3:10 to Yuma (2007) (Widescreen)

3:10 to Yuma A Wild Ride of A Western

By Yahoo! Shopping User  Jan 13, 2008

Pros: Despite the lack of many bonus features, the movie is able to rest on its own laurels.

Cons: The movie is offered both in a widescreen and fullscreen edition. Both have the same bonus features etc. So fans are really being ripped off to that extent. It would have been far better to have a single edition with the choice of wide or full screen, rather than make two different DVD's withthe same features, etc.

This is another remake, simply put. But for a remake, it is a top notch movie. It comes at a time when Hollywood really needed something different from everything else currently being offered to audiences. It may not have been considered a summer blo...ckbuster when it was in theaters, but it is a blockbuster in itself, even on DVD. What makes the DVD stand out is that for one, it is an anomaly being that it is offered only in single-disc edition, rather than a one and two-disc edition. Also, despite there being very few major extras on the DVD, there is little need for extras, as the movie itself is more than capable of standing on its own without the extras. While it is good that there is no 2-disc special edition to force audiences to choose between, they are are still forced to choose between the widescreen and fullscreen edition. As of late it seems as it so many movies that have come to DVD have come out on DVD in both single and double disc format. This movie is one of those very rare pieces that does not put that pressure on consumers. So kudos to Lionsgate for this. Those same kudos could be withdrawn, however, in that consumers are forced to choose between the wide and fullscreen edition of the movie. If Lionsgate had the movie put out on a single-disc edition, why not let audiences simply buy a single disc with the choice of screen resolution on one disc? The answer: Money. That is the answer, plain and simple. So while audiences have been given a wonderful movie (albeit another remake), they should also be angered at having to choose two formats with the same features, and everything else. Now with that area of interest covered, we move on to the cast. Christian Bale and Russell Crowe both look and sound the part of their characters despite one being an Aussie, and the other being a Brit. They are fully believeable characters, as are the rest of the cast. One charcter in particular, Charlie Prince--who is one of Ben Wade's henchmen--turns out to be a very integral character thanks to his rather cold-blooded personality. This role is expertly played by Ben Foster throughout the movie. He perfectly plays the role of someone who is simply put, a cold-blooded sociopath. Audiences won't be able to stop watching at any point as the movie keeps itself moving. To add to that, the movie is just under the 2-hour mark, which, in a sea of movies that sit at almost 3 hours (think Pirates 3, and Spiderman 3 among many others), this is a fully bearable ride (no pun intended). Audiences will find themselves laughing quite a bit at Ben Wade (Russell Crowe). Wade is a very cocky, arrogant man. But audiences won't be able to keep themselves from liking him for it, whereas Dan Evans (Christian Bale) is a character that audiences will be able to fully sympathize with. Evans is a struggling rancher who is just trying to do what he can to try and take care of his family, and be the role model that he believes his two young sons expect him to be. The most interesting aspect of this movie is that it is different from your run of the mill Western. Most Westerns build up to a point, and have a big shootout at the end. But this movie has shootout after shootout (I.E. it's a guy movie). The story's ending is what makes the movie so worth it. That ending won't be given away here, but those who pay attention throughout the movie will understand it. In understanding it, it will have made the entire movie worth the money. Read more Less