discussions of various subjects - emphasis on food and recipes, travel, art, gardening

=,=`==ivy==`=,=

forum guidelines . eyeglasses  disclaimer - read me . recipes from our kitchen . blog from our kitchen 

how to put a Webster's Online Dictionary search box on your site


etherwork.net
discussions of various subjects - emphasis on food and recipes, travel, art, gardening
 
Register Log in Log in to check your private messages FAQ Memberlist Search Usergroups etherwork.net Forum Index

movie: 3:10 to Yuma

 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    etherwork.net Forum Index » anything and everything (within reason) - archive
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ejm
registered


Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 353
Location: Canada

Slogan:

Come to Life. Come to Laziness.

PostPosted: Mon 14 Jan, 2008 10:04 am    Post subject: movie: 3:10 to Yuma Reply with quote

In the thread entitled movie: The Bourne Ultimatum,
Lawless in Lotusland wrote:
[T]he film we really appreciated this weekend was 3:10 to Yuma
Spoiler (highlight to read):
-- a classic western with lots of chasing around. It's also a very interesting, serpentine morality play.


We saw "3:10 to Yuma" this weekend too. I liked it quite a lot. And I really appreciated that it was not a carbon copy of the 1957 version with Van Heflin and Glenn Ford. It has been quite some time since I saw the 1957 version and I'd like to see it again.

wikipedia - 3:10 to Yuma (1957 film)
wikipedia - 3:10 to Yuma (2007 film)

However, in the 2007 version,
Spoiler (highlight to read):
why did Russell Crow's character get on the train in the end? Couldn't he just have walked away? And why didn't he just leave when they were in hostile Indian territory? He could have walked away then too, couldn't he?


edit: Please note that the wikipedia links contain major spoilers.

Reviews:
rottentomatoes.com - 3:10 to Yuma (1957)
rottentomatoes.com - 3:10 to Yuma (2007)



_________________
So... have YOU backed up your files lately? And defragged too!?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mats
registered


Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 503
Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Wed 16 Jan, 2008 10:02 am    Post subject: Slight Irony Reply with quote

Although not really related to the drama in 3:10 , I found it slightly ironic that
Spoiler (highlight to read):
in bringing one man to "justice" , about 200 people and many horses have to be killed


The price of justice?


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Lawless in Lotusland
registered


Joined: 17 Oct 2004
Posts: 47
Location: Lotusland

Slogan:

Get Serious. Get Lawless.

PostPosted: Fri 18 Jan, 2008 4:55 pm    Post subject: Re: movie: 3:10 to Yuma Reply with quote

ejm wrote:
However, in the 2007 version,
Spoiler (highlight to read):
why did Russell Crow's character get on the train in the end? Couldn't he just have walked away? And why didn't he just leave when they were in hostile Indian territory? He could have walked away then too, couldn't he?


Assuming you're serious about the question,
Spoiler (highlight to read):
he got on the train so there would be no doubt that the boy would get the money earned by his father in delivering him to the train. He did it for the child. The horse followed the train after being whistled for, so one presumes he would escape shortly, or as soon as he got to the prison. And he couldn't leave the other guy while they were in hostile territory -- it wouldn't have been right in the mind of Russell Crow's character! He did it for the child. What surprised me is that he had the father killed at the end of the film. Was this for the child, too, somehow? Did you watch the documentary at the end of the film which explained something about the moral logic of gangs like the Jesse James gang.


The moral questions raised in the film are the beauty of the film.

The ironies in the film remind me a bit of the moral logic in Pulp Fiction which seems to me to be a classic morality "play" which asks a lot of questions about morality by juxtaposing some extraordinary moral logic.

Spoiler (highlight to read):
For example, I'm thinking of the moral dialogue between the two hitmen at the beginning of "Pulp Fiction" just before they went in to do the hit. And the extraordinary scene where the hitman hesitates before plunging the life-saving needle of adrenalin through the chest of the Uma Thurman character.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.#phpforum   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    etherwork.net Forum Index » anything and everything (within reason) - archive All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001- 2004, 2006 phpBB Group
Theme created by phpBBStyles.com | Themes Database

-,-`--ivy--`-,------

                      *
                     *
                    []
                    ||
      *          *  ||*
    *          *  *|  |
        *__    _*_ |__|
        \*/    \*/ | *|
ejm      Y      Y  |__|   =(}
        _|_    _|_


Webster's Online Dictionary
with Multilingual Thesaurus Translation

English Non-English

HTML coding for the Online Dictionary search box