A brilliant character study; an old-fashioned Western with a modern twist

Rating: 8/10 (6 December 2007)

As beloved as it is, it cannot be denied that the Western is a dead genre, and for justified reasons. The same all-American clear-as-crystal stark morality of good versus evil that attracted us to the comic book superheroes of the second World War period also drew us to the heroic endeavors of the old American frontiersmen who explored and developed the far west. Ethics in the classic Westerns were simple: The good, honest men wore white and always defeated the bad, criminal men who wore black in a showdown. One could almost say that the old Westerns glorified the post-Civil War western frontier, which truly was a dark, difficult, and dangerous life for those who chose to live it. But this kind of morality quickly wore off, and when America turned to more complex super-heroes so the stark good-versus-evil morals of the Western genre began to outstay its welcome. Since then, Westerns saw only one other renaissance in the form of the Spaghetti Westerns of the 60's, whose morals were present but somewhat twisted. Since the 60's the Western genre saw few resurgences, the last one in the turn-of-the-90's with Kevin Costner's epic Dances with Wolves and Clint Eastwood's opus, Unforgiven. And now, we have another resurfacing of the genre with 2005's The Proposition and 2007's 3:10 To Yuma and The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford.
What is so good about these modern-day Westerns is that they are just that; old-fashioned stark morality is replaced by modern-day foggy-lined morals; 3:10 To Yuma provides an exquisite example of these plays on morality. Here is a hero that just wants to scrape by his simple farm life and performs heroic acts for selfish reasons only  erasure of debts, monetary reward, and his family's well being. Here is a villain who is obviously superiorly intelligent than his crew of cutthroats and who seems more preoccupied with bible verses and drawing sketches of nature than a life of crime. It's every man for himself, just like it was in the actual frontier.
I must admit, I haven't seen the 1957 original, but James Mangold does an exquisite job in his re-make/re-imagination. Although the film is overall old-fashioned, it still features many modern film-making techniques aside from the blurry morality of the brilliant screenplay and the down-and-dirty depiction of Wild Western life. Hand-held cameras and very modern-styled action photography are wonderfully employed, and in general the cinematography is a wonder to behold; naturalistic while managing to be stimulatingly beautiful. Mangold also directs like a modern director, allowing his brilliant actors to explore their characters and deliver powerhouse performances full of nuance and subtlety.
Indeed the entire ensemble cast can be mentioned in good light, especially supporting actors Peter Fonda as the scarred, craggy old bounty hunter who is one of the best examples of blurry morality in the film; in this chapter of his life he is under contract for the "good guys", but we learn that he has had no problem in the past murdering women and children; and Ben Foster, who delivers a truly scenery-chewing and brilliant performance as outlaw Ben Wade's clearly deranged right-hand man. But the true wonder lies in the film's two top-billed actors, among the best of their generation: Christian Bale and Russell Crowe.
The two plays off one another to absolute, pitch-perfect brilliance, and both manage to find the niches of both of their characters. It's wonderfully fascinating to watch how Crowe plays Wade as enjoying his playful-but-deadly manipulations of the party accompanying him to the train that will take him to Yuma prison to be tried and hanged. Only Bale's Dan Evans can provide the proper contrast to this, as his straight-man routine is coupled with obvious intelligence. He seems out of place in this landscape and we learn that he was originally from Massachusetts but was forced to move to the dry weather of the western frontier due to his young son's illness. For someone with so much to lose, we the audience  and even the characters in the film, including Evans himself  don't know exactly why he is so stubborn in delivering Wade to the train. Is all the trouble really worth the $200 reward? Or is Evans simply trying to prove something to his wayward eldest son who doesn't have faith in his father, who is embarrassed to tell him the tragically un-heroic way he lost his leg in the Civil War. The "battle of wits" reaches a climax as the two sit in a hotel room near the end of the film, waiting patiently for the train to arrive. The little conversation they have is rather banal, but we learn so much from the characters just by seeing how Evans is willing to open himself up to the outlaw, and how Wade listens intently to his story.
Like the greatest intelligent movies, 3:10 To Yuma is a character study of the kind that the characters don't have one simple trait that identifies them but rather are three-dimensional, fleshed out human beings who fascinate us with their unclear intentions, fears, regrets, mistakes and quirks. The film is incredibly well acted from its ensemble cast in general and its two stars in particular, and Mangold truly delivers the goods on the directing plane with his old-fashioned film-making with a modern twist in terms of the cinematography and action directing. This is a fascinating, realistic and brutally honest portrayal both of the 19th century Western frontier and of the morality of men, and is an extremely satisfying, entertaining and well-made film in general.