for a minute or two and then retreating. We barely get to see the seven samurai show their stuff. The 1960 version of "The Magnificent Seven", which I have seen 4 or 5 times, has an outstanding cast (Yul Brenner, Steve McQueen) and a great musical score, but this version of the story also makes no sense. It too suffers from being extremely dated. While watching the 1960 version, I kept thinking over and over, why would they all risk their lives for total strangers. The answers were never given. Without plausible motivations, I couldn't believe what I saw on screen. Thus the 1960 version is also overrated. I think both movies are considered classics simply because they have a reputation for being classics. The 2016 version has upgraded special effects and enough action to keep the audience awake, but, just like the previous two versions, this movie lakes common sense and realism. The bad guys are some of the worse hired gunslingers in the history of American Westerns. They drop like flies. And though we eventually understand Denzel's motivation for defending the villagers, we don't quite see what motivates the other 6. The characters just weren't developed enough for us to understand who they were and why they fought. When the smoke clears and the body count is tallied, we are left with wondering "was it all worth it?"… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

4

BertoflyingfoxSep 25, 2016

It should've been called "Denzel Washington And the Other 6". There are so many long scenes of him trying to look stoic and thoughtful while nothing is happening. Fuqua has made this movie before, it was called King Arthur. It too has aIt should've been called "Denzel Washington And the Other 6". There are so many long scenes of him trying to look stoic and thoughtful while nothing is happening. Fuqua has made this movie before, it was called King Arthur. It too has a "knife guy" and cheap one-dimensional character deaths.

This movie needed wide camera lens shots, instead it's talking heads and quick cuts. A sprinkle of scenes lifted directly from Django (minus the better dialogue) and then ruining the whole point of the story by connecting it to a revenge plot that didnt need to exist.

Overall, a lazy effort with a boring shoot out that overstays its welcome.… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful33

All this user's reviews

5

antenaNov 13, 2016

All of the typical Western genre tropes are efficiently ticked off one by one, but the whole is much lesser than the sum of its parts. Fuqua helms the whole thing with a reduced sense of humor and an amped body count. Not so much aAll of the typical Western genre tropes are efficiently ticked off one by one, but the whole is much lesser than the sum of its parts. Fuqua helms the whole thing with a reduced sense of humor and an amped body count. Not so much a "Magnificent" Seven rather more like a slightly acceptable one.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

SpangleOct 14, 2016

The Magnificently Boring Seven is, well, boring. Predictable to its core, director Antoine Fuqua tries to valiantly cram every action cliche into a single film and the end result is a cliche film. Job well done, good sir. I never really everThe Magnificently Boring Seven is, well, boring. Predictable to its core, director Antoine Fuqua tries to valiantly cram every action cliche into a single film and the end result is a cliche film. Job well done, good sir. I never really ever rated Fuqua as a director. Training Day is a one off hit. Otherwise, he just directs safe, Hollywood, and bland action movies. This film is no exception with its problems only exacerbated by an iffy cast. Before I speak further on the film, I should first confess a major sin. As God is a major part of this film, I feel as though it is still pertinent. I...I...I have never seen Seven Samurai or the original The Magnificent Seven. I know. I would not like me either. Anyways, pressing on...

The film's predictability comes from the very first shot. Throughout, the film is not just predictable because it is a remake (recall how I have never seen the originals), but also because you can sit there and just guess where each scene is going. What is worse is that the lazy writing carries onto the characters with skin deep character development at best. This development does not help to actually differentiate characters in the least. I honestly kept forgetting their names and mixing up who they are throughout the film. I knew that Red Harvest was the Native American, but I mean, that is because his name is Red Harvest. Hard to think that Denzel would be Red Harvest (I guess I should not say that, since Johnny Depp was Tonto...). Even worse from a character development standpoint is Emma Cullen (Haley Bennett). Okay, low-rent Jennifer Lawrence cannot act. She is not horrible, but I have yet to see any reason to cast her other than her resemblance to Lawrence. Yet, here, she plays a character that could have been a strong female character. Instead, her role disintegrates into being nothing more than a sexual object for us to ogle at thanks to frequent low-cut costumes and constant jokes about having sex with her and how she is pretty. The film can barely go 10 minutes without reminding us Emma's real role in the film: to be sexualized and objectified. How could I ever dream of forgetting such a key element of the film? Emma's role, in spite of the conclusion, continues to marginalized as she can never do anything for herself. Instead, she finds herself in the midst of gunfights and failing to defend herself. Rather, a man must come to her aid at every turn. What a missed opportunity here.

Yet, as mentioned, Bennett is nothing to write home about in the acting department. The rest of the cast is equally mediocre. Denzel and Ethan Hawke are fine. Not career-best work by either, but they are okay. Chris Pratt has nothing charisma and abs going in his favor. As an actor, he is the definition of safe and bleh. That said, Byung-hun Lee and Martin Sensmeier were the real standouts. If the film was just Billy Rocks (Lee) stabbing people and throwing knives at them with Red Harvest (Sensmeier) sniping them with arrows, I would be a satisfied customer. Instead, they are bit players at best. Manuel Garcia-Rulfo is fine, though the butt of numerous offensive Mexican jokes, which further highlights the lazy writing. Finally, Vincent D'Onofrio was abysmal. It is like he had a frog caught in his throat and had to fight against said frog with all his might to utter a single line. Please spare me.

As for the action, it is well done. The most entertaining part for sure. Yet, the in-between moments are so non-descript, slow, and shallow, it is hard to be entertained by the action. Instead, you are more-or-less relieved that film decided to try and do something again. I am a big fan of westerns (though I need to see more) and would love for a revival to happen. This film is not that revival. Instead, it just tediously moves along until Fuqua decides to let us get back to the good bits again with Denzel capping dudes left and right with his team by his side. In saying this, however, the action sequences are far too long and equally predictable, pulling out every cliche in the book (especially Pratt at the end, as well as the ending with Bennett).

The sole positive that elevates this film to being just mediocre is the cinematography and scenery. I love gawdy shots of the country side with the sun setting. The Magnificent Seven has them in spades. Yet, the film does not stop there with beautiful long shots of cowboys riding in the distance and silhouetted cowboys against the sun in the background. The end result is truly gorgeous imagery. The peak of this imagery comes at the end of the film, however, particularly a shot of Denzel silhouetted against the bright sun to his left (in the image) as he walks out of a building. Another highlight coming shortly after that with Denzel and Bennett in the church with the light pouring in through the windows. Big pluses, really.

As a whole, The Magnificent Seven is just really, really boring. Like, I am not a huge action guy, but damn. Nobody seems to have fun.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

horizonbtsSep 28, 2016

First of all I can tell you that I was excited when last year I learned of the remake and the cast to be involved. Yes I have watched the original and own it on DVD as yes I am a fan of the genre. For me the original and this version thereFirst of all I can tell you that I was excited when last year I learned of the remake and the cast to be involved. Yes I have watched the original and own it on DVD as yes I am a fan of the genre. For me the original and this version there are a ton of differences, still I will put a positive spin on it as I didn't dislike the movie, but just thought there was a chance given the cast and the budget that this movie could have been great!! I understand that there is a time limit, but felt like the characters weren't given their just dues in development. I felt like the first part of the movie was boring and somewhat lackluster when it was introducing us to each member of the Magnificent Seven. The story was set-up in the beginning as to why the seven were needed, but again didn't really give us much to go on. Peter Sarsgaard as the villain Bartholomew Bogue was well cast and one we hated, but again he could have been developed even more into one of the best vilians of all time-another lost opportunity for me. So many times in the movie it lost out to the original. Still with all that said, when the fight and the action does come, it is Magnificent and entertaining in the sense that the original couldn't match due to the technology of today! I thought the tricks and surprises to cut down the enemies was brilliant, the teaching of the townspeople how to fight was humorous too. In the end the story gave a little more light to the characters, but still think it could have given us so much more! All in all for those of you that haven't seen the original you will enjoy the action of this one, and Denzel Washington lives up to the billing, and does seem to enjoy his character. Bottom line for a few bucks its worth the ride.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

Jess_HillSep 30, 2016

Cliche upon cliche upon tired cliche, this really should have been better. I understand that when remaking a film, you should stay true to the source material, but thinly veiled racism, misogyny and every single western trope shoehorned inCliche upon cliche upon tired cliche, this really should have been better. I understand that when remaking a film, you should stay true to the source material, but thinly veiled racism, misogyny and every single western trope shoehorned in isn't necessary. There are some fantastic action sequences, and individual performances aren't bad, though no one stands out. The pacing is utterly wrong for a western, there's no drawn out tension, no time for the audience to pause, it doesn't feel right, it's much too fast and as a result you're not invested in the outcome. A mediocre film. 5.47/10… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

EpicLadySpongeSep 23, 2016

The Magnificent Seven tries the best it can do to be magnificent as it can get. Unfortunately, it's not as magnificent as it wish it would be like what it feels like. You'd be better watching the classic that inspired millions of dollars forThe Magnificent Seven tries the best it can do to be magnificent as it can get. Unfortunately, it's not as magnificent as it wish it would be like what it feels like. You'd be better watching the classic that inspired millions of dollars for this film.… Expand

5 of 12 users found this helpful57

All this user's reviews

6

NerdConsultantSep 28, 2016

The Magnificent Seven is a remake that almost worked completely, but it is held back by a few elements. The actors are pretty decent, the plot moves at a decent place and the action scenes are very good, plus it does a decent job jugglingThe Magnificent Seven is a remake that almost worked completely, but it is held back by a few elements. The actors are pretty decent, the plot moves at a decent place and the action scenes are very good, plus it does a decent job juggling the characters even though a few don’t get the necessary screen time they need. The film is held back by a really weak villain and a second half that really doesn’t match the tone of the first. I prefer it to the 1960 version because it has a bit more fun and it has fixed a lot of the pacing issues and dropped a lot of the un-necessary sub plots from the original but I would be lying if I said I thought this was a great movie. The first half is genuinely fun and I did enjoy myself watching the film but I am not sure I can entirely recommend it, I don’t think there is enough for fans of the old film to latch on to and I think they will be disappointed by the newer elements bought into the film and I don’t think a younger audience will connect with it as the producers want them to. I suspect this film will find an audience and it is a decent attempt at a remake but I think it needed a little bit more. As it stands, it’s a pretty fun movie if you don’t think about it too much.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

5

TVJerrySep 29, 2016

The opening massacre is the most violently shocking moment in this film. It's also the catalyst for the small town to hire the titular gang to defend them from the perpetrator (Peter Sarsgaard). They start with Denzel Washington, who sets outThe opening massacre is the most violently shocking moment in this film. It's also the catalyst for the small town to hire the titular gang to defend them from the perpetrator (Peter Sarsgaard). They start with Denzel Washington, who sets out to assemble his team, which includes a wise-cracking Chris Pratt and a rainbow of ethnicities. Most don't have much personality, but neither does the movie. With a re-imagining, you'd expect a stepped-up approach. Instead, it's a mostly somber drama with lots of serious posturing (and not much emotion). While copious bullets fly in the final showdown, not much of the action is original or even interesting. Without advancing the genre in any way, it's still an adequate Western.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

imthenoobOct 12, 2016

Bits of dialogue for everyone through out. The only one to really shine though would be Sarsgaard, who portrays the main villain of the film. The cast does a good job though at carrying a rather lackluster film. The action doesn't reallyBits of dialogue for everyone through out. The only one to really shine though would be Sarsgaard, who portrays the main villain of the film. The cast does a good job though at carrying a rather lackluster film. The action doesn't really happen until the last 30 minutes but it's non-stop the whole way and is quite enjoyable to watch. The story is kind of bland though and doesn't really capture the magic of the original film or Seven Samurai, which the original film was based off.

Overall, I liked it enough to not hate it. I thought the cast and the action were good enough to justify viewing it. I just wished there was a bit more dialogue and a bit more originality with it. I know it's a remake but it doesn't need to be a recycle.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

mrmonsterOct 4, 2016

I kind of regret paying the full theater price to see it, but still, it was a good movie. It had lots of great action and some very interesting characters; I just wish it focused more on the plot and the script.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

foxgroveOct 1, 2016

Despite its classic status the Original 1960 ‘Magnificent 7’ must be one of the most over rated films ever made. This new version does nothing to re-ignite any interest in a story that is basically simple to the point of non- existence. AsDespite its classic status the Original 1960 ‘Magnificent 7’ must be one of the most over rated films ever made. This new version does nothing to re-ignite any interest in a story that is basically simple to the point of non- existence. As with most film’s one starts watching optimistically, but after a promising but tried and trusted set up one begins to lose interest as Denzel Washington goes off in search of the other titular six. From here on in there really is not much here to pique the imagination. The film drags on for a good hour before finally letting rip with a half hour battle to save the town that is truly exciting and very well staged. The cinematography is the true star and the locations are breathtakingly gorgeous, but the music, half of which is credited to the late James Horner, is inappropriate and lacking strength for such a testosterone fuelled movie. It’s a pretty score, signature Horner in fact, and unobtrusive but it just seems out of place here. The film also would seem to have no right to its title being far from magnificent in its scripted characters. It is actually a misnomer. These characters don’t display anything resembling magnificence, a few of them even ending up as corpses. Most of the actors lack any kind of screen presence or charisma (Washington not withstanding) and the whole enterprise resolves to be a so-so affair. Magnificent? No. Just average.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

WintxOct 25, 2016

Big long time Western fan here. So needless to say, not very overwhelmed by this new addition. Feel like meddlesome middle of the road execs/focus groups got in the way of this one and bullied Fuqua into a remake that wandered in no man'sBig long time Western fan here. So needless to say, not very overwhelmed by this new addition. Feel like meddlesome middle of the road execs/focus groups got in the way of this one and bullied Fuqua into a remake that wandered in no man's land. It's not Silverado fun, not Wild Bunch drama, not Leone tension -- but throws in attempts at all of those, I suppose as an homage but feels more derivative (been there done that) than a respectful wink/nod. (sigh) Hopefully not a final nail in the genre's coffin.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

4

legoman786Nov 6, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Very little build up. I had to ask my friend half the time for the names of the characters every time they made an important remark. The only names I know by heart are Goodnight, Sam, and Billy... The others are practically bystanders who could have been replaced with civilians in all honesty. The plot is so simple... It's TOO simple... so simple that it leaves much to be desired. The only character that was given some sort of background and or buildup was goodnight who I was only able to understand after some far-fetched interpretation that really stretched the bounds into something I have to do in AP reading (such as him having horrible memories of the Civil War and leaving the main battle scenes because of it). Other than that, I know nothing of him or the other characters for that matter. I feel as though I have more questions then were answered-

The Civil War is over, so why is Sam given a racial connotation? I thought this was a Western movie. Pioneers traveled west to leave the past behind them and pursue opportunity. They didn't pursue Western Expansion to continue their racial stereotypes.

What motive does the Native have in joining the 7? Other then the fact he says his Destiny is different then the rest of the tribal citizens, it is not emphasized enough.

What's up with that ending? Where do the survivors of the 7 head off to in the distance? Is that for further audience interpretation?

What is Sam's background with Bouge? Why does he resent him so much other then some mentioning of rape within the church scene before Bouge is shot?

Where do the endless supply of Cavalcade come from within the final battle scene? It's obvious that a good portion was blown up by the dynamite. Furthermore, if you payed attention to the surroundings, you should have noticed the Cavalcade pushing towards the town in a Horizontal line formation where they broke up as they reached the center of town... So how is that there is more of them approaching the town from the background when the entire Cavalry pushed at one time? That was complete nonsense.

In continuation, the battle scene had no flow of strategy. It was a free for all where all hell broke lose. The residents over Rose Creek had the advantage, then Bouge pulled out the Gatling gun, then the Residents sent whatchyama call it out to go and blow the gun up with dynamite, and the rest were cleared out... Very confusing and the only parts I actually understood were the death scenes

My thoughts were all over the place with this movie. The only redeeming factor was the action. That's it. Great planning with poor execution.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

5

YoloSwag4DogeOct 9, 2016

The special effects and stunt work in this movie are great. And the acting, for the most part, is quite good. What fell flat for me was what felt like a lack of substance. We learn a bit about the several men and the plight of the townsfolkThe special effects and stunt work in this movie are great. And the acting, for the most part, is quite good. What fell flat for me was what felt like a lack of substance. We learn a bit about the several men and the plight of the townsfolk is done well. The villain is made out to be quite despicable, which certainly adds some weight to things. But when it comes to the actual shootouts (there's two big ones), it feels like a montage of badass kill maneuvers rather than actual shootouts. What I mean is that for all the style and flare, there is very little of the fighting that actually feels real. Especially the final showdown, there are literally dozens upon dozens upon dozens of guys just randomly popping up around the town sitting atop of their horses just waiting for someone to do a badass take down of them. The initial charge there appears to be maybe a couple dozen of the baddies, but somehow despite blowing up half of them with dynamite and surprising them with a hidden trench filled with armed villagers, they continue to pop up around the town in bunches of 3 just spinning around in circles on their horses getting shot. There's a gatling gun that's used later in the fight by the bad guys even though there killing some of their own men. Why this gun wasn't used to open up the fight, (kind of like bombarding with artillery fire), is beyond me. There's no flanking maneuvers. The bad guys run at the town head on, while the good guys later charge at the gatling gun head on. But I know, I'm just beating on a dead horse. Bottom line is the action is all flare without care. So, I found it somewhat amusing to watch, but I didn't really feel attached to the characters or the townsfolk, who were basically just fodder for the bad guys to kill while the good guys hip fired their 6 shooters like a cliche straigh outta the 60's. (Oh and don't worry. No good guy ever just holsters his pistol. There is always the double spin that somehow makes really loud windmill noises while they're doing it).… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

CineAutoctonoOct 12, 2016

"The Magnificent Seven" turned out to be an unnecessary remake, but entertained a lot, the cast, history and western atmosphere that drove was very good but felt that as a new movie and not remake, because it does not meet those requirements,"The Magnificent Seven" turned out to be an unnecessary remake, but entertained a lot, the cast, history and western atmosphere that drove was very good but felt that as a new movie and not remake, because it does not meet those requirements, but because you can do, it's an enjoyable movie.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

tallhollySep 28, 2016

Why is everyone sweating all the time except Denzel who manages to maintain his perfect black costuming admist swirling dust storms, raging rivers, and constant flesh wounds and gushing blood.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

4

ourtimehascomeMar 2, 2017

This film is a perfect example how not to produce a remake. Instead of sticking to the original script, it tries to be different. Except, in its struggle, it fails so magnificently it can hardly be called original. Instead, it isThis film is a perfect example how not to produce a remake. Instead of sticking to the original script, it tries to be different. Except, in its struggle, it fails so magnificently it can hardly be called original. Instead, it is cliche-ridden and predictable. Almost as if there was a checklist of Western tropes the team was making sure were included.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

badgerryan19May 19, 2017

A 1960 remake that isn't good as the original and won't rival the better westerns but is still a fun ride. All the performances were great especially Denzel Washington and Chris Pratt. The villain was pretty good for he did his job fine. TheA 1960 remake that isn't good as the original and won't rival the better westerns but is still a fun ride. All the performances were great especially Denzel Washington and Chris Pratt. The villain was pretty good for he did his job fine. The story is pretty generic but it is a western after all and you can't do much that hasn't been done already. It boils down to a fun action flick that even the fans of the original will have enjoyment out of even with all the flaws and if it isn't a great movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

thedaywalkerJan 2, 2017

Quite entertaining, but i think a movie like that with such characters could have had a bit more humor, the performances were great, but i didn't get enough from the characters

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

amheretojudgeJan 16, 2018

allow me to show you something..

The Magnificent Seven It takes it time to set the plot and characters and doesn't offer anything after that too; it's just a film that is stretched with the compilation of different clichéd characters andallow me to show you something..

The Magnificent Seven

It takes it time to set the plot and characters and doesn't offer anything after that too; it's just a film that is stretched with the compilation of different clichéd characters and the troubles they bring with it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

FlipjeJul 16, 2021

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A watchable remake with plenty of goodies and baddies. The good guys are good with some notable flaws and the bad guys are just awful human beings you look forward to seeing getting shot and killed later. Chris Pratt does his regular Chris Pratting while Denzel Washington, Vincent D'Onofrio and Ethan Hawke bring some grounded performances to their outlaw/gunslinger/hired hand roles. Peter Sarsgaard's Bogue is the evil baddie menacing the small town of Rose Creek and responsible for killing Emma Cullen's (Bennet) husband. She hires the seven, brings them back to the town, and they and the remaining townsfolk get ready for the big and bloodied high noon. Washington is the anchor of this film, and you learn later why he was willing to take on Mrs. Cullen's hired work. As for the rest of the six, there is little in the way of backstory. We get some 'reasons' for why they are doing what they are doing though as turns it out, with no real emotional pay-offs or great arcs being fulfilled at film's end - well, Washington's Chisholm and Bennett's Emma Cullen's characters are given completed stories - the characters are basically memorable. In fact, some deaths, while sad, never land into poignant territory. When Hawk's Goodight Robicheaux and D'Onofrio's Jack Horne shake off their mortal coil, the audience is left with nothing in the way of pathos. They are two more fallen bodies on the scuffed and dusty earth of Rose Creek. Granted, you have seven fellows here to focus on but the script could have been a bit more economical in what to share to the audience and what to sacrifice. This is a film where few relationships are made. Seven hired guns who do a job and some die and some live. The end.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews