MovieChat Forums > 3:10 to Yuma (2007) Discussion > [Rant] Inconsistencies and stupidities m...

[Rant] Inconsistencies and stupidities made me reconsider this movie

posted 13 years ago by seven-rchristie
74 replies | jump to latest

OK. Let me make a little confession. First time I watched it, I liked the movie. So maybe I wasn't too bright. But after reading around a bit, I agree with most of the posters, the plot holes, inconsistencies, plain stupidities made me reconsider my feelings toward this movie. This is a good story done in a very bad manner. Great concept, lousy execution. I don't just want emotions and character development (which is done incorrectly either), I want a REAL PLOT that is believable.

Here are the list of things that made me reconsider:

1) THE CAPTORS DOESN'T SEEM TO WANT TO PACIFY WADE AT ALL

They handcuffs this man hands at the front of his body, not the back. This is plain stupid. We have a man who is an infamous bandit. He robbed 21 coaches and killed lots of people. And you cuff his hands at the front so he can kill people, take a gun and aim them. There are **hundreds** of ways to pacify this guy. How stupid were the captors?

- Handcuff his hands on the back. Have him tied to the horse (face down, tummy to the saddle) and have one man take the horse with him (while also riding a horse).
- Blindfold him.
- Gag his mouth so he wouldn't speak.

After he KILLED one of the captors, are we to believe that the sheriffs at the wild west era are pansies that just hit him?

- Shoot off his fingers
- Shoot off one of his leg
- Again, cuff this guy on the back

We are to believe that law enforcement people that are SMART enough to make a stagecoach bait are not smart enough to cuff this guys hand at the back. Heck, tie ropes all around him and his legs for that matter.

2) WE HAVE A MAN WHO IS MOST DEFINITELY WANTED DEAD OR ALIVE. YES, LET'S TAKE HIM TO YUMA WHERE THERE IS GREAT CHANCE THAT HE WILL ESCAPE AND WE WILL GET KILLED BY THE BANDITS. NO DON'T KILL HIM HERE AND NOW.

We are to believe that law enforcement at wild west are all corrupt, yet one of them believes in court and the law so strongly that he doesn't execute a man on the spot. It's like the law enforcement are all modern politically correct liberal lefties somehow transported to the wild west by some time machine (no wonder all of them are pansies and can't hold a gun, let alone aim them).

At one point, the *beep* law enforcer (that burned the barn) once said 'I say we shoot him right here right now' - NO REPLIES. Yes. That's right, THERE IS NO REASON NOT TO KILL HIM RIGHT THERE RIGHT NOW.

Remember. *This* *is* *the* *wild* *west*. Ever heard of the term 'Wanted dead or alive'?

3) WE OFFER $200 DOLLARS FOR EVERYBODY THAT KILLS A LAW ENFORCEMENT GUARD. YES, $200 FOR ALL OF YOU TO BE AN OUTLAW. AND THE WHOLE CITY FALLS FOR IT (30-40 PEOPLE)

*This* *is* *the* *wild* *west*. And this is the south. Citizens have guns. They loath bandits. It wasn't a small, obscure pirate's cove. It's an effing budding town with railroads. In a time and place where citizens have to fend for themselves against bandits, the whole town chooses to be an accessory to the crime, support the bandits and kill the sheriffs. I agree with they guy that said it, this is like osama bin laden offering 30,000-100,000 dollars to new york citizens to kill a cop - GUARDING AN EFFING TERRORIST.

I'll say no more and quote this amzing post by 32Ford:

You forgot to mention the dumbest part. We are supposed to believe a gang of 7 o outlaws with prices on their heads can ride into a town and sit around in the open on their horses and threaten the town Marshall? In the real west it would have taken about 3 minutes for the towns people to shoot them off their horses and then pose smiling for photos with the bodies while they wait for the reward money to come rolling in.

On top of that,we are supposed to believe one of the gang can shout out to the town that he will pay anybody 200 dollars each for each of the guards they murder,and the people in the town start grabbing their guns to go shoot the deputies and Marshall?

I am a BIG fan of Elmore Leonard,but if he wrote this script he had to have been smoking some super weed when he wrote it because it may be the dumbest damn thing I have ever seen.

4) WE HAVE 7 - YES -SEVEN PEOPLE DOWN BELOW, OMG WE ARE SO AFRAID. SO LET THE BANDIT GO OUT AND SPEAK TO THEM - THE MOST STUPID THING EVER IMAGINED. OH YES, AND DON'T SHOOT THE BANDITS BELOW EITHER.

How many IQs do you have to have, that you keep your prisoner's mouth stuffed rather than let him talk to his homeboys? They don't effing know for sure that he's at the motel for crying out loud.

Have you ever realized why the 7 guys waited instead of just storming inside?

1. The law enforcement guy have height and cover.
2. They are afraid of shooting because they might shoot their boss that they're trying to save. Why do you think they sit down and wait instead of going in?

And the seven guys there, in plain sight, the guys could have separated to different rooms with different vantage points, and starts shooting the below. In *the* *wild* *west* the marshal surrenders. Pathetic. You don't get to be marshals for being pansies, you get to be marshals for being tough.

5) LAW ENFORCEMENT CAN'T SHOOT.

Look, I know bandits at the *wild* *west* are tough. Marshals and sheriffs and bounty hunters and yes, even regular citizens, they are all tough too. In this movie, only bandits can shoot. The others are either afraid of shooting or have allergies with guns. Remember the holdup at the hotel. *No* *bullets* *fired*.

---

Now, the movie has an interesting concept - that the honest-to-the-core bale character could affect wade and his worldview, that they grow together as a character - but it was crudely made. If there was a change of heart in wade's character, it wasn't shown in words, expressions, or any kind of body language. Wade in this movie, let me stress this, is CONSTANTLY CONSISTENT. That's what made the sudden change of heart in the end quite unbelievable.

Many posters made interesting theories on how bale-character influence wade. I appreciate that, it shows some depth in the concept, however it's just not well made. It made this movie a disappointment.

/end rant

[–] Lost_Woods87 11 years ago

Thanks for the heads up that this was a rant. Otherwise I would have read the title and mistaken this post for an intellectual thought.

[–] alexcool79 11 years ago

You know this is a movie right? Not real, get it?

I can't think of something that will make you remember my quote.

[–] wwiisgttom 11 years ago

First off I really enjoyed this film. I will have to say Even's and the rest were held up in the hotel Wade's 7 men were out in the open. Evans and his guys had the high ground. They could have got in a few clear shots and taken at least a few guys out. What the heck were they waiting for an invitation?

How poorly they secured Wade can't really be excused either.

[–] mgtbltp 11 years ago

Yes watch more Westerns this was beyond stupid.

quote from dave jenkins:

The gang rides into town and sets up under the hotel window from which five armed men are overwatching. The gang are murderers, wanted men, known to law enforcement officers. The men in the hotel room include three peace officers. They have every legal and moral right to open up on the gang as soon as they appear. They also have the advantage of higher ground. No additional advantage can be gained by delaying. It is the height of idiocy that the men in the hotel room don't immediately start firing on the gang below! Further, even if they were to delay, the moment the gang starts offering the 200 dollar bounty the lawmen would begin firing just to shut the men up and discourage takers. But the men in the hotel room are completely passive. Yet this is just one stupidity in a sequence of hundreds in this stupid movie.

Equally stupid things happen on the trail from the farm to Contention. The group leaves at night, under cover of darkness. Presumably, speed and concealment are the two things the party is most concerned with. In the very next scene, however, we see them lounging about by a campfire. Why have they stopped? They want to make time, and they should want to do it in the dark. Also, stopping means having to put a watch on Wade while the others sleep. For some reason, Wade is allowed freedom of movement throughout the night (his manacled hands aren't much inconvenienced). Then, only one man is left to watch the notorious killer (a union rule?). In the morning, the watchman is dead. Incredibly, the men just write him off and proceed with their journey! All psychological plausibility goes out of the movie at that point. If you are traveling with a murderer, and he murders one of your company, you just don't continue on with the status quo ante. You reassess the situation. In the present case, you realize that getting the guy to Yuma may not be do-able, that even with your full crew it was gonna be tough, but now with one man short it is likely impossible. The guy who decided Wade had to go to Yuma (and who is bankrolling the expedition) is along, and therefore should call an audible. Even if he doesn't, the rest of the crew should prevail upon him to change the terms of the expedition. They should realize that all their lives are likely forfeit if Wade continues to live. They should do the rational thing: kill Wade on the spot.

Instead, they go merrily on their way, allowing Wade to kill again. Even then the group doesn't learn.

Then there is the "shortcut" through the pass, which we are told is controlled by hostile Indians. This shortcut requires another night and another campfire. What the *beep*

Then there's the stupid digression with the mining camp. What the *beep*

Finally, reaching Contention, more stupidities abound, as cited above (but not exhaustively. It would take 2 pages of text to enumerate all the idiotic things that occur there).

The original film was not flawless. It had great style and a good set-up, but the story turned stupid at the end. One problem was with the basic concept: waiting for a train. If you are traveling with a prisoner, the only reason to take him to a hotel is to conceal him. The moment his whereabouts is known, the hotel is a liability. You have enormous blind spots in a hotel room, and your mobility is compromised. Also, getting the guy from the hotel to the depot is something of a problem (as we see). Better to forget the hotel and go straight to the depot. Who cares if there aren't enough chairs for everyone, at least you have clear fields of fire in all directions.

But why wait for the train at all? Such a tactic fixes you in place, and allows the gang to catch up. A more prudent course would be to ride up the line toward the oncoming train and hail it as it approaches. You keep ahead of the outlaws, and then gain an earlier speed advantage. Also, why not use the telegraph and call for reinforcements? Maybe Contention is a worthless town, but why wouldn't there be towns up and down the line where reliable helpers could be recruited? Why not contact the army? They too have an interest in seeing Wade and his gang brought to justice.

If you do a remake of a film, you should set out to improve on the original. In the case of 3:10, a serious revision in the plot was called for. The remakers not only didn't fix the old problems, they created hundreds more. I'm really disappointed that they didn't adopt the obvious solution: put the good guys on the train early, and then have Wade's gang try to stop it. A running train battle would have been cool. The most important thing, though, would have been to have characters acting like rational beings, not pawns in a stupid plot. This remake gets 1/5, as do all stupid films.

[–] kenny-164 11 years ago

I should point out to those readers here who are not familiar with him that mgt has an obsessive hatred of his film, and has long been on my ignore list. I recommend that approach to him for all else here.

[–] mgtbltp 11 years ago

I should point out to those readers here who are not familiar with him that kenny-164 has an obsessively unhealthy love for this film, and should not be put on anyone's ignore list. It is fun to see the ridiculous lengths he goes to, to defend this poor excuse for a Western.

[–] manirat91 11 years ago

Excellent post this...the loopholes were just too glaring... I wudnt have cared much about if it hadnt boasted actors of the calibre of Russel Crowe and Christian Bale.

So...let me add my bit...

1. The guy who is sent in the place of Ben Wade to fool his gang...he surely knew he would be killed when the gang caught up with him...was it a suicide mission then...he also could have lied about where they were taking Wade...

2. A badass villain like Crowe staying back just to have some fun with a local Bar girl and getting caught stupidly...please...

3. At the end when Bale asks his son to go and hide in the other room till it was over...what was he thinking...Wade could have shouted out to his gang that his Evans's son was with them...then surely his gang would have kiled the son too...

4. The escape from the hotel to the station was just too damn implausible...evading all those bullets while simultaneously aiming a gun on an outlaw as good as Wade...it could never have happened if Wade himself had not wanted to get o the train in which case his gang would have given up their chase for him...and surely Evans knew that even if he succeeded in getting Wade on the train he was surrounded by gun toting outlaws who will kill him...again...was he planning on suicide...

5. And finally...the biggest of them all...why in hell would Wade gun down all his fellow gangmen...they were as bad as him...they come all the way to save him and just because they kill a man who accompanied him on this journey...he takes a gun and shoots them all...he suddenly has a change of mind in which case he must have killed himself too...come on...logic...??!!

[–] kenny-164 11 years ago

manir,

Most of your objections would have been resolved if you actually watched the film, which i doubt from your post. Overall my comment is how could you miss that Wade was tired of his life as a criminal and did not care at all for his gang?

That answers about half your not well thought out objections.

As for Evans, while I would not say he was suicidal, I would say he was willing to sacrifice himself for the deal that he got from the railroad guy and simultaneously to rehabilitate his image in his son's eyes. Which he did. Beyond that is also the angle that he was trying to save Wade's soul by showing him how to sacrifice for others. Is that really so hard?

As for the guy who rode in the stage coach, the plan was obviously not successful, and so in hindsight it was a poor one, but I think they thought they would make it to the fort before the gang caught up with them.

As for the implausibility of the escape to the train station, you must remember they were trying to not shoot Wade.

That covers it, and do yourself a favor by not agreeing with an obsessive like mgt.

[–] Don-the-Lamplighter 8 years ago

The OP and mgtbltp are spot on. Kenny, your condescension seems childish.

I enjoyed the movie, but to not somehow permanently incapacitate Wade after he kills one of his captors with a fork...immediately took me (and my friends) out of the movie. If you don't execute him on the spot, you shoot him through both hands, or at least through his right hand. Something. What you don't do is do nothing.

The outlaws buying off the entire town to turn on the lawmen was eye roll-worthy. My first thought wasn't, "Oh no, what will the good guys do?" or "What does this mean for Dan?" or anything to do with what was going on in the movie. It was, "Wow, that is some lazy screenwriting." Again, took me and those watching with me right out of the movie.

[–] mgtbltp 11 years ago

It could have been a whole lot better.

[–] DoctorStrangelove 11 years ago

Excellent points all.

I was hoping for a remake; they gave us nonsensical PC garbage. Disappointing and pathetic.

The Doctor is out. Far out.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] dwgryph 11 years ago

- When Charlie and the gang catch up to the decoy wagon, the man pretending to be Ben Wade shoots Charlie when he is a few feet away from the wagon. Charlie staggers back one or two paces further away from the wagon. The decoy turns to look at the rest of the gang riding up and Charlie has somehow teleported to the wagon close enough to reach in and disarm the decoy.

- For some bizarre reason the decoy has allowed himself to be LOCKED IN the wagon followed by armed criminals. Why couldn't they "dummy-lock" the door by simply tying the chain in a knot inside the wagon ? (Looks locked from the outside but the passenger can free himself if necessary.) Or here's a wild idea: why not just give the decoy the key ?

- Charlie is shot point blank by the decoy but all it does is knock him back a few feet. Either Mr. Prince is wearing a bulletproof vest under his duds or his secret identity is Clark Kent.

- The fast decoy rig was supposed to have reached Fort Huachuca before dawn. The fort is a little under 30 miles due west from Bisbee. Charlie Prince was able to:

a) locate his gang;
b) catch up to the "fast rig" whose destination HE DOES NOT KNOW;
c) change direction and head north to Contention; and
d) pick up Ben Wade's real trail

-- all before the posse can reach Contention. BTW, from Bisbee to Contention is approximately 30 miles (as the crow flies). Granted, Bisbee is somewhat hilly (it's a mining region) so passes through the hills will add to the distance. Call it 40 miles. The journey will take them through the county seat -- a place by the name of Tombstone, which contains over a hundred saloons and has a population of 14,000. Even after waiting for the cover of darkness, the posse should have reached Tombstone by sunup, at which time they can notify the marshal to be on the lookout for the Wade gang; feed and water the horses; and depart for Contention (an easy 15 miles away) -- all before Charlie Prince HAS EVEN CAUGHT UP to the decoy wagon.

I don't get the kneejerk defensiveness some commenters have. I thought it was a good premise and a great cast but the multiple boneheaded stupidities ruined the film for me. And a lot of the mistakes could have been fixed with a little thought.

Take the whole "Charlie and the gang go 30 miles the wrong direction but still magically catch up with their boss." What if Charlie or one of the others didn't fall for the decoy ? Maybe one of them is suspicious that there's only a driver guarding Ben Wade and think it's a trap ? Not following a decoy the wrong way would more realistically allow them to catch up to Evans' group. Same result but with much less insulting-your-intelligence.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] TVippy 10 years ago

Very good rant! You pointed all of the errors correctly, although there are many more.

--------------------------------------------
I own you.

[–] kvarkas25 10 years ago

Most stupid western I ever watched