1966·Western·1h 35m
7.0
★
Chico, one of the remaining members of The Magnificent Seven, now lives in the town that they (The Seven) helped. One day someone comes and takes most of the men prisoner. His wife seeks out Chris, the leader of The Seven for help. Chris also meets Vin another member of The Seven. They find four other men and they go to help Chico.
Directed by Burt Kennedy
mexico
horseback riding
male friendship
sequel
Trailer
IMDB
N/A
Where to Watch
Cast
Yul Brynner
Chris Adams
Robert Fuller
Vin
Julián Mateos
Chico
Warren Oates
Colbee
Claude Akins
Frank
Elisa Montés
Petra, Chico's Wife
Fernando Rey
Priest
Emilio Fernández
Francisco Lorca
Virgílio Teixeira
Luis
Rodolfo Acosta
Lopez
Jordan Christopher
Manuel
Ricardo Palacios
Jailer
Crew
Burt Kennedy
Director
Larry Cohen
Screenplay
Elmer Bernstein
Original Music Composer
Ted Richmond
Producer
Lynn Stalmaster
Casting
Julián Mateos
Property Master
Akira Kurosawa
Original Concept
Popular Reviews
22 reviews
Nicks_927
6.0★ · 02/28/26
It’s a solid western in its own way, with several flaws and nothing that makes it particularly outstanding, yet still enjoyable to watch.
Even if we overlook the typical “issues” of the genre, such as the surreal disparity between the protagonists, who don’t die even after taking two hundred shots, while secondary characters drop like flies, there are other elements that weaken it; for example, given the short running time, it’s hard to grow attached to so many characters, too many of them and all too superficial and uninteresting.
It’s curious that the sharp dialogue that had characterised the first film is mostly abandoned here, briefly present in the opening scenes and then completely set aside (and perhaps that was the most effective choice, since they already felt rather forced).
Even if we overlook the typical “issues” of the genre, such as the surreal disparity between the protagonists, who don’t die even after taking two hundred shots, while secondary characters drop like flies, there are other elements that weaken it; for example, given the short running time, it’s hard to grow attached to so many characters, too many of them and all too superficial and uninteresting.
It’s curious that the sharp dialogue that had characterised the first film is mostly abandoned here, briefly present in the opening scenes and then completely set aside (and perhaps that was the most effective choice, since they already felt rather forced).
It’s a solid western in its own way, with several flaws and nothing that makes it particularly outstanding, yet still enjoyable to watch.
Even if we overlook the typical “issues” of the genre, such as the surreal disparity between the protagonists, who don’t die even after taking two hundred shots, while secondary characters drop like flies, there are other elements that weaken it; for example, given the short running time, it’s hard to grow attached to so many characters, too many of them and all too superficial and uninteresting.
It’s curious that the sharp dialogue that had characterised the first film is mostly abandoned here, briefly present in the opening scenes and then completely set aside (and perhaps that was the most effective choice, since they already felt rather forced).
Even if we overlook the typical “issues” of the genre, such as the surreal disparity between the protagonists, who don’t die even after taking two hundred shots, while secondary characters drop like flies, there are other elements that weaken it; for example, given the short running time, it’s hard to grow attached to so many characters, too many of them and all too superficial and uninteresting.
It’s curious that the sharp dialogue that had characterised the first film is mostly abandoned here, briefly present in the opening scenes and then completely set aside (and perhaps that was the most effective choice, since they already felt rather forced).
Mirriau
5.0★ · 02/22/26
Some reheated nachos from the first one, but with worse ingredients.
Some reheated nachos from the first one, but with worse ingredients.
Sean
4.0★ · 11/16/25
This isn’t horrible on the surface, you still get the western action you came for and Elmer Bernstein returning for the score was a saving grace but I’m so disappointed with this sequel concept that this low a rating feels right to me. This story is climbing the quality ladder down at an alarming rate, I gave Kurosawa’s a five of course but I then gave The Magnificent Seven a three and a half, and now this is sitting at a two. I’d say that’s because my experience with the story has been nothing more than a chain of subpar remakes, with this remaking a remake that was already a pretty bad remake in the first place and I’m just so tired of it. I really felt like there was some potential here for a good sequel, pick any of the seven from the first film and make an action thriller or character study about what they did after that one, or with a dead character a prequel story, but no, they just chose to remake the exact same story giving this movie’s existence almost no value to me whatsoever. Like I said earlier Bernstein’s score was really a saving grace as his work and the action were the only way I got through this, I genuinely don’t think I’ll ever continue this series with how bland it seems but if I ever do it’ll be for the music. Overall it’s a rough watch but I understand why some could’ve enjoyed it, I just long for creativity in westerns at this point in my journey and a remake of a remake of a remake is simply the opposite of that.
This isn’t horrible on the surface, you still get the western action you came for and Elmer Bernstein returning for the score was a saving grace but I’m so disappointed with this sequel concept that this low a rating feels right to me. This story is climbing the quality ladder down at an alarming rate, I gave Kurosawa’s a five of course but I then gave The Magnificent Seven a three and a half, and now this is sitting at a two. I’d say that’s because my experience with the story has been nothing more than a chain of subpar remakes, with this remaking a remake that was already a pretty bad remake in the first place and I’m just so tired of it. I really felt like there was some potential here for a good sequel, pick any of the seven from the first film and make an action thriller or character study about what they did after that one, or with a dead character a prequel story, but no, they just chose to remake the exact same story giving this movie’s existence almost no value to me whatsoever. Like I said earlier Bernstein’s score was really a saving grace as his work and the action were the only way I got through this, I genuinely don’t think I’ll ever continue this series with how bland it seems but if I ever do it’ll be for the music. Overall it’s a rough watch but I understand why some could’ve enjoyed it, I just long for creativity in westerns at this point in my journey and a remake of a remake of a remake is simply the opposite of that.
Diogo Magalhães
5.0★ · 08/28/25
This sequel is a rehashed version of the original, but considerably worse. The cast isn’t as impressive (although Yul is good, as always), the plot is basically the same and the action sequences aren’t as thrilling.
This sequel is a rehashed version of the original, but considerably worse. The cast isn’t as impressive (although Yul is good, as always), the plot is basically the same and the action sequences aren’t as thrilling.
Wyatt
6.0★ · 06/29/25
Vin: Why else would I be here? Sure Chico is a friend of mine. But, hell, I don't even know his last name.
Chris: Neither do I.
Vin: Don't it make you wonder?
Chris: No.
A sequel with only the magnificent Yul Brynner reprising his role, not that it doesn’t feature a lot of the same characters, it’s just that no one else wanted to show back up. Mr. Brynner is still awesome as Chris, an impeccable beacon of good in the wild wild west. It’s a western, a short one at that, and they got the stunt workers really earning their wages and I think that’s admirable enough. I wonder if the next movie will also include 7 people saving a town from bandits. Tinge more violent than the first?
Chris: Neither do I.
Vin: Don't it make you wonder?
Chris: No.
A sequel with only the magnificent Yul Brynner reprising his role, not that it doesn’t feature a lot of the same characters, it’s just that no one else wanted to show back up. Mr. Brynner is still awesome as Chris, an impeccable beacon of good in the wild wild west. It’s a western, a short one at that, and they got the stunt workers really earning their wages and I think that’s admirable enough. I wonder if the next movie will also include 7 people saving a town from bandits. Tinge more violent than the first?
Vin: Why else would I be here? Sure Chico is a friend of mine. But, hell, I don't even know his last name.
Chris: Neither do I.
Vin: Don't it make you wonder?
Chris: No.
A sequel with only the magnificent Yul Brynner reprising his role, not that it doesn’t feature a lot of the same characters, it’s just that no one else wanted to show back up. Mr. Brynner is still awesome as Chris, an impeccable beacon of good in the wild wild west. It’s a western, a short one at that, and they got the stunt workers really earning their wages and I think that’s admirable enough. I wonder if the next movie will also include 7 people saving a town from bandits. Tinge more violent than the first?
Chris: Neither do I.
Vin: Don't it make you wonder?
Chris: No.
A sequel with only the magnificent Yul Brynner reprising his role, not that it doesn’t feature a lot of the same characters, it’s just that no one else wanted to show back up. Mr. Brynner is still awesome as Chris, an impeccable beacon of good in the wild wild west. It’s a western, a short one at that, and they got the stunt workers really earning their wages and I think that’s admirable enough. I wonder if the next movie will also include 7 people saving a town from bandits. Tinge more violent than the first?