Shane
Let's cut to the chase. Shane should be horribly dated. It should be one of those movies that loses its impact because it has been copied so many times. I went in with this fear and almost saw it realized.
I sensed trouble brewing immediately. Just like we've seen a million times before, an evil rancher - in this movie his name is Ryker (Emile Meyer) - is trying to push all the farmers off his potential grazing grounds. And just as we've seen a million times before, a bunch of thugs are in the process of bullying a poor sharecropping family (Van Heflin as dad, Jean Arthur as mom, and Brandon DeWilde as the son) when silent and badass Shane (Alan Ladd) appears. The bad guys, terrified of Shane's badassness, run away. The immediate problem for me, even this early in the movie, was that Shane just wasn't bad ass. I was pretty sure that even I could take him in a fight - and considering how much of a wuss I am, that says something. What follows is a bunch of scenes we've seen in dozens of westerns, including bar fights, country dances, a gunfighter who tries to settle down, quick draws, and evil guns-for-hire (a young and menacing Jack Palance). Maybe Shane did a lot of this first, but we've seen it all now a hundred times over.
But as the movie progressed a funny thing started to happen. I got hooked. The acting is truly what won me over. Van Heflin's perfectly pitched and natural performance as the farmer Joe Starrett was the first thing I noticed. Then it was Palance's genuinely creepy bad guy who seemingly can't stop smiling even when he guns you down. And then I figured out Shane's secret. He doesn't need to act badass. He doesn't even want to be badass. He's a genuinely nice and polite person. But push him too far and there will be hell to pay. He's nowhere near as tough as later lone warriors as played by Clint Eastwood, Mel Gibson or countless others, but I have a feeling he could kill them all without blinking. It's a subtle performance from the underrated Alan Ladd, and very real.
So it is safe to say that by the time the movie ended, I thought to myself, "Yeah, this IS a classic." We've seen it a dozen times before, but rarely has it been done better. The movie sneaks up on you and wins you over completely. I would definitely recommend it!
SPOILER: DON'T READ THIS IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE!
One thing to discuss is whether or not Shane dies at the end of the film. I am of the firm belief that he does die. When the last shot of the movie is Shane's silhouette, stiffly slumped over a horse that is aimlessly walking across camera...I'm pretty sure the man is dead. Besides, Shane can't live. It defeats the purpose of the movie. His world is ending. Civilization and families are moving in, as represented by the Starretts. Shane does love this new world. He wants to be a part of it and much of the movie revolves around his attempts to join this more peaceful future. But in the end, its not his world. His world is the gun, blood, and ultimately death. And to me, that's what the movie is about. So sorry folks - Shane is dead!
OSCARS: Best Cinematography
OSCAR NOMINATIONS: Best Supporting Actor (Palance and DeWilde), Best Director (George Stevens), Best Picture, Best Screenplay
MVP: Alan Ladd puts in terrific work, but I'm actually going with Van Heflin. His performance is not dated in the least. He should be a noble and pompous ass, as written, but Van Heflin grounds the performance in reality and makes Starrett a man who ultimately just wants what is best for his family. You can't help but to look up to the guy. It's good work from an actor I never really paid attention to before. I'll be paying attention now...
TRIVIA: The memorable scene were Shane practices shooting in front of Brandon DeWilde took 119 takes to get right!
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Pffft. Shane killing Josey Wales?
ReplyDeleteMaybe Josey Wales would be distracted when Shane offered him some coffee...and he would definitely be surprised when Shane quickdraws his gun and blows him away!
ReplyDeleteWell, maybe.