Tonight's Movie: Shane (1953) at the Autry
It's hard to believe, but somehow I made it to this point in my life without ever seeing SHANE.
I think at a younger age I was put off because I erroneously thought it was a sad movie, perhaps because all I knew of it were the film's famous final words. As I learned more about the film, I felt sure I'd like it, and it became one of those movies I thought would be extra-special and wished to see at just the right place and time. I've occasionally done this with other films I've long wanted to see, such as THE CONSTANT NYMPH (1943); I wanted it to be an undistracted viewing when I could fully savor the experience and its expected impact. With half a dozen people and four animals in our house, sometimes those "perfect viewing" moments aren't all that easy to come by!
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/97a10/97a10ee0afb6c0a094e43afaa5902fb8e033efa3" alt=""
Today was the day, and hours later I'm still trying to process the experience. I loved it, I absolutely loved it.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/82e7b/82e7b8f43462ede8359a0e209dc2bff02c6c7d71" alt=""
SHANE is the story of a range war between farmers, led by Joe and Marian Starrett (Van Heflin and Jean Arthur), and cattlemen, headed by Ryker (Emile Meyer). Shane (Alan Ladd), a mysterious loner, shows up at the Starretts' homestead one day and befriends them; he's idolized by the Starretts' little boy, Joey (Brandon De Wilde), and there's an unspoken attraction between Shane and Marian. Shane ultimately battles Ryker's hired gun, the evil Jack Wilson (Jack Palance).
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/82f09/82f0962384a7416c9354add1dee8095fb22435ce" alt=""
Some random thoughts on the movie:
I loved the barroom brawl between Shane and Chris (Ben Johnson). It was a superbly staged fight that looked real. Contrast it, for example, with the typical saloon brawl from an Errol Flynn Western, which almost looks like a choreographed musical number or stuntman's exhibition, and no one really looks hurt. In fact, that "realness" is one of the reasons the film works so well, in general. In every respect -- such as Brandon De Wilde's remarkable performance as little Joey -- the film feels authentic and as though it actually could have happened.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e66f8/e66f80b48b09c1e8eff10785afa7f780846b27a9" alt=""
During the final confrontation, I loved something as simple as the way Shane positions himself next to the bar. That final spin of his gun back into his holster is as exciting a cap to the film as Luke Skywalker successfully firing the shot to destroy the Death Star. The audience breathes a sigh of relief.
One wonders why there was concern about Alan Ladd's height. It's not height that matters, but attitude, and Ladd's Shane has attitude to spare.
Something that has always puzzled me about the film, dating to when I first saw stills from the movie, is Jean Arthur's mop of hair, which doesn't seem to "fit." I don't recall seeing another woman in the film with her hair in that sort of unkempt, boyish style and wish the filmmakers had chosen something else. That might be my sole criticism of the film, which in a backwards way illustrates the movie's strength in every area.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7bbe3/7bbe3ed6a64073510a0b0775e8db00a7fb7e0c12" alt=""
I'm sure many more such thoughts will come to me after I post this, and next time I see it, and the time after that. It's that kind of movie.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a4663/a46636a08a1a5cf144a56844e3eda05d4b1107db" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f99d0/f99d0c9f9f91ca010ada6ea56d42ccc810bae2f6" alt=""
The supporting cast includes Elisha Cook Jr., Ellen Corby, Douglas Spencer, John Dierkes, Nancy Kulp, and Beverly Washburn. Alan Ladd's children, David and Alana, have bit parts.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0bd0e/0bd0eb63b4063c7d4c1998470e099dc6a1ac7d72" alt=""
A re-release trailer is currently available on YouTube.
The 35 millimeter print shown by the Autry was quite good much of the time, but far from perfect. The beginning of each reel was rugged, especially during the opening credits, and periodically a thin vertical colored line would appear near the edge of the screen. In this day and age when we're blessed with beautiful DVD prints and can also sometimes see restored prints on the big screen, it's a disappointment when a print has some issues. However, the overall print quality was such that it was worth the occasional distractions in order to see the film for the first time on a screen in 35 millimeter.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d5886/d5886f9d64297ff14dd5544d8543d95f02b2c84d" alt=""
And if you haven't yet seen SHANE, please don't put off enjoying it as long as I did!
10 Comments:
"Shane" on the big screen? Oh, yeah. What an experience, I really envy you. Seeing this movie, especially for the first time, in such a way. Good for you. Also, thank you so much for the link.
Couldn't agree more Laura! "Shane" is a Hollywood classic and deservedly so.
B.
Ps. BTW, for some reason, I just flashed on Cliff Robertson's "turn" as cowardly "villian-of-the-week" "Shame" in the original "Batman" TV series! BLASPHEMY!!
I used to watch this film with my parents when I was a kid....I haven't seen it recently, but yes, it's great! I should re-watch it now that I know the actors (just reading Jean's biography I realized she was in it!). Loved reading your review and you're so lucky to had the opportunity to see it on the big screen!
Sounds like a great experience, Laura. I saw Shane for the first time, myself only a few weeks ago and it was still impressive. I love the way Stevens shoots dialogue as well, a lot of varied angles and very careful blocking.
I'm surprised you could concentrate on Jean Arthur's hair and not on the giant cloud of soft-focus that seemed to follow her everywhere. It wasn't quite on Star Trek levels, but it was close.
My understanding is that Jean ARthur, who was much too old for her part, wore a full wig. As for Ladd's height, I don't think it was a problem for Paramount, only something nasty people in the business brought up in hindsight.
Thanks to you all for your notes! It was a wonderful experience.
And you're very welcome for the link, Jacqueline!
Rachel, there was definitely a lot of soft focus. :)
Barrylane, Arthur was past 50, but she still looked younger (soft focus or not!), especially considering she was playing a worn-out pioneer woman. I think they could have chosen a wig more a little more pleasing and perhaps it also would have been more historically accurate -- her hair pulled up in a bun or something like that -- and Arthur works fine in the part.
It seems that the filmmakers actually used a number of tricks to try to hide Ladd's height, so they were concerned about the issue contemporaneously with the making of the film.
Best wishes,
Laura
Laura, they weren't concerned, only realistic. Lots of short leading men, then and now. It wasn't an issue, it's just the movies. The business of illusion.
But my entire point, Barry, was that it was an issue to the filmmakers at the time the film was made, and I don't believe it needed to be because of the strength of Ladd's performance.
Best wishes,
Laura
When my husband and I were dating, it came up in conversation that he had never seen "Shane". He claims the rest of our party looked at him as if he had just confessed to a murder. I know I was shocked, but I think he's exaggerating.
Great review!
We're linking to your article for Academy Monday at SeminalCinemaOutfit.com
Keep up the good work!
Post a Comment
<< Home