Shane

A gunslinger, a farmer, a wife, a little boy, a dog, and some dastardly villains....

I first saw "Shane" from the back seat of a '51 Ford, at a drive-in theater somewhere in Montana. The movie was new, and I was about 4 years old. From that time, I remember quiet male voices and the ring of spurs. Those sounds have lived in my mind for decades.

"Shane" is a classic -- no, not a bang-bang shoot-em-up B Western, but it is a solid Western that gives fans of the genre some something to think about besides "they went thataway." The scenery (Jackson Hole, Wyoming) is grand and was even moreso on the big screen. When well known Western novelist A.B. Guthrie wrote the screenplay, he kept fairly faithful to Jack Schaefer's novel. The movie makes a reasonable attempt, for that time, to look authentic in costume and gear, and gives fans of the movies of the '40s and '50s some interesting cinematic moments (see the small things, like how the camera was used to make Alan Ladd seem more "heroic").

I'd probably recast some of the secondary roles, if I had the chance, but Ladd's soft-spoken, gentlemanly way is just right for Shane, and Jack Palance is subtly evil.

Yes, "Shane" contains a few clichés, but they weren't yet quite so cliché, in 1953. Besides, they were well done clichés, so, while you may recognize them, you probably won't mind them.

But, what's "Shane" about, exactly?...

Courage. Loyalty. Honor. Friendship.

It will leave you wishing you knew what happened next.

One of my favorite movies of all time. Classic good virus evil. Friendship between a rancher and and a stranger. Love between a husband and wife and also between the wife and a stranger. Admiration between a boy and a stranger. This film developed characters as well as any film ever made. There is not one unnecessary scene in the entire movie. To simply say it's a classic or even it's the best western ever made doesn't do it justice. If you've never seen this gem, please watch it. Or if you're like me and have seen 50 times, watch it for the 51st.

I first saw this in the early 90s. Revisited it recently on a DVD which i own. When you love a western, it's a film like Shane that you go back to time and time again. Everything has already been said about this great film n there seems to be little left to say but as a fan of western films, lemme contribute by praising how good this film is. The single greatest asset is the wonderful cinematography. The mountains, the lakes, the hills, farms n houses all looked straight outta poetry n painting. Loyal Griggs did an amazing work with the film's cinematography. The story is about a mysterious gunfighter (Alan Ladd) who helps a farming family against cattle barons wanting the farmers land. Jack Palance in a role of pure malevolence with his evil smirk n few dialogues. George Stevens' direction is truly stunning. He made a very touching film. This film has contributed a lot towards the western genre.

This film begins with a retired gunslinger by the name of "Shane" (Alan Ladd) riding up to a small house somewhere in Wyoming to get some water. Although the owner of the ranch house "Joe Starrett" (Van Heflin) initially has no problem with this, his hospitality changes when some other cowboys are seen in the horizon riding toward him causing him to suspect that Shane is part of this group of men who have been harassing him and other settlers in the area. However, it's during the subsequent altercation with these men that Joe realizes that he has judged Shane wrongly and hires him to help out as a ranch hand. But what neither Shane nor Joe fully comprehend is just how badly a cattle baron by the name of "Rufus Ryker" (Emile Meyer) wants every last settler out of the area. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this is one of the best Western films made during this particular time period due in large part to the new wide screen technique which captured the beautiful Wyoming scenery along with a couple of graphic scenes of violence enhanced by certain innovations which were introduced to audiences worldwide. Naturally, the special effects are much more advanced now but even so this film was not only enjoyable but clearly ahead of its time as well and for those reasons I have rated it accordingly. Definitely above average.

No need to echo consensus points from 300 reviews. What follows is my brief effort at characterizing the movie's important social subtext.

Besides the first-rate cast, majestic scenery, and excellent script, few Westerns capture the mythic history of the West better than Shane. The battle is really one between two types of society. The Rykers represent a feudal type with their land baron ownership of huge swaths of as yet barren land. I'm glad the script includes struggles they've had in taming the territory for their huge cattle-grazing purposes. It's not like they've sacrificed nothing for their dominant position. No doubt it would have been easy for the film to portray them as unadulterated bad guys.

On the other hand, The Starretts and their neighbors may be squatters on the land, but they represent a different future, one of broad settlement, farming pastures, and cooperative community. In short, they're a communal threat to the Strykers dominance. That's shown in their family gatherings, common purpose, and common desire to come together; that is, if they can resist The Strykers' effort to drive them apart. Actor Heflin's dad Starrett represents this resolve and dedication to the community dream, as well as a strong sense of personal morals, which are just the sort needed in order to lead the transition. He has the guts, but does he have the skills, and that's where Shane comes in.

Of course, it's Shane and little Joey that represent the drama's appealing heart. In short, Shane amounts to the vital transition figure between the old and the new. As a gunfighter, he's a product of the open range of the Starretts, but as an exceptional man who's sampled the Starrett's family life he senses the need for constructive change and is willing to risk his life for it. Meanwhile, Joey, in a meaningful sense, represents the power of Shane's enduring norms, which Joey will no doubt carry into his own and the town's future. Ironically, however, Shane realizes that his strength is also an unintentional threat to the Starrett's cohesion as a family unit-- mom (Arthur) is attracted to him, while he's replacing dad as Joey's adult model. Thus, in the celebrated closing, Shane must ride away into an uncertain future, his contribution to civilizing the West his lasting legacy. At the same time, Joey will chase after the hope of somehow being the good man's equal in his coming years. And our last shot is Shane as he rides toward the majestic peaks he has now earned. Thus concrete events in the film transform into a spirit of the new West.

Anyway, this is my take on what I think is the film's powerful subtext embodied in characters and events. All in all, the movie was a critical hit when I was a kid, and I think it still is.