Sergio Leone Web Board
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
January 21, 2018, 05:54:27 PM
Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
News:


+  Sergio Leone Web Board
|-+  Films of Sergio Leone
| |-+  Other Films (Moderators: cigar joe, moviesceleton, Dust Devil)
| | |-+  The Magnificent Seven (2016)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 Go Down Print
Author Topic: The Magnificent Seven (2016)  (Read 5055 times)
Spikeopath
Guest
« Reply #45 on: February 08, 2017, 02:17:05 PM »

Well I liked it plenty enough  Cheesy

I seek righteousness. But I'll take revenge.

Directed by Antoine Fuqua and written by Nic Pizzolatto and Richard Wenk. Starring Denzel Washington, Chris Pratt, Ethan Hawke, Vincent D'Onofrio, Byung-hun Lee, Manuel Garcia-Rulfo, Martin Sensmeier, Haley Bennett and Peter Sarsgard. Music is by Simon Franglen (also working from a James Horner template) and cinematography by Mauro Fiore.

Seven gunmen band together to aid the town of Rose Creek whose inhabitants are being driven out by ruthless capitalist Bartholomew Bogue.

We are now in an age of film making where "tagged classics" are no longer sacrosanct. Any number of these "tagged classics" have been and will become viable for remake - reboot - reimaging for newer audiences. It's here, it happens and really there's nothing we can do about it but moan amongst ourselves. John Sturges' 1960 The Magnificent Seven (itself a remake of Kurosawa pic Yojimbo) is a much loved film, and not just in Western lovers circles, it's a film that non Western fans are known to enjoy - and rightly so, it deserves its place as a "tagged classic" and still enthrals over 50 years since its release. So the big studio big wigs and Antoine Fuqua were taking a major gamble remaking a classic remake with their own remake!

Undeniably the shadows loom large over the 2016 version, so much weight of expectation, in fact to some it was a stinker of a film even before it was released! Well, as those who have seen it will attest, both the fans and the dissenters, it hasn't raised the bar for the "Seven" formula, but, and this is very key here, the makers wasn't setting out to make a film that down the line would be a perceived a "tagged classic", and this is evident in the ream of extras available on the Blu-ray releases. They achieved what they set out to do, to make a blunderbuss Oater for the modern era to sample, and they have done it with much love, much cool and lashings of technical greatness. Add in a cast clearly enjoying themselves and not letting anyone down, and it's a tasty plate of beans.

Fuqua updates things by having his seven as a row of differing ethnicity's, which works a treat, and crucially he and his writers are respectful of those characterisations, even if a bit more fleshing out wouldn't have gone amiss. Yet nothing is at a cost to honouring the great Westerns of old. Beautiful landscapes envelope the players, the musical score bouncing around man and nature with homaged sweetness. There's closeups, silhouetted slices of panache, superb stunt work (man and beast), glorious set design, and then there's the action. The fight sequences are excellently constructed, a feast for the eyes and ears, death and slaughter unfurled in brutal but hunger appeasing strokes. There's comic relief about the place, and while much of the dialogue wouldn't have the great poets of yore troubled, there is deepness to be found. Intelligence, too, the addition of PTSD to one of the main players is a notable piece of worth, while how wonderful to find a Western lady character of great substance (Bennett excellent), so good in fact she could have been one of the seven!

It's a bare bones story, with a pointless motive revelation tagged on for the finale, while some anachronisms will irritate those bothered by such. But if you are able to judge it on its own terms, as a Western entertainment for this era, and to accept it isn't trying to outdo the source of its inspiration, then a good time can readily be had. 8/10

Logged
cigar joe
Moderator
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12835


easy come easy go


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: February 08, 2017, 03:27:27 PM »

thanks for the review cigar joe (mgtbltp)  Afro

Logged

"When you feel that rope tighten on your neck you can feel the devil bite your ass"!
drinkanddestroy
Global Moderator
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8496

trust a man who wears both a belt and suspenders?


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: February 08, 2017, 07:13:17 PM »

Welcome aboard, all newbies  Afro Afro Afro

Logged

There are three types of people in the world, my friend: those who can add, and those who can't.
uncknown
Gunslinger
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 410

What about me?


View Profile
« Reply #48 on: April 27, 2017, 08:27:04 PM »

It all looks too green and too PC don't ya think?

Probably got one black man, one asian, one woman, one hispanic, one white man, one transgender, one gay.  Afro Afro Afro

My thoughts at first but...

this is the rare exception where multi-cultural casting absolutely works!
 Smiley

Logged

"Other Morton's will come along  and they'll kill it off"

My article on the restoration of the The Big Gundown
http://thekinskifiles.blogspot.com/2009/01/cinemaretro-13-big-gundown.html
uncknown
Gunslinger
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 410

What about me?


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: April 27, 2017, 08:28:42 PM »

DENZEL:

GLORY
CRIMSON TIDE
FLIGHT
INSIDE MAN....

nah , no good movies Lips Sealed

ad MAG 7 to that last of "no good" movies Azn

Logged

"Other Morton's will come along  and they'll kill it off"

My article on the restoration of the The Big Gundown
http://thekinskifiles.blogspot.com/2009/01/cinemaretro-13-big-gundown.html
uncknown
Gunslinger
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 410

What about me?


View Profile
« Reply #50 on: April 27, 2017, 08:32:14 PM »

They achieved what they set out to do, to make a blunderbuss Oater for the modern era to sample, and they have done it with much love, much cool and lashings of technical greatness. Add in a cast clearly enjoying themselves and not letting anyone down, and it's a tasty plate of beans.

"Fuqua updates things by having his seven as a row of differing ethnicity's, which works a treat, and crucially he and his writers are respectful of those characterisations, even if a bit more fleshing out wouldn't have gone amiss. Yet nothing is at a cost to honouring the great Westerns of old. Beautiful landscapes envelope the players, the musical score bouncing around man and nature with homaged sweetness. There's closeups, silhouetted slices of panache, superb stunt work (man and beast), glorious set design, and then there's the action. The fight sequences are excellently constructed, a feast for the eyes and ears, death and slaughter unfurled in brutal but hunger appeasing strokes. There's comic relief about the place, and while much of the dialogue wouldn't have the great poets of yore troubled, there is deepness to be found. Intelligence, too, the addition of PTSD to one of the main players is a notable piece of worth, while how wonderful to find a Western lady character of great substance (Bennett excellent), so good in fact she could have been one of the seven!

It's a bare bones story, with a pointless motive revelation tagged on for the finale, while some anachronisms will irritate those bothered by such. But if you are able to judge it on its own terms, as a Western entertainment for this era, and to accept it isn't trying to outdo the source of its inspiration, then a good time can readily be had. 8/10"



can't really add much to that.
Its a Western made by people who love westerns for movie goers who love westerns
.
bruce marshall

Logged

"Other Morton's will come along  and they'll kill it off"

My article on the restoration of the The Big Gundown
http://thekinskifiles.blogspot.com/2009/01/cinemaretro-13-big-gundown.html
uncknown
Gunslinger
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 410

What about me?


View Profile
« Reply #51 on: April 27, 2017, 08:34:02 PM »

I don't think I'll be bothering with this in the near future.

id...id... idi... Azn

Logged

"Other Morton's will come along  and they'll kill it off"

My article on the restoration of the The Big Gundown
http://thekinskifiles.blogspot.com/2009/01/cinemaretro-13-big-gundown.html
uncknown
Gunslinger
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 410

What about me?


View Profile
« Reply #52 on: April 27, 2017, 08:36:20 PM »

D & D was completely surprised when Ethan Hawke's character returned at the end.
"I never saw that coming!" he reportedly yelled out loud Azn

Logged

"Other Morton's will come along  and they'll kill it off"

My article on the restoration of the The Big Gundown
http://thekinskifiles.blogspot.com/2009/01/cinemaretro-13-big-gundown.html
drinkanddestroy
Global Moderator
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8496

trust a man who wears both a belt and suspenders?


View Profile
« Reply #53 on: April 27, 2017, 08:57:35 PM »

D & D was completely surprised when Ethan Hawke's character returned at the end.
"I never saw that coming!" he reportedly yelled out loud Azn

I literally never saw it coming: I was busy making out in the back corner of the theater   Evil

Logged

There are three types of people in the world, my friend: those who can add, and those who can't.
uncknown
Gunslinger
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 410

What about me?


View Profile
« Reply #54 on: April 27, 2017, 09:01:34 PM »

I literally never saw it coming: I was busy making out in the back corner of the theater   Evil

with a human being? Evil Evil Evil

Logged

"Other Morton's will come along  and they'll kill it off"

My article on the restoration of the The Big Gundown
http://thekinskifiles.blogspot.com/2009/01/cinemaretro-13-big-gundown.html
Moorman
Gunslinger
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 316


View Profile
« Reply #55 on: November 19, 2017, 03:04:48 PM »

Again, this was a wasted opportunity.  Hollywood, caring more about fast bucks and not making a classic, did exactly what spikeopath said they did.  They set out to make a widely accepted, entertaining movie, with no thought or care for making a new, classic western.  The remake of 3:10 to Yuma had the perfect balance that i wish this movie had. In the 3:10 to Yuma remake, they made a modern western ( not avengers movie), and spiced it up with just enough entertainment to keep the modern microwave audience tuned in.  Like i said in the " Homesman" thread, i believe that after Clint made Unforgiven, that there are only a couple of modern westerns that still pay homage to the classic westerns...

« Last Edit: November 19, 2017, 03:06:20 PM by Moorman » Logged

cigar joe
Moderator
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12835


easy come easy go


View Profile
« Reply #56 on: November 20, 2017, 06:39:58 AM »

The remake of 3:10 to Yuma had the perfect balance that i wish this movie had. In the 3:10 to Yuma remake, they made a modern western ( not avengers movie), and spiced it up with just enough entertainment to keep the modern microwave audience tuned in.

Sorry to burst your bubble here, you're judging the remake with what you yourself have admitted was a limited knowledge of Westerns to begin with. Take my point of view. Living in the 50s we were inundated with Westerns, not only on film but prime time TV had 20+Westerns spread over every night of the week.

I agree, spicing up the Genre is a good idea to attract the "microwave audience" but it's got to make what I guess we can call "Western" sense in the story, especially for Western Aficionados.

To me the Original 3:10 to Yuma is still superior to the remake. I applauded the fact that they attempted to make a Western but it's extremely hard to get that feeling from the "Golden Age" Westerns right in a lot of respects, one of the major factors for this is the lack of personnel to get it acted right, to look right, and sound right. They, you could say, sort of had a "Western infrastructure" in place in the past that was used over and over again by film personnel who knew how to do it over and over in a way that got that  Mythos of the West right, not necessarily historically correct.

Remember the first Western was "The Great Train Robbery," it was filmed when the Wild Bunch was still active and robbing trains. A lot of the Western actors, once filmmaking moved to Hollywood, were originally out of work real cowboys, or they lived during the transition from the horse and buggy days and knew how to ride horses and drive teams. They had those Western US speech patterns, regional dialects, western slang words, etc., etc. It was a hands on knowledge.

(An old timer friend of mine's father was a teamster. He hauled freight wagons around central Montana to ranches and towns. The old timer told me that things didn't really start to change out West until after WWII. Railroads, and the horse were still predominant before the war, the larger towns had some electricity but the rural areas stayed pretty primitive. After the war the perfection of the technology of tracked vehicles opened it all up fast.)

Anyway getting back to the making of Westerns, so these original filmmakers sort of just turned out these films like a stamp mill, continually polishing their craft through the years, the next generation learned first hand from the first, continuing to perfect their craft. When this second generation started to die off Western production also started to wane. (The end of the "Steam Age" was also towards the end of the 1950s a lot of the Western Shortline RRs that still used steam locomotives converted to diesel) So you also lost that infrastructure background resource for making a Western look realistic. Jet aircraft leaving contrails across big sky country screwed up a lot of Western Landscape shots.

So the hand me down hands on knowledge on how to make a Western, had no place to go and the old West and interest in Westerns was gone by 1980s. After that any Western made had to be recreated from scratch, with highly variable and inconsistent results. Today you got screenwriters who don't know squat trying to write Westerns with no knowledge of the West other than them watching Westerns and inserting PC ideas into stories, and it just don't feel right.

If you were born in the 1980s you wouldn't know the difference, and any Western made is a big deal.

I initially said (3:10 (2007)) that "It's a good worthy shot at a Western but it's not a Classic." (I was hoping we'd start improving from it.)

After that, we started seriously debating the film and getting a bit heated with each other pointing out the flaws. dave jenkins then posted in response to this

Quote from: The Firecracker on September 07, 2007, 10:50:31 PM

The 200 dollars offered by Prince was stupid as well. Would the town's folk risk being hanged by firing at a marshall? Doubtful.
Also, why didn't the Marshall make a counter deal promising the town's folk DOUBLE the amount of cash Prince was offering to fire upon Wade's gang?


this:

It's even stupider than that. The gang rides into town and sets up under the hotel window from which five armed men are overwatching. The gang are murderers, wanted men, known to law enforcement officers. The men in the hotel room include three peace officers. They have every legal and moral right to open up on the gang as soon as they appear. They also have the advantage of higher ground. No additional advantage can be gained by delaying. It is the height of idiocy that the men in the hotel room don't immediately start firing on the gang below! Further, even if they were to delay, the moment the gang starts offering the 200 dollar bounty the lawmen would begin firing just to shut the men up and discourage takers. But the men in the hotel room are completely passive. Yet this is just one stupidity in a sequence of hundreds in this stupid movie.

Equally stupid things happen on the trail from the farm to Contention. The group leaves at night, under cover of darkness. Presumably, speed and concealment are the two things the party is most concerned with. In the very next scene, however, we see them lounging about by a campfire. Why have they stopped? They want to make time, and they should want to do it in the dark. Also, stopping means having to put a watch on Wade while the others sleep. For some reason, Wade is allowed freedom of movement throughout the night (his manacled hands aren't much inconvenienced). Then, only one man is left to watch the notorious killer (a union rule?). In the morning, the watchman is dead. Incredibly, the men just write him off and proceed with their journey! All psychological plausibility goes out of the movie at that point. If you are traveling with a murderer, and he murders one of your company, you just don't continue on with the status quo ante. You reassess the situation. In the present case, you realize that getting the guy to Yuma may not be do-able, that even with your full crew it was gonna be tough, but now with one man short it is likely impossible. The guy who decided Wade had to go to Yuma (and who is bankrolling the expedition) is along, and therefore should call an audible. Even if he doesn't, the rest of the crew should prevail upon him to change the terms of the expedition. They should realize that all their lives are likely forfeit if Wade continues to live. They should do the rational thing: kill Wade on the spot.

Instead, they go merrily on their way, allowing Wade to kill again. Even then the group doesn't learn.

Then there is the "shortcut" through the pass, which we are told is controlled by hostile Indians. This shortcut requires another night and another campfire. What the f***?

Then there's the stupid digression with the mining camp. What the f***?

Finally, reaching Contention, more stupidities abound, as cited above (but not exhaustively. It would take 2 pages of text to enumerate all the idiotic things that occur there).

The original film was not flawless. It had great style and a good set-up, but the story turned stupid at the end. One problem was with the basic concept: waiting for a train. If you are traveling with a prisoner, the only reason to take him to a hotel is to conceal him. The moment his whereabouts is known, the hotel is a liability. You have enormous blind spots in a hotel room, and your mobility is compromised. Also, getting the guy from the hotel to the depot is something of a problem (as we see). Better to forget the hotel and go straight to the depot. Who cares if there aren't enough chairs for everyone, at least you have clear fields of fire in all directions.

But why wait for the train at all? Such a tactic fixes you in place, and allows the gang to catch up. A more prudent course would be to ride up the line toward the oncoming train and hail it as it approaches. You keep ahead of the outlaws, and then gain an earlier speed advantage. Also, why not use the telegraph and call for reinforcements? Maybe Contention is a worthless town, but why wouldn't there be towns up and down the line where reliable helpers could be recruited? Why not contact the army? They too have an interest in seeing Wade and his gang brought to justice.

If you do a remake of a film, you should set out to improve on the original. In the case of 3:10, a serious revision in the plot was called for. The remakers not only didn't fix the old problems, they created hundreds more. I'm really disappointed that they didn't adopt the obvious solution: put the good guys on the train early, and then have Wade's gang try to stop it. A running train battle would have been cool. The most important thing, though, would have been to have characters acting like rational beings, not pawns in a stupid plot. This remake gets 1/5, as do all stupid films.


If you want to join/revive the debate have at it the link to the original thread is here: http://www.fistful-of-leone.com/forums/index.php?topic=6074.msg95454#msg95454




« Last Edit: November 20, 2017, 09:02:01 AM by cigar joe » Logged

"When you feel that rope tighten on your neck you can feel the devil bite your ass"!
stanton
Bounty Killer
*****
Online Online

Posts: 3015



View Profile
« Reply #57 on: November 20, 2017, 07:33:03 AM »

Dave is right.
The 3:10 remake is really too often on the stupid site of things. And the directing is often quite uninspired. A very disappointing film considering the original's quality and some fine actors, especially a very charismatic Crowe.

I think it's worse than the Mag 7 remake, which is also nothing to write home about.

When los Coens are not able to get a really good film out of a remake of a classic western, why should muddle filmers like Fuqua or Mangold succeed?

Logged

Moorman
Gunslinger
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 316


View Profile
« Reply #58 on: November 20, 2017, 03:30:44 PM »

We are on the same page cigar joe. I never said the remake of 3:10 to Yuma was better than the original. I'm comparing it to its modern day contemporaries.  After Clint made Unforgiven, there has been only a handful of modern westerns that i consider to strike any semblance at all to the classics.  The remake 3:10 had some elements, but its still a modern western.  When i say " modern western", i am not in ANY way saying the modern westerns are like the classics. The mag7 remake was more a superhero movie to me, than a western.

I've said numerous times that i prefer classic movies from 1970 to the movies made afterwards.  A VERY GREAT PART OF MY APPEAL for classic movies is the fact i love history.  Thats why i love the write up you gave above.  We are on the same page...

« Last Edit: November 20, 2017, 03:32:09 PM by Moorman » Logged

T.H.
Bounty Killer
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1786



View Profile
« Reply #59 on: November 21, 2017, 11:41:06 AM »

When los Coens are not able to get a really good film out of a remake of a classic western, why should muddle filmers like Fuqua or Mangold succeed?

Great point.

I do wonder if the mid/late 90s Coens could have pulled it off better though. 

Logged


Claudia, we need you to appear in LOST COMMAND. It's gonna revolutionize the war genre. What did you think of the script?
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  



Visit FISTFUL-OF-LEONE.COM

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.03 seconds with 20 queries.