MovieChat Forums > 3:10 to Yuma (2007) Discussion > The ending was better in the original.

The ending was better in the original.


The original ending was better and made more sense. The whole reason why Dan Evens took the job was because he was poor, poor because of a drought. At the end he shoots his way to the train gets the bad guy on it and he is set for a fat pay cheque, then it starts to rain and it's a massive double win. Great success.

...no 6 pint of beer and 7 bottles, and you know what? I'm not even pissed.

reply

agree, better.

reply

Have forgotten, how did original end?

reply

Absolutely.

"It's a hard country, kid."

reply

The ending was better in the original


I disagree. The original ending was a good-but-quaint "good ending" whereas the climax in the remake is deeper. Actually, the whole movie's deeper, not to mention has way more action and is IN COLOR. See my thread "Explanation..." for details: https://moviechat.org/tt0381849/310-to-Yuma/5af36a378ea65c00145e0c1d/Explanation-based-on-obvious-clues-in-the-film-SPOILERS.

reply

[deleted]

"..has way more action and is IN COLOR."

Wow, two things that don't contribute to a movie being better.

reply

You'll notice I said "deeper" first, followed by "not to mention has way more action and is IN COLOR."

And, generally speaking, color does make a movie better, which is why 99.99% of movies released are IN COLOR. B&W, by contrast, offers a visually flat experience. Audiences understandably much prefer color and producers know it.

As far as action goes, we're talking about the genre of the Western where action (of the Western style) is a staple. This doesn't mean character development and compelling drama take a back seat. Actually they improve the action and make it more meaningful.

reply