A Revolta dos Sete Homens

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.

After the let-down that was Return of the Seven, it's good to know that the Magnificent Seven are in safe hands again. Dropping Yul Brynner and bringing on Georege Kennedy to pay Chris was a risky move, but it pays off. He may not look anything like the Chris from the previous two films, but Kennedy brings confidence and gravity to the role that strangely deserted the ill-at-ease Lee Van Cleef when he played him the for the final sequels, The Magnificent Seven Ride. There is a Zapata-like plot with Chris freeing a Mexican revolutionary, but to be honest, that's about it for Spaghetti Western influences. A Euro-Western it might be labelled, but it's closer to John Wayne than Clint Eastwood. So, don't expect a bloody, gritty Spaghetti with priests ears being cut off and forced to eat it, but an enjoyable Sunday afternoon western that, while it isn't as good as the original and not a violent, savage and sickening death of beating in sight, as you get in the really good Spaghetti Westerns, it can be liked and remembered with fondness.

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.

Look at the stars of 1969's Guns of the Magnificent Seven - George Kennedy, James Whitmore, Monte Markham, Reni Santoni, Bernie Casey, Scott Thomas, Joe Don Baker... though the latter one matches, in sheer inexpressiveness, one Robert Vaughn - the rest of the cast hardly matches up with the star-studded original line-up (the Brynners, McQueens, Bronsons, Coburns & co.). Yet this film is indeed far-more action-packed than its illustrious predecessors (who all had tough gunslinger Yul Brynner in them; but then again, so did Westworld and... ugh... Futureworld! But that is another story...) Thus, I am tempted to theorize that, not just here but around the world, 1969 was dominated by... props! The true stars of so many mainstream releases were the premises, the themes or the sets - and, in this case, as the title clearly emphasizes, the guns! Let's face it, most of these guys are not "magnificent" - but they are reliable TV actors for the most part - and they delivered the goods here! And this was seen in many more 1969 productions - the new Bond was unknown George Lazenby, who mattered less than all the gizmos 007 used... There was a sequel to the Planet of the Apes released too - it mattered not that it really starred James Franciscus all throughout and merely had a cameo by Charlton Heston near the end of the film - what mattered was that the planet was revisited (and re-exploited!). Closer (in spirit as in style) to Guns, The Wild Bunch was all about gunfire and violence - it mattered little to the average moviegoer that it gave a slightly over-the-hill William Holden another chance... and co-starred Ernest Borgnine in the closest thing to a major role he'd get since Marty... Need I go on...? George Kennedy and William Holden almost - ALMOST - could have switched films in 1969... and few would have noticed! (Sam Peckinpah would have though - and that is what really matters!).

James Whitmore is a solid, rock-solid actor - I will always remember his many guest spots on various TV dramas - most notably his turn as an alien in The Invaders! Michael Ansara makes for a debatably adequate villain of service... him I remember for rather silly appearances in shows such as Lost In Space! He matched up well with Guy Williams - when Guy was Zorro too! Note the presence, also, of an illuminary here - Fernando Rey, the Portuguese/Galician actor who, in typical Hollywood supporting role attribution fashion, is given a bit part here... Hey - Hollywood had no clue what to do with enchanting leading ladies such as Romy Schneider and Catherine Deneuve when THEY came to Tinseltown... Thus, it comes as no surprise to me that the pet actor of the great film director Luis Bunuel -Rey- was so poorly treated in the USA! Fernando Rey was, at best, an exotic flavour du jour for casting agents - and on par with the likes of Charles Durning or E.G. Marshall... maybe! He was, by sharp contrast, a major actor in Europe - and Portugal's answer to Laurence Olivier, no less! Then again - what did Hollywood really do for Laurence Olivier himself, ultimately...? Most people will completely miss Fernando Rey's performance here - if they blink an eye! What a shame really...

All in all - in conclusion - Guns of the Magnificent Seven is a good one... a very good one! Lots of action - and more than meets the eye, on many levels!

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.