12 Movies Challenge: 'Shane' (1953)

by Julian Spivey

Photo: Paramount Pictures

This year, I’ve taken on the task of going through the American Film Institute’s 100 Greatest American Movies list and watching the top 12 I haven’t seen.

My first selection was “Shane,” director George Stevens’s 1953 Western about a gunfighter looking to give up the violent life who ends up working for homesteaders in sparse Wyoming.
The film was ranked No. 45 on AFI’s 2007 list.

“Shane” has been on my “too-watch” list for two decades now, and I haven’t gotten around to it (that list is hundreds of films long). It’s surprising because I’m such a huge fan of old Hollywood Westerns and “Shane” is considered top-tier among them. It’s the fourth highest ranked Western on the AFI list behind “The Searchers” (No. 12), “High Noon” (No. 27) and “The Treasure of the Sierra Madre” (No. 38).

I think the biggest reason I’ve always loved Westerns is that – most of the old Hollywood ones, at least – have a clear-cut idea of good versus bad, and the good guys always come out on top. I realize it’s a fantasy view of life today and, assuredly, life at the time these films are set, but aren’t movies an escape?

“Shane” is undoubtedly a tale of good versus bad. The titular character is a gunfighter who wants to put that aspect behind him and begins helping out a family of homesteaders being threatened off their land by a rancher who believes all the surrounding land to be his own.

The plot is similar to director Fred Zinneman’s “High Noon,” which came out the year before and was nominated for Best Picture and won Gary Cooper the Oscar for Best Actor. I can’t help but wonder if this may have played a role in Alan Ladd not being nominated the next year.

Stevens filmed “Shane” in Technicolor and used actual Wyoming locations. The beauty of such places wasn’t always captured in black-and-white Westerns, some of which were shot in Hollywood studios or backlot “Western towns.”

Some of the most fascinating aspects of “Shane” are what’s being said below the surface. It’s apparent – though never explicitly stated (primarily because of the period it was made) – that Shane and Marian (Jean Arthur) have romantic feelings for each other. And maybe it’s just me – because I know they never would’ve tried to get away with this in the early ‘50s – but I see some underlying romantic feelings between Shane and Joe (Van Heflin), too.

It was interesting seeing Arthur in a non-screwball comedy. I loved her work as the sharp, sarcastic dames in director Frank Capra’s “Mr. Deeds Goes to Town” (1936) and “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.” The only actress I’ve seen who could give her a run for her money in those type of movies was Barbara Stanwyck, a favorite of mine.

Seeing Arthur in something more dramatic was neat, but I don’t know that she added much to the film than any other actress.

The film belongs to Ladd and his quiet, stoic performance, and Heflin and his confident, “I won’t be pushed around” figure. They were co-leads to me, despite Heflin being the third bill behind Ladd and Arthur.

The performance of Joey, played by 11-year-old Brandon deWilde, who through his eyes a lot of the story is told, is another star of the film. He was nominated for an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor, the youngest actor ever nominated for an Oscar at the time.

Another Best Supporting Actor nomination from the film, more of a head-scratcher, was Jack Palance as the “black hat” Jack Wilson. He doesn’t have to do much in the film except look menacing and laugh maniacally, but he was new on the scene around that time, and maybe it was a new kind of menace for Hollywood.

The film's showdown between Shane and Wilson is one for the ages. It’s a Western low on gunfights, but the big showdown is well worth the wait.