I was fortunate to read Elmore Leonard's short story in which this film was based first. It was included in a book that contained all of Leonard's short story westerns which when read back to back in this volume presented an anthology set in the Arizona and New Mexico region with each story presenting a little more information to the reader. Historical figures and places would cross over from story to story for example. Given that the short stories were published in various short story magazines throughout the 1950's, this was something few readers would have benefitted from at the time. This inspired me to see the original film which turned out to be a great film as mentioned here. A couple years after I saw this film I saw the remake and it was good as well. The original was a better film, but the remake expanded on the script (some from the short story which has been omitted for the first film) making it very watchable for that reason. Though not the classic as the original deserves to be called, I definitely recommend watching it after the original.
At least there's no annoying son is this version. Glenn Ford as the outlaw works a lot better than I can imagine Van Heflin in the role because Ford's gang almost comes across like a '50s motorcycle gang. Wasn't Felicia Farr Jack Lemmon's wife? Henry Jones' death scene is really striking.
Having literally seen the remake again last week, I have a question for the haters: Why is this highly enjoyable film so bad? Simply being a remake isn't enough. I think it's the old "well, if its a remake it must be crap" attitude so typical of pretentious snob film "fans."
Thank you Heidi & TFH!
I was fortunate to read Elmore Leonard's short story in which this film was based first. It was included in a book that contained all of Leonard's short story westerns which when read back to back in this volume presented an anthology set in the Arizona and New Mexico region with each story presenting a little more information to the reader. Historical figures and places would cross over from story to story for example. Given that the short stories were published in various short story magazines throughout the 1950's, this was something few readers would have benefitted from at the time. This inspired me to see the original film which turned out to be a great film as mentioned here. A couple years after I saw this film I saw the remake and it was good as well. The original was a better film, but the remake expanded on the script (some from the short story which has been omitted for the first film) making it very watchable for that reason. Though not the classic as the original deserves to be called, I definitely recommend watching it after the original.
Let's have a little love for Delmer Daves, He cranked out some classics, including Cowboy which blew me away when I was a kid.
Excellent take on 3:10 To Yuma.
Great 😊
I saw the remake long before ever seeing the original and I ended up much preferring this version.
Great movie, so much better than the remake
The remake is a good movie too.
Yep, it seems like people who aren't aware it is a remake seem to love it. Odd!
At least there's no annoying son is this version. Glenn Ford as the outlaw works a lot better than I can imagine Van Heflin in the role because Ford's gang almost comes across like a '50s motorcycle gang. Wasn't Felicia Farr Jack Lemmon's wife? Henry Jones' death scene is really striking.
Good call Heidi
Having literally seen the remake again last week, I have a question for the haters: Why is this highly enjoyable film so bad? Simply being a remake isn't enough. I think it's the old "well, if its a remake it must be crap" attitude so typical of pretentious snob film "fans."