Year OF The Western! #7 Shane (1953)

So it turns out that I made a mistake and thought Shane came out in 1963, not 1953. So in my grand attempt to watch these 30 films in order is undone by about 10 years. Honestly, this is a mistake that I am glad I made because that put Johnny Guitar first on my list and that film really got me excited for all the different possibilities a western could be. Had I seen Shane first, I think I would have felt similar about the hope of different stories being told, but I feel that my enthusiasm would not have been so high. 

However, having 6 other films under my belt gave me the opportunity to process Shane a little differently than I would have otherwise.   

Film #7 Shane (1953)

Here is the imdb.com cast listing. Here is the wikipedia page about the production. 

The main plot of the film is as follows: Sometime after the Civil War, a group of homesteaders in Wyoming are being harassed by a cattle baron, Rufus Ryker (Emile Meyer) who wants to have all the valley to himself. He is escalating the attempts to scare them away and the farmers are being forced to make a decision: fight or flee. In the middle of this, a lone mysterious man named Shane, with a six shooter and riding a horse (Alan Ladd) crosses paths with the default leader of the homesteaders, Joe Starrett, (Van Heflin) and his family. 

Not that it was intentional, but the plight of the open range cattlemen versus the sodbusters was a theme in the previous film I watched, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. That one was the end of that story and Shane is more about the beginnings of that struggle. Evidently a lot of westerns were influenced by the Johnson County War, a series of fights between cattle companies and settlers from 1889-1893 (If you are anything like me and like deep dives into wikipedia, enjoy!).

I was happy to see Van Heflin again after seeing him 3:10 to Yuma, I appreciate his down to earth sincerity and no nonsense approach to what is right and wrong. It is easy to almost believe this is the same character from that film in the way both handle their decision making. 

This was my first exposure to Alan Ladd, who plays Shane. He has a quiet demeanor but his performance shows that due to his dark gunfighter he knows that he could easily shoot his way out of any situation, but he really wants to try to live a life making the valley a better place without violence with the Starrett family. He knows he is idolized by Starrett's son Joey (Brandon De Wilde, more on him in a minute), but he is quick to downplay the glamor of the gun. He knows that once the trigger is pulled, there is no coming back. Ladd doesn't look like your typical western lead and I wasn't sure what to make of him at first, but by the end I really liked his performance. 

Joey. I was warned about a frustrating child performance before watching Shane, and boy howdy am I glad for the heads up. I understand that child acting and what to expect from it during the 1950's is vastly different than it is today, and I also understand that Joey's character is supposed to be the heart of this story because not only is the fight for the valley about right and wrong, it is about legacy and what will make a man a man, guns or hard work, and he is supposed to be a witness to his father's determination and to Shane's bloody brutal solutions, but wow, this kid was annoying.

The fact that he was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Actor in a Supporting Role that year really blows my mind (Jack Palance was also nominated for the same award, could you imagine how mad he would have been to lose to that kid?). Your mileage may vary. I don't see it. 

So what makes this film worth seeing for me and belong this list? The approach to the gun violence is very different than anything I have seen so far and it surprises me as it is the oldest film in the list and that I won't see its effects till later. Director George Stevens wanted to show the audience the real terror of guns and did so by taking the sound of a large weapon and firing it into a trash can. This created a cannon shot of a sound effect that totally did not make me jump 10 feet when watching this with headphones on. It is a stark contrast to the light pinging and zinging sounds I have heard in other westerns so far. The gun in a monster and its roar is deafening. 

Stevens also incorporated some wire pulling effects with the actors when they were to get shot, causing them to be pulled backward against their will, giving more weight to the gunshots themselves. 

This scene, which does not have any of the main actors outside of Jack Palance (which I should note is impressively badass in the short time he is in this film) but it is my favorite. Here, Jack Wilson (Palance), is working for Ryker and is attempting to draw the homesteaders into drawing their guns first as then it will be perfectly legal to defend themselves when they easily kill the out matched farmers. Wilson knows this particular farmer, Frank "Stonewall" Torrey (Elisha Cook Jr.), can be provoked over his previous enlistment as a Confederate in the Civil War. 

The pause when Torrey realizes that he just killed himself and then Wilson smiles and shoots him is not something I was expecting and I can see how this will germinate into future films. It is also one of the few moments in the film that is not over powered by music and it is much more impactful because of it. The slow jangle of Wilson's spurs is enough to instill dread.

This is an important western in for what it would set the stage for later and much like things that are first, that doesn't always mean they are the best. I can appreciate what it was doing but I don't think this is one that I will revisit. 

Western Checklist (nowhere near official or scientific):

• Weird gang member names? Not really. I appreciate that the town/general store was named Grafton's as it matches the name of my home town. My Grafton has like two more buildings (and a Wal-mart) than this Grafton.
• Beautiful Landscapes? The distant Grand Teton mountains in the background were breathtaking and very different from the desert and southern plains of the films I have seen so far. I think it helps showing how rough and beautiful they are and reflects the lives of the people living there.
• Odd musical cue's early in the film to denote whimsical comedy? Not that I could hear, but there may have been as I stated before that this film is just crammed to the brim with music.It started to wear me down after awhile
• Does a building catch fire? Yes, Ryker's men set fire to a homesteaders' place after they moved out. It was a dick move. 
• How many Ernest Borgnines? None, but Jack Palance showing up gave the second half of the film bigger stakes, even though he couldn't get on his horse properly. 
• Does it have a theme song with the name of the film in the title? No, but the opening score is quite nice and I am sure it brings a tear to men of certain age anytime they hear it.

Bonus info: I honestly thought I knew Shane from an episode of Married With Children when Al was desperately trying to get home to watch his favorite western but got stuck in a grocery store. Turns out that film was actually Hondo with John Wayne. This has caused me to think Shane was John Wayne (Shane Wayne?) until this time yesterday.

Rating:

3.75 tin stars out of 5. Alan Ladd as Shane was great, Jack Palance was pure evil and I enjoyed that, and Van Heflin was solid as well. I did like this story better than The Searchers but the kid really sunk it for me. It's not his fault (it's totally his fault) but every moment he wasn't speaking, the film was better for it. Unfortunately he spoke a lot. Come back Shane? Nah, I think I am okay.