3:10 to Yuma BCG

The 3:10 to Yuma and the remake produced in 2007 have a multitude of differences. Remade in 2007, the second 3:10 to Yuma is nothing short of revisionist. The second meets all of the qualifications of a revisionist film, and most importantly, the use of the anti-hero, and increased use of violence. Ben Wade is the anti-hero, possessing all of the qualifications necessary for the villain, yet he holds up some sort of values, as he helps Dan Evans on the way to train station.

The increased use of violence is truly what makes this a revisionist film. The opening scene is ten times more explosive and violent than the original. The revisionist film uses technology previously unthought-of in Western films. A gaitlin gun mounted on a carriage? The use of the scope attached to a rifle provided precision and added effect of violence. In the entire last scene of the original, there was only a handful of Ben Wade’s men shot. In the revisionist film, not only did Dan Evans kill more men, but Ben Wade killed them as well.

Christian Bale’s character of Dan Evans shows is more emotional, and distressed than the character in the original. However, Christian Bale’s character seems to be more of an alpha-male than the original Dan Evans. This may be attributed to his expert use of the gun and his past. The past of Dan Evans is explained more in depth in the revisionist film. Dan Evan’s lost leg shows a weakness of flaw that was not a part of the original. With the addition of Dan’s son to the picture in the revisionist film, it adds an extra dimension to the choices that Dan Evan has to make. This critical flaw can be seen as part of the revisionist idea of the analysis of masculine figures. Dan Evan’s character still is provided with the dilemma to choose between his family and bringing Ben Wade to justice.