3:10 To Yuma Remake--possibly not horrible

Status
Not open for further replies.
Strange ending but excellent acting, superb sound design and good camera work. Well worth the ticket cost to see on the big screen.
 
Strange ending
Not strange, just PC. A bad man with a heart of pure mush. The toughest choice Ben Wade will have to face after he overpowers his guards and jumps off the 3:10 to Yuma, landing squarely in the saddle of his faithful horse, is whether to grab Emmy Nelson by her heart-shaped ass and carry her off on a singing tour of Mexico's finest dives, or to settle down with Alice and the boys on the ranch impaired by Dan Evans' demise. Maybe he'll manage to do both.

The Proposition was much more honest with its villains.
 
Saw it today with the wife. There were 16 people in the theatre including us. The movie had alot of gun action and the acting was good but didn't like the hollywood ending where the bad guy is the hero. Typical hollywood I guess, always against law and order.

jj
 
Saw it on Saturday and really enjoyed it. I don't know enough about the time period to say whether or not all the weapons were correct, but it was loads of fun all the same. I thought the Schofields were a nice touch.

jm
 
Was the 1897 Winchester the very first pump shotgun on the market?

Not by a long chalk. The Spencer was on the market from 1882:

spencer-shotgun-16.jpg

There were one or two others which predated the Winchester '97 too, including of course the Winchester 1893 model.
 
Just saw it, thought the gunplay was good. The acting was terrific, Bale and Crow were absolutely dynamite. Some real star power there. The second-in-command gunslinger was also a terrific actor.

I wonder whether a revolving rifle would be accurate enough for the scoped out "designated marksman" role.
 
Saw it yesterday and liked it despite the weapons being wrong for three years after the civil war.

And maybe it's just me but didn't anyone else think that Dan Evans could run REAL good for an amputee with a post civil war era wooden leg?!
 
Saw it yesterday and liked it despite the weapons being wrong for three years after the civil war.

And maybe it's just me but didn't anyone else think that Dan Evans could run REAL good for an amputee with a post civil war era wooden leg?!

It wasn't just the running -- how about jumping off the buildings to land on that prosthesis? Beyond the nitpicking, saw it yesterday, enjoyed it and hope to see more Westerns on the big screen soon.
 
About the ending

The ending is practically straight out of a Japanese movie. That's why it's so strange; it's from a different culture.

For any of you familiar with oriental martial arts or philosophy, remember the role of honor. Ben Wade was an honorable man, in the oriental sense. A samurai, with guns. Educated, intelligent, never taking the world, his allies, or his enemies for granted.

He understood the caliber of man presented by Dan, and was honor-bound to carry out Dan's last wish.

For me, it was a very emotional and beautiful movie. Western gunslinger meets Japanese samurai ethics.
 
I don't think it was 3 years after the Civil war. More like 15 years after.

His eldest son is 14 and looking at it, that Dan came home in 1863 or 64 after being drafted and then injured. Got married and had kids, that would put the time period of the movie around 1878-1879 which would explain the guns etc much more easily than assuming it was 3 years after the war.

They'd only been living in Arizona for 3 years because his youngest son has TB and needed the better climate.
 
3:10 to Yuma

Saw the movie-loved it! As for the rifle, it is a Colt Revolving Rifle similar to the ones first issued to Berdan's Sharphooters in the Civil War. Never saw one with a scope before-dramatic license, I guess.
 
Also-anyone notice Peter Fonda's sawed-off shotgun (dumb question)? Looked like no simple chop job-the space between the barrels has been filled and a bead installed. Handy little alley cleaner!
 
Regolith-I believe if you take a closer look, the barrels are maybe only an inch or two longer than the fore end-perhaps 14" or so. I use a Rossi Coach Gun w/20" barrels for my Cowboy Action Shooting, and the barrels of Mackleroy's (Peter Fonda's character) sure look a lot shorter-maybe the fore end is longer-take a look at the trailers/video clips for the movie and I think you will see what I mean.
 
I just finally saw it last night and I liked it a lot.

I thought the ending was weird as well...His gang just busted ASS for I forget how many straight days trying to save Ben and how does he repay them? He guns them all down for killing the guy trying to put him in jail! LOL

I actually really enjoyed everything about the movie, I just thought it was weird.
 
Finally watched this western and was not at all impressed. It made the good guys look like idiots and the bad guys heroes. I guess after a long carrer in law enforcement it just rubbed me the wrong way. I suspect back in the day a guy like Wade would not have made it alive another 10 seconds after he forked the guy on the trail the first night. No self respecting lawman of the day transporting such a deadly criminal would have plopped themselevs down in the desert around a campfire. And the idiot deputy that locked himself in the decoy stage, really. Sorry to rain on the "great movie parade" I know it is just entertainment right...
I truly believe flicks like this only add to the decay of our social fabric and do harm to legitimate shooting.
 
I think people are misinterpreting Wade's character. He really is bad to the bone. So bad he has no loyalty at all to his fellow criminals. This is established when he kills a wounded one. Also, you have to ask why he's doing what he's doing. The man essentially LETS himself get caught by lingering in town when he knows perfectly well the law and pinkertons will be there shortly. He makes sure to leave multiple witnesses ALIVE when he could have killed them (the bounty hunter, the dirt farmer and his kids). He offers no resistance. He passes up on SEVERAL opportunities to escape, though it's clear he could easily overcome his captors. He kills whoever he wants to kill, when he wants to kill them. And if he doesn't kill them it's because he's using them for some other purpose--not because he's nice.

So you have to ask--why is he doing this? He knows his gang will come out after him out of loyalty, and I think he hopes most of them will get killed in the process. He will then kill any remaining lawmen and make his own way to the hidden cache of money, keeping all of it for himself. This is in fact how the plan unfolds. The lawmen are dead or ineffective, the gang is killed off by the lawmen or Wade himself. And he's about to escape again and go get his loot. Not exactly a "heart of gold." His character is the same throughout, though like a true sociopath he's good at appearing to be nice. The only ones who go through a crisis are the good guys. Wade has no crisis because he's completely without a soul. He just wants to be the last man standing so he can go get the money and keep it for himself.
 
I've held back on watching this because I have the DVD of the original Glenn Ford/Van Heflin movie and there is no way you can convince me Russell Crowe/Christian Bale can outdo Glenn Ford in ANYTHING. Van Heflin you might persuade me, but Glenn Ford was an original film noir/cowboy superstar. He could outfight, outshoot, outlove Russell Crowe without even breaking a sweat. And that goes double for Christian Bale.
 
Naw. This movie didn't have the guts to make Wade a true bad guy. People talk about the ending to "No Country to Old Men," but the ending to this film wasn't just lame, it was insulting to anyone who just sat through the last 89 minutes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top