I didn't realise Russell Crowe's 3:10 to Yuma was a remake, so I got this out to compare the two - a little bit dated but still worth a viewing as Glenn Ford is always brilliant to watch as is Van Heflin a great movie at any time.
Perfect Sunday afternoon fare. Glenn Ford turns on the charm as a notorious villain caught by a bunch of bumbling Western types led by struggling farmer Van Heflin. The gimmick is that Heflin will get the $200 he needs to bring water to his land if he can escort Ford to the train station (going to Yuma) without losing him or getting killed by his 12-man gang. Good gimmick and keeps the film ticking away at a tense pace. (I'm not interested in the Russell Crowe remake).
This is the original version of the successful and excellent 2007 remake with Russell Crowe and Christian Bale.
In black and white with a somewhat dated and cheesy song to introduce it this film is a great western. In essence the story is the same as the Russell Crowe version but this does not mean that having seen one you can miss the other. This is a film of its time. It has a slow pace and gives more room for contemplation. This slowness combined with some lovely black and white cinematography reflects the isolation and mundanity of much of life in the West far better than the more exciting and immediate 2007 remake. This sense of space and slower tempo makes the psychological interplay between Glenn Ford and Van Heflin more of a focus. Glenn Ford is excellent and the film builds well to an interesting if not fully satisfying finish. In true western tradition this film explores the code and courage of good and bad men in tough situations. Clearly the film comes out with a tick for the hard working family man who risks all to stick to his principles but it does so without painting the characters as simply black and white. Van Heflin comes out a hero but his motivation for doing so leaves some doubt as to the source of his heroism, true grit or desperation. Glenn Ford starts as the bad guy, charms you and finishes the film with a show of ethics that hints(or not) at redemption.
This is worth a look both in its own right and, in conjunction with the remake, as an interesting comparison of film making then and now.
The tension between the farmer and the outlaw in the hotel room awaiting the train is as good as anything like it. It beats computer graphics and stuntmen hands down. Exceptional film.
Not a bad flick considering its vintage. A worthwhile story, quite good acting, etc. If vintage films are your thing, worth a watch.
A better than average Western which concentrates more on character than action. While the remake has a harder edge, the original is more memorable in its innocence. 3.5 stars
Why did they bother with a remake? This well-shot B W western has a crisp story-line and good acting. Glenn Ford does a better job of the Ben Wade character than Russell Crowe although hats off to Christian Bale's turn - a lot grittier than Van Heflin's.
One of the classic Westerns of all time. Its 1950's, in black and white, and no special effects.
Just a great story, acting beyond compare, and class all the way. Frankie Laine is the icing on the cake!! Nobody sings western songs like Mr. Laine.
I wanted to watch this original movie before I saw the remake and I am glad I did. Glenn Ford plays a baddie for a change, but he still comes across smooth. Not too much violence, but more of a mindgame between the two main characters. Good western, with more than a touch of High Noon.
Good first time around OK this time but there won't be a 3rd time
An excellent Western starring
Glenn Ford. What a great actor. Good story line. It was even better because it was in black & white.