A Worthy Remake

(090607) It's impossible to tell (and irrelevant, too) whether James Mangold's remake of the classic Western "3:10 to Yuma" was deliberately planned to coincide with the 50th anniversary of the original, also titled "3:10 to Yuma," one of the best psychological (they were called "adult" at the time) Westerns of the 1950s, driven by taut plot and strong characterization. Though considered Delmer Daves' best directorial effort, the 1957 "3:10 to Yuma" doesn't have the comparable prestige in film history that other Westerns of the era, such as "The Gunfighter" (1950), "High Noon" (1952) and "Rio Bravo" (1959) have, perhaps because its director was not on the same league as Henry King, Fred Zinnemann, and Howard Hawks, respectively. More importantly, the original oater stars Glenn Ford and Van Heflin in the leads, all skillful actors but, again, lacking the pedigree of Gregory Peck, Gary Copper, and John Wayne, in the three aforementioned films.

All that is changed with the arrival of James Mangold's follow-up to his critically acclaimed, commercial hit musical biopic (about the Man in Black Johnny Cash), "Walk the Line," for which Reese Witherspoon received the Best Actress Oscar.

A combination of a well-structured scenario, that more or less follows the source material, Elmore Leonard's acclaimed short story, Mangold's taut direction (his craftsmanship continues to improve), and most important of all, the casting of two of the most appealing stars and finest actors working today, Russell Crowe and Christian Bale, immediately positions the "3:10 to Yuma" as an A Western. With some luck and box-office success, the film might revitalize a quintessentially American genre that's been all but dead in contemporary Hollywood.

With a sharply detailed script, credited to Halsted Welles, Michael Brandt, and Derek Haas, Mangold's version doesn't so much reinvent the genre, as taking the good elements (which were plentiful in the 1957 film) and bringing them up-to-date, specifically in terms of characterization, a more cynical mood, and different denouement that will please some while frustrate the more purist critics and viewers.

Though Crow and Bale, who are playing the roles of Glenn Ford and Van Heflin, respectively, inhabit the same basic parts of an infamous outlaw and the struggling rancher who volunteers to deliver him to justice, Mangold's version lacks the more allegorical dimensions of the original film, which was a biblical parable of good and evil, replete with mythical rains that terminate the terrible drought at the end of that picture.

That said, Mangold and his writers offer a gritty depiction of life in the Old West, plunging the viewers from the very first frame into a landscape of hastily constructed towns and mean self-interest at the dawning of the transcontinental railroad. It combines intense physical action with sharply honed character drama in delivering a supremely satisfying, thoroughly modern entertainment.

Bale plays Dan Evans, an honest man who has spent his life abiding by the rules, but has little to show. A former Union Army sharpshooter, Dan came out of the Civil War with a hobbled leg and a small compensation that allowed him to move his wife Alice (Gretchen Mol) and two sons to a modest ranch in the Arizona territory. However, hopes of a new beginning quickly fade amidst the harsh conditions and rampant corruption of the West. An ongoing drought renders Dan's land barren and decimates his herd, driving him deeper into debt and leaving his family on the brink of starvation.

The ranch's deed-holder, recognizing an opportunity in the coming railroad, attempts to drive the Evans clan off their property. Though time is running out, Dan continues to be a believer, stoically working his land, hoping for his luck to change. In other words, a man of honor, Dan refuses to descend to the level of his tormentors.

The dreary economic conditions—-literally a survival issue—-and few perceived prospects for the future exert a negative effect on his family and on his self-perception of a "real man." Dan is painfully aware that he is losing the respect of his oldest son, Will (Logan Lerman), a teenager who thrills to the adventures of the bandits and villains he has been reading about in popular dime novels of the Wild West. Son Will increasingly views his father with contempt, and even his mom Alice begins to question her husband's stubborn resolve.

Opportunity knocks on the Dan's door with the capture of notorious outlaw Ben Wade (Crowe), whose violent hold-ups and roguish persona are already the stuff of legend. Brilliant strategist and natural-born leader, Wade commands loyalty from his band of thug, particularly second-in-command, the ruthless Charlie Prince (Ben Foster). Wade and his baddies have run roughshod over the Southern Pacific Railroad, making off with lots of money and the killing of several men over during a dozen robberies.

Arresting Wade is first and easiest step in bringing him to justice. In a situation similar to that of "Rio Bravo," from the moment he is taken into custody in Bisbee, those guarding him are vulnerable to attack from his gang.

Mangold then introduces a gallery of secondary characters. Southern Pacific Railroad representative Grayson Butterfield (Dallas Roberts) seeks paid volunteers to join the posse aimed at taking Wade to Contention (good name for a town that would justify its reputation), a three-day journey. One in Contention, Wade will be loaded onto a train with a prison car, bound for Yuma, where there is a Federal Court (hence the title).

Desperate and seizing the opportunity to save his ranch and his family, Dan accepts the $200 fee and joins a group that will deliver Wade on to the 3: 10 train to Yuma prison. Leading the expedition is veteran bounty hunter Byron McElroy (Peter Fonda), a God-fearing mercenary, motivated by relentless hatred of Wade.

Perfectly cast as the bad-good (anti) hero, Crowe shows that even when he shackled, he's still lethal threat and badass. Beneath the charming, attractive façade, there is an intelligent and perceptive survivor who knows how to manipulate and exploit the slightest glimmer of human weakness to his advantage. A man of action, when Wade sees an opportunity to escape or retaliate, he grabs it. Manipulative schemes work up to a point: When Wade offers Dan more money and set him free (he's hand-cuffed for most of the yarn), the rancher, still maintaining some sense of decency, flatly declines.

The film's mid-section depicts in detail the perilous three-day journey to Contention, where encounters posse of both good and bad men. As the conflict becomes more intense, and their number dwindles, Dan begins to rediscover reserves of strengths he thought had been lost.

Following generic conventions, Dan becomes committed to execute justice and fights to complete the mission—at all costs. With the clock ticking down, as he did so effectively in "High Noon," with all concerned waiting for the arrival of the train, Mangold prepares us for a bloody shootout that occupies a good 10 minutes or so.

Also predictable is the growing camaraderie between the two men, who were initially enemies. With time in their hands, and locked in one room waiting for the train's whistle, the two thespians rise to the occasion and begin to share episodes and secrets from their past, making some unexpected confessions.

We have seen it before, and yet the dialogue is so crisp (often poignant and even touching), the mise-en-scene (with plenty of close-ups in intimate scenes, both exterior and interior) so precise, and the acing so accomplished, that we are easily immersed in the one-reel repartee as we witness two men, initially from opposite ends of the moral spectrum, take one another's measure, learn from one another, and eventually find unexpected kinship, leading to intimate camaraderie.

Surprisingly, Mangold the director doesn't magnify the train's whistle as it approaches Contention. The last act deviates from the original in ways that can't be disclosed. Suffice is to say that Dan Evans' last-ditch attempt to save his ranch—and honor—turns into something deeper and more profound. Risking his life in an effort to redeem himself, in his family's eyes and his own, he regains the desirable self-respect, teaching in the process his son Will what's the true meaning of honor, justice, and manhood.

As director, Mangold's greatest achievement is his mixture of a good, classic Western saga with some modernist touches. There's no doubt that the lingo, dark humor, and cynicism, not to speak of visual style, that define this"3:10 to Yuma" are a reflection of our zeitgeist rather than that of the Old West, in myth or reality.

Russell Crowe is back in top form, excelling is words as well as actions. Crowe navigates smoothly between the rougher and more sensitive dimensions of his richly detailed part; ultimately, the scenario favors him with snappy lines, though, to be honest, it's always easier to play the good-heavy than the good-good guy, burdened with morality and earnest speeches about family and honor.

The enormously gifted Christian Bale again proves that he is versatile and blessed with a range that allows him to do any role (even psychopathic killers as in "American Psycho") in any genre, be they period drams, comic-strip sagas ("Batman Begins"), adventures (most recently in Herzog's "Rescue Dawn") and now Westerns.

As scripted and performed, ultimately, Crowe and Bale represents two sides of manhood, suggesting that the ideal man is one that combines the best traits of each man. One of the year’s very best.