This film is well acted with a reasonably good look and feel. It's even well written in terms of interesting dialog and character complexity. The problem is (and it is a serious problem) that the plot, character motivations, and action are ill conceived and never credible. Ben Wade (Glen Ford) is a charismatic and ruthless thief and murderer who charms the woman and disarms the men. Dan Evans (Van Heflin) is a simple farmer with a sense of justice who is hired to transport Wade to Yuma in secret and under threat from Fords gang of thieves. The two engage in a psychological battle as they wait in a hotel room for the 3:10 to arrive.
All that sounds great, but credibility is the issue. The script is too clever for it's own good. To start, Wade and company actually report their own crime after having committed the robbery without hiding their identities. No explanation is even offered for this odd behavior. Once caught (and he is too easily caught), Wade is far too smug in his presumption that his gang will save him. Evans becomes inexplicable dedicated to his task, willing to risk his own life against impossible odds even after he is released from his commitment.
Even so, Evans is inexplicably deferential to his own prisoner. He rolls and lights cigarettes for Wade, repeatedly, without Wade having asked for the favor. Evans evens tell Wade that he has nothing against Wade and is only doing his job. But Evans, seemingly so concerned with justice, actually saw Wade kill two men. Evans contradicts himself in both word and deed. At one point, Wade rushes Evans and is knocked back. His explanation: "I wanted to see if you would shoot." Please. The film is an odd and failed combination of incompatible dynamics. While it assumes the audience is intelligent enough to be fascinated by the psychological battle, it also assumes we're not smart enough to question the many absurdities. In the end it's a real eye roller.
All that sounds great, but credibility is the issue. The script is too clever for it's own good. To start, Wade and company actually report their own crime after having committed the robbery without hiding their identities. No explanation is even offered for this odd behavior. Once caught (and he is too easily caught), Wade is far too smug in his presumption that his gang will save him. Evans becomes inexplicable dedicated to his task, willing to risk his own life against impossible odds even after he is released from his commitment.
Even so, Evans is inexplicably deferential to his own prisoner. He rolls and lights cigarettes for Wade, repeatedly, without Wade having asked for the favor. Evans evens tell Wade that he has nothing against Wade and is only doing his job. But Evans, seemingly so concerned with justice, actually saw Wade kill two men. Evans contradicts himself in both word and deed. At one point, Wade rushes Evans and is knocked back. His explanation: "I wanted to see if you would shoot." Please. The film is an odd and failed combination of incompatible dynamics. While it assumes the audience is intelligent enough to be fascinated by the psychological battle, it also assumes we're not smart enough to question the many absurdities. In the end it's a real eye roller.