Shane (1953)

 Shane (1953)


George Stevens, the film auteur behind Giant and A Place in the Sun, revolutionized the ‘Western” genre in his 1953 feature, Shane. Like many westerns, it follows the tropes which gives it a level of predictability at times. However, the film was different in other ways. Do you think you would get the graphic violence from Sam Peckinpah’s The Wild Bunch without this film? I think not. Stevens came up with ways to show how horrid violence can be from gunshots, so the intensity factor increased. Also, he developed the main character in a unique way. Shane is not your typical, masochist leader. He is a more mysterious, feminine type which of course goes against Western mythology. All of the changes allowed for changes to be made in a dying genre.

 

At the time of release, the movie was the most expensive Western ever produced. A miniscule budget by today’s standards, but it did carry a hefty three-million-dollar price tag which it did eventually recoup at the box office. The film is also noticeable for being one of Paramount’s first “flat” widescreen films which was invented by the studio because it gave the audience a more panoramic view.

 

Like many westerns to come before and since, this movie can be described as a moving oil painting. Loyal Griggs’s camerawork capturing the beautiful landscape of Wyoming really opens your mind. His work actually earned him a much-deserved Oscar win. In addition to stunning cinematography, we can call this a complex character study. I mentioned briefly how Shane is different from most leading men in the genre. I do not want to over analyze anything, but psychologically complex characters were created. Shane and the farmer’s wife show mutual attraction for one another but they don’t act upon it out of respect for the farmer, Joe. Shane also becomes a father figure towards their son, Joey. There are many complex situations that arise over the course of the film which gives this film extra dimensions. Then again, Stevens always knew his way around complicated characters.

 

The mysterious Shane (Alan Ladd) rides into the Jackson Valley where he hopes to settle as a farmhand. He works for a farmer Joe (Van Heflin), his wife Marian (Jean Arthur), and his son Joey (Brandon De Wilde). He soon becomes drawn into the family’s conflict with the cattle baron, Rufus Ryker. There is bad blood between both sides with Rufus wanting to take over the farmland so the cattle can roam freely. Shane realizes that he must protect the family from Ryker and his gang, which includes the famous gunslinger Jack Wilson (Jack Palance).

 

The performances are excellent. Alan Ladd never reached the heights of movie star in his career, but he always had solid acting skills and people went gaga over his charming looks. Stevens had to recruit the 50-year-old Jean Arthur out of retirement. She did a great job, and this ended up being her final film. Jack Palance, despite a few lines, gave you a very menacing aura. His character was the one that made the violence more graphic. Hollywood lore has it that he looked so awkward on a horse that out of desperation, Stevens made him walk the horse during his introduction. That actually worked because his intro gave me the chills. Van Heflin did well as Farmer Joe. Brandon de Wilde, who played Joey, was nominated for an Academy Award. My reaction is how?? I liked the father figure angle between Shane and him, but his annoying and screeching voice made his character unbearable at times. “Shannnnnnneeeeeee, come back!” is a line that will sadly never leave my mind.

 

Shane is a really good movie that changed the style of how Westerns were made. It has your typical saloon fights and drama between farmers and barons, but the violence is more graphic, and the characterizations of some key characters were changed. I also liked the film’s ending. Not only is it emotional in terms of line delivery, but it is ambiguous. It is up to the audience to really believe what happened. Excellent cinematography, direction, and musical score. That said…my gosh, Joey, you really need to take a chill pill.

 

My Grade: B+

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986)

Image
Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986) “Life moves pretty fast. If you don’t stop and look around once in awhile, you could miss it.” Ah, wise words from our new young friend, Ferris Bueller. In John Hughes’s 1986 film, Ferris Bueller’s Day Off , all Ferris wants to do is take a day and have fun. That is the most simplistic theme the movie has. You can go deeper, but the main takeaway is that it is okay to have fun. That is a motto I have taken to heart. I really loved the film. People consider The Breakfast Club to be Hughes’s best and most important movie. That’s a fine statement to make, but I would personally rank the film number two behind this particular one. The teen characters are instantly relatable, it has a memorable antagonist for the children, and this is basically a thirty-year-old travel guide for Chicago. Just how Woody Allen creates his movies as love letters for New York, this is applicable for John Hughes. A Chicago love letter!   Like all of his films, Hughes wrote...
Read more

The Spy Who Loved Me (1977)

Image
The Spy Who Loved Me (1977) The James Bond franchise is one of those franchises that will never die. It has been going strong since the first movie rolled out in the early 1960’s, and new James Bond movies are still produced today. What makes this series unique is they use multiple actors to play the titular character over the years. They all bring their own gravitas to the role, and each Bond is a different man when compared to each other (although the martini, shaken not stirred and the beautiful women among other things remain a constant.) So my first James Bond review for this blog is 1977’s The Spy Who Loved Me. This wasn’t my first look at the series, but it was my first look at the older movies. I really liked what I saw. This is an old-fashioned story that combines a spy drama and an action-packed war movie into one package. Like many of the older Bond movies, the story can get borderline preposterous. The cheesiness of the plot did come to grow on me after awhile, even...
Read more

Table for Five (1983)

Image
Table for Five (1983) I can guarantee that ninety percent of my readers here have not seen this tear-jerking melodrama 1983’s Table for Five , yet alone heard of it. Hopefully after reading my kind words, you will be somewhat intrigued by this movie. When doing my research for the film, I was shocked to see how vastly underrated the movie is. There are only a few reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, hardly any information on Wikipedia or Google-hardly anything out there in this vast Internet landscape. Then, why on earth is this movie so good? Sure, maybe some folks will say the movie is just a predictable Lifetime TV movie, but honestly it is much more than that. There are some elements that makes this film seem destined for the television at times, but to me it is much more than that. I consider the movie to be an honest, emotional portrayal about fatherhood and family. Directed by Robert Lieberman, this film is about a man named J.P Tannen (Jon Voight) who fails at being fathe...
Read more