3:10 to Nowhere.

Rating: 4/10 (6 February 2008)

There is a lot of good photography and some exciting set pieces, and there are bits of good acting in this movie, and even a few scenes that work pretty well. But the high points are overwhelmed by numerous plot points wherein characters do inexplicably stupid things or things contrary to the nature of the character. This happens mostly with the good guys, but also a couple times with bad guy Russell Crowe. My wife and I paused the movie halfway through because it got late and I was tired and the next day she had to convince me that we should finish it so at least we knew what happened. But my wife also felt that the movie was, as a whole, unbelievable due to these many plot holes and inconsistencies. It seems to me that a supposedly exciting movie should hook you in better than that.
I also have to say that this is the 2nd movie I have ever seen with the adult Christian Bale (back in the 80's I saw 'Empire of the Sun') and I have yet to be impressed. Of course the other film was 'Batman Begins' which stinks in too many ways to count. But anyway, so far, it is my opinion that the adult Christian Bale seems to be a 1.5 note player. He's good at doing that vacant, angst-ridden stare that is so popular these days, the expression into which bad directors hope the audience will project their own emotions so as to save the artists some work. But not much more.
Another thing: some critic said this is the best western since 'Unforgiven.' Please! Not that 'Unforgiven' was all that great, heck, 'High Plains Drifter' and 'Outlaw Josie Wales' are tons better. But truly, the best western since 'Unforgiven' was 'Brokeback Mountain.' And for crimony sakes, 'Brokeback Mountain' was better than 'Unforgiven.' I will concede, however, that watching '3:10 to Yuma' is better than watching no western at all. But is it better than just watching a rerun of 'Gunsmoke' or 'Kung Fu'? I don't think so.