"Liberty Valence", "Shane", I don't get 'em (spoilers)

These two films get mentioned in threads on favorite Westerns, so about 8 years ago I watched them. My memory of the details isn’t reliable, but was disappointed by the basic setup-up/resolution of both films.

In** Liberty Valence** I was waiting for a interesting twist. What I got seemed the least interesting twist possible: the bad guy was actually shot by big John Wayne, a skilled and brave gun fighter and traditional alpha male. It wasn’t the little non-macho politician. Again, it seemed the least interesting twist available.

In Shane, the quiet gunfighter is trying to leave his violent past behind. The evil local bully makes life so hellish for Shane’s friends that Shane fights him, triumphs, then leaves. Maybe that sort of reluctant hero tale was rare when the film came out, but to me it seemed like Standard Plotting 101, no deviations.

The little kid was annoying, and if there was simmering sexual tension between the mother and the reluctant hero, it didn’t seem as steamy in the 21st century (when I first watched the film.) Jack Palance was a very effective bad guy, but I never had a doubt that Shane would prove a better gunfighter when the showdown came.

So, that’s my take. Both films had completely unimaginative resolutions, and the entire plot of Shane was by-the-book. I can’t defend these positions vigorously, because it’s been so long since I watched the movies. Also, I don’t like trying to convince someone that a movie they like is bad … I’d rather be shown that there were virtues to the film that I wasn’t fully grasping.

Shane was the archetype for the reluctant hero with a checkered past who helps the gentle farmers fight off the bad guys. It preceded Seven Samurai that served as the model for an ensemble of reluctant heroes performing the same mission.

As for Liberty Valance, I never saw it as a big deal either, except for the ending about legend vs. reality, which came too late in an otherwise IMHO weak film.

I am in your corner with this assessment. Shane was a rather predictable western that seemed to be propelled by Alan Ladd’s charisma. And although Jack Palance heartily deserved his Oscar nomination, Brandon deWilde had no place be nominated for supporting actor. He should be competing with Jake Lloyd for most annoying performance in a major motion picture.

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance was a radical deconstruction of the Western myth - specifically, John Ford’s own Western myth. It was Ford’s Unforgiven.

If I recall correctly, there’s an amusing continuity problem in “Shane” - at the climax, Shane rides off to town for the gunfight, and the kid runs to follow him - reaching the town, on foot, in time to see the gunfight.

Well, there was the bit at the end about going with the legend instead of the facts, but having Wayne be the real hero seemed like a mindless continuation of traditional Western storytelling.

It’s like any joke - if you have to have it explained, you aren’t ever going to get it. But Alessan nailed it. Plus the fact that the big shot gunfighter hero didn’t get the girl, either. All Wayne got was Woody Strode.

Shane! Shane! SHAAAAAAANNNNNNEEEE!*
All I can say to that is NOOOOOOOOO!

*I always hear it in my head with a cutsey teddy bear pronounciation: Schane.

I never liked Shane, mostly for that kid.

“QUIIIIII-Gon! Come baaack, QUIIIIII-Gon!”

Do we give LIBERTY VALENCE bonus points for having John Wayne quietly handle the combat stuff and letting Jimmy Stewart act like the hero, since it was actually Jimmy Stewart who did his duty during WWII when John Wayne was making war movies?

Shane has some beautiful imagery. Liberty Valance was another film showing the dusty old West while Shane was shot in the Grand Tetons. The farmers were dressed like farmers, although Jean Arthur was a little over dressed for a farm wife. Shane wore buckskins instead of the standard cowboy costume. Great performance by Jack Palance that really established his career. I’m a fan of Lee Marvin but I think he ate too much scenery as Valance. They’re both important movies, but not to everyone’s liking. And yeah, the kid didn’t work quite right.

BTW: Shane brought me to the Dope. I was hoping to find an answer to whether Shane died at the end or not. He appears to slump over in the saddle because he was shot in the final fight. Cecil never answered my question but I found it elsewhere, the book is just as ambiguous about the ending as the movie, as if to leave the reader/viewer to decide. Maybe Shane found redemption and then went to Heaven, or maybe he just rode off into the sunset where all the other western heroes hang around telling their tales.

You may be right. FWIW, I don’t care for many Westerns from the 30s through the mid-60s. Liked** High Noon**. (Favorites Westerns are High Noon, McCabe & Mrs. Miller, Jeremiah J, Once Upon a Time ITW, Silverado, Hombre, maybe Ride the High Country.)

Except that Wayne’s character (Tom Doniphon) wasn’t the “real hero”. Sure, he saved, Ranse from being killed and allowed him to be credited with killing Valance, in the process losing Hallie to him, but the real point of the film is that heroes are not made of single acts; they’re the people who spend a lifetime fighting injustice and championing the betterment of others. Doniphon could have killed the brutal and villainous Valance at any time, and frankly, nobody but Valance’s crew (who he and Pompey could probably have taken out in one fell swoop) would have cared. (Valance knows this, hence why he steers clear of Doniphon.) But he allows Valance to terrorize the townfolk and people around the area because he figures it’s a problem for the weakling sheriff and the sparsely manned marshalls to deal with.

Ranse Stoddard, on the other hand, came out West with a clutch full of law books and a dream of civilizing the West, giving it law and justice and, eventually, representation as a state. He had no prospects, and it was aptly clear that he was grossly inequipped to handle the perils of a West run by thugs and freerangers opposed to legal restrictions on grazing their cattle. He doesn’t tuck tail and run when beaten within an inch of his life by the eponymous villain; he stays and works to cover his room and board while he heals, then teaches the townfolk, including Pompey, the mestizo children, and of course Hallie to read and write, and more significantly, about the Constitution and the rights that they are all entitle to. Doniphon (in a fashion both typical of the characters Wayne typically played and Wayne himself in real life) has no real interest in this; he only comes around to aiding Doniphon because he sees how much this means to Hallie, and ultimately, what a better life this will make for her in the future when his cowpoke lifestyle is no longer viable.

In the end, Stoddard becomes a hero in the public eye because he “killed” Liberty Valance. But his real heroism was pressing forward in representing the public over the interests of freerangers, and working tirelessly to help the people of Shinbone and the unnamed state that is formed even as it clear that he’s become weary of maintaining the genial senatorial personality for the public. The moral of the film is that we are so focused on the single public event that brings a figure into prominence and often don’t appreciate the real effort that makes a genuine hero, hence the need to “print the legend, not the facts”. Doniphon, and to a certain extent, Hallie, both made sacrifices to make this happen, and for his part, Stoddard bears the guilt of both having lied to achieve his star and having deprived his friend and savior of the woman that he loved most in the world, but he carries on for the public good.

It’s a valid point. While Wayne was busy playing up the good ole’ boy cowboy persona and allowing the studio to build him up in the public image of a hero, Stewart put his career and life on the line to join the USAAF (technically, he was initially drafted but he had done much work to encourage and train pilots, and actually enlisted after failing to meet weight standard), become a B-24 pilot, and flew bombing sorties with the 453 and 445 Bombardment Groups, later flying pathfinder sorties with the 389 BG, and earning duty awards too numerous to list. After the war, he remained in the AAF and AF reserves, rising to the reserve range of Brigadeer General, and even flew missions (as a non-duty observer) over Viet Nam. Despite all this, he never brought up his service and downplayed his heroism with interviewers, only intentionally addressing it in public in support of the Air Force (mostly voiceovers for documentaries and occasionally promoting films like Strategic Air Command).

So not only is Ransom Stoddard the true hero of The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance vice Tom Doniphon, but Jimmy Stewart was a genuine and humble hero in real life versus the bombastic and self-awarding Marion Mitchell Morrison.

Stranger

I consider Shane one of the greatest books of all time. I doubt the movie is as good as the book, but it follows the plot fairly faithfully. Basically I agree with what Tripolar said.

The thing is they weren’t “by-the-book” at the time the movies were made. They went against previous cliches of the genre. Now that we have been seeing these kinds of plots for more than sixty years it’s easy to overlook that they were breaking new ground at the time. It’s like not realizing how innovative Citizen Kane was because its innovations soon became standard.

“I don’t know what’s so great about Shakespeare. It’s just a bunch of old quotations strung together.” :slight_smile:

I didn’t like Liberty Valance. It seemed to drag along and I’d loose interest. It was so odd a film in the 1960’s was filmed in black and white.

I am a big Jimmy Stewart fan and like his tough guy Westerns. This role went against type and its one of the few Stewart films I won’t watch. Oddly enough, he had one of his best roles in Flight of the Phoenix and it was made right after Liberty.

Liberty’s revelation is quite odd. Imagine a modern day politician that was known for a brave act. The scandal if the truth came out.

I liked “Liberty Valance” when I saw it many years ago, mostly for the complexity of John Wayne’s character, Doniphon. He was not entirely on Jimmy Stewart’s side. He was a lot closer to the bad guy (Roose) in outlook and temperament than he was to Stewart. His conflict in siding with Stewart was what made the film interesting.

I always thought that “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance” was an allegory of the times in which it was made.

It was shot in 1961. Roosevelt was dead, Truman retired, and Eisenhower was wrapping up his last term. It was the beginning of a decade of self reflection and discovery.
This movie was a retrospective of History, and a brutal exposure of the fact that the Heroes in History were not always the people with the greatest deeds, but of the people left around with the biggest mouths or the best PR.

It was a Monument to those people… the ones without Platinum PR, the ones who DIDN’T run for office. It was about the ones who fought just as hard, fought side by side, but whose names fell through the holes of “history”.

It was about changing times and the rise of media (new fangled newspapers and dime-novels)… but it was also an allegory of the changing times from when it was filmed as well: Motion Picture ‘propaganda’, Slick radio,
and a medium called TV that as of yet had almost no regulation.

Cigarette Puff
Cigarette Puff

It was the story of men who, with almost nothing, risked everything that they had in the world against the hired gun mobs of the men in power… the 'Bosses" who wanted to keep order and maintain their lion-share of the profit flow.

It was about disrupting the un-even playing field established by the rich for little or no reward beyond anything but… self satisfaction and the love of America: the land, the people, and the Very Idea of America.
And it was about how so Very Many of those talented and brave men were lost to history, even when they “won” against the Evil Money Machines that opposed them.

I’m sure that if even ONE of those “Money-Machine” Scumbags were around today, they’d say, “You can’t count on Luck, but you can ALWAYS count on Money.”
Maybe they’re right… maybe there will always be Whores… but By Og, that doesn’t make us ALL Whores… does it?

The true hero of the story dies in alone and in poverty in a modest house, in need of repairs, but never once asking for help.
I’m sure that there are people who are like that this very day… names and stories lost to history… but would the wealthy and famous ‘Heroes’ ever take even a single day out of their lives on their behalf the way that
the poor once did for those who came to fight these gold idoled media kings before…?

Would the Self Entitled ‘Kings of Media’ today even Allow it…?

Again, Tom Doniphan is not the hero of Liberty Valance, nor does the future that bookends the story the vision that Doniphan had for the West. Tom Doniphan (like Wayne) was very much a traditionalist who saw no reason to encourage literacy in his subordinate, mixed-race children, or his intended fiancee, and spends most of the film mocking the ideals that Ranse Stoddard promotes. He tries to run Stoddard off several times by demonstrating that he and is law books are no match for the merciless brutality of Valance and his gang (which includes a young Lee Van Cleef, BTW), and takes every opportunity to mock him publically. He eventually gains a grudging admiration for Stoddard and a recognition that the literacy and order that Stoddard stands for is the only viable future for Shinbone and the West, even though it means an end for his own way of life, and of course, the loss of Hallie to Stoddard.

For her part, Hallie plays the role of the life of a politician’s wife to the hilt, but clearly has regret and sadness for the loss of Doniphn and his way of life. Stoddard himself has regret (hence, his insistance that Doniphan be buried with his boots, and his shock that Doniphan no longer carried a gun) and feels shame for his part in destroying that way of life despite the inevitablity and his lifelong effort to make life better for all, and it is that theme that informs the post-Valance portion of the story where Doniphan pushes Stoddard into running for election. Doniphan could have ended the reign of terror by killing Valance, even if he had to manipulate a conflict, and there would have been nothing but relief by both the townspeople and the sheriff, but it took Stoddard standing up to Valance in a hopless challenge where he would certainly lose for Doniphan to act. Doniphan made the choice to give up his way of life and Hallie, but it was Stoddard who took the risk in the brave stupidity of standing up to Valance in a gunfight he was guaranteed to lose, and the one who lived with the guilt of of his manufactured reputation and what it did to Doniphan.

Stranger

I feel like I’m reading outtakes from the movie “The interrogator.”