A worthy western. Review on 3:10 To Yuma Movie

Lately, Hollywood hasn’t been dishing out as many western movies as fans of this genre would like to consider satisfactory. This segment has been sorely underserved by the wizardry of current technology and the whiz-bang effects of today’s stunts. Perhaps, it is the lack of compelling new western stories that has been holding things up, and keeping matters notably quiet on the western front.

With ‘3:10 to Yuma’, James Mangold of ‘Walk The Line’ fame, makes his own effort to end the hiatus. His shot at reviving this forgotten medium could have easily run afoul making the cowboy look, as the Texan gibe goes, all hat and no cattle. But thankfully, that is not the case here with James Mangold and his well aimed and finely executed project. For this mission, he makes a rather apt choice in deciding to adapt a subject matter that is considered a classic of epic proportions in western drama.

James Mangold’s ‘3:10 to Yuma’ is a remake of the short story written, oddly enough, by a Detroit-based American novelist and screen-writer, Elmore Leonard. It was earlier adapted for the screen way back in 1957. The backdrop for the plot is the post American Civil War(1861-1865) Arizona Territory. And, the story is about an accidental and rather absorbing clash between two unlikely characters. Dan Evans(Christian Bale) is an impoverished rancher and a wounded veteran. Ben Wade(Russell Crowe) is a murderous and conniving outlaw.  Highly in debt and hounded by landlords, Dan stumbles on an opportunity to collect a reward of$200 for playing a role in nabbing Ben and for escorting him to the nearest railway station, to send him off on the 3:10 train to Yuma, for imprisonment.  The 80 mile journey to the station proves rather treacherous with the psychological warfare being unleashed by Ben, with his henchmen constantly on the tail of the caravan, with the Apache Indians on the loose, and with the revenge-seeking victims of Ben on the prowl as well.

With the good and the bad both being on the run, you keep wondering as to how it all ends when the 3:10 train arrives at the station. The answer to that question largely depends on your own imagination of what the aftermath could lead to, as opposed to the exact events as they slowly culminate. But besides those elements of engaging suspense and calculated ambiguity, the timeless story of Elmore Leonard also offers a lot of potential for rich drama, which is well leveraged, and very sincerely enacted here. The main thread involves the interplay of conflict and collaboration between the two men, as they fight against each other and defend themselves against their attackers.  The clash also shows how they occasionally rise above the layer of friction to espial and admire the qualities of mettle and fortitude in the other. The other, rather poignant, thread involves Dan and his teenage son William(Logan Lerman). When the story opens it shows how the father is rather wary and angry with the reckless gallantry of his brave young son, and how the son is quite disdainful and ashamed of the father for being very unworldly and incompetent. Through the ordeal they get closer to each other and develop a partnership that helps them discover the love and respect they have had for each other all along.

As for the canvas of this movie, it comes with a bright and veritable look, complete with all the required sceneries, props, and artifacts such as rugged landscapes, panoramic wide-angle shots, period costumes, stagecoaches, horses, and a little smattering of trains. Yes, they are all there in moderate measures, but without some real action-packed sequences to boast of. The tepidity on this front is a glaring sore point of the undertaking.  Mangold guns only for drama, and ignores the restricted, but highly even and inviting, potential for spectacle at several points throughout the script. Most action scenes look rather hurried and simplistic. Even the last sequence involving the train, which should be considered a plum opportunity for a high note of adventure, gets slighted. His caution here smacks more of hesitation than restraint.

On performances front, both the lead actors put in respectable efforts to lend conviction and realism to the conflict and drama. But, somehow between Russell Crowe and Christian Bale the latter comes ahead in the race, not because of playing the role of the likeable good guy, but because his efforts seem more sincere. Kudos to Logan Lerman, who as young William gives a very spirited performance. Ben Foster as the henchman desperado looks quite comical.

Cinematography by Phedon Papamichael is quite a visual treat. Acoustics of Marco Beltrami’s music create the right ambience.

All things considered, it is a worthy trip back to the west.