These magnificent seven are politically correct and historically inaccurate, but still far more fun than any sequel to the first film.
“Magnificent Seven” – the original film – was a remake of a Japanese production, and ended up being followed by an unnecessary and rather poor succession of sequels. Only the Japanese original and the early American film remain for posterity, which is a classic in its own right. What we have here turns out to be a remake of the remake, and despite its many merits, it doesn't make us forget our first love.
The film has two big points in its favor: the production, luxurious and detailed, and the quality of the cast involved. The script presents the same story that we already know, but structured differently and with different types of actors, in addition to being entirely in the USA, and not in Mexico. That was another point in its favor, as the story of the first film had already been virtually copied, chewed up and dismantled by the sequels that followed.
I liked the work of Denzel Washington, an impeccable actor and perfectly comfortable with action movies. Ethan Hawke is very supportive and does some quality solo work as well. Haley Bennett is also excellent. Chris Pratt, Vincent d'Onofrio, Lee Byung-Hun and all the others help, but they don't capture our interest or really stand out. Peter Sarsgaard, the villain, did a good job considering the weaknesses of the material received: the character appears little, has almost nothing to do and, in the end, inside the church, he has a behavior that does not match anything that had happened so far. there.
Technically, the film features a huge amount of effects-laden action and high-quality CGI. Antoine Fuqua knew how to understand how the film should be, honoring its predecessor without, however, copying it. The film has excellent effects, good costumes and good sets. The production paid attention to the period details, which does not prevent some minor anachronisms, which were not a substantial problem. The action scenes were well executed and the film will certainly please fans of the genre, and the soundtrack has a certain epic flavor that goes well and harmonizes well with the (already historic) musical theme of the film, which was rerecorded for the new production.
These are all qualities, and minor flaws. Where I really feel that the film failed was in the casting of some of the actors. After the recent controversies in the industry (which involved not only the infamous accusations of harassment, but also the discrimination of professionals based on color or ethnicity), there was an effort to counteract bad publicity with actors who were black, Native American or Latinos in all sorts of characters. I'm not against it, but I think there are characters better suited to it than others, and I doubt, for example, that a Native American would pair well with a group of mostly white gunslingers in the late 19th century. As much as political correctness is appeased, it is an idea that goes against historical verisimilitude. Another problem with this film is the attempts to introduce humor, both in the situations and in the dialogues: they are so bad and so shaky that it would be better if they had removed them from the final version.