Rating of
3/4
Could have occured in any time period
Alex - wrote on 02/15/08
The western genre is one of my favorite genres. But, it is unfortunate that they don't make them like they used to. This one is no exception (though it is still a good movie). What made westerns great was the ruggard terain, the true struggle to survive and the scenery/atmosphere. Almost every western made in the last 30 years fails on most of these counts. 3:10 is no exception.
The story is great. The acting is on par, but nothing really makes it a western. It could have taken place in the 70's 80's or even made it into a sci fi on another planet. None of the costumes or characters looked too rugged or dirty. None of the characters were desperate enough. The scenery was also not all that great (though there were some good shots). I think that if you were to combine the story line/flow/acting of 3:10 and the scenery/atmosphere/music of "Jesse James" you would have the best western of the last 25 years. Instead, we are left with a good movie that is no different than any western to come out.
What I liked about this movie was the characters. Russel Crowe does a great job - in almost his reverse roll of his other Western (The Quick and the Dead), and bale does ok as a wounded farmer. The story was also good. It had some interesting twists and turns that make you begin to like all characters. So, it was a good movie.
The only other down side was that there were too many cheesy poorly written one liners or scenes. One character gets shot in the most predictable way. Then in some scenes it's as if the characters remembered they were being shot at. Anyway, good enjoyable movie that I will watch again - but it could have been better.
