rikitiki

I would bet a month's salary "The Magnificent Seven Returns" (MSR) was made-for-TV. Other reviewers attest that MSR was a theatrical movie, and I'll take their word for it. The logical answer must assume it was originally shot for TV, and after a change-of-studio-heart, it was released theatrically instead. Every actor is primarily a TV actor: Mariette Hartley, Michael Callen, Ralfe Waite, Stephanie Powers... TV performers all. Lee Van Cleef split his time between TV and theater screens. Stephanie Powers has only made 3 or 4 "real" movie appearances in the last thirty years of a very prolific television career. Minor players are veteran small-screen actors who can be seen on old reruns of "Gunsmoke", "Wild Wild West","Streets of San Francisco," and so on.

The ho-hum sets are identical to the Universal Studios Tour sets, often seen in old episodic TV. And the editing betrays the one-or-two-takes-hurriedness of TV, with limited camera movements, positioning, cutting, and lighting. The sound track, exclusive of the original Berstein themes, are straight from seventies television. Yep, I'd bet money it was shot for TV.

That's an important point in evaluating MSR. Initially I watched MSR on cable assuming it was an old theatrical release. In comparison to the original "Magnificent Seven", it's a joke, a cartoon, an amateurish attempt at movie making. Acting, lighting, writing, settings, action, cinematography, music (exempting the Berstein themes), editing, pacing,...on and on....all pale in comparison to the classic "Magnificent Seven" which is close to the perfect 60's western, and one of the great action movies of all time.

However, viewed as an early 70's made-for-TV movie, the film is actually better than average. Those unfortunate enough to live through the 70's as an adult, know what I'm talking about. MSR would have competed favorably with "Alias Smith and Jones" and similarly bland network shows. During the seventies, "Gunsmoke" was a quality show, concentrating on character development rather than action, deemphasizing gun play to two shootouts a week. MSR has more action than a whole season of "Gunsmoke." In this light - in this frame of reference - MSR is passable entertainment, a cut above the TV fare from that decade.

I'm a Private Pilot and I'm very forgiving of flying movies, much more so than mainstream movies, so long as they offer something in return: great flying sequences, good acting, interesting airplanes, a meaningful message about life and people, or at the very least, provide a couple hours of amusement. The new "Flight of the Phoenix" offered none of these in adequate amounts.

A movie can redeem itself by lingering after viewing - some films are so moving, so haunting, they affect me for days, or pop-up into my awareness years later. This movie is throw-away forgettable - I won't think of it again. The original 1965 James Stewart "Flight" was memorable, and if I crash land an aircraft or find myself in a survival situation I will remember it, while the new "Flight" is just another movie to watch on cable.

Those who haven't seen the original might enjoy the couple hours runtime - the new "Flight" wasn't a complete waste. Indeed, the original had its flaws, such as the utterly stupid "bellydancer" sequence. But those hoping for a film equal or better than the 1965 version will be sorely disappointed. The new script added nothing original; the female character was wasted, failing to inject sexual tension; the dialog lacked wit and failed to provoke thought, in fact it weakened the hopelessness and desperation felt by the survivors, the torment within Captain Towns, and the dangerous, life-threatening power struggle between Towns and Elliot/Dorfmann*.

It's a pity, one more rewrite of the screenplay, emphasizing the human elements could have produced a movie that entertained as well as enlightened.

*Dorfmann was the original 1965 name of the model airplane designer. +