Linbeymusol Wonderful character development!

SparkMore n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.

Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Ogosmith Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

shakercoola It was always going to be difficult to re-cast the role of Chris Adams, Cajun gunslinger, leader of the Seven - a part made so famous and so charismatically in the original by Yul Brynner. But, the gritty, fatherly, gargantuan George Kennedy has a job to do and he takes us with him to rescue a Mexican patriot who is attempting to assist helpless and downtrodden peasants. The film has more expanse than the first sequel - more drama, breeziness, and the occasional funny one liner. The ensemble cast and others are quite interesting - playing it entertainingly high spirited and quirky. There are some tonal problems with the majestic Elmer Bernstein score and it is a very formulaic western, but it has some good action sequences and plenty of colour.

Uriah43 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.

Wizard-8 Of the three sequels to the original "Magnificent Seven" movie, "Guns of the Magnificent Seven" is the best. However, it still isn't a very good movie. The main problem with the movie is the fact that the middle section of the movie moves at an extremely slow speed. You can really sense the padding, and the 106 minute running time is just one sign of this. The movie not only needed to be shorter, but a few more action sequences would also have helped. And GOOD action sequences, because the action in the movie (even in the climatic battle sequence) is only so-so. The movie does have some merit. George Kennedy does pretty well inheriting the role that Yul Brynner played in the first movie, the supporting cast is also good, with some of their characters coming across as interesting. And the movie clearly had a budget; it looks pretty good. However, all this good stuff isn't enough to salvage the enterprise. I would only recommend this movie to patient (and die hard) western fans.

ianlouisiana "When love congeals it soon reveals the faint aroma of performing seals" wrote Lorenz Hart who knew a good few things about love,the movies and even performing seals for all I know.Certainly a seal - like aroma pervades this truly terrible rip - off (sorry,sequel) to a much - loved original.Any remaining goodwill is soon dispersed with the appearance of George Kennedy (with a laughable syrup) as a narrow - eyed cigar chomping "Chris".He is squeezed into trousers at least two sizes too small which has the effect of making his bum resemble that of a less than athletic hippopotamus and has trouble bending down - let alone running.He recruits a crew of second - rate (James Whitmore always excepted)TV actors to rescue Fernando Rey who would quite like to escape from a Mexican prison and who can blame him? Bernie Casey plays a "Blaxploitation"dude a hundred years before his time ,is handy with a Gatling gun and often artistically covered with sweat but - like the others - dies with a whimper rather than a roar. The only other even vaguely interesting figure is Joe Don Baker as a disabled ( or crippled - as he delicately puts it)Confederate Civil war vet who,like Chris,can hardly hobble and it is hardly a surprise that he is less than adept at dodging bullets when the time comes. George Kennedy only seems happy when he is leaning against a doorway/hitching post/adobe wall lighting a cigar and narrowing his eyes - he does a lot of that. In the circumstances it is almost a blasphemy to use Elmer Bernstein's iconic music and it only serves to underline how far down the path of mediocrity "Guns of the Magnificent Seven" has wandered. A lot of Mexican soldiers are slaughtered at the end - a large proportion of whom are,for some reason not wearing a shirt.Kennedy and Whitmore ride off into the sunset.Hopefully the next time he tries recruiting mercenaries at a hundred bucks a pop he will go for quality rather than quantity.