Yes...I knew this...that's why I called it a remake of The Seven Samurai....although it's really a remake of a remake of The Seven Samurai.
Both great movies. I somehow doubt this will hold up as a remake though.

It's a remake from 1960 here is the trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abwMykCREW0 starring Yul Brynner, Steve McQueen, Charles Bronson. Which was a remake of The Seven Samurai.

I think it was just yesterday I read someone here say that soon we'll be casting a remake of The Seven Samurai with an all Western cast....and here we are.

I treat movies like these (like Oldboy, Edge of Tomorrow) as basically adaptations of foreign stories to Western society. It's not at all a surprise that Western audiences will generally want a Western lead, and studio execs know this. Besides what would be the point of remaking the anime/manga verbatim (besides converting anime to live action)? The original stands by itself.

What bothers me more is the inevitable dumbing down of the material. You can bet philosophical discussion on the boundary between human and machine, dualism and emergent bandwagon will be replaced by actions, explosions and CGI.

I guess Russell Crowe is finally too old for these remakes.

This feels like spectacle over substance.

I wonder how well this remake would stand up to the original on plot and writing? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0016641/

Hello Gladiator remake?

I have zero problems with an all female ghostbusters. It's actually a lot more interesting than just a straight remake.

But all they've done here is gender flipped the roles. It looks like a carbon copy of the original right down to the token black character.

So they decided to remake a great move with all woman.

Feminism for feminism sake is not always a good idea.

Is this Disney's new film strategy? Remake 40-year old movies in an effort to renew copyright?

Man, if there was ever a remake of Poltergeist 2, George Takei would be the perfect cast for Reverend Kane. Creepiest lovable person I've ever seen.

Actually blade thickness has a lot to do with cutting power. Having a nice sharp edge at a good angle helps with the bite of the blade - and a host of medieval and ancient swords had that - but blade thickness impacts how deeply a cut can go, the thicker the blade the harder the hit will have to be.

It's why your kitchen knives are measured in milometers. Beyond that thickness of a blade has a large impact on its weight (katanas are a shorter blade but heavier than most longer swords), how long the hilt needs to be (and katana hilts were significantly longer than the remakes of today) and more.

One might think the thickness is there for durability and certainly the blades were durable, it's why there are still some of the originals around today, but the real reason is Japanese steel wasn't very good and full of impurities while at the same time the Europeans were mass producing steel of a significant higher quality. I hear the Japanese folding process vaunted as the height of sword-making but the real reason they folded the steel wasn't because it was a superior process - it wasn't, pattern-welding was and it was used in Europe as far back as a millennium earlier - but because it helped spread those impurities throughout the steel. That extra thickness helped keep the impurities from ruining the blade as well.

The katana... it's beautiful, fun to wield, unique looking, has a treasured past but it just.. isn't.. a very... good.. sword.

Your video, Final Fantasy 7 remake trailer 2 from PSX 2015, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

...and here I was expecting a shot for shot remake of Bohemian Rhapsody.

Wow, the new remake of CnC: Generals is looking awesome!