Culturally 7

Culture is a tricky word. Anything and everything surrounding it is risky business. However, the best definition I have heard describing culture is as follows: human interaction and its products; one learns from other people. A major factor in the difference between Akira Kurosawa's "Seven Samurai" and Jon Sturgess's "The Magnificent Seven" revolves around that sticky word culture. Not only the interactions of the characters on stage, but also the audience in which the films are directed at are defined by culture, what people of different upbringings and standings have learned as commonplace.

In japanese culture, the class system was life. A man or woman was born into a certain role and that is where they stayed for the rest of their life. It is how everyone lived and how everyone treated one another. In America, there have always been issues of race where the white man is essentially on top and all other immigrants (depending on the time period) were below him. This is simply how the cultures vary, how the compare.

For instance the hierarchical class system in "Seven Smurai" plays a HUGE role with the way every character acts and in "The Magnificent Seven" it is hardly used at all, if not simply for a plot device. I would say the opening scene where Chris and Harry go to bury the deceased, unnamed native american man incorporates this. It shows the injustice and inequality of the times in pre-WW1 America. Race for the western versus class in the japanese film is a fair culture comparison and both are directed at their respective audiences. These issues are addressed in multiple scenes, however the overall plot states the conflict better than any individual one.

"Seven Samurai" begins with poor farmers, peasants who are in desperate need for protection. When the men attempt to hire samurai for the first time in town, they are called "pathetic" "blockheads" and "foolhardy." the poor farmers are constantly ridiculed for the plight and are continually spat on and ignored. Coinciding with this meek introduction to the peasants' lifestyle, a group of Mexican farmers are treated the same way in "The Magnificent Seven." They go to the border hoping to buy guns, but find a different method of protection instead. As I mentioned before, the cowboys' introduction scene opens with Harry and Chris defending the burial rights of a dead native american. The group of mexican peasants approach Chris and tell him of their poor story and how no one will help them to defend their town.

The farmers in both films are treated the same, poorly, not because they are both peasants, but because of the equal discrimination between class in traditional japanese society and race in American society. Being a cowboy, white of course, is equivalent to being a samurai, one step up on the ladder.

I would also like to view the role of cowboy/samurai as savior and defender of the lower class or race (however that is not how the heroes view their roles). This seemingly unreachable middle class warrior stands for the equality and injustice of his fellow man. The peasant is a cruel man in these movies, he betrays his defenders and does not trust them. Like Kikuchiyo says after his failure with the samurai armor, "What did ya think these farmers are anyway...There's no creature on earth more wily than a farmer...They kowtow and lie, playing innocent the whole time. You name it, they'll cheat you on it! Farmers are misers, weasels, they're mean, stupid murderers!" But he goes on to ask "Who do you think made them that way?" He blames the samurai for this, for their lack of caring for the lower class." In this way the samurai seek to right their wrongs and unite the class divide.

Although it is not directly referenced, I think it is fair to compare this to actions of the Mexican farmers in "The Magnificent Seven." They betray the gunslingers in the end and for what reason? They do it out of fear and believe this white man, more powerful than they cannot be trusted and they will not win a battle. Somehow in the end between both "Samurai" and "Magnificent" equality blossoms between the two divides. Despite the differences, the betrayal, the lack of trust, both groups of people fight side by side one another for freedom and justice and the hope that one day maybe, just maybe all men can live in a fair world. This of course contradicts the ending where in both films, the protagonists say out loud (in different words), "The farmers have won, not us." In the end it seems equality is simply too distant a thing to brought to reality.

On a different note, the Bollywood film Sholay (which was shot in 1975) raises another sort of culture question reflective of its era. Sholay, instead of dealing with the race or class systems, deals with law vs. lawlessness. In the raging tumultuous decade of the seventies, this was a huge issue touched on by many films due to the large upswing in organized crime, illegal drugs, and an overall disrespect towards law enforcement.

Different than both Magnificent 7 or Seven Samurai, the defenders are not the "honorable men" or higher class. They are the unlawful ones, in fact Veeru and Jai are notorious criminals who are hired for a single task. This shows how far a man's vengeance can take him, even out from under the law which he has sworn to defend (Thakur).

This can be most prominently seen in Sholay's double feature ending, one which portrays Gabbar Singh apprehended by the law and another which shows the villain killed viciously by the Thakur. The latter is, of course, the director's cut and was not released for the mainstream audience. The argument for this was that Gabbar's death symbolized a civil unrest and general lawlessness among people.