3:10 to Yuma (2007) R 122 minutes
Action, Adventure, Based on book, Crime, Dark, Drama, Gritty, Overrated, Remake, Suspense, Thriller, Violent, Western
Director: James Mangold
Cast: Russell Crowe, Christian Bale, Peter Fonda, Ben Foster, Dallas Roberts, Logan Lerman, Alan Tudyk, Gretchen Mol, Vinessa Shaw
A lot/Strong : Death, Gore, Language, Violence
Some/Mild : Alcohol, Sex/Nudity, Torture
No : Drugs
Overall grade: "B-"
Recommended: "To unfavorably compare with the original"
Directing: "B+", Acting: "A-", Visual Effects: "N/A"
Story Line: "B-", Aftertaste: "B-", Date Movie: "F"
Family Friendliness: "F", Original Concept: "No"
The 2007 “3:10 to Yuma” is one of those movies loved by general audience and critics alike. I suspect it would be hard to convince anyone in the opposite – that the 2007 Movie is a bad western and an inferior remake, but I will try.
Both the original 1957 movie directed by Delmer Daves (“Dark Passage”) and the 2007 remake directed by James Mangold (“Walk the Line”, “Kinght and Day”) are based on the same short story written by Elmore Leonard in 1953. Both movies use the same screenplay created more than fifty years ago by Halsted Welles.
And yet, right from the beginning we see the two very different movies, and not only because Michael Brandt and Derek Haas mightily distorted the original screenplay for the new adaptation.
The 2007 remake tries to impress at all costs, but despite (or maybe because) of that it ends up being a shallow disappointment. It is more concerned with being entertaining than with making the story concise and whole. The shocking extremes and the sharp contrasts make the movie showy, but disconnected from reality on many levels – from the questionable plot twists to the impossible in the real world characters.
As a result, instead of a serious, solid western the 2007 remake ends up being a flashy gimmick with a strong artificial aftertaste and a severe lack of insight into human nature.
In addition, the 2007 “3:10 to Yuma” is so preoccupied with being witty, original, and shocking that it almost completely leaves humor out of the story
The original 1957 film, on the other hand, features some simple, but tasteful humor, appropriate for a western. It wins us over by genuinely and thoughtfully telling a simple, naturally and smoothly unfolding story. As a result, several important plot elements are better thought-out in the older movie than in its “younger” counterpart.
That definitely includes the final confrontation scene that wraps up the 1957 movie very elegantly without any significant damage to the believability. The 2007 version, on the other hand, has a disastrous ending that cancels out most of the groundwork that had been painstakingly laid throughout the movie.
While the 2007 version received an Oscar nomination for Best Original Score (Marco Beltrami), shortly after having watched the movie we cannot recall a single tune from it. The music from the 1957 movie did not receive any awards, and yet we keep humming the simple melody of its unpretentious, a little outdated theme song “3:10 to Yuma” for many days.
Overall, unlike the original “3:10 to Yuma”, the 2007 remake focuses more on the action and adventure elements and on the gun battles than on the battle of wits and wills between the ordinary rancher Dan Evans (Christian Bale) and the gang leader Ben Wade (Russell Crowe).
In the 2007 version the characters of Ben Wade and his gang of outlaws are grotesquely overdone to the point of being a caricature, more appropriate for a horror or an action movie than for a western. According to the official movie description, they are “vicious gang of thieves and murderers”. Ben Wade and his “outfit” are portrayed as ultimate villains - extremely disgusting, aggressively inhumane, scary monsters and heartless killing machines, full of horrific cruelty.
The 1957 original movie found a much more balanced and believable tone for depicting the outlaws led by Ben Wade (Glenn Ford). There they are still humans, and not dangerous animals beyond redemption. They look like humans, behave like humans, feel like humans; they do not enjoy committing senseless cruelty.
As of Ben Wade himself, in the 2007 remake he is portrayed as a confusing mess, an artistic and narcissistic Hamlet with a gun, a puzzling, artificially constructed hybrid of Hannibal Lecter and Prince Charming. This modern Frankenstein's monster, a product (or should I say a by-product?) of the rich imagination of the movie authors, absolutely does not belong to the simple world of American Old West.
He does not have much in common with anyone in the movie, including Dan Evans. Therefore, the unique bond slowly developing between Dan Evans and Ben Wade looks unconvincing and artificial in the 2007 movie. It is hard to believe that being so strikingly different from Dan Evans, Ben Wade suddenly starts to respectfully appreciate something about Dan, and even somewhat envy his humble life. In the key scene in the hotel room Ben Wade unconvincingly tries to negotiate with Dan by employing melodramatic childhood stories as well as a large dose of pseudo-intellectual philosophizing that the authors had recklessly put in his mouth.
In the 1957 version, Ben Wade with his down to earth, very human character is flesh and blood of American Old West. There is no unnecessary complexity or confusing mystery involved. Ben is a confident leader of the gang and definitely not a simpleton. At the same time, unlike his colleague from the remake, he does not show any weirdly peculiar miracles of cleverness and deceitfulness. He is flawed, but not hopeless.
Most importantly, Ben Wade has surprisingly a lot in common with Dan Evans and the rest of the small town folk. Even having gone different life paths, even having made different life choices, they all still remain children of American Frontier. They speak the same language, they are haunted by similar thoughts, and their value systems are more compatible than it seems at first. All of that makes the unlikely bond that develops between Dave Evans and Ben Wade in the original “3:10 to Yuma” both plausible and believable.
In a tastefully done (albeit a little dragging out and cheesy) brief courtship scene at the tavern from the 1957 movie, Ben Wade treats the barmaid in an appropriate for the time and place respectful manner. In contrast, in the 2007 remake the same scene strikes as distasteful as Ben Wade plays the “Casanova” card too crudely and almost pounces on the poor girl.
In the original 1957 movie Ben Wade can kill under circumstances, but prefers not to.We tend to believe him he says “I mean, I don't go around just shootin' people down... I work quiet, like you.”
In the 2007 remake, after all the multiple vicious murders that Ben Wade has committed on the screen, the same words are perceived as full of bitter irony and as a nasty, cruel joke.
Ben Wade’s archrival Dan Evans in the 2007 “3:10 to Yuma” for some reason is portrayed as the ultimate victim and the ultimate loser. He is a victim of the Civil War where he lost his leg, a victim of the bureaucratic indifference of the government, a victim of the hostile, powerful, wealthy neighbor who want so seize Dan’s land and sell to the railroad, and even a victim of the weather conditions (drought). In addition, one of Dan’s kids is seriously sick.
Dan’s wife and two sons, while loving him dearly, have more pity in their love than respect or admiration, which seems to be an additional source of humiliation for Dan. His rebellious teenage son keeps questioning the father’s authority. There is also a tension in the Dan’s relationship with his wife.
Unlike the extreme character from the 2007 remake, in the 1957 film Dan is just an ordinary, somewhat conservative and stubborn rancher whose life naturally happens to be hard. He courageously fought in the Civil War and was known as a sharp-shooter. He is loved and respected by his wife and his two healthy kids adore him.
I could go on and on, contrasting and comparing the characters, the scenes, and the other elements of the two identically named, but separated by fifty years movies. I hope by now you see that the original 1957 “3:10 to Yuma” and the relatively recent 2007 “3:10 to Yuma” are two very different animals. Watching both films and then drawing your own conclusions is perhaps the best way to determine the “winner”.
Here is what I think: the 2007 “3:10 to Yuma” is a watchable entertaining show with some good acting by Christian Bale, Russell Crowe, Ben Foster, Peter Fonda, Gretchen Mol, and others. However, those after a true western experience might be far more satisfied by the solid 1957 classic.
