The Magnificent Seven

Guess who finished the review but forgot to post it? (I was working on review stuff I promise, next Monday you get a double feature.)

I can't even believe they had the balls to remake this movie, what the hell is the point? I'm not saying a story like this couldn't work in a modern times setting but if you're just going to make it cowboys again then just stop. And this is quite a good movie, I daresay even that people who just claim westerns of that time just ripped off Kurosawa films need to take a time out cause shocker, Kurosawa himself gave a glowing review. So I don't want to hear any nonsense about american bastardization of foreign cinema, it's worked before and it can work now. Yes, the main story of a small town besieged by bandits who have to hire seven gunslingers is similar but the movie has enough distinguishing factors in terms of characterization, performances, and setting to make it unique enough. It's similar but it's not derogatory. I really enjoy our main cast, I've actually been a fan of Yul Brynner since I saw Cecil B. Demille's Ten Commandments when I was 5 or 6 years old and I'm always excited when I see his name in a movie's credits because he's such a cool personality, Steve McQueen is still the man and shows he can act in period settings whether it be the old west, World War 2, or the 1950s suburbs, James Coburn is wonderful as well and again he's very much a fun person to have in a movie despite the context and setting, Charles Bronson has already proven to me how well he works in a western movie so I was all for seeing more of him. The chemistry between them all is also really good and come on, how can you get a better western villain than Eli Wallach? But the production is very good too, seeing as how this was the last real decade of western films the quality is still just as strong in any other film of the genre. And it really doesn't bother me that the story follows similar beats, because it's such an enjoyable film from our stars. I doubt there is a western out there that really could top Once Upon A Time In The West, but I'm incredibly happy to have seen this movie regardless. The action is handled well, nothing fancy but certainly not boring or dull either, I do enjoy the characters and the story, this is still regarded as one of the best westerns made and I can't very well argue with that. 4 stars, 7.5/10!

Ugh, this week has been too hectic. It really does bring my blood to a boil when I forget something as important as a review and that sucks because my memory is shot to all hell, and I never want to dissappoint. Next week will be better, movie review, new movie review, television review, all bases covered and I can't wait.

The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly

What many consider to be the best western ever made, how does it stack up in my eyes?

Let me make one thing perfectly clear, I do not hate this movie. I do not dislike this movie. I do not think it is a bad movie. It is however, an overrated movie. Sure the scale is the biggest we've seen in this loosely connected trilogy, the story is pretty simple and can lead to one hell of a showdown at the end, but....it's very cluttered. So let me try to explain, Clint Eastwood returns as our favorite bounty hunter who just captured a bandit named Tuco played to absolute brilliance by Eli Wallach, who soon escapes and through various circumstances they both discover a raided confederate camp, where one dying soldier departs information of a large sum of gold buried in a cemetary. Clint Eastwood's character, now named Blondie (no relation to the singer) knows the name of the grave, and Tuco knows the name of the cemetary but neither of them is telling. Meanwhile, Lee Van Cleef returns as a ruthless, malicious, son of a mother bounty hunter known as Angel Eyes, who wants the gold too and is tracking our duo. So you may be wondering, well the story seems simple so why is it cluttered like you said? One reason, sidetracking! Mother of God the sidetracking! It is padding levels of boredom! This movie should barely be an hour and a half long and not almost 3 HOURS!! 3 fraking hours?! Lord Of The Rings was 3 hours, but that was because they had a lot of story to tell and pretty thick books to adapt! This movie is at least half sidetracking doing other BS meaningless things, instead of heading to their goal, the cemetary. No, let's not just address the fact this takes place during the Civil War but let's spend at least more than an hour reinforcing that fact with Angel Eyes interrogating our duo at a internment camp for northern soldiers, them getting wrapped up in this completely meaningless and prolonged sequence with a colonel wanting to destroy a bridge and fight off enemy troops, I mean sweet Jesus when do we get back on track here?? I don't hate this movie man, I swear! The action though offtrack at times is excellent. All our leads are outstanding especially Eli as the cunning, foul mouthed, yet awesome Tuco and Lee Van Cleef is a great villain, granted I loved him much more as Douglas Mortimer in For A Few Dollars More but that's besides the point, so acting is spot on! The music by Ennio Morricone is the stuff of legend in this movie, with one particular track Ecstasy Of Gold being soooo good Metallica plays it before every concert they perform, seriously! Cinematography is gorgeous and expansive, showing massive battlefields, great stunts, and the mexican standoff we all know and love. Needless to say that is the highlight and best scene of the movie, even if you haven't seen the movie you have seen this standoff. You love it, I love it, it's amazing! But honestly, that's the only part worth anything. Just go to YouTube and watch that scene and save yourself almost 3 hours of unnecesary padding, that just so happens to be shot very well and has good actors in it. I'm sorry guys, I just don't see why people say this is the best western. It's a good western with a massive scale and terrific action, but for the life of me it just couldn't stay on track to tell the story. It's a basic story that tried to prop itself up to be an epic, when in reality sometimes less is more.