Browse > Home / Headlines, Living & Arts, Movies / Good and Evil Blur in Yuma

Good and Evil Blur in Yuma

October 15, 2007

New Western embodies tradition of the genre.

by Rhea Boyd

yuma.gif    The story of the battle between good and evil has been told since the beginning of time. Westerns are a superb voice for this saga, and 3:10 to Yuma is a worthy spokesman for Westerns.

    3:10 to Yuma, a remake of the 1957 original starring Glenn Ford, hit the theaters on September 7. Its opening weekend grossed $15 million, proving old parables are still popular.

    Elmore Leonard initially told the plot of 3:10 to Yuma as a short story in 1953. It follows an outlaw named Ben Wade (Russel Crowe) who is being escorted across the countryside to a train station in order to be taken to a Yuma jail, where he will be executed for his “twenty-two robberies, and over four hundred thousand dollars in losses,” stated Butterfield (Dallas Roberts), the man who finally captures him. Wade also demonstrates that he is capable of countless murders with his trusted pistol, even of his own men, if he finds it necessary. One of his escorts, Daniel Evans (Christian Bale) is a poor rancher who owes money to his landowner and agrees to help transport Wade for $200 because he is desperate to save his ranch. 

    Evans lost his leg in the Civil War and is now struggling to keep the ranch going smoothly. As he and his family watch their barn burn down (a punishment for late payments) he feels as if his sons and wife have lost respect for him.  Deeper into the movie, the audience learns the complex truth of why he decided to volunteer himself as a deputy to Wade’s adventurous and dangerous transportation.

    Because this is a Western, I walked into the movie expecting to witness a flick with a stereotypical “shoot-em-up” attitude with little character development and a shallow plot. But as the projector rolled on, I became entranced by each character as his unique personality. In the beginning it is clear who is good (Daniel Evans) and who is evil (Ben Wade), but throughout the movie the line between the two becomes blurred. Despite the fact that we know Wade has committed terrible crimes, it was hard not to fall for him. His obvious charm and good looks help build this emotion, but the realization that he is not all evil is the breaking point for the audience. This love for the antagonist was confusing for me, and it made me think about what we, as humans, believe is good and what is evil. We base this judgment on people’s past actions, whereas Ben Wade proves we should look inside individuals, instead.

    In the climax of the movie, the tension is high when Wade and Evans are trapped in a small hotel room together. Evans is the only one left who is willing to escort Wade to the train station in order to send him off to his demise. Outside, Wade’s gang of bandits awaits. Evans is well aware that if he exits the building with Wade as a prisoner he is going to be killed, yet he proceeds anyways in his fight for his true identity. Wade is extremely stubborn when it comes to being captured and will not give in without a fight. The audience is absorbed by both sides of the good and evil spectrum. Evans is giving Wade a spiel on how he should give up this intense battle because Evans needs this chance to prove himself to his family. In the meantime, Wade is trying convince Evans that he is one hundred percent evil and will never give that up, even for Evans’ opportunity to be the hero.

    So, does the audience choose to side with the obviously good and humble character or do they have sympathy and a soft spot for the obviously bad character? This is what makes a Western appealing, and 3:10 to Yuma fits the bill.

Print This Article Print This Article

Written by Rhea Boyd · Filed Under Headlines, Living & Arts, Movies