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. Mar 6, 2015
    4
    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 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 moviesFun 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
  2. Feb 10, 2015
    5
    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 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 onlySuch 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
  3. Jan 2, 2015
    4
    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'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 fightI 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
  4. Aug 25, 2014
    7
    Christian Bale and Russell Crowe make a very good game in this one, and surprisingly (being no fan of his), Crowe is honestly the most symphatetic character in the end.

    The characters move, shift, and evolve through the movie, but still in the end it isn't quite clear why exactly Wade (Crowe) does what he does. Maybe he knows he has nothing to lose? A real movie with great scenery,
    Christian Bale and Russell Crowe make a very good game in this one, and surprisingly (being no fan of his), Crowe is honestly the most symphatetic character in the end.

    The characters move, shift, and evolve through the movie, but still in the end it isn't quite clear why exactly Wade (Crowe) does what he does. Maybe he knows he has nothing to lose?

    A real movie with great scenery, sounds, and acting.
    Expand
  5. Apr 19, 2014
    8
    Really good film here. Christian Bale and Russell Crowe turn in reliably great performances here, but the real star of this show for me was Ben Foster. From the moment he entered the picture, he began staking his claim as the actor with the best performance in this film. His performance honestly floored me and, while he clearly defined himself as the antagonist and pure evil, I could notReally good film here. Christian Bale and Russell Crowe turn in reliably great performances here, but the real star of this show for me was Ben Foster. From the moment he entered the picture, he began staking his claim as the actor with the best performance in this film. His performance honestly floored me and, while he clearly defined himself as the antagonist and pure evil, I could not help but root for him to some very small degree. Beyond the acting, the action was really well done and, throughout, the suspense and intensity of those situations and the non-action sequences were definite pros for this film. The characterization of everybody was very well done as well. The film was just two hours, but managed to go into shocking detail on all of the major players and that really impressed me. Another pro was the sets, costumes, and cinematography. All of those worked really well to encapsulate the time period and the cinematography really provided some "classic Western shots" that were as beautiful as always. I really have a thing for the cinematography in westerns and this one is a great example of that beauty. Finally, the ending was suitably tragic and, yet, oddly uplifting at times, which really made it all the more effective as we saw the end of every character's arc and it really leaves you feel satisfied. Expand
  6. Feb 24, 2014
    3
    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
  7. Feb 16, 2014
    6
    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
  8. Nov 13, 2013
    6
    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.
  9. Sep 23, 2013
    9
    I didn't think I was a fan of western films until I saw this one. One of those rare remakes where you're glad they made it. Bale, Crowe and Foster brought something new and original to the table. The casting was perfect. Bale plays a destitute rancher, Evans, bringing Crowe's Wade to justice while being chased by Wade's gang led by Foster's Prince. So begins a capricious journey to hellI didn't think I was a fan of western films until I saw this one. One of those rare remakes where you're glad they made it. Bale, Crowe and Foster brought something new and original to the table. The casting was perfect. Bale plays a destitute rancher, Evans, bringing Crowe's Wade to justice while being chased by Wade's gang led by Foster's Prince. So begins a capricious journey to hell and back again. These men played their characters with absolute dedication and the result was a gun slinging drama matched by none of the other movies in the genre. I found myself rooting for all of them. Wade isn't such a brute as he would have us believe. I also applauded Prince for his unwavering loyalty to his boss. But the show stealer was the one-legged conflicted Evans who served as the moral compass of the movie. The length was just right and the movie did not drag at all. The cinematography was commendable, and the score was engaging. I thoroughly recommend it. Expand
  10. Aug 18, 2013
    5
    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 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 andIt 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
  11. Aug 5, 2013
    7
    3:10 to Yuma 7/10.....................................................................................................................................
  12. Mar 6, 2013
    7
    To begin, this film is a pretty decent western. I thoroughly enjoyed it up until the end. You can see it coming from a mile away and kind of ruins the movie. But besides that I think this is a pretty good movie. Also the antagonists choices near the end kind of confused me but whatever, it's still a nice experience.
  13. Dec 10, 2012
    5
    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 trying to make some good. Very slow paced and not as much action as expected.
  14. Nov 28, 2012
    9
    A well-acted, visually fascinating western drama crafted by the hands of James Mangold. "3:10 To Yuma" is an intense film generated by themes surrounding the ideas of agricultural hardships, good and evil, and doing the right thing. Although the ending isn't particularly satisfying, I felt it was fairly appropriate in relation to the subject matter presented in the rest of the film.A well-acted, visually fascinating western drama crafted by the hands of James Mangold. "3:10 To Yuma" is an intense film generated by themes surrounding the ideas of agricultural hardships, good and evil, and doing the right thing. Although the ending isn't particularly satisfying, I felt it was fairly appropriate in relation to the subject matter presented in the rest of the film. Overall, "3:10 To Yuma" is good stuff. Expand
  15. Sep 5, 2012
    8
    A superb western that has a perfect blend of drama and action that should keep anyone entertained and engaged. Great cast, good acting and overall a great film.
  16. Apr 15, 2012
    8
    A tribute to western movies,great perfomance's and directing,fast paced and a wonderful cast with Cristian Balle and Russell Crowe,a worth seeing movie with lot twist and turns
  17. 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
  18. 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
  19. 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
  20. 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
  21. Aug 15, 2011
    10
    Amazing movie. Alot of action in it, really lives up to a wild west movie. Had interesting characters, great actors. Twisting moments that would set you amaze at what just happened throughout it. The end was shocking, and somewhat confusing, (spoilers!) but if you understood the ending, it was rewarding. Seeing the horse follow the train at the end makes you no doubt think of what happenedAmazing movie. Alot of action in it, really lives up to a wild west movie. Had interesting characters, great actors. Twisting moments that would set you amaze at what just happened throughout it. The end was shocking, and somewhat confusing, (spoilers!) but if you understood the ending, it was rewarding. Seeing the horse follow the train at the end makes you no doubt think of what happened afterwards. If you're into Wild west movies, this is a movie you must NOT miss. A true Hollywood movie! Expand
  22. Jun 12, 2011
    7
    This movie actually surprised me a lot. I didn't have very high hopes but after seeing the movie it was actually pretty darn good. The only things I didn't like were a couple of the explosions. I am not sure but I think its kind of hard to hit a bag of explosives from a moving stagecoach while they are attached to a running horse. Also may be very difficult to hit a falling stick ofThis movie actually surprised me a lot. I didn't have very high hopes but after seeing the movie it was actually pretty darn good. The only things I didn't like were a couple of the explosions. I am not sure but I think its kind of hard to hit a bag of explosives from a moving stagecoach while they are attached to a running horse. Also may be very difficult to hit a falling stick of dynamite from your moving horse. I also didn't know you that shooting a stick of dynamite would make it blow up. Other then that the acting was great and the plot flowed nicely. Overall a great movie. Expand
  23. Jun 9, 2011
    6
    Beautifully filmed! This one has a really great look to it on screen. Russell Crowe is great as ever, and Christian Bale gives a good one as well. Still, I found this film slow and tedious. Several parts of the film work, but still something didn't feel right. If you want a lackluster, medium-low grade western, this is for you.
  24. 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
  25. 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.
  26. 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.
  27. 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
  28. 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
  29. 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
  30. 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!
  31. 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.
  32. TubbyS
    Apr 16, 2008
    4
    Clever story, good acting, solid themes; but, too many glitches. The film oozes unbelievability from start to finish.
  33. CoryG
    Apr 13, 2008
    9
    Acting was great, but I think we are done with Western movies nowadays.
  34. 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.
  35. 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
  36. 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
  37. 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
  38. ChrisG.
    Mar 8, 2008
    10
    Excellent movie. If you like complex characters in a story then this one's for you.
  39. 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.
  40. LarryB.
    Feb 25, 2008
    1
    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 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
  41. 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
  42. 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.
  43. 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
  44. 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
  45. 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
  46. FrankM.
    Feb 13, 2008
    9
    Good old fashion western with a great story and really good acting by all.
  47. AlexB
    Feb 12, 2008
    0
    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.
  48. 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
  49. PaulB.
    Feb 7, 2008
    10
    Terrific acting. Unique story of two characters with completely different perspectives coming to respect each other.
  50. 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!!!
  51. BB
    Feb 3, 2008
    7
    Great acting and a good story.
  52. 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
  53. 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.
  54. 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
  55. TomS
    Jan 29, 2008
    2
    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 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
  56. TruthB.
    Jan 28, 2008
    0
    Terrible, This movie makes me sick. 3:10 to disloyalty.
  57. 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
  58. 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
  59. 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
  60. 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
  61. 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
  62. 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
  63. 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.
  64. 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. Collapse
  65. KarenW.
    Oct 22, 2007
    8
    A lot of violence, but awesome performances. Grabs hold of your emotions. The Western is back!
  66. 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.
  67. 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
  68. 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
  69. 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."
  70. 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?
  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. EllenS.
    Sep 27, 2007
    7
    I enjoyed the film, mostly because of the dynamite interaction between Russull Crowe and Christain Bale. And it has that moral ambiguity that always makes Westerns intriguing -- the bad guys show glimmers of humanity, and the good guys are willing to to change sides for money. The ending was perplexing but this is a Western after all: movie vigilante justice doesn't always make sense.
  73. SusanS.
    Sep 26, 2007
    6
    Okay, so maybe like a 6.75. I'll be the first to admit that I went to see this movie only because it was advertised as a western with Christian Bale, both of which I love. I did enjoy this movie a good bit, but also found it too predictable (even beyond my large tolerance of predictability) and preachy, and much of the dialog was just wretched. Fortunately, there's not much Okay, so maybe like a 6.75. I'll be the first to admit that I went to see this movie only because it was advertised as a western with Christian Bale, both of which I love. I did enjoy this movie a good bit, but also found it too predictable (even beyond my large tolerance of predictability) and preachy, and much of the dialog was just wretched. Fortunately, there's not much dialog. The landscape was beautiful (the plains of "Arizona"), and the acting was more than passable--Bale and Russell Crowe do their jobs well, and most of the supporting cast were enjoyable, particularly Ben Foster as Charlie Prince. I wish the morals of the movie had remained more ambiguous, like in old westerns, but I guess that doesn't happen anymore in big budget Hollywood. Not a bad way to spend two hours, but don't spend the ten dollars to see it--wait till the dollar theater, or if you've got a large flat-screen, for the DVD. Expand
  74. 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!!!!!!
  75. 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)?
  76. [Anonymous]
    Sep 24, 2007
    6
    The ending made no sense at all.
  77. Orson
    Sep 23, 2007
    3
    "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 "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
  78. DS.
    Sep 23, 2007
    3
    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 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
  79. 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
  80. DoyleO.
    Sep 22, 2007
    9
    All the best of a classic western, with great performances.
  81. JaredC.
    Sep 22, 2007
    8
    3:10 to Yuma is surely a Western classic. Russell Crowe and Christian Bale had amazing performances and the movie itself will no doubt become the best Western movie of the 21st Century. Which also includes the song "They're gonna hang ya in the morinin," that song will surely become a humorous classic.
  82. ChaquitaKid
    Sep 21, 2007
    3
    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.
  83. EricS.
    Sep 20, 2007
    9
    Simply good...don't go further! Classic western, efficient and true! A must see for all western lovers!
  84. 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
  85. Alex
    Sep 17, 2007
    9
    Really good movie! Great acting from Russell Crowe and Christian Bale which are without a doubt the best male actors of our time.
  86. 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.
  87. MySelf
    Sep 17, 2007
    8
    Loved it x3. This is exactly what movies are supposed to be: totally entertaining. All the characters had some substance, the story was a classic western. Cool also because the antagonist is sympathetic. Ciao.
  88. 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!
  89. 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
  90. StuA.
    Sep 16, 2007
    2
    Poor movie - too long - boring - simplistic plot.
  91. StaceyM.
    Sep 16, 2007
    9
    Revived my faith in Westerns as a genre.
  92. 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.
  93. 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.
  94. JudyT.
    Sep 15, 2007
    4
    What was the point? A really bad TV episode of a B-rated western.
  95. 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?
  96. GerryK.
    Sep 15, 2007
    1
    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
  97. NickA.
    Sep 15, 2007
    8
    A remade version of the
  98. 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.
  99. 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
  100. 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.
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.