User Score
7.2

Generally favorable reviews- based on 378 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 44 out of 378
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jan 15, 2012
    8
    Human fleshed out characters with motives and a history to them, even if imagined off screen (that's how well they are written and played). Excellent performances, quiet moments of reflection, cruelty and understanding, great action sequences and a sly but honest script. You can forgive the somewhat unrealistic ending to quite a large degree if you apply the fore mentioned motivation andHuman fleshed out characters with motives and a history to them, even if imagined off screen (that's how well they are written and played). Excellent performances, quiet moments of reflection, cruelty and understanding, great action sequences and a sly but honest script. You can forgive the somewhat unrealistic ending to quite a large degree if you apply the fore mentioned motivation and understanding.

    Ben Foster deserved best supporting actor for this film.
    Expand
  2. Jun 4, 2011
    6
    In most regards this is a very traditional western. Well cast, well acted. There is a little too much moral ambiguity with a central character, to a degree which for me was not credible. Overall a little lacking in substance
  3. Mar 26, 2012
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. James Mangold's remake of the stellar 3:10 to Yuma is a mixed bag - there's some great acting, and beautiful camerawork, but also a fairly implausible script. Christain Bale and Russel Crowe star as a poor ranch owner Dan Evans and the infamous highwayman Ben Wade. Ben Foster and Peter Fonda strengthen the otherwise lacklustre supporting cast, both giving powerful performances. A lot of users have rather harshly critiqued the lack of realism in the script and if it weren't for Bale and Crowe's strong acting the implausibility and holes in the script might have shone through even moreso. For example, the bizarre ending - Crowe suddenly decides to allow himself to be captured, but rather than simply call off his gang he further endangers himself and Bale by being chased by the bloodthirsty gang to the train station. If he was trying to make Bale's character look like a hero, this would make some sense, but then all logic is thrown out the window as he shoots every remaining member of his gang. This really held back the film for me, and I otherwise would have scored it an 8.
    It's a little hard to score 3:10 to Yuma, because there's a lot of conflicting elements holding back the film from legend status, but despite these frustrations it's still a very entertaining watch.
    Expand
  4. Dec 27, 2011
    9
    I cant say much but wow. I wasn't so sure about this movie at the beginning, but as it progressed, it drew me in more and more. The star part of this movie is it's ending. In simple words, suspenseful, amazing, beautiful. Dialog may be a little difficult to understand at important parts, but once you go back and put the pieces together, you will quickly realize this movie is a masterI cant say much but wow. I wasn't so sure about this movie at the beginning, but as it progressed, it drew me in more and more. The star part of this movie is it's ending. In simple words, suspenseful, amazing, beautiful. Dialog may be a little difficult to understand at important parts, but once you go back and put the pieces together, you will quickly realize this movie is a master piece. I got it on Blu ray for 5 dollars. Best 5 dollars iv ever spent. Expand
  5. Feb 26, 2012
    6
    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'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 anIts 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
  6. RalphS.
    Jan 26, 2008
    5
    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 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
  7. JohnM.
    Sep 14, 2007
    6
    Too violent, too long, implausible ending.
  8. DaveP
    Feb 20, 2009
    2
    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 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
  9. RobS
    Feb 19, 2008
    3
    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. 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
  10. DavidD.
    Feb 24, 2008
    3
    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 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
  11. ChristopherS.
    Feb 20, 2008
    3
    Pretty awful stuff this. Followed it up with the equally dreadful Michael Clayton. Has American cinema reached its nadir? If not it soon will.
  12. John
    Jan 23, 2008
    0
    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 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
  13. SteveT
    Feb 2, 2008
    5
    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.
  14. Nov 23, 2010
    10
    One of my favourite movies ever, absolutely lovced it everytime i saw it, the amount of idiots on here that gave this a low score is laughable. It is one of the best westerns i have ever seen and the music to it was wonderful.
  15. JeanD.
    Oct 1, 2007
    9
    I'm not crazy about westerns, nor of violent films. I was convinced to see this movie and I'm so glad I did. The use of psychology and philosophy to show the characters was brilliant. Showing that anybody, regardless of moral character, can fall over to the opposite side. Even the good guys struggled with staying "good."
  16. RyanC.
    Sep 16, 2007
    8
    A very entertaining. The story gets a little fuzzy near the end regarding Wade's choices, but otherwise a great story.
  17. MichaelS.
    Sep 10, 2007
    7
    Good Western's have provided meaningful messages about life and relationships and this one provided several good ones. Crowe's and Bale's performances standout in this film and together they enabled the director to deliver valuable lessons about home, family, and the brutalities of life. Despite some of the character actors and script flaws in the film, a good western was Good Western's have provided meaningful messages about life and relationships and this one provided several good ones. Crowe's and Bale's performances standout in this film and together they enabled the director to deliver valuable lessons about home, family, and the brutalities of life. Despite some of the character actors and script flaws in the film, a good western was delivered for the money. Expand
  18. EricS.
    Sep 20, 2007
    9
    Simply good...don't go further! Classic western, efficient and true! A must see for all western lovers!
  19. JimS
    Sep 6, 2007
    9
    Very good, entertaining film. I was never a huge fan of westerns, but was surprised at how much I enjoyed this movie. Well paced and acted, I would recommend it to anyone who enjoys a good action drama.
  20. BillyP.
    Sep 7, 2007
    5
    The treacherous ending immediately erases all the very substantial accomplishments in the film. Shame. Go rent the original first at least.
  21. RowanJ.
    Sep 9, 2007
    5
    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.
  22. BrianF.
    Mar 31, 2008
    0
    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 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
  23. Rex
    Oct 1, 2007
    9
    This was a modern version of an old style western. I loved that it wasn't super realistic and gritty. I loved Russell Crowe and the ease in which his character
  24. KarenW.
    Oct 22, 2007
    8
    A lot of violence, but awesome performances. Grabs hold of your emotions. The Western is back!
  25. H.K.C.
    Oct 8, 2007
    10
    Yes this is the one if you like the old West with a twist. Twist it does just about throughout the whole movie. So put on your spurs and saddle-up with a bag of Non-Buttered Popcorn and a 16 Caliber Diet Coke and Enjoy the Show. Regards, HK.
  26. jwh
    Sep 11, 2007
    1
    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 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
  27. DeborahL.
    Sep 13, 2007
    9
    Revival of a great genre with 21st century technique, led by fine performances
  28. BM
    Sep 14, 2007
    1
    Worst movie ever. melodramatic, non-westerner, nothing to look forward to. Bale and Crowe can't even hide their accents.
  29. FredW.
    Sep 17, 2007
    9
    As the movie is based on the work of one of my favorite writers (Elmore Leonard), and starring some of my favorite actors (Christian Bale and Russell Crowe), I felt compelled to watch it. I'm happy to report it is simply the best movie I've seen all year. The pace is tight, there are no extraneous material to distract. The acting is superb, as is the story. There isn't so As the movie is based on the work of one of my favorite writers (Elmore Leonard), and starring some of my favorite actors (Christian Bale and Russell Crowe), I felt compelled to watch it. I'm happy to report it is simply the best movie I've seen all year. The pace is tight, there are no extraneous material to distract. The acting is superb, as is the story. There isn't so much as one thing I can negatively review about this movie. Watch it and enjoy. Expand
  30. DWilly
    Sep 18, 2007
    3
    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 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
  31. Eoin
    Sep 23, 2007
    5
    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
  32. MikeA
    Sep 30, 2007
    10
    Amazing film with an even more amazing cast. Love Crow and Bale together too. Hope they have other projects together in the future. The ending with it's moral ambiguity is wonderful. Maybe a sequel of some kind?
  33. BrettF.
    Sep 4, 2007
    10
    Very well done. Best western movie in a long time. Kept my attention the whole time. The acting is great along with some great gun fights and twists. Overall, a great movie.
  34. NickM.
    Sep 6, 2007
    8
    A great western, given the lack of westerns in the last 10 years. This is a great movie to go see and I strongly suggest that you do so. its blends modern day thriller with old west shoot outs, bounty hunters and carriage robbery with modern day thrills.
  35. JoanB.
    Sep 6, 2007
    10
    Absolutely wonderful. Great acting, story and pacing. I haven't loved westerns for a long time, but the love affair has been rekindled, at least for 3:10 to Yuma. Crowe is magnificent as Ben Wade, Bale brings us all we need in a sturdy portrayal, and newcomer Ben Foster, a character actor to watch in the future.
  36. JudithP.
    Sep 6, 2007
    10
    I really enjoyed this film..imagine a grown-up adult film with no superheroes,wizards or shaky camera work.The fifties original was suited for its time but Mangold's version is meatier and Crowe is outstanding
  37. NickB.
    Sep 7, 2007
    8
    I thought the rhythm of the film was on point. The actors were all well cast, except for Luke Wilson - what are you doing in there? Not being a fan of typical male themes - pride, honor, braun - it seemed that this film didn't let those characteristics become characatures. And Ben Foster should get a few more mentions for his delicious portrayal of Wade's right hand.
  38. CydneyB.
    Sep 7, 2007
    10
    Wayyyyyyyyyyyy too intense for me, but my husband was over the moon excited. He loved every second of it and plans to buy the DVD as soon as it comes out. High praise from a guy whose favorite film genre is western, and who's been woefully disappointed in the past. Audience was so quiet and involved, you could have heard the proverbial pin drop, and then a great big exhale and the end.
  39. AA
    Sep 8, 2007
    9
    A fun yet heavy western. Well acted which makes this almost formula movie much better to watch. I escaped into a bygone era when right and wrong was clear. The critical difference and one worth noting is right and wrong got mixed and I really enjoyed that exploration. Crowe and Bales are really superb. The action is a bit expected , but still fun.
  40. ROBERTM.
    Sep 8, 2007
    9
    James Mangold may not be a genius as a Director, but if he isn't I would sure like to meet the guy who is ahead of him in line. 3:10 to Yuma is action packed and the story flows naturally from beginning to end; there are no rough spots here. Russell Crowe and Christian Bale are each worth the price of admission alone, together they are terrific. The young actor who plays the 14 James Mangold may not be a genius as a Director, but if he isn't I would sure like to meet the guy who is ahead of him in line. 3:10 to Yuma is action packed and the story flows naturally from beginning to end; there are no rough spots here. Russell Crowe and Christian Bale are each worth the price of admission alone, together they are terrific. The young actor who plays the 14 year-old son has a very bright future if he can keep it between the white lines and out of the ditches of booze, drugs, and too many "party women". The tension and interaction between the 3 of them was compelling throughout. The Mangold-directed "Walk The Line" had one of the best movie beginnings of all time, while 3:10 has one of the best, most satisfying endings. This movie lived up to the hype, something that cannot be said about most movies. Expand
  41. equality7-2521
    Sep 8, 2007
    10
    There are very few Westerns that I like that aren't directed by either Sergio Leone or Sam Peckinpah. I despise all John Wayne's films, for example. Last year's "The Proposition" was good but hardly inspiring. James Mangold's version of "3:10 to Yuma" is a masterpiece and may very well be my fave western ever. This movie ripped my heart out. I could not talk for ten There are very few Westerns that I like that aren't directed by either Sergio Leone or Sam Peckinpah. I despise all John Wayne's films, for example. Last year's "The Proposition" was good but hardly inspiring. James Mangold's version of "3:10 to Yuma" is a masterpiece and may very well be my fave western ever. This movie ripped my heart out. I could not talk for ten minutes after walking out of the theater... Expand
  42. MylesHay
    Jan 31, 2008
    4
    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 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
  43. GordonL
    Oct 4, 2008
    8
    Wow fun movie, totally unfair for alot of people on here bashing it. its probably the same person for all i know, unless everyones lost their minds, this movie had such a good script, strong emotional prevalance compared to many other action movies with an empty story, this one actually has "heart" or shall i say, a mind of its own, like a gun triggering off, nonstop. a very nice remake, Wow fun movie, totally unfair for alot of people on here bashing it. its probably the same person for all i know, unless everyones lost their minds, this movie had such a good script, strong emotional prevalance compared to many other action movies with an empty story, this one actually has "heart" or shall i say, a mind of its own, like a gun triggering off, nonstop. a very nice remake, my final personal rating is a 3/4 not a masterpiece like say, lord of the rings, but seriously HOW CAN someone give this a 1 or a 2? thats sooo lame seriously if you watch the directing, the pace of the film, the script...it all moves smooth slick and a fulfilling western action/flick starring two great actors. do you have any idea how ridiculed i am with such low ratings? if your going to bash a movie, why dont you try something like "era gone" lol this ones so ON though! its got a pulse, yah thaz right. bite it. Expand
  44. FrankL.
    Feb 12, 2008
    3
    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 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
  45. RickS.
    Feb 20, 2008
    6
    I'll admit, it was a great movie. Cristian Bale was great, whatever. Now that I have that out of the way, I do want to say this, it could never touch the caliber of The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. Criticize me all you want. There was no powerful cinematography, the script was almost useless, and there are some major pacing issues here. Jesse James may have I'll admit, it was a great movie. Cristian Bale was great, whatever. Now that I have that out of the way, I do want to say this, it could never touch the caliber of The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. Criticize me all you want. There was no powerful cinematography, the script was almost useless, and there are some major pacing issues here. Jesse James may have been slow, but it's pace was consistent. I'm sorry, but the 3:10 pace is, at one moment ultra-fast, the next, so slow that it puts you to sleep because you are accustomed to the quick pace. However, I did like the storyline and the acting was...good. Can't touch Jesse James. Expand
  46. BB
    Feb 3, 2008
    7
    Great acting and a good story.
  47. ConorH.
    Feb 4, 2008
    10
    As a fourteen year old boy I know that this movie should not appeal to me but it does and for that reason it really grinds my gears when a critic who has only read the story line gives a movie a bagging. This is another great story of one of the great men and women of the US country music scene - not unlike Coal Miners Daughter. I give it 10/10 - loved it!!!
  48. AdamA.
    Mar 5, 2008
    7
    An interesting movie of morals and virtues. It was all around well done. However, some parts had just too much shooting, while others had too little. The movie seems undecided whether it wants to be a charachter piece, or an action movie.
  49. ChrisG.
    Mar 8, 2008
    10
    Excellent movie. If you like complex characters in a story then this one's for you.
  50. DaneD.
    Mar 9, 2008
    7
    As those who wrote before me have mentioned, the acting is the saving grace of this trite tale. I haven't read the Leonard story, but I hope it provides a bit more insight into the ridiculous and sudden character dynamics in the final quarter of the plot. I found myself waiting for some other element of the film to catch up with the performances. Unfortunately, nothing stepped up to As those who wrote before me have mentioned, the acting is the saving grace of this trite tale. I haven't read the Leonard story, but I hope it provides a bit more insight into the ridiculous and sudden character dynamics in the final quarter of the plot. I found myself waiting for some other element of the film to catch up with the performances. Unfortunately, nothing stepped up to the plate: the cinematography was everything short of poetic, the attention to detail faded just when it was needed the most (the shoot-out), and - as I mentioned before - the plot jumped tracks at the end. Despite its shortcomings, it's still an enjoyable romp. It could have been much more than that, though. Expand
  51. DanC
    Jan 29, 2009
    7
    The first 3/4 of the film are sheer brilliant intensity, and deserve a score of 10/10. In the final half hour, the acting remains superb, but the plot breaks down badly. I can't quite wrap my head around the illogic of the final scenes, and I can't quite love the film because of that. Still, it's well worth watching, and exciting to see such an excellent Western in this day The first 3/4 of the film are sheer brilliant intensity, and deserve a score of 10/10. In the final half hour, the acting remains superb, but the plot breaks down badly. I can't quite wrap my head around the illogic of the final scenes, and I can't quite love the film because of that. Still, it's well worth watching, and exciting to see such an excellent Western in this day and age. The best since Unforgiven. Expand
  52. JosephS
    May 7, 2009
    7
    Nice classic western action movie; very good production values and acting. The story is a bit too straightforward, no surprises here.
  53. ChadS.
    Nov 17, 2007
    9
    In a crucial scene, Ben Wade(Russell Crowe) violates the old dictum that there is "honor among thieves", which makes him an anti-hero if you're the sort of person who roots for the bad guy. You sort of feel bad for Charlie Prince(Ben Foster) in the end. His undying loyalty for Ben makes him heroic, even if he's on the wrong side of the law. Charlie(whose last name is "Prince" In a crucial scene, Ben Wade(Russell Crowe) violates the old dictum that there is "honor among thieves", which makes him an anti-hero if you're the sort of person who roots for the bad guy. You sort of feel bad for Charlie Prince(Ben Foster) in the end. His undying loyalty for Ben makes him heroic, even if he's on the wrong side of the law. Charlie(whose last name is "Prince" for a reason) will do anything to protect his "king(?)". "3:10 to Yuma" is interesting because there are two heroes. Dan is the official hero; Ben Wade is the anti-hero(the murderer with a heart); and then there's Charlie Prince, who will do anything to protect save another person's life, which is, by definition, a hero. "3:10 to Yuma" is one good-looking western, and like any good western, its law-and-order men are faced with the same moral quandries as the bad guys. Expand
  54. DaveR.
    Oct 1, 2007
    3
    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 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
  55. LucasC.
    Oct 26, 2007
    9
    This movie is great. It brings about the revival of the continuously dying western. In a few years from now some movie will make the genre return dormant, but never the less this is one of my favorite movies.
  56. BarfoB.
    Sep 10, 2007
    2
    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 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
  57. MikeJ.
    Sep 12, 2007
    8
    Refreshing old western done nicely in a contempo motif. [***SPOILER***] Other than Ben Wade ridiculously killing his gang at the end, (should never have happened) the movie was flawless. I enjoyed the action immensely. Jolly good show!!!!!!!!
  58. MichaelP.
    Sep 12, 2007
    5
    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 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
  59. WoodyD.
    Sep 13, 2007
    2
    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.
  60. JohnK
    Sep 14, 2007
    4
    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; 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
  61. MikeF.
    Sep 14, 2007
    9
    A very satisfying film--a morality play more than a western, it's a perfectly directed and no scene or performance is wasted. While I liked "Bourne", this film has more heart and to that end, more enjoyable.
  62. NickA.
    Sep 15, 2007
    8
    A remade version of the
  63. JamesT.
    Sep 15, 2007
    7
    This movie could draw a 10 or a 1, depending on how much you turn a blind eye to the story/screenplay liberties. Overall I enjoyed it - the great acting won out over the many "say what?'s" in the plot. For me Foster stole the show. Crowe did a great job, but am I alone in thinking he didn't quite have the edge his character history suggested?
  64. ElizabethL.
    Sep 15, 2007
    10
    I don't even like westerns but this one's got so much heart and it's exquisitely made. The film glowed and Russell Crowe and Christian Bale have the best on screen chemistry ever. A really great film, highly recommend.
  65. StaceyM.
    Sep 16, 2007
    9
    Revived my faith in Westerns as a genre.
  66. NancyO.
    Sep 17, 2007
    9
    Very much different from the original, but equally complex and interesting. However, as in so many movies, the female roles were cast with an eye to beauty, not acting depth. Not too much support from the screenwriters either.
  67. ChrisK.
    Sep 17, 2007
    8
    Just before this movie came out I was thinking the Western is pretty much dead, but this film will breathe some new life into it. Overall fun movie, the audience was into it and applauded at the end. Like many films not completely realistic story but thats part of why I go to the movies - to escape reality - if I want reality I can just open my door. If you want escape go see it!
  68. DoyleO.
    Sep 22, 2007
    9
    All the best of a classic western, with great performances.
  69. Kurt
    Sep 25, 2007
    4
    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)?
  70. FrankO.
    Sep 25, 2007
    9
    One of the best western movies I have seen in years. Better than the original that starred Van Helfin and Glenn Ford. Mangold gets the maximum performances out his actors (i.e. Crowe, Bale, Fonda and Foster). Even plot turns & twists to keep my interest. Highly recommended!!!!!!
  71. BillC.
    Sep 30, 2007
    4
    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.
  72. CindyW.
    Sep 4, 2007
    10
    A terrific movie, high marks all across the board, a great balance between exciting action and the riveting psycholgogical duel between Ben Wade and Dan Evans. All the supporting players are fine but Crowe and Bale are superb.
  73. ColbyS.
    Sep 5, 2007
    9
    All hail the return of the Western. Not just a film of substance, artistry and character development, 3:10 to Yuma also functions remarkably as a taught action thriller. Bale and Crowe, two favorites, amaze as expected. I was also pleasantly surprised and disturbed simultaneously by a relatively unknown Ben Foster. Add to that a great selection of laughably quotable lines and you have a All hail the return of the Western. Not just a film of substance, artistry and character development, 3:10 to Yuma also functions remarkably as a taught action thriller. Bale and Crowe, two favorites, amaze as expected. I was also pleasantly surprised and disturbed simultaneously by a relatively unknown Ben Foster. Add to that a great selection of laughably quotable lines and you have a great, Oscar-worthy start to the fall movie season. Expand
  74. BradC
    Sep 7, 2007
    9
    Great Western. Really engaging. Crowe is outstanding!
  75. ChrisN.
    Sep 7, 2007
    10
    the best hollywood remake in many years! do you self a favor and go see this tonight.
  76. RitB
    Sep 8, 2007
    6
    This is a great movie --- except for the last 20 minutes. When the movie ended I looked at the faces of my fellow movie goers as they exited and they all looked as confused as me. The ending was very exciting but also improbable and unbelievable. This movie could have been on par with High Noon if it had a better ending.
  77. JulieT.
    Sep 8, 2007
    10
    Hooray for the Western!!!! It's about time. Great cast and stellar performances in what could only be called a 'classic' film in the western genre.
  78. RogerD.
    Sep 8, 2007
    2
    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!
  79. ChrisA
    Sep 8, 2007
    10
    Great film. Great acting, great direction. This movie had the whole audience entranced and excited. Bale is a master of the acting skill and Crowe is superb. This is the best Western in a very very long time.
  80. JonathanF.
    Sep 8, 2007
    7
    How Roger Ebert gave this 4 stars I will never understand. It wasn't that great.
  81. DickD.
    Sep 9, 2007
    9
    An exceptionally well-crafted, old-fashioned Western, in the very best sense of the term. All roles are beautifully acted, and there's stellar work in all departments, right down to the music over the closing credits!,
  82. DougN.
    Sep 9, 2007
    8
    More than just another western.
  83. MikeN
    Sep 9, 2007
    6
    One liners were a hit every time. Whether being gut shot or burned alive, people were just tougher in the old west. Apparently even cold blooded killers have hearts of gold. I did see some people reload, so I do have to give props there. If you
  84. EdD.
    Jan 22, 2008
    3
    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 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
  85. MickG
    Jan 27, 2008
    4
    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 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
  86. TruthB.
    Jan 28, 2008
    0
    Terrible, This movie makes me sick. 3:10 to disloyalty.
  87. FrankM.
    Feb 13, 2008
    9
    Good old fashion western with a great story and really good acting by all.
  88. JaredB.
    Feb 16, 2008
    9
    I had heard a lot about this movie, and have wanted to buy it for a while. My dad just picked it up. It was worth the money. Until the halfway point, my rating would have been a 5 at the highest, because it moved so slow. But, in the second half, this movie picked up momentum. It started to become what I have come to expect from westerns, that is, full of action and some serious I had heard a lot about this movie, and have wanted to buy it for a while. My dad just picked it up. It was worth the money. Until the halfway point, my rating would have been a 5 at the highest, because it moved so slow. But, in the second half, this movie picked up momentum. It started to become what I have come to expect from westerns, that is, full of action and some serious shootouts. I also didn't like some of the modern touches they put into the script, namely having two F-bombs dropped almost back-to-back. In spite of the slow pace, if they had left this out, my rating would have been a 10. Expand
  89. DSBelievin
    Feb 2, 2008
    0
    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 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
  90. PaulB.
    Feb 7, 2008
    10
    Terrific acting. Unique story of two characters with completely different perspectives coming to respect each other.
  91. BobL.
    Mar 24, 2008
    2
    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 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
  92. Aaron
    Apr 1, 2008
    2
    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.
  93. CoryG
    Apr 13, 2008
    9
    Acting was great, but I think we are done with Western movies nowadays.
  94. TubbyS
    Apr 16, 2008
    4
    Clever story, good acting, solid themes; but, too many glitches. The film oozes unbelievability from start to finish.
  95. GabeK
    Jul 12, 2008
    1
    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.
  96. Keith
    Sep 3, 2008
    8
    Why does no one seem to get the end of this movie? Ben jumps on the train to make a hero out of Dan to his son, all the while knowing he can well escape a prison he's escaped twice before. He no longer needed his men, and, after meeting someone as incorruptible as Dan, took his vengeance on them for Dan's murder. This movie is excellent and absolutely took my breath away!
  97. ShogoL
    Nov 8, 2007
    10
    Great acting from Bale and Crowe, they play their roles perfectly, so that you can see the way the two men calculate each other as they travel together. The supporting cast is also extremely well done, and the musical score is very fitting and hits some pretty epic highs at points. The story itself has been fleshed out a lot over the original 1957, with new characters and more detailed Great acting from Bale and Crowe, they play their roles perfectly, so that you can see the way the two men calculate each other as they travel together. The supporting cast is also extremely well done, and the musical score is very fitting and hits some pretty epic highs at points. The story itself has been fleshed out a lot over the original 1957, with new characters and more detailed imaginings of old ones. The best change they made to the plot, in my opinion, is extending the journey to Contention with a lot more action and suspense. This really make the final scenes, which have also been added on to very nicely, all the more exciting because there is much more of a buildup. I enjoyed the original, but it was not an incredible movie. THIS 3:10 to yuma, however, is. Worth buying or renting once the dvd is out. This is one to watch on the biggest screen possible (some of the landscapes are gorgeous). Expand
  98. MartinZ.
    Oct 26, 2007
    4
    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 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
  99. JamesL.
    Sep 11, 2007
    4
    [***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 [***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. Collapse
  100. HerbF.
    Sep 12, 2007
    1
    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 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
Metascore
76

Generally favorable reviews - based on 37 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 35 out of 37
  2. Negative: 0 out of 37
  1. This is how a Western today tries to give us more bang for the buck. By working this hard to be a crowd-pleaser, though, it may please fewer crowds.
  2. A largely compelling ride on the strength of a powerful cast led by Russell Crowe and Christian Bale.
  3. 80
    In this movie, Fonda really is iconic. 3:10 to Yuma may be familiar, but, at its best, it has a rapt quality, even an aura of wonder.