Wednesday, September 26, 2007

Movie Review: 3:10 to Yuma

I didn't grow up watching westerns but have tried to fill in the gaps by seeing some of the better ones. I'm often surprised, as with The Man Who Shot Liberty Vance as to how much depth they have. When I heard 3:10 to Yuma was a remake of a 1957 original, it didn't surprise me that I'd never heard of it. After seeing the current remake I'm very curious to see the original.

Christian Bale plays Dan Evans a rancher who lost his leg in the civil war and is now at risk of defaulting on his ranch because of a drought and a landlord who's diverting water from his land, burning down his barn, and wanting to sell the land to the railroad. His wife (Gretchen Mol) and boys have little if any faith in him.

Russell Crowe plays the outlaw Ben Wade. He and his gang rob a stagecoach carrying railroad money. The robbery is a western version of a modern car chase; there's a gattling gun and one horse explodes when shot, just like a car in a bad action film. Still it's an exciting well done sequence. Dan probably has a different view as he watches it happen with his boys. He helps the lone survivor, an unrecognizable Peter Fonda, back to town. Ben and his gang also go to town to celebrate their success but Ben stays too long and is captured. Authorities decided to send him to the feds which involves transporting him to the train station in Contention so he can take the 3:10 train to the prison in Yuma. Dan joins the posse to escort Ben to earn $200. Ben's gang tries to rescue him and Dan's 14 year-old son comes along despite Dan's objections. So that's the setup; the rest of the film follows the chase.

You know it's going to come down to Ben vs Dan. Both are smart men. Ben quotes the bible, sketches, has been to big cities, manages his gang well and charms the ladies. Dan has lost the faith of his family, is about to lose his farm, has lost his leg, is quiet, and...well maybe Dan isn't so smart, but he's played by Christian Bale so he must be smart.

Actually this kind of stuff is what bothered me. The various scenes of the chase all play out well except for their initial stupidity. Ben keeps getting the draw on members of the posse because they forget to watch him. He's handcuffed but I would have tied him to a tree. If you escort him out of camp so he can relieve himself, watch him, don't keep spinning in circles. If you're worried about Indians, bring two people to watch him and don't have a camp fire going all night. If you arrive in a town, bring him to the jail to hold him, don't go to the bridal suite in a hotel and bring the marshall to you.

I also forgive that injuries in this film seem to involve blood and scraps but cause no other impediment to people's capabilities. People shot in the gut can ride horses and run posses. People bashed in the face just sorta laugh (or rather sing) it off. And Dan didn't seem at all hindered by his wooden leg. When Ben asked him how he "got that hitch in his step" I wondered "what hitch"?

So these were all (almost) little things that I could forgive. The end baffled me a bit and I won't give it away. I just didn't believe the motivations of the characters and yes I did understand them. it just seemed out of character and the growth argument seems to be too much of a leap. To be clear it's a problem with the script and not the acting which I thought was superb. I did check my watch a few times in the film, but each time I was surprised much more time had gone by then I expected. The film is a little slow but there's a lot there and it's well done. I'm now really curious to see the original as it's a half hour shorter and there are some differences, particularly in the ending.

** MASSIVE SPOILERS (read after seeing the film) **

Dan proves he's smart by negotiating the deal at the end for everything Ben was offering him ($1000) and more (legitimacy, no problems with the landlord). Dan raised his son well, though neither of them would agree to that before the ending. Ben was clearly going to escape from Yuma. He whistled for the horse and had escaped twice before.

My problems with the end begin when Dan and Ben leave the hotel. First off, 7 guys should have easily been able to cover all the exits. Then at that point I didn't buy Ben voluntarily going with Dan through a flurry of bullets. I would have forced him to drag me but Ben is running out in front. It wasn't just his own men shooting so he wouldn't have trusted their aim.

Ben's true colors come through in the building when he says he's not playing along anymore and attacks Dan. At this point Dan tells the story of how he lost his leg and at this point Ben turns entirely. The fact that just before this Ben was beating on Dan and was getting away means this conversation changed his mind. So what to take from it?

Dan was a coward and ashamed of himself to his own son and he was doing what he could for his family. He was managing to pull it all together (being brave, doing the right thing, negotiating a good deal for his family and not being taken advantage of) and I can see Ben respecting that. I think Ben saw Dan grow since the beginning of the film. But I don't buy Ben risking his own life because Dan had shown growth. If Ben wanted to help Dan he could have told his gang to stop shooting. And if they didn't, he could shoot one like he did in the beginning and then they'd stop.

No comments: