Sunday, September 9, 2007
3:10 to Yuma
“3:10 to Yuma,” a remake of a Glenn Ford-Van Heflin classic, is more than an ordinary western, more than good guy vs. bad guy. It’s a morality play with good and evil reflecting shades of gray: not all of the good guys are good and there’s bad and then there’s really bad. Christian Bale’s Dan Evans is a troubled rancher who remains true to his principles; however, this makes his character static. For Dan, there are no lessons learned, no new perspectives about life discovered. Only Bales skill as an actor imbues Dan with characteristics that make him multi-dimensional. Russell Crowe has the more colorful role as Ben Wade, a cold-blooded killer one minute and a charming rogue the next. Although director James Mangold’s “3:10 to Yuma” is about fathers and sons, it is more about the relationship between two men and how a hardened killer can come to admire a man who is willing to put his life on the line for what he believes is right. Initially I thought a remake of “3:10 to Yuma” was going to result in ‘Why?’ But it’s a complex story with strong characters and it deserves a large audience. (9/9/07)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Loved the film until the ending, which blew it. You kill the hero, and let the bad guy get away. Yes he gets on the train but then whistles for his horse. This original had it flaws but what made it memorable was it was a pyschological western that did not rely on violence. This was about the violence.
Director James Mangold certainly added more violence in his remake and, yes, he changed the ending. I didn't like that particular change either, but the movie is still worth seeing.
Post a Comment