Yum I found there to be many differences. Starting out with the music used In the old movie was the actual 3:10 to Yum song. You could hear the lyrics of the song before you even saw any characters giving you an Ideal of what the movie was all about, whereas, in the newer movie the music had no words and an unsettling feeling like something was about to go down. Also in the old one the soundtrack consisted of one western song Just at different speeds, where in the new one the songs were ore tribal sounding.

I am not sure if any of the songs played in the current version were actually the 3:10 to Yum song that was used in the first one, I could not tell. I think there were changes made between the original and the remake because back then the technique of sound effects were not mastered. For instance, in the bar scene in the original the music was playing during while he was trying to woo the bartender. In the remake during that scene there was no music but you could hear the clinging of the glasses and the moans and groans of the other guys In the saloon.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

I am not sure of what the culture of the time was during the making of the Orlando version, but I do know that the remake does reflect the culture of today. In the original movie there were less action sequences, and more time that the music played a role in the movie. In the latest one there is much more action. From the beginning with the shoot-out to the gun battle in the caves or mountains with the Native Americans, people of today want action. We are a people who need instant gratifications and if you ask to pay $9. 50 a piece to see a movie it better be good.

I eel had the original came out now know one would have seen it. It was too simple. I think that the two movies appeal two different audiences. The original movie appeals to an older generation that can appreciate its simplicity with the music and characters. The remake Is more realistic. Take Into consideration of the relationship Dan had with his eldest son. In the old version his son was very obedient and was proud of him no matter what he did. He soul looked up to his father even though he did not know what was to come.

In the other, the son knew exactly what was going n, he knew that his father had yet to pay his debts and that he was unable to provide the family with enough food and water for them to live let alone there cattle, so he lost all respect for his father. So much so that when Dan left to take Wade to Contention he followed them. I am sure he thought that his father was going to mess something up or get scared and not follow through. It turns out that he did make a good decision that saved the family. Back then most children did not think of defying there parents because they feared the consequences that were at stake.

Now, some hillier Just do not think and have no real consequences to there actions. In all, I think the ending of the movies are what separates what kind of audience they appeal to. In the Orlando Dan gets Wade on that train with barely any shots fired, they both live, and It begins to rain. That says the write was an optimist. That good will always prevail over bad. In the remake it still has the sort of good prevailing over bad but more realistically cone. Dan ales, Nils son sees It, out wade still Jumps on Tanat train. That was real. To get to the salvation you have to go through hell.