Categorized | Gary Karbon, movies

Tags | ,

Movie Review: 3:10 to Yuma (2007)

Posted on 25 April 2008 by Gary Karbon

 

 

3:10 to Yuma tries to break the traditional Western-movie mold like Clint Eastwood’s Unforgiven (1992) did. But at the end, 3:10 fails to solve one of the equations that it sets for itself in Act 1.

Basically this is another "delivering the criminal to justice" story with a "morality play" at its core.

Protagonist Dan Evans (Christian Bale) is a crippled Civil War veteran and loser of a farmer who cannot even command his own son’s respect.

He emerges as an unlikely hero turning down all incentives to betray himself. He resists the easy way out and sticks with a higher principle until the bitter end.

(WARNING: plot points revealed)

Time and place: Post-Civil War Arizona.

Dan Evans is a farmer with a wife, two boys, and a bad leg who struggles not to lose his ranch to men and nature. Rain is scarce and crops are bad. Plus, a local developer to whom Evans owes money is trying to push him off the land to resell it at a profit to the railroad company.

Into this picture, enters the cocky highway bandit Ben Wade (Russell "Gladiator" Crowe).

Wade is a cocky rotten apple with a Robin Hood complex. He believes killing, pillaging, and holding up stage coaches is nothing more than a “wealth re-distribution” project.

Our antagonist is caught after a bloody hold up. Evans signs up for $200 as one of the guards to take the toxic Wade to the train station in the faraway town of Contention.

The goal is to eventually put him on the “3:10 to Yuma,” the train that will take Wade to justice and probably to the gallows. That’s when things start to get interesting.

Wade’s psychotic posse tracks down the group in order to set Wade free. During the perilous trip to the train station, Wade and Evans, the prisoner and the guard, find themselves on the same side while fending off against the Indians and other unwelcomed parties. That’s when the line between the lawmen and the law-breaker gets blurred up.

Much of Act 2 and 3 is filled with The Chase. Guns are fired. Dynamites explode. Horses are ridden to exhaustion. Bodies start falling here, there and everywhere.

At the end the main plot (taking Ben Wade to justice) and the sub-plot (Evans trying to redeem himself in the eyes of his son) dovetail nicely. That’s the first equation and it’s solved to our satisfaction.

What does not work is what Wade does in the last scene. That’s the second equation that addresses Wade’s inner world and his psychology. What Wade does in the end is totally inexplicable given his career as a hardened criminal. That really comes across as a major let down, as a “neat solution” forced upon the story line for the sake of casting a heroic halo over the main antagonist.

We are living in a confusing world, don’t we? No wonder even the Westerns are confused these days.

 

Popularity: 5% [?]

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • Ma.gnolia
  • Propeller
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis

Related Posts

2 Comments For This Post

  1. Bobby Ozuna Says:
    April 25th, 2008 at 11:13 am

    Gary:
    I have to both agree and disagree with your analysis of this movie. I personally loved the storyline (being a remake as it is). The film gives the audience a chance to choose between sides, obviously on one hand there is the hero–Dan Evans–and his journey of personal redemption in the eyes of his family (no respect for doing the right thing) and the town (no one else will take this mission on morality’s sake). We hear his family brag of his shooting ability and how he “defended the Nation’s Capital” but later we learn that was simply untrue. Yes, he was injured in that particular battle, but in retreat…and shot from behind by one of his own comrades. Not quite the story I would relay to inquisitive sons. But in a time of lawlessness, I love the idea that a man can still fight to raise children (boys who will become men one day) in a manner of respect, honor and duty to righteousness and morality.

    On the other hand the audience is introduced to the villain–Ben Wade–but subtly, not in the manner that would force us to agree that he is the bad guy (???). He is private enough in his past that we aren’t sure how he became this evil-doing renegade and open enough to let us know he will neither bend or break for the sake of what the world sees as virtuous. Remember, killing a man and killing animals isn’t much different to him.

    I believe the director did a wonderful job of allowing us to see the obvious–good versus evil–but shielded enough of the symbolism within the characters and their roles within this story to make us wonder whether we are truly seeing a Good Guy take a Bad Guy to justice. I think in the end Dan Evans wasn’t battling Ben Wade but merely principle. Ben Wade wasn’t the epitome of evil, but maybe nothing more than a man who took his place in an evil world, when Good no longer had need of him. He witnessed enough of the personal struggle of the simple farmer Dan Evans and his struggle to set an example to a son who hasn’t grown up enough to understand who or what he is and that experience brought change in the essence of the role of Ben Wade’s character.

    I think a story shouldn’t always be so cut and dry–Good versus Evil–but telling enough to allow the audience to struggle with depicting who they believe is Good and what symbolizes Evil. Ben Wade’s character changes and that is significant in the life journey of any good hero (good or bad). Dan Evans remains the same, unchanged, and because of this I don’t feel he was necessarily the “hero” of the story. He was unwavering in his beliefs in the opening of the story and remained that way until his death. I believe “3:10 to Yuma” was the story of Ben Wade and his change from “evil bad guy” to a seemingly “good” man who took the wrong path and became another puppet on the strings in an evil, unjust world.

    I love your articles!!! Keep them coming!!!

    ~Bobby Ozuna | author of Proud Souls

  2. unni Says:
    April 27th, 2008 at 9:19 am

    man, very good review. It is in my all time favorite list though :)

Leave a Reply


Add to Mixx!





  • Recent Comments





    • RELATED SITES

    INFORMATION