Vuelven los siete magníficos

George Kennedy is no Yul Brynner and Monte Markham is no Steve McQueen and on and on and on. Guns of the Magnificent Seven went in a slightly different direction than the two Magnificent Seven movies that preceded it.

What's the same?

Mexico. Farmers. An injustice. Seven fighters. Pretty Mexican woman falling for one of the fighters.

What's different?

The enemy. The cast. The run time.

The differences aid the movie a lot more than the similarities with the exception of the cast. It's not that the cast was bad, it's just that they weren't the original Magnificent Seven and that will always be a negative.

Okay, so it's not as good as the original, but it's definitely better than the "Return of the Magnificent Seven" and a gazillion times better than "Magnificent Seven Ride!" (which I had to turn off 30 minutes in because it was too painful to watch). The previous reviewer feels "Guns" is long and boring...I agree it is too long, but it's far more interesting than the second and fourth films. I feel "Guns" must be separated and stand on its own. If compared to the original, it is a sub-par sequel, but as a stand-alone Western, it has some really nice moments.

Most of the actors are young and inexperienced, which wouldn't be as noticeable if they hadn't cast James Whitmore...the guy is a brilliant character actor...you can't take your eyes off of him...his scenes with a little Mexican boy who has been burned out of his home and whose father has been imprisoned are wonderful...every scene Whitmore is in is charged with energy and life...I have always been befuddled why he never became the huge star he deserves to be. There is something about Monte Markham I have always liked...he doesn't have the screen presence for films, but I always felt he could have been a huge TV star given the opportunity...unfortunately, after the opening scene, the script gives him little to do. I thought Reni Santoni was fun to watch...he veered into over-acting a few times, but overall I enjoyed his performance...he had a few really nice moments. I enjoyed the relationship between Joe Don Baker and Bernie Casey and felt they had some nice moments, too. For whatever reason, the script leaves less-than-nothing for Scott Thomas to do...he is the most forgettable one of the group. In spite of the atrocious blonde toupee, I was surprised to find that I enjoyed George Kennedy as Chris. Few men could ever come close to having the screen presence of Yul Brynner, but if one takes this movie on its own, Kennedy does a good, solid job.

I fully concede that this is a mediocre film, but I can't help but smile whenever the theme starts to play. For some reason I have fun watching this movie and if you are in the mood for light entertainment, then I really think this one is worth a try.

Guns of the Magnificent Seven is by far the best of the sequels to the classic original. The cast is definitely the second best in terms of "up and coming" actors at that time, and viewers will probably recognize most of them. The plot of this one has Chris (George Kennedy) and a new gang being hired to free a Mexican revolutionary from a prison known as "The Rat Hole". Of course, the prison is run by a highly ruthless colonel, who frowns on dissidents, and tortures and kills for pleasure.

The gang here is an eclectic bunch, each with their own specialty. Although considering more than half the gang gets wiped out in every film, it's beyond me why anyone would still be crazy or desperate enough to join! I guess news doesn't travel over the border much. It's a shame that Yul Brynner didn't do this one (no insult to Kennedy), as it seems more dimension has been added to this character than we've seen before. The character of Keno (Monte Markham) is suspiciously similar to Vin from the previous two movies, but the rest of the gang are wholly original for the series: there's a black explosives expert; a one-armed sharp shooter (who happens to be a Civil War veteran - think of the word play between these two!); an old, fatherly-figure knife thrower; and finally a quiet rope expert who seems to have either cancer or tuberculosis.

What the film lacks in originality is made up for by the characters (and the actors who play them), great action, music and cinematography. The climactic action scene is definitely the second best of the series (although a couple of the gang die way too soon), and the movie moves along at a faster pace then the previous entries. Another interesting note on this entry is that there are parallels within the story to what was happening in the real world at the time of it's release. Racial prejudice, talk of revolution, overly harsh and abusive authority figures, etc. I don't believe any of the other entries touched on modern themes so directly. Yet they don't date the film, and are surprisingly still relevant today.

A couple small complaints: when did Chris's "price" go up to $600 a job??? It was only $100 in the first film and I can't imagine inflation rose that high in a few short years! Although each member is seemingly recruited for their individual expertise, there's no evidence showing any of these skills being used, except as an occasional afterthought. Strangest of all is when Chris says something in Spanish at the end, prompting one of the Mexican children to ask `What did he say?'. I don't know if it's just me, but why wouldn't a child of about 10 understand what was said in his own language?

While the overall execution of this film is standard as both a western and entry in this franchise, it still holds up better than the other two sequels, the earlier "Return of the Seven" and later "The Magnificent Seven Ride". Fans of the `Seven' series, or westerns in general, should find enough excitement here to hold their interest. Just don't go looking for a masterpiece, and accept it as one of the few decent sequels churned out by Hollywood.

**1/2 out of ****

Essentially I agree with "palmer 4" on most of his major points. I am a huge fan of Yul Brynner's "Chris," and it took me some adjusting to accept George Kennedy in the same role, but I think Kennedy did a very good job. (And ultimately I just decided they weren't the same character, but that Kennedy was another Chris, perhaps mistakenly identified by the Reni Santoni character as the one Yul Brynner played.) Kennedy had a history of playing big dumb lugs, but in this role he showed he could play a big intelligent lug, and a charismatic leader. "GUNS" is far more entertaining than "RETURN" and superior on every level to the unfortunate, better-they-hadn't-made-it "RIDE." As "palmer" says, the members of the seven in "GUNS" are more interesting and have better chemistry than the members of the seven in the other sequels. (Although I liked the Claude Akins character in "RETURN" and think he would have fit in well with the original seven.) What makes "GUNS" the superior "Seven" sequel, above all else, is the humdinger climax, the attack on the prison-fortress. It was well thought-out and well-planned by the screenwriters and the director, and is almost as exciting as the climactic shoot-out in the original.

After a revolutionary by the name of "Quintero" (Fernando Rey) is captured by the Mexican army and his small band is subsequently murdered, a lone survivor named "Max" (Reni Santoni) goes to a bandit leader by the name of "Lobero" (Frank Silvera) for assistance in helping to free him. Although the bandit leader has the men and the weapons, they lack a person with the leadership abilities to complete the mission. Likewise, nobody trusts Lobero to keep his end of the bargain. For that reason, the decision is made to have Max try to persuade "Chris" (George Kennedy) to lead the mission for $600 in gold. Naturally, he also needs some good men he can trust so he recruits a few of them on the way to Mexico. But even then the odds are not in his favor and when Lobero pulls out at the last minute the chances of success decrease even more. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this was an okay western which managed to keep my interest for the most part. Of course, it suffers in comparison to the original film, "The Magnificent Seven" but that probably goes without saying . Be that as it may, I have rated it accordingly. Average.