Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Funny you should mention it. It's Cheep Chewsday and I just got back from Sleuth. The remake.

Now I don't see many remakes, mainly 'cos I don't see many movies and most remakes look to be bad from reviews and trailers. Well aside from Hairspray, which while not as good as the original is pretty good.

I just remembered being very satisfied by the original Sleuth many years ago and the touts for the remake were pretty positive. I'd say the remake is good to very good. The trouble is half the fun of the original is the twist /surprise which is a bit easy to spot once you know.

But nicely done with the Michael Caine casting making sense even without the added wink to buffs from the earlier flick. The house interior is modern (not post modern for a change) and hi-tech and it works.

If you liked the old one the new one is perhaps even worth going to on a full price day.

btw does the 3.10 arrive say at 3.05 and leave on time?

FX: Sleuth is one of the few fillums I can remember my parents talking about when I was a wee kiddy. I like both Caine and Larry, but I can't effing stand Jude Law.

There should be more of Jude getting his head smashed in like in The Talented Mr Ripley.

And the train was late.

Dan Evans: What time is it?

Ticket Clerk: About ten past three.

Dan Evans: Where's the 3:10 to Yuma?

Ticket Clerk: Running late, I suppose.

Ben Wade: Goddamn trains. Never can rely on 'em, huh?

How long since you've seen the 57 version? The ending is as corny and predictable as they come. The 07 version is not flawless, eg too much padding, but in many respects, eg acting (even Russell) and cinematography, is much better than the 57 one.

That's why I said "maybe Yuma 2007 is true to the book while the makers of Yuma 1957 did a Natural and squibbed it".

The new one is neither corny nor predictable, but that doesn't necessary make it better or worse.

Great review of both old and new 3:10's in the current Quadrant - and, as generally with Neil MacDonald essays, much else besides. I don't always agree with him, but always worth reading (like all the best film critics). For example, I didn't know Rio Bravo and El Dorado were shot in the same town/set. No wonder the Duke looked like he knew his way around!

FX: Sleuth is one of the few fillums I can remember my parents talking about when I was a wee kiddy.

gee they must have been child brides/grooms.

mumbles - smartarse

This review was self-absorbed, long and boring. You could have cut off the last two paragraphs and not missed anything. When Wernor Herzog made an appearance was when I had to leave.

**&1/2 stars out of 100,000.5 stars

Whose review? Mine? You c*nt!

* Added to keep comment polite.

tONE: Can you get the MacDonald review online? Or do I have to start buying the magazines?

I loved Rio Bravo when I was 25 and loved ElDorado when I was 10. Needless to say, RB held up better on recent Foxtel viewings. RB was still OK, but ED was just plain rubbish. 3:10 to Yuma 2007 used an old film set, too, but I'm not sure which. I thought it might have been Silverado.

I just emailed a scann to the "aftergrogblog" address. Quadrant have a site, but only some articles online (not including this one).

I still love RB - one of my favorite films still. You've read Danny Peary - sums it up perfectly (Leigh Bracket screenplay full of great lines - "That's all you got?" "It's WHAT I've got"). El Dorado is just fluff - I like Mitchum in it, and Caan is young and fun, but it's pretty hokey, and too long.

Thanks, TONE. Top hole. I will peruse it at my leee-zure.

FX: One man's meat is another man's minutiae. Or is that "one man's minutiae is another man's potatoes"? I forget.

The comments to this entry are closed.