3:10 to Yuma

6

Jefflyn90Feb 26, 2012

Its something that we've seen before, its almost impossible to have an actor whose so high powered (Crowe) play the bad guy, he can do "bad" things but he must always have a reason. Ben Wade (Crowe) is like that he can kill anybody but he'sIts something that we've seen before, its almost impossible to have an actor whose so high powered (Crowe) play the bad guy, he can do "bad" things but he must always have a reason. Ben Wade (Crowe) is like that he can kill anybody but he's kind of excused because he likes to sketch and has that I'm not all bad look. Its pretty much Collateral but with horses and dirt. Its a remake of an imperfect movie having the imperfections of the original, but with better actors and more emphasis on the journey. There are some shining moments from the supporting cast, but the movie is all about Bale and Crowe. The relationship present is more due to the actors rather than the characters. Bale manages to make Evans very likable as he comes to terms that the journey is for something more than money. Despite all this Crowe overshadows everybody, presenting a character that's interesting and humane. Although the actors have their shining moment, the action is not all that great especially the final shoot-out. Its a shame to see a solid movie being spoiled so late.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

RayzorMooseNov 13, 2013

3:10 to Yuma soars.
The movie begins well and continues to hold the viewers interest. The character motives in certain parts are a bit sketchy, but with that being said the premise and acting are acceptable.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

ManofActionFeb 16, 2014

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is a great movie. I love Christan Bale's and Russel Crowe's characters. In fact, I loved all of them. The only one I hated to the core of my body was Logan Lermans character. He was Stubborn...well, that is about it. But he is tooo Stubborn. But that really doesn't matter. His character isn't as bad to where it could kill the movie. The ending was the best! I loved the ending but what I did not like ***SPOILERS*** Was Christian Bale's Character dieing at the end. But the ending was still good. I give this a 6 - 10. Mainly because 2 / 4 of the movie was just talk and riding horses. But again, it was still good.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

BillyP.Sep 7, 2007

The treacherous ending immediately erases all the very substantial accomplishments in the film. Shame. Go rent the original first at least.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

RowanJ.Sep 9, 2007

The acting was solid but the script was DREADFUL... more holes in it than the shot up bodies in the film and that ending??? Save your money and rent "Unforgiven"-- which deserves the reviews this bad movie seems to be racking up. Sorry, just The acting was solid but the script was DREADFUL... more holes in it than the shot up bodies in the film and that ending??? Save your money and rent "Unforgiven"-- which deserves the reviews this bad movie seems to be racking up. Sorry, just not good -- again, despite many terrific performances.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

EoinSep 23, 2007

Distracting, entertaining at times, but overall an insignificant addition to the genre, and also guilty of having an antagonist whose unbelievable actions only exist to place twists in the plot. Diasppointing

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

MichaelP.Sep 12, 2007

Strong acting and competent direction it may have, but from the opening sequence contrivances and absurdities mar the story (Bale's one-legged character running over rooftops is perhaps the peak there) culminating in an ending that is Strong acting and competent direction it may have, but from the opening sequence contrivances and absurdities mar the story (Bale's one-legged character running over rooftops is perhaps the peak there) culminating in an ending that is possibly the most implausible climactic change of heart ever seen in a Western or any buddy pic (which is what this is, except the two leads never quite convincingly connect--a fatal flaw). Rent "The Searchers" or "High Noon" and skip this one.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

RalphS.Jan 26, 2008

Your viewer Ed D. has it almost exactly right: it amazes that none of the mainstream reviewers remarked on the extraordinary implausibility of the plot, which weakens the story to virtually laughable. It also surprises me that all reviewers Your viewer Ed D. has it almost exactly right: it amazes that none of the mainstream reviewers remarked on the extraordinary implausibility of the plot, which weakens the story to virtually laughable. It also surprises me that all reviewers thought Russell Crowe's performance excellent. He came across as Russell Crowe having a great ol' time, not as a 19th century villain. All the other actors were excellent, the scenery beautiful and the psychological play between the two protagonists interesting. The ending sequence between Crowe and his gang makes no sense whatsoever and is utterly implausible.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful

5

SteveTFeb 2, 2008

A solid, but maybe a bit slow-moving western, up until the last 15 minutes. The ending is a real head-scratcher and knocked at least 2 points off my rating.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

5

kublay0880Dec 10, 2012

Great actors bad story, the first time that I saw the movie somehow it seemed like I have seen it before, that was maybe because to me, it offered anything new to the old west movies same thing, heartless assassins, and the unknown guy tryingGreat actors bad story, the first time that I saw the movie somehow it seemed like I have seen it before, that was maybe because to me, it offered anything new to the old west movies same thing, heartless assassins, and the unknown guy trying to make some good. Very slow paced and not as much action as expected.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

peterbAug 18, 2013

It seems as though the director was let down by the script. The film has some interesting sequences, such as the stagecoach robbery at the beginning. The two main characters are interesting and we see how their relationship develops duringIt seems as though the director was let down by the script. The film has some interesting sequences, such as the stagecoach robbery at the beginning. The two main characters are interesting and we see how their relationship develops during the film. However in some respects the script seems to have been cut and stitched together, there are several events which do not make any sense and that push ones imagination beyond the boundaries of a satisfying and coherent narrative.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

BBBoyFeb 10, 2015

Such a disappointing movie! Two off my favorite actors ever and they are miscast. Crowe and Bale are unable to bring any life to there roles. Director Mangold just paints by the numbers. A better director could have done something interestingSuch a disappointing movie! Two off my favorite actors ever and they are miscast. Crowe and Bale are unable to bring any life to there roles. Director Mangold just paints by the numbers. A better director could have done something interesting with this movie and gotten better performances from his actors. It doesn't help that the screenplay is terrible. It 's one big cliche. The only bright spot in the film is Ben Foster. He is very good and steels the movie. Had the movie been about his character it might have been good… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

NoBuenoDec 10, 2021

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. If you like true westerns or any kind of realism in a movie, this is not for you.
Literally none of the movie makes sense just random shooting with no motives and the captive doesn't even help his own man trying to rescue him, he appears to develop some kind of Stockholm syndrome for his captor, as for Dan like where does his morals even stand, GREAT Actors but they could only do so much for this poorly written film, Extremely outdates style and If I had of known who the writers were I wouldn't have watched this and saved myself the time as Derek and Brandt only write movies that are suited for people with absolutely no taste or intellect to match.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

MylesHayJan 31, 2008

This is a woeful film - I wanted to like it and really thought i would enjoy it. But the story is rubbish and the characters consistently do things which don't make sense - it fails even on the ground of basic narrative plausibility. This is a woeful film - I wanted to like it and really thought i would enjoy it. But the story is rubbish and the characters consistently do things which don't make sense - it fails even on the ground of basic narrative plausibility. The acting isn't bad, but that really means little if your characters and events have NO credibility or authenticity. Overall, this film is fatally flawed by Poor writing and should have never been sanctioned as fit for production. Shame on these critics for praising it so....… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

JohnKSep 14, 2007

The first two-thirds of the movie is entertaining and Crowe, Bale, Fonda, and Foster are great actors and fun to watch. But [***SPOILER***] as the men approach Yuma the story becomes more and more absurd, and the last ten minutes are an The first two-thirds of the movie is entertaining and Crowe, Bale, Fonda, and Foster are great actors and fun to watch. But [***SPOILER***] as the men approach Yuma the story becomes more and more absurd, and the last ten minutes are an insult to any intelligent mind in many ways. Bale's character shifts motivation (make money, impress son, do the right thing) from scene to scene; and the actions of Crowe's character make no sense at all. Major disappointment, especially for fans of the original movie. This movie is much longer and less suspenseful.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

KurtSep 25, 2007

Implausible. Inconsistent actions taken by the characters. What else? Oh, how about some good acting (Bale/Crowe) mixed with soap opera level acting (Bale's wife)?

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

BillC.Sep 30, 2007

Remember when Nick Cage made good movies? It's been quite awhile hasn't it? Is the same happening now to Russel Crowe? He can act with the best of them, so what's he doing it this film.It starts out slow,follows the standard Remember when Nick Cage made good movies? It's been quite awhile hasn't it? Is the same happening now to Russel Crowe? He can act with the best of them, so what's he doing it this film.It starts out slow,follows the standard 1950's TV western plot, but then goes off the rails with a ending that makes no sense at all. Disapointing to say the least.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

MickGJan 27, 2008

Great Picture, some great acting by Ben Foster. Crowe and Bale did some fair acting. However, the story is so ridiculous that I have to shave 6 points off it. The logic is absurd. I tried to wrapped my brain around why Crowe killed his own Great Picture, some great acting by Ben Foster. Crowe and Bale did some fair acting. However, the story is so ridiculous that I have to shave 6 points off it. The logic is absurd. I tried to wrapped my brain around why Crowe killed his own gang at the end. I guess earlier in the movie when he killed 1 of his gang members for not finding the Pinkerton in the stagecoach is why.? In other words, his gang had to die because they couldn't find him quick enough.??? So he killed his whole gang cause a rancher could outlast them for a while. This still makes no sense. And the many times Crowe could had escaped made the movie unbelievable.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

TubbySApr 16, 2008

Clever story, good acting, solid themes; but, too many glitches. The film oozes unbelievability from start to finish.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

MartinZ.Oct 26, 2007

I'm baffled by the high ratings this has received. Filled with unresolved or unmotivated subplots, cod-Freudian psychological motivations and a level of pointless violence which not only became boring, but worked against some of the I'm baffled by the high ratings this has received. Filled with unresolved or unmotivated subplots, cod-Freudian psychological motivations and a level of pointless violence which not only became boring, but worked against some of the weaker elements of plot and character, this is one of the dumbest Westerns of recent years. Worse, it gives in to the tendency, already endemic in almost every other action-oriented genre, towards an endless succession of frankly boring, one-pace action sequences. A waste of potentially fine acting and a solid premise.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

JamesL.Sep 11, 2007

[***SPOILER***] I was going to overlook all of the implausibilities in the plot and say that I enjoyed this film, then they reached Yuma and the film was an insult to my intelligence. The whole ending was so unbelievable that it actually [***SPOILER***] I was going to overlook all of the implausibilities in the plot and say that I enjoyed this film, then they reached Yuma and the film was an insult to my intelligence. The whole ending was so unbelievable that it actually made me angry. Crowe bonded with Bale, dodging bullets while Bale runs with one leg, Crowe kills his entire gang, hops on the train, and then the damn train has no guards which makes it even worst. I should have known that the film would end like this when he seduced the barkeep or killed the dastardly renegade Indians by himself.. Sorry but this film was a joke on the audience.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

JudyT.Sep 15, 2007

What was the point? A really bad TV episode of a B-rated western.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

oDjentoJan 2, 2015

I found this film not bad, but just pretty underwhelming. Performances are best by Russel Crowe, with Christian Bale doing fine in his role but not being a conflicted character he is meant to be believably. The morals behind all of Crowe'sI found this film not bad, but just pretty underwhelming. Performances are best by Russel Crowe, with Christian Bale doing fine in his role but not being a conflicted character he is meant to be believably. The morals behind all of Crowe's actions seem a little twisted really, and you're still not really concices you should like him towards the end. There isn't that many real western fight scenes in the film which is what i was looking forward to about this, it tries to become over sentimental. A fine enough film to watch but you shouldn't feel bad if you miss it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

CameraBounceGodMar 6, 2015

Fun cast...short movie.....once again we have a cuckold type scenario here in the beginning...we even see a woman that looks like the wife with Wade...The end is pretty enticing.....The rest is well shot and its fun but its not so much that IFun cast...short movie.....once again we have a cuckold type scenario here in the beginning...we even see a woman that looks like the wife with Wade...The end is pretty enticing.....The rest is well shot and its fun but its not so much that I can easily watch it three times .....The problem with this movie is that its not as fun as you think it will be....I don't think that's the movies message on adventures either....… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

DWillySep 18, 2007

Oh, Lordy, this is a mess. Mildly effective at times, but jaw-droppingly bad much more often. Ridiculously overrated, especially if you like westerns or what you thought was Russel Crowe's work ethic (he smirks his way, Burce Willis Oh, Lordy, this is a mess. Mildly effective at times, but jaw-droppingly bad much more often. Ridiculously overrated, especially if you like westerns or what you thought was Russel Crowe's work ethic (he smirks his way, Burce Willis style, through this). [***SPOILER***] Character's constantly switch loyalties without real motivation, Peter Fonda is shot in the solor plexis, yet responds as if merely bothered by a 24 hour flu, Russel Crowe is treated like a prince when he's captive and offered repeated oportunities to kill, one by one, his meaner captors, while the nice ones react with chagrin; at one point the menacing, one dimensional bad guys cluster like a shooting gallery in the open, but, nope, our lug headed good guys don't take a shot, they're thinkin' on what to do. At one point, I swear, I thought a reel had been skipped. You've been warned.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

FrankL.Feb 12, 2008

Good acting, but character decisions make no sense at all. Not from objective point of view, and not even from viewing the character development during the movie. Why should Croves character make a turn around ? Only because he saw a father Good acting, but character decisions make no sense at all. Not from objective point of view, and not even from viewing the character development during the movie. Why should Croves character make a turn around ? Only because he saw a father and his kid ? Because he saw a stupid Farmer without leg taking stupid decisions bringing his family in jeopardy ? Nah, I couldn't even say from whom this western would be likable, but for anyone having a little spirit for a story it certainly is not.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

RobSFeb 19, 2008

3.10 to Yuma perpetuates the naive myth cold blooded psychopathic criminals are charismatic, surrounded by beautiful women and capable of becoming good. Having worked in in the criminal law field, I can tell you this is far from reality. 3.10 to Yuma perpetuates the naive myth cold blooded psychopathic criminals are charismatic, surrounded by beautiful women and capable of becoming good. Having worked in in the criminal law field, I can tell you this is far from reality. Criminals or anyone who's been in trouble with the law for serious crimes are not capable of empathy (their brain wiring is different) or change. Furthermore they surround themselves with skanky money hungry women who are insecure (because of their self-perceived ugliness). They have no charm as the only thing in life they chase is sex and money. They are not interested in history, art, travel, or gain any enjoyment in the the world or the human experience. 3.10 to Yuma could have been a great film (beautifully filmed, multilayered conflict, great actions sequences and performances) but sadly it was cliched-bad person gets a conscience.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

DavidD.Feb 24, 2008

Fairly well made movie _until_ the last scene, as it totally went against the orginal 3:10 to Yuma movie (rent it) and the character played by C Bale lives (with his wife looking on, no less)! The ending of this remake is absolutely foolish, Fairly well made movie _until_ the last scene, as it totally went against the orginal 3:10 to Yuma movie (rent it) and the character played by C Bale lives (with his wife looking on, no less)! The ending of this remake is absolutely foolish, and the writer and director should be given a 1 year suspension for silly and useless graphic violence for the sake of blood letting. Why not let the Hero (Bale) live and let the repentant murderer (Crowe) be judged willingly? It is just plain silliness for box office receipts.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

ChristopherS.Feb 20, 2008

Pretty awful stuff this. Followed it up with the equally dreadful Michael Clayton. Has American cinema reached its nadir? If not it soon will.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

DaveR.Oct 1, 2007

The longer it went on, the more it lost me. Good acting and atmosphere, but the characters made choices that made less and less sense, culminating in an absolutely unbelievable ending, and the pace alternated between being too slow and The longer it went on, the more it lost me. Good acting and atmosphere, but the characters made choices that made less and less sense, culminating in an absolutely unbelievable ending, and the pace alternated between being too slow and jumping over sequences and leaving us confused. James Bond can do that stuff and get away with it, because James Bond is a cartoonish character and we expect him to be over-the-top, but this lays claim to a more reality-based framework. It's a forgettable diversion at best.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

EdD.Jan 22, 2008

I recall in Network, or some such film, a scene in which a wealthy Texan makes it clear that he is in the market for "big" art. The American public likes big movies as much as they liked big cars in the 70s. This movie had virtually no I recall in Network, or some such film, a scene in which a wealthy Texan makes it clear that he is in the market for "big" art. The American public likes big movies as much as they liked big cars in the 70s. This movie had virtually no plausibility, as it crowbarred morality and meaning into coldblooded killers and down and out ranchers. What made it an absurd movie? The one staggering question as to why Crowe wasn't simply shot out of hand and brought in dead; scenes where hugely powerful bad guys wiped out everyone in the vicinity virtually at will ; igniting dynamite thrown in the air with a shotgun fired from the back of a galloping horse; leaving the coldest of coldblooded killers alone with Christian Bale's wife; shootouts of one to 20 or more proportions; a plot which went to ludicrous lengths to wedge Christian Bale into the last man standing role; and the totally unexplainable actions of Russel Crowe as he repeatedly assists his captors and finally gets on the train himself--the movie's makers have failed miserably to make a morality play out of an BIG western. This is a movie that can only make sense as a load of crap sold to a public that demands it, and pushed by critics who don't know what it smells like.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

ChaquitaKidSep 21, 2007

DWilly and many other user critics are correct; there are some movies with events that stray so far from logic as to become nonsensical, this is one of those movies. Characters often react and do things that are 'uncharacteristic' DWilly and many other user critics are correct; there are some movies with events that stray so far from logic as to become nonsensical, this is one of those movies. Characters often react and do things that are 'uncharacteristic' or simply make no sense at all, and that really ruins the movie. Do not buy into the massive amounts of praise this movie has received.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

DS.Sep 23, 2007

The real villains in the film are the filmmakers who totally betray the audience with their laughable, insult-to-the-intelligence "plot" developments. You can almost feel the contempt the screenwriters have for the moviegoer in the insane The real villains in the film are the filmmakers who totally betray the audience with their laughable, insult-to-the-intelligence "plot" developments. You can almost feel the contempt the screenwriters have for the moviegoer in the insane choices made by the characters in the last half of the film. ("Oh, they'll believe anything") [***SPOILER***] Christian Bales's character isn't courageous at the end, he's incomprehensibly suicidal. Crowe's part looks like it was written by his manager. "Yeah, he's a psychopathic murderer who will viciously kill anyone including his buddies, but make it so he's really likable by the end. Oh, and don't forget to write in some love scenes for the ladies -- this is Russell Crowe after all!"… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

OrsonSep 23, 2007

"Wanted:Dead or Alive!" Somehow, those in this film, those who wrote this film, never got tis message. THERE WAS GOOD REASON for this message - to prevent stupidity from being followed is one reason. This is merely good logic. As an example "Wanted:Dead or Alive!" Somehow, those in this film, those who wrote this film, never got tis message. THERE WAS GOOD REASON for this message - to prevent stupidity from being followed is one reason. This is merely good logic. As an example of motivated drama, this film simply fails. But if you are among the lame-brained who believe the Old west was a lame-brained Hell Hole, you'll enjoy this vision of excess. As for myself, I just walked out.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

PolymothFeb 24, 2014

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I like westerns, and I like modern westerns. I like the dust and sweat and the "hard" men, following in the footsteps of Eastwood's High Plains Drifter. This film is good to look at and has all the makings of a good movie, but the way the characters behave just become more and more unbelievable until in a climax of illogic for both the characters and the audience we are supposed to suddenly find Ben Wade a likeable chap, and he is expected to kill the remnants of his gang with a sparkle at his eye teeth.

How many times were the good guys to let Wade kill one of there number without doing anything about it? Every time. How often was Dan Evans going to turn his back on Wade without being killed? Innumerable times. And why oh why, in one of the final scenes when the baddies are all lined up in the street like ducks at a fair, and they kill the unarmed Sheriff and all his men, and Dan is a sharp shooter and has his rifle in an upstairs window, why does he just sit there and let it happen? No idea.

Lucky to get a three score really. That's for the grime and sweat :)… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

2

BarfoB.Sep 10, 2007

The first 2/3 of this film were fairly entertaining but the last part made no sense and the climax preposterous. How did the Christian Bale character expect to make it from the hotel to the train station with the whole town gunning for him? The first 2/3 of this film were fairly entertaining but the last part made no sense and the climax preposterous. How did the Christian Bale character expect to make it from the hotel to the train station with the whole town gunning for him? Why was the Russell Crowe character assisting him? [***SPOILER***] Okay, the RC character had a change of heart but does that mean he is going to blow the whole gang away for trying to spring him? I must be dense, but I didn't get it. The whole Chinese rail camp thing was also kind of a waste of time...a sidebar, if you will. Disappointing. I don't understand all the good reviews.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

WoodyD.Sep 13, 2007

trite, entirely predictable, and poorly directed. A reel bore. Tried to be a classic western. Tried, without the tension, without the eery awkward silence and slower pace...basically crap.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

RogerD.Sep 8, 2007

This movie was boring and pretentious. It took forever to "start" and once the real part of the story began it moved at a snail's pace. The director loaded the picture with unneccessary quick cutting and ominous close-ups of This movie was boring and pretentious. It took forever to "start" and once the real part of the story began it moved at a snail's pace. The director loaded the picture with unneccessary quick cutting and ominous close-ups of people's faces. The ending was totally unbelievable!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

BobL.Mar 24, 2008

Back in the 1880's in Arizona Territory, people were really dumb. They allowed all of their decisions to be made by moviemakers whose only interest was sensation and bloat. There is little logic in this movie. The shoot-out at the end, Back in the 1880's in Arizona Territory, people were really dumb. They allowed all of their decisions to be made by moviemakers whose only interest was sensation and bloat. There is little logic in this movie. The shoot-out at the end, while thrilling in a ho-hum sort of way is particularly stupid, as is whoever wrote this and expects the audience to believe anything. If you want a good and thrilling--not to mention realistic--shoot-out, take a look at the ending of the made-for-TV "Open Range."… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

AaronApr 1, 2008

The movie sucked, the critics are pathetic in applauding a film which is riven with plot holes, illogical developments, hammy acting, & a dire script. The film was an absolute mess and boring to boot.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

DavePFeb 20, 2009

The characters kept making decisions and doing things that just are not plausible! How do movies like this get made? In pre-production does nobody ever say "hey lets change the script to make it more plausible or not insulting to someone The characters kept making decisions and doing things that just are not plausible! How do movies like this get made? In pre-production does nobody ever say "hey lets change the script to make it more plausible or not insulting to someone with a brain". How does Russell Crowe or SOMEBODY not have a little chat to the director and change a few things so i don't have to roll my eyes and think 'are you kidding me! you expect me to swallow that!… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful

2

StuA.Sep 16, 2007

Poor movie - too long - boring - simplistic plot.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

TomSJan 29, 2008

I don't know what movie everyone else saw, this was an awful movie. As has been pointed out, the characters choices made little to no sense. Also, if we ignore that aspect of the film and focus on it simply as a morality tale or I don't know what movie everyone else saw, this was an awful movie. As has been pointed out, the characters choices made little to no sense. Also, if we ignore that aspect of the film and focus on it simply as a morality tale or something deeper than simply a shoot em up western, the movie is still rubbish. Crowe's eventual moral turn is so minor in comparison what he had been doing throughout the movie that it doesn't really change anything. If you like westerns, and you gave this film anything higher than a 5, please watch Unforgiven and tell me it's not twice the movie that 3:10 to Yuma is. Finally, Ben Foster, Crowe's second in command character, never seemed a plausible fit in that role, and I am shocked that critics pointed to him as a bright point in the film.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

jwhSep 11, 2007

This movie is a farce. If you are looking for a movie so unrealistic that it is comedic - go see this. Example: a group of lawmen are in an upstairs room looking down on 7 bad guys (all of whom are known murderers) who are ALL LINED UP in This movie is a farce. If you are looking for a movie so unrealistic that it is comedic - go see this. Example: a group of lawmen are in an upstairs room looking down on 7 bad guys (all of whom are known murderers) who are ALL LINED UP in front of them, but they don't open fire. Instead, they hold up their hands and walk out in their own straight line so they can be shot down and butchered. It is a movie with NOTHING to offer and the reviews here mystify me. Go rent Unforgiven to see a class act western. This is dreck.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

BMSep 14, 2007

Worst movie ever. melodramatic, non-westerner, nothing to look forward to. Bale and Crowe can't even hide their accents.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

GabeKJul 12, 2008

I am sorry to say but good acting and visuals do not save a film from a horrible plot. This movie makes no sense. Besides the fact that no one can properly detain a prisoner in this movie, the ending made no sense. This whole movie was laughable.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

HerbF.Sep 12, 2007

I think I saw a different film from the one reviewed. "Yuma" was as weak as any western I have seen. fonda lives although gut shot, Evans runs on roofs with a wooden leg, and a totally unattractive Bales seduces a gratuitous barmaid. The I think I saw a different film from the one reviewed. "Yuma" was as weak as any western I have seen. fonda lives although gut shot, Evans runs on roofs with a wooden leg, and a totally unattractive Bales seduces a gratuitous barmaid. The can-can would have been a welcome break in the absurdity, especially if they were really professional in this one-horse town in the West. Then there is the change of heart in the train station. Yuk. What was it with the Crucifix on the pistol grip? What a total stinker!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

GerryK.Sep 15, 2007

This was the most disappointing hyped weatern ever. The end with Christian Bale running like a track star with only having one leg was utterly ridiculous. The ending was along the same lines. Where do these critics get paid from??? It is a This was the most disappointing hyped weatern ever. The end with Christian Bale running like a track star with only having one leg was utterly ridiculous. The ending was along the same lines. Where do these critics get paid from??? It is a real stinker… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

LarryB.Feb 25, 2008

Really sad when I compare this movie to the 1957 original version. The original movie was about a man who faced difficulties with dignity and who was loved and admired by his family. The 2007 version was about a man who was basically a Really sad when I compare this movie to the 1957 original version. The original movie was about a man who faced difficulties with dignity and who was loved and admired by his family. The 2007 version was about a man who was basically a loser, had already lost the respect of his family, and who died at the end, for what exactly I don't know. The original had a wonderful screenplay where not a moment was wasted in excess dialog; the remake just went on and on with silly banter, and nothing believable.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

BrianF.Mar 31, 2008

Absolutely ridiculous all the way through. From the needlessly bloody and ill-handled stagecoach robbery, to the mind-numbingly insipid ending, the entire film was an exercise in credulity assault. The bad guy escapes as often as he wants Absolutely ridiculous all the way through. From the needlessly bloody and ill-handled stagecoach robbery, to the mind-numbingly insipid ending, the entire film was an exercise in credulity assault. The bad guy escapes as often as he wants and kills as he goes because his captives mindlessly do not secure him, outside of some handcuffs. Sharpshooters are killing moving stagecoach drivers from improbable distances with deadly accuracy but in the final sequences can't seem to hit the broad side of a barn while standing right in front of it. I could not get past the miserable storyline to enjoy any 'psycho drama' said to be unfolding along the way. Even watching the film for free, I felt violated.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

JohnJan 23, 2008

This is one of those films that makes a farce of the entire movie review system. It got very good reviews from almost all sources, and it is so horribly bad that I really had to ask if the I had seen the right movie. The acting, the This is one of those films that makes a farce of the entire movie review system. It got very good reviews from almost all sources, and it is so horribly bad that I really had to ask if the I had seen the right movie. The acting, the directing, and everything else about this piece of garbage is almost remarkable. Have a clue. those of you who review films. This thing is a very bad joke. If there could be a rating lower that 0 I'd use it here.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

0

TruthB.Jan 28, 2008

Terrible, This movie makes me sick. 3:10 to disloyalty.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

DSBelievinFeb 2, 2008

Rented the DVD. I usually find something to like in most movies. This movie, however, actually made me angry several times. It tried to play up reality and emotion, yet the characters respond completely unrealistically. Crowe's Rented the DVD. I usually find something to like in most movies. This movie, however, actually made me angry several times. It tried to play up reality and emotion, yet the characters respond completely unrealistically. Crowe's character is obviously a charismatic psychopath, yet, all characters respond to him as if he was Yoda. It is insulting to the 'good' characters in the film and insulting to the good sense of the audience. Finally, when the film does reveal that it wants to be both drama and action, the action is totally devoid of creativity and is as implausible as a one-legged man jumping from rooftop to rooftop. I hated this movie!!!!!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

AlexBFeb 12, 2008

quite funny to see such positive reviews from the "professional" reviewers. Its really a benefit that their importance clearly diminished in web2.0 times. I read the critics here before, decided to give it a try, and stopped after the plot quite funny to see such positive reviews from the "professional" reviewers. Its really a benefit that their importance clearly diminished in web2.0 times. I read the critics here before, decided to give it a try, and stopped after the plot became laughable at the end. Makes you believe the good writers were already striking when this plot was done. An "user critics" LOL 2.0 to this movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3:10 to Yuma

User Reviews