Magnificent Seven (Antoine Fuqua)

Agent Coulson

Ethan Hawke Joining Denzel Washington, Chris Pratt in 'Magnificent Seven'

Ethan Hawke is in negotiations to join what is shaping up to be an all-star cast of MGM’s remake of Western classic The Magnificent Seven, THR has confirmed.

The move will reteam Hawke with director Antoine Fuqua and actor Denzel Washington, with whom Hawke worked on 2001’s police thriller Training Day.
Chris Pratt and Haley Bennett, who appeared with Washington in Fuqua’s thriller The Equalizer, are also in the cast.
The movie tells of a woman (Bennett) who hires a disparate group of gunslingers to protect her town from rampaging bandits.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/ethan-hawke-joining-denzel-washington-778557


This makes me sad

johnny_ultimate

Yet another remake of Seven Samurai, ey?

Agent Coulson wrote: »

This makes me sad

Then ignore it.

Mickeroo

This is Fuqua's third Seven Samurai remake by my count with Tears of the Sun and King Arthur being the others.

Kiith

I long ago accepted that they'll remake anything, so we'll just have to live with it.

I do like all three of those actors though, so who knows, it might be good.

JP Liz V1

The remake of 3.10 to Yuma was very good

MfMan

o

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Ethan Hawke Joining Denzel Washington, Chris Pratt in 'Magnificent Seven'



http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/ethan-hawke-joining-denzel-washington-778557


This makes me sad

Hawke did his level best to sink Training Day, so presume more of the same under the same director.

silverharp

I showed my 10 this movie last week he liked it but preferred the good the bad and the ugly. But otherwise I reckon my son son would prefer to watch paint dry than be made watch a western.
That and ww2 movies.

JP Liz V1

Matt Bomer, Vincent D’Onofrio and Jason Momoa have joined

JP Liz V1

First image of cast

Harry Palmr

Are any of the 1960 version still alive? Have a suspicion the answer is no.

Wedwood

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Are any of the 1960 version still alive? Have a suspicion the answer is no.

Robert Vaughn is the last surviving member of the original 7.

Links234

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deSRpSn8Pyk

MisterAnarchy

They had better keep the magnificent Magnificent Seven theme tune .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9iteRKvRKFA

FunLover18

Looks like fun, but 'Justice Has a Number' is a terrible slogan

Mr Freeze

For some reason, I was so expecting to see Walton Goggins in the trailer playing some part.

Sadly not.

Not overly impressed by the trailers, but its good to see them still making the odd Western though.

Texas Jack

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

First image of cast

where's Momoa in that pic?

FunLover18

Texas Jack wrote: »

where's Momoa in that pic?

Momoa was never going to be one of the Seven, but a henchman. He dropped out though, supposedly because of scheduling.

MadDog76

Directed by Antoine Fuqua and starring Peter Sarsgaard, Denzel Washington, Chris Pratt, Ethan Hawke and Vincent D’Onofrio ......... really looking forward to this one!

Lemming

This particular story attained perfection in 1954, courtesy of Akira Kurasowa.

NIMAN

No need for a remake.

MadDog76

Lemming wrote: »

This particular story attained perfection in 1954, courtesy of Akira Kurasowa.

Not a big fan of the Kurasowa version to be honest.

MadDog76

NIMAN wrote: »

No need for a remake.

I love a good remake!

I preferred the 2010 True Grit remake to the original, for example, but I usually judge remakes as movies in their own right rather than compare them to their originals, they're two separate movies and can be enjoyed separately ......... and this Magnificent Seven remake looks like it's going to be cool as f*ck!

kumate_champ07

MadDog76 wrote: »

I love a good remake!

I preferred the 2010 True Grit remake to the original, for example, but I usually judge remakes as movies in their own right rather than compare them to their originals, they're two separate movies and can be enjoyed separately ......... and this Magnificent Seven remake looks like it's going to be cool as f*ck!

watched the remake first, then saw the original on tv, Jeff Bridges did a way better job than John Wayne

Texas Jack

Wonder if they'll ever remake Butch and Sundance

FunLover18

MadDog76 wrote:

I preferred the 2010 True Grit remake to the original, for example, but I usually judge remakes as movies in their own right rather than compare them to their originals, they're two separate movies and can be enjoyed separately ......... and this Magnificent Seven remake looks like it's going to be cool as f*ck!

I agree about True Grit but in fairness the Coen brothers would say it wasn't a remake but a new adaptation of the book.

MfMan

Going by the trailer 's'gonna be rubbish. All flash and shapes. The presence of Ethan Hawke also sets off alarm bells.

Mickeroo

Texas Jack wrote: »

Wonder if they'll ever remake Butch and Sundance

Theres a decent (unofficial) sequel called Blackthorne.

kumate_champ07

MfMan wrote: »

Going by the trailer 's'gonna be rubbish. All flash and shapes. The presence of Ethan Hawke also sets off alarm bells.

actually thats a good thing, he already worked well with the same director in Training Day, and was great in 3.10 to Yuma

MfMan

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

actually thats a good thing, he already worked well with the same director in Training Day, and was great in 3.10 to Yuma

He nearly single-handedly sank Training Day; was like that kid with the pudding-bowl haircut in the Mastercard ad. who gets to walk out on the Champions League pitch. DW, Scott Glen, Cliff Curtis etc. brushed him aside like a bug.

Heckler

MfMan wrote: »

He nearly single-handedly sank Training Day; was like that kid with the pudding-bowl haircut in the Mastercard ad. who gets to walk out on the Champions League pitch. DW, Scott Glen, Cliff Curtis etc. brushed him aside like a bug.

Thought he did a fine job. One of my favourite films for both Washingtons and Hawkes performances.

Spon Farmer

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

The remake of 3.10 to Yuma was very good

I was disappointed that they skipped over the scenes in the hotel room from the original - I had gone in expecting Crowe and Bale to chew up the scenery with a similar interaction to Ford and Heflin. A damn great movie regardless.

As to the new Magnificent Seven, it doesn't appear to be a remake at all. There is no Calvera or bandit army. No Mexican villagers. Even the Seven have different names and , for the most part, different occupations and backgrounds.

It is simply Magnificent Seven 5.

Besides, as we all know, the original wasn't so original either.

I hope it is a success and that we get even more westerns on the big screen.

Mr E

Looking forward to this. Looks like good fun.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DO8obpoIO0I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1RxxxZiZnw

Harry Palmr

Hope it flops.

Links234

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Hope it flops.

Why?

ricero

The cast is great.

Expect this to be good fun

py2006

I've only really come across this movie in the last day or so.

What are peoples thoughts on the casting? The original is one of my fathers generation movies and he has mentioned that the big draw in its day was all the big stars coming together into one movie.

Do you think the lack of BIG (apart from maybe Denzel) stars may affect the movie?

py2006

py2006 wrote: »

I've only really come across this movie in the last day or so.

What are peoples thoughts on the casting? The original is one of my fathers generation movies and he has mentioned that the big draw in its day was all the big stars coming together into one movie.

Do you think the lack of BIG (apart from maybe Denzel) stars may affect the movie?

The big draw wasn't the cast given the most of the cast were only known for TV at the time. The only big star in the film was Brynner, the rest of the casts careers were launched by the film and in fact, the cast for this remake has far bigger names when compared to the original at the time.

Spon Farmer

Links234 wrote: »

Why?

General begrudgery and a level of negativity only to be found on the internet would be my guess.

A person can be not interested in the film it appalled at the idea of remaking this remake but there is no rhyme or reason to a statement like hoping it flops. The very fact that this was all that was posted is evidence that the user had nothing to contribute but sourness.

FunLover18

I actually really enjoyed this. A grand way to pass an evening.

Features the best version of the Angelus yet.

p to the e

Have to say it wasn't bad. Some decent action sequences and most seem to be enjoying themselves.

I believe it was rumoured that D'Onofrio would play Judge Holden in a film adaptation of "Blood Meridian" at one point but it fell through. After seeing this I think he would have been perfect.

Sarsgaard is so good at being bad.

The female lead (Haley Bennett) held her own but, I can't believe I'm complaining, at points I felt like she could do a few buttons up on her shirt.

Is it an all time classic? No. Is it a decent way to spend two hours? Definitely.

mikhail

p to the e wrote: »

The female lead (Haley Bennett) held her own but, I can't believe I'm complaining, at points I felt like she could do a few buttons up on her shirt.

Yeah, there were so many shots of her cleavage that just felt gratuitous. It magnified my feeling that her character was just the token tough girl Hollywood injects everywhere now. It's lazy and boring.

I've heard a few people raving about the score. I don't get that. It was the same jumble of influences every big picture has now. Sometimes atmospheric, but never memorable.

Fun film overall, for all my griping.

constitutionus

just back from it and i agree its a great bit of craic

i kinda feel sorry for denzel and pratt as you cant look at them without thinking "thats denzel and pratt" but i thought the other lads used their "second tier" status in the film to try and do something interesting with their roles.

Donofrio was brilliant for instance, he went above and beyond to portray something you'd see in a john wayne film but updated, and hawke was the most intrigueing of em all to me as i tried to figure out what his problem was.

visually its gorgeous looking and its brilliantly directed during the attacks though i do think toneally it was a bit off as some jokes just didnt seem to come off when they shouldve.

still minor gripe there.

its wonderfully tense in places, rolls along at a good pace, and in places manages to channel a bit of the aul spagetti westerns .

im not a huge fan of the genre but ya can do worse than this

i give it a 7/10. and a fun one at that.

Bob Z

i liked it. it wasnt really a remake thoughwhich is probably better. i was surprised at who survived and who didnt. i didnt like the villian who bad for the sake of being bad. also denzel didnt seem to know much about most of the guys he recruited was it just luck they were really good with a gun? or what ever weapon they used.

Spon Farmer

I enjoyed the hell out of this movie.

It is an old fashioned western with a great villain, great dialogue and great chemistry between the cast.

The action sequences were spectacular and I like that they avoided the cliches of the scoundrels softening and bonding with individual townspeople like taking a boy under his wing and girl reminding one of a lost child. The Seven bonded with the whole town instead and didn't get soft.

Chris Pratt needs a few roles were he isn't being just Chris Pratt/Starlord but his character is still fun in this.

I'm disappointed that Chislom was given a motivation other than doing the right thing. It was fairly obvious from early in the film but at the same time he was also being established as wanting to to be there just to help. That said though the showdown was great stuff.

The music was good but it was a letdown that the Magnificent Seven theme wasn't used until a small section of the closing credits. It was being teased as the Seven assembled and the composers should have let loose with it as they finally rose together. Then put is aside again until the final scene.

D'Onforino steals the show as always.

Spon Farmer

Bob Z wrote: »

i liked it. it wasnt really a remake thoughwhich is probably better. i was surprised at who survived and who didnt. i didnt like the villian who bad for the sake of being bad. also denzel didnt seem to know much about most of the guys he recruited was it just luck they were really good with a gun? or what ever weapon they used.

Yes it wasn't a remake at all - it was just the next film in the series. A few tips of the hat to the original like the "stolen horse" stand off but all so small or used differently that they are simply Easter eggs.

And it was indeed very surprising to see who survived and who didn't

Sometimes a bad guy is just a bad guy. What set him down that path in life wasn't relevant and Bogue himself explained his own motivations very well.

Chislom didn't know the men well (except for Goodnight) but he knew enough there was something more there than they showed the world. They had never met yet Faraday drew his gun to ensure he got a fair fight, Billy was recommended by Goodnight, Horn was a legendary fighter and Red Harvest was obvious awesome . I wasn't able to catch the details of Vasquez' wanted poster but considering that Chisholm had earlier killed a truly bad man, it is obvious that recruiting the Mexican showed that Chisholm at least suspected he was innocent or justified - otherwise he would have been able to hire up a lot more outlaws.

Riddle101

Just back from seeing The Magnificent 7. Great movie and definitely worth the watch. Not sure if it's better than the original, but it's still got the typical Spaghetti Western cliches we all know and love, and some nice action sequences overall.

Doc2311

It'll never be as good as the original (I thought the main villain was weak) but it's a decent western in its own right.

Looper007

It was a lot better then I thought it would be, nowhere near the same ballpark as Seven Samurai (one of the greatest films made) or Steve McQueen classic, I think it was massively let down by Peter Sarsgaard underwritten bad guy and some of the seven like Red Harvest and Vasquez been underwritten also

funny that they were the two along with Denzel to live

.

Must admit I was shocked that

Chris Pratt was killed off, fully expected him and Denzel to be the only ones to survive

and it was shocking that this only got a 12A, it must have been close to a 15, that last minutes are pretty violent. Loved Lee Byung-Hun (at last given a decent role) and Vincent D'Onofrio and Ethan Hawke was great too. Denzel was great as usual. The last 40 minutes are amazing.

I swear Hayley Bennett is the twin of Jennifer Lawrence, I thought it was Lawrence in a cameo :pac:

Outlaw Pete

Bored me. Not a patch on the original.

Bob Z

Looper007 wrote: »

It was a lot better then I thought it would be, nowhere near the same ballpark as Seven Samurai (one of the greatest films made) or Steve McQueen classic, I think it was massively let down by Peter Sarsgaard underwritten bad guy and some of the seven like Red Harvest and Vasquez been underwritten also

funny that they were the two along with Denzel to live

.

Must admit I was shocked that

Chris Pratt was killed off, fully expected him and Denzel to be the only ones to survive

and it was shocking that this only got a 12A, it must have been close to a 15, that last minutes are pretty violent. Loved Lee Byung-Hun (at last given a decent role) and Vincent D'Onofrio and Ethan Hawke was great too. Denzel was great as usual. The last 40 minutes are amazing.

I swear Hayley Bennett is the twin of Jennifer Lawrence, I thought it was Lawrence in a cameo :pac:

yes i think maybe the director did that on purpose SPOILER*****two of them even got killed in the one go%%%%%

TerrorFirmer

Very decent, surprisingly violent for a 12A film as well - I had been concerned that the film would be a bit 'soft' given the rating but it's definitely not the case, enough graphic violence and profainity to warrant a 15a. Not complaining, but no need to be concerned that it might be too 'family friendly'. Suffers a bit from the cliche 'faceless waves of baddies' fare, but it fit the bill well enough in the context of the film and the films it was paying tribute to. Loud, OTT, hammy at times, but good solid entertainment. Quite long as well, which I only realised once it was over, which in itself is a fairly positive sign, nothing worse than a film that drags, regardless of the runtime. I'd say it's one that won't be remembered in a few years and will just be lost in the endless sea of passable entertainment, but it's well worth a watch if you find the time.