Skip to main content

Lucky Number Seven


          The Magnificent Seven is a remake of two films, both classics. The 1960 Magnificent Seven, its closer relative, was one of the landmark films of the western genre: an action-packed, thrill ride that could still be corny at times. But it was already a remake of Akira Kurosawa’s 1954 masterpiece Seven Samurai, an epic trailblazer of a film about heroism and honour. Antoine Fuqua’s current remake of the latter thus has a lot to live up to. The question is, does it even come close?
          The story is very simple: a crazed California official Bartholomew Bogue (Peter Sarsgaard) invades the mining town of Rose Creek, killing many civilians in the process, and lays claim to the land, promising to return and reap its profits. Emma Cullen (Haley Bennett) the wife of one of the killed men, hires a bounty hunter Sam Chisolm (Denzel Washington) to protect the town. Unable to do so alone, Chisolm recruits six other men: lethal gambler Josh Faraday (Chris Pratt), Mexican outlaw Vasquez (Manuel Garcia-Rulfo), veteran sharpshooter Goodnight Robicheaux (Ethan Hawke), knife fighter Billy Rocks (Byung-hun Lee), eccentric tracker Jack Horne (Vincent D’Onofrio), and Comanche archer Red Harvest (Martin Sensmeier). 
          There isn’t much about this movie that’s original. The story about a group of heroes banding together to protect the underdog has been done in dozens of movies since Seven Samurai, and this film doesn’t plot-wise do a whole lot different from that movies’ western remake. The characters are all archetypes, mostly parallels to the 1954 cast. Washington is Yul Brynner, Pratt is Steve McQueen, Hawke is Robert Vaughn, Lee is James Coburn, etc. The beats of the story are very familiar to anyone who’s seen the tropes established in these kind of movies. But here, a lot of them manage to be fun again: the training of the town to get ready for the upcoming battle, the initial hopelessness in their endeavour that you know will turn in their favour, the corny “how many you got?” bit.
          Each of the Seven are great. Even though some aren’t developed as much as they should be, they all get a few moments to shine, and the comradery comes through. Washington is as usual pretty on form, Pratt is doing his thing, D’Onofrio is delightfully strange, and I want to see more of Lee, Sensmeier, and Garcia-Rulfo. The best performance of this group though is definitely Hawke, as his character has the most interesting backstory. He’s also unsure of his abilities, which he masques with humour and his reputation during the Civil War. I also really like the ethnic diversity of this cast, as though it does feel a tad contrived, it’s a great metaphor for the films’ theme of unity. As for the villain, Sarsgaard’s good but the character’s pretty dull. There really isn’t a reason for why he’s doing what he’s doing beyond generic greed. His insane, violent personality is imposing, but doesn’t seem all that necessary. In both previous iterations of this story, the villains were simple bandits, they didn’t need to have a complicated scheme to steal the people’s goods, they just stole them. And even at his station in life, I find it hard to believe Bogue could summon an army to illegally harass this town.
          While the first Magnificent Seven was made during the romanticized era of westerns, this film is of the gritty realistic variety the genre has more-or-less consistently favoured since Unforgiven. This both amplifies the violence (you can feel the impact of every gunshot), but it also makes the action so much more thrilling because the stakes feel more real. It’s much more satisfying to see the heroes taking down these bad guys after we’ve had a glimpse of the terror they’re capable of. The action in this movie is really well done, the climax very engaging and enjoyable. It’s shot really well too, not with sweeping grandeur like John Ford, but with intimate detail and focus. The opening scene where Bogue arrives at the town church, is made all the more suspenseful by the subtle horsemen you see out the windows, foreshadowing his larger gang. 
          It’s also worth noting the music, as this film’s score was the last composed by the late great James Horner, and it’s pretty good. But don’t worry, the classic Elmer Bernstein theme is in there too.
          The Magnificent Seven isn’t a great film. It’s a remake of a story that probably would have been more interesting if reconstituted in a whole new context, and I wish the story set-up and character archetypes were a little more original, but I can’t say I didn’t really enjoy the ride. It’s refreshing to see a western succeed at both gritty realism as well as entertaining action and character, and I hope this isn’t the last to do so.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...
Post a Comment
Read more

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....
1 comment
Read more

Back to the Feature: New York, New York (1977)

New York, New York  is a two hour forty minute musical movie largely about a toxic relationship and I understand why it was Martin Scorsese’s first big flop. Some have blamed its poor reception on the kind of movie it was, of a style and tone Scorsese wasn’t known for, but I find that hard to believe. Even after only five films, he’d proven himself an extremely versatile director, and Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore  found an audience. Sure this jazz musical love letter to New York City was following up Taxi Driver and its’ far more cynical take on the city, but then it’s also ‘from the director of Taxi Driver ’ which itself was a big hit. Was it a matter of public appetite for musicals, or mere word of mouth and early critical reception that dissuaded viewers? Irrespective of that, I was stunned to discover this movie was the origin of the titular song, which I’d assumed was much older (it’s definitely got the sound of something that might have come out of the Jazz sce...
Post a Comment
Read more