3:10 to Yuma
The latest installment of "Russell Crowe makes a good, not great action movie that gets nominated for an Oscar." A bunch of people are going to think it's deep, cause it has the trappings of being deep.
There's some good action, coherent, not over-stylized, and generally treated like it matters by the plot. It's well shot, well paced, and mostly well acted. I'm saying this cause I recognize my tendency to bitch about stuff that I thought was pretty good overall.
But Russell Crowe can not pull off the charismatic psychopath. He's meant to be a toned-down, old west Hannibal Lecter, who poses a danger even in captivity. There are a bunch of scenes like this:
Russell Crowe: "Innocuous-seeming, but personal question."
Person: "Tentative response."
Crowe: "More probing question or insight which shows he is getting in someone's head."
Person 2: "Don't talk to Crowe!" or, to Crowe "Don't talk to him/her/me!"
The audience is meant to believe that the other characters are running a serious risk by letting him converse, and that he might make Migs swallow his tongue or something, but I never bought it. It's just a guy acting laconic, making small talk with some innuendo mixed in.
Also, the third act has some major character development/motivation issues. If anyone else has seen it, we can hash that out more in spoilers.
PS As a society, it's time we had a conversation about whether Christian Bale is the new Keanu Reeves.