MOVIE REVIEW: “3:10 TO YUMA”
“3:10 to Yuma” (1957)
Directed by: Delmer Daves
Written by: Elmore Leonard
Screenplay by: Halsted Welles
Cinematography: Charles Lawton Jr.
Starring: Glenn Ford , Van Heflin, Felicia Farr, Leora Dana
4 1/2 stars (out of 4)
“3:10 to Yuma” (2007)
Directed by: James Mangold
Written by: Michael Brandt, Derek Haas
Cinematography: Phedon Papamichael
Starring: Russell Crow, Christian Bale
2 1/2 stars(out of 4)
To compare the two “3:10 to Yuma’s”, would be something like taking a hand built 1930’s Bugatti (the 1957 version) to a detail shop, have the paint sandblasted off, remove the rims and tires, and have them replaced with rusted tractor wheels, the dark royal blue leather interior stripped out and reupholstered in a polyester paisley pattern with a constant barrage of cigarette smoke pumped into the closed up interior (that would be the 2007 version of “3:10 to Yuma”).
The Michael Brandt, Derek Haas screenplay have taken a pearl and glossed it up to extremes at every turn. In the process, they have managed to make credibility an element of irrelevancy. There are many scenes that could be compared from the original to the 2007 “3:10 to Yuma”, but just to use one, consider the scene at Contention. The town is full of people in the 2007 version: walking, riding and filling the streets. The 1957 version has the town completely empty. Riders enters early in the a.m. to hide the fact that Ben Wade is going to be held in a hotel room to wait until a train arrives at 3:10 in Contention. The 1957 version creates a bleakness, a quietude that helps to construct the tension that builds between Wade and Dan Evans. As they lock their fates together in the bridal suite of the second floor hotel room, they challenge each other’s wits, their intellects, and their moral positions. They goad, they needle, they sweat, wait, think, talk, and ultimately Dan Evans gains Wades respect for his unpretentious struggle to hold his ranch and his family together.
In contrast, James Mangold has taken Elmore Leonard’s short story to drive a 21st century vehicle into a box office hit, and in the process, simultaneously creates a late term 50 million dollar abortion of what was originally a magnificent psychological portrayal of it’s two main characters as they crash into each other’s lives. As a consequence, they test the limits of each other’s morality.
In the beginning, there was Cain. Or Ben Wade, aka Russell Crowe. This is a leap of faith, but I’m assuming that Mangold, and Crowe, saw the 1957 version of “3:10 to Yuma.” Crowe must have studied Glenn Ford’s interpretation of Ben Wade. That (maybe) being the case, Crowe completely misses the subtlety of what Ford brings to the “Wade” character. Mangold, having enough wherewithal knows, for instance, that Crowe can’t possibly match Ford’s horsemanship as witnessed in the beginning scenes of the 1957 “3:10 to Yuma,” and therefore instructs Phedon Papamichael to shoot Crowe on horseback close-up so we don’t notice Crowe’s lack of ability to move a horse around at any speed beyond first gear. Smart. Crowe (assuming he watched Ford’s performance) interprets, assimilates, and reconstructs Ford’s low-key, powerful, laconic style, and becomes convinced that he is completely overwhelmed. Crowe climbs into a cardboard box, and proceeds to walk through the film. Suddenly, the mainstream media throws out the idea that this is an Oscar level performance. What a grand irony! (and Georgie and Dickey are going to turn Iraq into a sublime Democracy!) This is a double tragedy.
Glenn Ford (in the 1957 version) is cast against type and does turn in what should have been a Oscar winning performance. What Ford did, was unprecedented (in creating such a charming, complexly layered, bad guy). Ford’s “Wade” has a subtle perceptive charm that seduces first Emmy (the bartender), and later even Van Heflin’s wife, “Alice” if only briefly. This is the most complex, three dimensional “bad guy” up to this point in history that has been portrayed in the Western genre. Eleven years later, it would happen again, when Henry Fonda is cast against type in Sergio Leone’s “Once Upon a Time in the West.”
Russell Crowe, who has been a brilliant actor, and has a deserved Oscar from his performance in “A Beautiful Mind,” is so far out of his element playing the leader of an outlaw gang, riding around in New Mexico in the middle of winter, it is stunningly pathetic. He might as well be a Red Sox fan, sitting in the bleachers at Yankee Stadium in the fall of 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000. One wonders if James Mangold had any influence in the choice of who became the cinematographer in the 2007 version of “3:10 to Yuma.” The film barely uses the magnificent location of New Mexico inbetween the utterly banal tight close-up shots of all actors in all scenes. They are nothing more than ‘talking heads.’ Does this claustrophobic shooting style hope to create tension? I’ve noticed that when I strangle my dog, it can no longer bark, so does that qualify as authentic tension or is it contrived? These people really have no business shooting Western films. They have no affinity for this genre. They, and their misguided producers would have been better off had they taken their 50 million dollars and used it for the $10,000 necessary to buy in for the World Championship Poker Tournament held in Las Vegas. Even with that hedge, they would never have made it to the final table. I guess, though, that in all fairness, the intent of our present production is to generate income. Art was never a consideration. The current production left that criteria to the makers of the 1957 version unchallenged for the ages.
P.S. Kudos to Peter Fonda. His performance is genuine. He alone in this group of misanthropes, understands this genre. He stamped his signature to this genre with a minor gem that he created, also shot in New Mexico, in the high renaissance era of Western films that culminated in the mid 1970’s.
