Scene in 3:10 to Yuma *potential spoiler*

[J. Lamar King IMPOSTOR]

OK film, I liked the fact that they eschewed backlight on night exteriors. There was a scene though that I am still scratching my head over that seems completely illogical. Maybe I wasn't paying attention or something. Even now I think I might be confusing two different scenes.

 

The posse is camping at night while escorting Ben Wade to the train. They are attacked by a group of indians who shoot at them. Wade gets hold of a pistol goes up the hill and kills the indians. He comes back down the hill with the pistol in hand. All of the posse are pointing there guns at him. Evans has gotten a head wound and passes out/falls asleep and when he wakes up Wade is gone. Someone in the posse said he 'just walked off.'

 

However the scene happened why would the posse, still armed to the teeth, just let Wade walk off?

Edited September 10, 2007 by J. Lamar King

[Tom Lowe]

OK film, I liked the fact that they eschewed backlight on night exteriors. There was a scene though that I am still scratching my head over that seems completely illogical. Maybe I wasn't paying attention or something. Even now I think I might be confusing two different scenes.

 

The posse is camping at night while escorting Ben Wade to the train. They are attacked by a group of indians who shoot at them. Wade gets hold of a pistol goes up the hill and kills the indians. He comes back down the hill with the pistol in hand. All of the posse are pointing there guns at him. Evans has gotten a head wound and passes out/falls asleep and when he wakes up Wade is gone. Someone in the posse said he 'just walked off.'

 

However the scene happened why would the posse, still armed to the teeth, just let Wade walk off?

 

If my memory serves: Because they knew none of them were good enough shots to get into a straight-up shootout with Wade? Remember, you are talking about a kid, a paper-pushing train company man, etc. I think Fonda was toast by then.

[Jonathan Bowerbank]

Just saw this, and yeah, although they had their guns pointed at him. They were scared s***less.

 

I think you should watch those night scenes again though Lamar. There definitely is some bluish/green backlight in the majority of those scenes.

[Brad Grimmett]

I saw this the other night and thought it was fantastic. Westerns definitely aren't dead thankfully. I thought the look was a little uneven, but still quite good.

[Jonathan Bowerbank]

Westerns definitely aren't dead thankfully. I thought the look was a little uneven, but still quite good.

 

Yeah, Papamichael's style (referencing "Pursuit of Happyness" and "Walk the Line" was very present in this film. The technique of "finding focus" in a shot, or allowing the actor to move in and out of focus by working in a very shallow DoF. But it gave a very fresh look to the western genre, where things are usually shot in broad strokes to show the landscapes they shot in.

 

Still, I'd have to say it's the best "American" western in a while, probably since "Unforgiven" as they say. I'll probably definitely include it in my current collection of gritty westerns, including the aforementioned, "The Proposition", "Dead Man", and "Once Upon a Time in the West".

[Brad Grimmett]

Yeah, Papamichael's style (referencing "Pursuit of Happyness" and "Walk the Line" was very present in this film. The technique of "finding focus" in a shot, or allowing the actor to move in and out of focus by working in a very shallow DoF. But it gave a very fresh look to the western genre, where things are usually shot in broad strokes to show the landscapes they shot in.

Actually, that's not my issue. I thought there were some matching issues with the look throughout the film. Some shots looked sharper than others and some shots were more saturated than others....that sort of thing. There were a few shots that resembled old film stock and old lenses (to my eye) and others in the same scene that looked as updated as anything else in theaters now. Does that make sense?

[Jonathan Bowerbank]

I'd like to know what lenses he used for wider shots and what he used for closeups. The closeups I think definitely did have a very different look to them. I don't know if it was a change in saturation to my eye, but more a contrast thing. They seemed to be of higher contrast when he switched to the long lenses on closeups.

 

There was a scene when Crowe attacked Fonda where everything seemed to be dry and desert like in one shot, then they turned around and all of a sudden there was snow everywhere and fog coming from their breath. I read in IMDb trivia that they had an unexpected snowfall during production, perhaps it was the only real continuity issue that occurred from it.

[Jonathan Bowerbank]

by the way, I guess details will be revealed in the upcoming issue of the AC Mag.

[J. Lamar King IMPOSTOR]

Maybe they were supposed to be scared or whatever. I guess I was going by the old Western movie rule about having "the drop" on the other guy. That is you are pointing your gun at him before he does at you. They could've just told him to drop it.

 

I remember several night ext. scenes where the backlight was really low or non existent and there wasn't much landscape lit. Anyway it didn't feel backlit Hollywood style which I liked.

[Tom Lowe]

Pretty decent article in AC. It goes into some detail about the night scenes and "moonlit" scenes.

 

One thing that was mentioned was a blue reflector. What exactly is this (I assume a blue mirrored bounce card/reflector), but what is the effect on the subject lit by a blue bounce card in outdoor settings like the ones in this movie?