3h10 pour Yuma

Just saw a screening of this movie in New York. Amazing. Bale continues to prove that he is quickly becoming one of the best lead actors out there. Crowe exudes cool throughout the movie as a heartless, smooth talking, Bible quoting killer. Of course...Ben Foster. Yes. Ben Foster. Welcome him to the bigtime, cause he made this movie. There hasn't been a western with a character so badass as the one Ben Foster plays in this movie. Story-wise, the movie is an opposite Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, with the good guys trying to run away from the bad guys in order to make a 3:10 train to Yuma. What ensues is an awesome movie you wanna watch till the last battle.

Christian Bale (Dan Evans) holds the screen as an honest rancher who volunteers for two hundred dollars to be part of a doomed group of guards to take the enigmatic bandit and killer Ben Wade (Russell Crowe) to a train, the 3:10, leaving Bisbee, Arizona for Yuma prison to trial…

Beaten down by an old Civil War injury, and unable to protect his farm and his family from Wade's ruthless gang and humiliated by his teenage son (Logan Lerman) who makes no efforts to hide his disappointment in his impoverished father, and who doesn't try to hide the fact that he admires the charismatic criminal, Dan finds a great quantity of reasons to undertake the perilous trip to Contention City to fight back like a real man and regain his son's respect… The story concentrates on Evans whose unknown destiny tries to paint to his son an unforgettable picture turning up poignant and endearing…

Wade—leader of a murderous band of robbers—had great respect for Dan throughout the film and develops a kind of understanding and appreciation for him… Their short scenes in the hotel room celebrate the virtues of two opposite men who stand up for what they believe stopping on issues in relation with family, dignity, virtue, and admirable integrity… The best scenes are those in which Wade teases Dan: "Your conscience is sensitive, Dan. It's not my favorite part of you."

Crowe's interpretation of a gifted cold-blooded smooth-talking bad man is one of the most compelling parts of the film… Bale is splendid as the struggling, crippled rancher, misunderstood by his whole family… The two actors comfortably inhabit this stunning western…

It is nice to see that there are still good westerns being made lately… And James Mangold's "3:10 to Yuma," a remake of Delmer Daves' 1957 picture, is one of them… It is a Western with realistic violence, great action sequences, breathtaking photography, and an inevitable final shoot-out

Decent Western, the ending was ridiculous though. It ruined the film.

Dan Evans is a struggling rancher being pushed off his land by men he dare not stand up to. An amputee from his part in the war, Evans longs for the respect of his sons, but all they see is his refusal to take up arms for his land. Evans is in town to try and reason with the landowner for more time to pay off his debts when he stumbles across outlaw Ben Wade in a bar with his guard down. Wade is captured and a posse is put together to transport Wade while a decoy draws off his gang. With the money and the moral aspect, Evans joins the posse and sets out, with the time pressure on them from the very start.

I missed this film at the cinema but I did want to see it as I had greatly enjoyed the original and had indeed commented in that review that the film would work if done well in any setting, so I figured the remake could work as well. The simplicity attracted me to the original and this remake, for all its Hollywood production values, is still a solid and simple tale. The heart of the film is the battle between good and evil as it occurs both between Evans and Wade but also within Evans himself. This comes out best in the final scenes (the waiting for the train is a smaller part of the film than the original) and it did make me wish that more had been made of this. However, what makes up the majority of the film does still mine this theme, albeit not as effectively because of the sense of space and action tending to take away from the pressure cooker of the hotel room with the ticking clock.

IMDb currently has this within the top 250 films ever made, which needless to say I disagree with but will say that it is a strong modern western and a very engaging film all round. Director Mangold does a sterling job of keeping the material the focus and succeeds in making the climax very tense, even if he cannot drag it across the whole film. I did like the way that the film is restrained in regards the cinematography; too often westerns will feel obligated to have sweeping landscapes and make the most of them just because it is what the genre does. Here though the locations are impressive without ever being forced onto the viewer as if they were the focus – Mangold and his crew keep the focus tighter and the characters don't get lost in wide shots.

The cast is one of the main draws for the modern viewer, with the star pairing being a big selling point. Crowe is a solid Wade but I never felt like he was doing more than playing the character rather than totally being it. Bale on the other hand is much more convincing and this did make it work very well. The two men do play off one another really well and again it just added to my desire that the film had allowed them more time with just the two of them and a ticking clock. Lerman is a device character but he works well within the demands of the script. Foster enjoys a simple but memorable character by being simply evil throughout. Support is solid as well with some good turns from people such as Mol, Fonda and others.

Overall then a solid and enjoyable western. The things that made the original so strong are not quite as well delivered here but they are still present, with strong delivery across all aspects making for a very good, but not brilliant film.

Long ago, I saw the original 3:10 to Yuma featuring Van Heflin and Glen Ford, but I don't remember it well enough to compare it with James Mangold's new remake. Instead, my review will focus exclusively on the new film.

Mangold's film is a tense, traditional western based on an Elmore Leonard story. Leonard is a solid writer, and gave the material upon which the film is based enough background and characterization to permit willful suspension of disbelief. Mangold's film does the same. Our protagonist and antagonist are, respectively, Dan Evans (Bale) and Ben Wade (Crowe). Evans is a would-be rancher and family-man whose family is suffering from a drought and a merciless landlord. Evans and his boys cross paths with notorious outlaw Ben Wade and his gang on their way into town to confront their landlord, and Wade whimsically lets them go. But the connection between these two men and Dan's eldest son is far from over. Eventually Dan will accept an offer made by a railroad agent to help escort Wade to a train headed to Yuma prison, while Wade's crew of murderers dogs their every step.

Two performances stood out for me - Bale and Ben Foster (Charlie Prince). Crowe was good, but it's not clear that he engaged with his role with his usual intensity. There are several very talented actors in supporting roles, and they each pull off the transition to the western genre quite nicely (Alan Tudyk, Logan Lerman, Gretchen Mol, Peter Fonda and others). The film showcases the acting talent very well without losing sight of its straightforward but interesting story.

More often than not, good westerns are at least as much character studies as they are 'shoot-em-ups'. After all, it pretty close to impossible to enjoy a film in which anybody might drop dead at any given time without caring about the people you are watching die, or those doing the killing. Mangold achieves this by drawing on the simple strengths of the original material and allowing relationships to dominate both the story's development and the cinematography. For a western, there is a tremendous amount of dialog in this film, coupled with the usual meaningful stares. Wade is so wily and unpredictable that you really never know what to expect out of him, and his crew is headed up by his loyal and equally nihilistic protégé Charlie Prince. Dan Evans is his polar opposite, and Dan's son is an unusually accurate and complex Hollywood portrayal of a teenager. These and other relationships are the strengths and the medium of the film. When the camera isn't being used to build tension before a battle or showing us a gun-fight, it is establishing relationships and character. And many of the characters and relationships we see are surprising, ambiguous and more than a little ironic.

Highly recommended for western fans.