3:10 To Yuma

[andyfox]

A poetic post, Rick, with the unhappy ending, unfortunately, that you alluded to. Which is one of the things I don't like about no-limit. Seven hours of careful hard work belly busted by one card.

[Wynton]

[ QUOTE ]
There was a bit of homage in the film as well. Peter Fonda was definitely channeling both John Wayne and his father. Crowe was Brando. And Bale was Jimmy Stewart. 3:10 to Yuma is a kind of knock-off of High Noon anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's mostly a knockoff of the original version of 3:10 to Yuma, with Glenn Ford.

I just saw this over the weekend and enjoyed it, despite the ending. I'm a fan of westerns and realize that one does not see these movies expecting plausibility. But even by those standards, the ending was deficient, in my view.

On the other hand, I had no complaints about the acting or directing. And I was diverted the entire time, which is really all I want from this kind of movie.

Incidentally, a kind of similar movie - and one of the classics - is "Last Train from Gun Hill," with Kirk Douglas.

[andyfox]

Well, the original 3:10 to Yuma was an attempt to cash in on the success of High Noon. "Diverting" is a good description of the curent 3:10.

[Borodog]

I cannot understand the people who are calling the end of 3:10 "deficient."

As far as I could tell the ending was perfect. What sort of ending did you want exactly?

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[Peter666]

I walked into the movie with the prejudice of seeing the original plus reading these posts. I am greatly disappointed in the veteran posters who praised the film so highly.

The people who say the film is implausible are right on. There are things that are implausible in real life, and things implausible in the context of themselves. Unfortunately, the remake of 3:10 to Yuma is the latter, which is a mortal sin in movies.

The idea that people would bother taking an outlaw to a train to be hung in another city, while dozens of others are being blown away in the process is ridiculous and distracting. If a member of your posse is having his throat gouged out with a fork, you would not shoot the offender on the spot?

Also, Russell Crowe's character completely lacked the charm that Glenn Ford brought to the role. The scene with the woman at the bar was markedly inferior to the original film, which was a lot more suggestive without seeing any skin or a bedroom at all. The change of Crowe's character in the end was also unconvincing. Why would his posse bother going after him when it is clear that he is running away from them while jumping from roof to roof?

I'm adding "3:10 to Yuma" to this years list of most overrated films. It is second only to "The Bourne Ultimatum" in that regard.

[andyfox]

Westerns have always been fairy tales to me. I don't expect the same level of plausibility in a western that I do in other movies. After all, the "west" that is depicted in westerns is not what the west was like at all. (It was essentially made up by Owen Wister, who never saw the west.)

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
Westerns have always been fairy tales to me. I don't expect the same level of plausibility in a western that I do in other movies. After all, the "west" that is depicted in westerns is not what the west was like at all. (It was essentially made up by Owen Wister, who never saw the west.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Gotcha Andy. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] According to this thingy I just Googled Wister (who I never heard of prior to your post) "....had spent summers in the West, and on the basis of these experiences he started to produce Western sketches."

Also ran into 2+2er Private Joker today. He said the guy who directed "3:10 to Yuma" couldn't direct traffic and the Brad Pitt western about Jesse James was great.

~ Rick

[Paluka]

[ QUOTE ]
Why would his posse bother going after him when it is clear that he is running away from them while jumping from roof to roof?

I'm adding "3:10 to Yuma" to this years list of most overrated films. It is second only to "The Bourne Ultimatum" in that regard.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree completely with this stuff. Both of these movies threw themselves in the garbage with characters just acting in bizarre and irrational ways for the last 45 minutes of each.

[Phat Mack]

[ QUOTE ]
I cannot understand the people who are calling the end of 3:10 "deficient."

As far as I could tell the ending was perfect. What sort of ending did you want exactly?

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Will driving the cattle in front of the train to trample Charlie Prince and provide cover for his dad, a trick he learned from Ben Wade at the beginning of the film; Ben Wade's gang being killed by "The Hand of God;" the more I think about this ending, the more I agree that it was perfect.

Btw, when Ben Wade is jumping from roof to roof, not only is his gang shooting at Dan, but they have to kill all the trigger-happy townfolk they'd hired five minutes previously (referred to as "dumb sh!ts" by Charlie Prince), since they're just as likely to kill their boss. For all the gang knows, Ben Wade is running from the mob.

[Phat Mack]

[ QUOTE ]
If a member of your posse is having his throat gouged out with a fork, you would not shoot the offender on the spot?

[/ QUOTE ]

Shoot the offender, do not pass Go, do not collect $200.