This week-end my wife and I watched the movie “3:10 to Yuma“. We streamed it via netflix. It’s a very good film. It’s not too long, 93 minutes or so I think. The story is pretty simple, but in that short time and with a short narrative, the film explores a lot of different aspects of human nature. The film is based on a 1953 short story that I wouldn’t mind reading, to see how it compares. We both enjoyed it quite a bit and I think it has held up well over the years. I recommend checking it out.

In 2007 a new version of “3:10 to Yuma” came out. It had two big names for the lead roles, Russel Crowe and Christian Bale. I saw it shortly after it was released in the theater with a friend of mine. At that time I had never seen the original and did not know what to expect at all. I enjoyed the film. The ending though left me a bit conflicted and confused. Now that I’ve seen the original, I see that the new version ends completely differently.

The films are also very different in how they get to that end. There is a lot more action in the newer film. The new film is longer, and I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that the additional time is mostly bullets flying everywhere and such. (It’s been over 2 years since I saw the original so I could be mistaken. My memory fools me quite often.) I think Crowe did a good job of developing the bad guy and Bale was given more to work with as the hero. The original film isn’t nearly as confusing, as things are stated more directly. But even with things being simpler I think the acting from Glenn Ford and Van Heflin is better. This may reflect some prejudices of mine though. I think there’s a lot less moral ambiguity in the older version and I like it a lot better.

That said, I think the new one was a pretty good western and I’ll probably watch them both again at some point.