User reviews

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.

This movie starts off pretending to be Old Yeller and moves slowly and ominously into death and carnage mode. Great performances by Alan Ladd and Van Heflin with a disturbingly wicked portrayal of an assassin by Jack Palance turn this from a standard cowboy flick into a masterpiece. The trope of the stranger come to help the beleaguered family is worked to its best effect. A classic western not to be missed.

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.

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.

SHANE is an entirely visual and iconic example of the western genre that also standards as Alan Ladd's most famous role. The thing that makes this film is the direction from George Stevens, which is really something else. Stevens carefully crafts a film that looks a treat and his direction of the action sequences is second to none, making them some of the strongest of the genre. My only real complaint with this film is the incessant use of day-for-night filming; everything else is great.

The story is one of those ones which has plenty of mileage in it. Alan Ladd plays a retired gunslinger who joins up with a group of settlers, including Van Heflin who is fine in support and bags a more interesting character than Ladd's. The settlers find themselves up against Emile Meyer as the cruel Ryker, and his various men including veteran genre star Ben Johnson and Jack Palance in a truly evil, star-making performance. Elisha Cook Jr. is here too, playing a tougher character than you'd expect.

A lot of the material is told through the eyes of your typically annoying American kid, but thankfully he's not too grating and at least his heart is in the right place. There's plenty of suspense and drama to keep the tale moving, but it's the action which really hits home. The excellent climax is a given - and Eastwood would later reference it in UNFORGIVEN - but it's the bar-room brawl which is something else, one of the most powerful fist-fights I've seen on a film. Top stuff indeed.

Often mentioned as one of the greatest westerns ever, it is easy to see why. This film stands as a masterpiece of the art, even more so since it was filmed so long ago. It starts with a great story, the story of Shane (Alan Ladd), a quiet gunslinger who is trying to escape his past and befriends a pioneer family who have settled out west. He attempts to settle down and become a hired hand to Joe Starrett (Van Heflin) and his wife Marian (Jean Arthur), but the ranchers who need to drive cattle through the homesteader's property are attempting to drive them out. Shane tries to stay out of the disputes, but keeps being drawn in and is finally compelled to put his six shooter back on when the ranchers hire Jack Wilson (Jack Palance) a noted gunfighter to intimidate the farmers.

This story is outstanding in so many ways. It is a classic battle of good and evil. It has its share of fist fights and shoot outs, but this film is more about principles than action. It exemplifies principles and values that unfortunately have become outdated in today's society such as, character, integrity, loyalty, pride in accomplishment, persistence and the willingness to fight for what is right. It is also an excellent human interest story and succeeds in getting the viewer to love the homesteaders and hate the ranchers.

George Stevens directed this film late in a notable career and does a splendid job. The locations were breathtaking, shot with majestic mountains in the background of almost every scene. The cinematography was stunning, and the color rich despite the fact that it was filmed almost 50 years ago.

The acting was superlative. Van Heflin wins us over almost immediately with his high minded principles and unshakeable character. He actually has far more lines than Ladd, who was more of an icon of strength than a vocal character. Jack Palance is the archetypal western villain and went on in his career to become the most prominent and enduring villain in movie history. His sneering arrogance and haughty gait made him the villain we loved to hate for decades.

Elisha Cook, as Stonewall Torrey, had a prolific career as a supporting actor, with over 150 appearances in film an TV that spanned almost 60 years. This is one of his best an most memorable roles as a fearless, proud and petulant former confederate that gets goaded into a gunfight with Jack Palance.

Brandon DeWilde as young Joey, gave a compelling performance. One of the best scenes in the movie was when he asked Shane to shoot at a small rock and Shane shot it 5 or 6 times and hit it every time. The wide eyed look of surprise was terrific. Though he went on to do about a dozen mostly minor films, he was never able to capitalize on his success in this role.

Finally, there is Alan Ladd. I've often heard criticisms of his performance of being too low key. I could not disagree more. His understated performance made him loom large as an imposing figure in the film. It created an almost godlike presence. This strong silent portrayal is very attractive adding humility to his many positive qualities. This unassuming style is also what made Gary Cooper so popular.

This film is on my top fifty list of all time. It is a magnum opus that the film industry can be proud of. It combines great filmmaking, direction and acting with a memorable and morally instructive story. This should be required viewing for any serious film buff. A perfect 10.

This is a classic Western about usual confrontation between cattlemen and homesteaders. A strange and weary cowboy named Shame comes to defense peasants in their struggle against the nasty owners , as the gunfighter fighting to stifle the conflicts between homesteaders and cattlemen who hire a hired hand . A drifter (Alan Ladd) comes to a farm in the Old West just in time to reckoning gunslingers and owners . Shane attempts to settle down with a homestead husband named Starrett (Van Heflin) , his wife named Marian (Jean Arthur was over 50 years old ,she was, in fact, ten years older than Emile Meyer and Katharine Hepburn was originally suggested for the role of Marian) and a son , but a smoldering settler/rancher conflict forces him to act. He is a mysterious gunfighter who comes to the aid of countrymen from a greedy wealthy owner (top-notch Emile Meyer as grizzled old cattle baron Rufus Ryker) trying to encroach on their land . Meanwhile , the Good Stranger is idolized by their son (Brandon De Wilde). As the wealthy owner contracts an outlaw as hired gunfighter (Jack Palance) to kill Starrett and Shane.

Well crafted and sweeping Western with interesting screenplay written by A. B Guthrie , including memorable dialogue and important phrases , as the movie's line "Come back, Shane!" was voted as the #69 of "The 100 Greatest Movie Lines" by Premiere in 2007 . Agreeable Western packs drama , thrills , go riding , shootouts and some moving action sequences . It's a high budget film with good actors , technicians, production values and pleasing results . Alan Ladd is unforgettable in the title role coming to help a group of struggling homesteaders . Director George Stevens originally cast Montgomery Clift as Shane and William Holden as Joe Starrett , when both decided to do other films instead, "Shane" was nearly abandoned , a bit later on , upon seeing a list of actors under contract to the studio, Stevens cast Alan Ladd, Van Heflin and Jean Arthur . The scene where Alan Ladd practices shooting in front of Brandon De Wilde took 119 takes to complete. Good casting with several prestigious secondaries as Edgar Buchanan , Ben Johnson , John Dierkes , Elisha Cook Jr , and special mention to Jack Palance as a downright nasty pistolero . Exquisitely shot in CinemaScope by Loyal Griggs who deservedly won Oscar Best Cinematography , with a magnificent photo tography on impressive exteriors and snowy mountains backgrounds , being filmed on location in Big Bear Lake, Big Bear Valley, San Bernardino National Forest, California and Grand Teton National Park, Moose, Wyoming . Thrilling as well as sensitive musical score by Victor Young , though the music cues for the climactic ride that Shane takes to the showdown are from an earlier Paramount film, ¨Rope of sand¨ . Although the movie is generally remembered for its blue sky vistas, the weather was actually cloudy or rainy for a great deal of the shoot ; however, if you look beyond the mud in the town, you can see that the ground is dry , obviously, part of the town had been watered down . Meticulous care was taken at all levels of production. All the physical props were true to the period, the buildings were built to the specifications of the time and the clothing was completely authentic , director George Stevens even had somewhat scrawny-looking cattle imported from other areas, as the local herds looked too well-fed and healthy .

The motion picture was directed in sure visual eye by the great George Stevens . In 2007, the American Film Institute ranked this as the #45 Greatest Movie of All Time and ranked #3 on the American Film Institute's list of the 10 greatest films in the genre "Western" in June 2008 . Many years later , Clint Eastwood directed ¨Pale rider¨ , this film is made in somewhat similar style to ¨Shane¨ , and which so much cloning of ¨High plains drifter¨ also directed by Eastwood only this time the drifter appears to have been sent from hell rather than heaven to right from ordinary injustices . This classic Western ¨Shane¨ as good as the notorious ¨Pale rider¨ is splendid in every way . It was followed by a TV series starred by David Carradine and Jill Ireland , equally titled ¨Shane¨.

Hoping to put his violent past behind him, a former gunslinger tries to settle into a small town, only to soon find himself compelled to fight again this iconic western starring Alan Ladd as the laconic title character. The plot is more complicated than just that as a young boy also comes to idolise Ladd and the film has some very good scenes as Brandon De Wilde slyly keeps looking at Ladd at the dinner table and silently sneaks out to watch him fight. De Wilde has such expressive eyes that it is almost no wonder that he was nominated for an Oscar back in the day; unfortunately, whenever he opens his mouth to speak, the magic is ruined. While his shrill, whiny voice is no help, he is not exactly saddled with the best dialogue either, and it is hard not to wonder whether the film may have come off better with more focus on Ladd's checkered history (and reluctance to fight once again) rather than De Wilde's idol worship of the man. Add in overbearing music and an underwritten character for Jean Arthur as De Wilde's mother, who may or may not have designs on Ladd herself, and 'Shane' is hardly a flawless masterpiece. The lush colour photography is a very nice touch though, the mysteriousness of Ladd's past is handled well, and topped off by one surefire memorable ambiguous ending, it is easy to see why some consider this to be a classic of the genre.

"Shane" should be required viewing for anyone setting out to make a film. It tells its story visually, through subtext, and creates a realistic portrait of people; it is also emotionally and morally complex. It is never stated that Shane had been a gunfighter; we just understand this, from his appearance and from what we glean through the dialogue. Likewise, there are no overt moments of intimacy between Shane and Marion (Mrs. Starrett), but we are aware that there is a deep attraction between them. When Joe, Marian's husband, realizes it, it is not because of anything he states, just a line at the 4th of July party, when Marian (in her wedding dress) is dancing with Shane: "Looks like I'm fenced out," and what is spoken as a joke becomes serious as we watch the expression on his face. The closest he comes to actually saying anything is toward the end, when he's going to ride into town to face Ryker, and tells Marian that if anything happens to him he knows she'll be taken care of. Likewise, at the end of the film, when little Joey is calling across the plains for Shane to "come back," he yells to Shane, "Mother wants you, I know she does," and the words echo back, we see a close up of Joey, his expression changing, and we know the child realizes too that Shane does (or could) mean something more to his mother.

Stevens also didn't make the "bad guys" black-and-white villains. We understand that these men fought and tamed the land and are now being displaced by the homesteaders. What they want might not be fair, but it is not completely unreasonable either.

Most of the scenes, even the simple ones, play in montage. It looks as though Stevens shot each scene from about 15 different angles and edited them together. The effect is striking.

Far and away one of the best films ever.

George Stevens directed Alan Ladd as Shane, a drifter and retired gunfighter drawn into a conflict between a cattle baron and homesteaders, like the Starretts(played by Van Heflin, Jean Arthur, and Brandon Wilde as their son Joey) Shane is staying with the Starretts, and cannot sit idly by while they(and others) are being forced off their land, especially when a thug(played by Ben Johnson) and a notorious gunfighter(played by Jack Palance) start terrorizing and murdering... Well-remembered western is a bit overpraised but still entertaining and interesting, with fine performances and memorable final scene offsetting the familiar and predictable plot.

Shane is an awesome film. Loyal Griggs' cinematography uses the Grand Teton Mountains as a scenic backdrop in framing a simple story of ranchers vs. homesteaders in early Wyoming. Alan Ladd stars as the enigmatic gunfighter named Shane. Ladd has seldom been better. He sides with a homesteader family (Van Heflin, Jean Arthur and Brandon DeWilde) against local ranchers named Ryker (Elisha Meyer and John Dierkes). The Rykers hire a gunfighter (Jack Palance) from Cheyenne to drive off the homesteaders. Shane tries to put down his gun and start a new life, but the plot inevitably forces him to a fateful climax with the Rykers and the hired gun.

The film has a darkly realistic look. Grafton's saloon is dark and moody, far different from the brightly lit and colorful dance halls in other Westerns. The film is alternately bright and dark. The sadistic killing of the homesteader by the gunfighter is a dark moment even though it occurs in broad daylight. Director George Stevens took advantage of an afternoon thunderstorm and plenty of mud to make one of the most memorable scenes in the movie. The thunder provides an appropriate backdrop to the confrontation between Torrey (Elisha Cook, Jr.) and the gunfighter. This is little more than an execution and the gunfighter goes about his business with a cool, detached professionalism. Although small, Jack Palance's performance as the gunfighter from Cheyenne is one of the most memorable in the film.

Shane's background provides plenty of questions but few answers. "Where will you go", Marian Starret (Jean Arthur) asks. "One place or another. ..someplace I've never been," Shane says. All we know is that he's a gunfighter. It becomes clear that he knows about gunfighting. He's even heard of the gunfighter hired by Ryker. Chris Calloway (Ben Johnson) and another cowboy are playing cards in Grafton's saloon when Shane walks in. Calloway starts to pick a fight. The other man gets up and says "Deal me out. . .Let's just say I'm superstitious." Does he know Shane? More than likely he does, but we'll never know for sure. Shane's mysteriousness is one of the film's strengths.

This is a film about personal relationships. Shane and Joe Starret (Van Heflin) become friends. The relationship between Shane and Marian Starret defies description. Is it love? Respect? Whatever it is, it becomes clear in the late moments of the film that her husband has observed it, too. There is also a close bond between Shane and Little Joe Starret (Brandon DeWilde). The film is told through the eyes of the boy.

This is a film about good and evil, but good and evil sometimes overlap. Jack Palance represents evil. His black hat, black gloves and black vest leave little doubt which side he's on. The Rykers are bad, but they are not all bad. Rufe (Emile Meyer) tries to make a deal with Starret and speaks with sincerity and feeling about his right to the range. The homesteaders are good, but one of them, Torrey, is a hot head. Shane is a good guy. Or is he? Marian Starret tells him in one memorable scene that she won't be happy until all the guns are out of the valley--"even yours". Shane realizes this. Despite his attempts to start a new life, he tells Brandon DeWilde after the final showdown at Grafton's: "Tell your mother that there are no more guns in the valley."

The image of death stalks through this film in many forms. The scene where the gunfighter rides into town makes it clear that he is the messenger of death. Shane tells Marian Starret that "a gun is a tool", but she knows that it is an engine of death. "Guns aren't going to be my boys life," she says. The scene where Shane shows Little Joe how to shoot demonstrates the power of the gun. The shooting of the homesteader in the dark, muddy street is followed by his burial in a cemetery on a bright, sunny day set against the grandeur of the mountains. In the final frame Shane rides out of the valley and through that same cemetery. Death once again rides a horse.

I really enjoy Victor Young's musical score. The opening melody, "Call of the Faraway Hills", has been frequently recorded and is only a little less familiar than "The Magnificent Seven". It is unfortunate that no-one has seen fit to make the score for this film available to collectors. I keep hoping.

Shane is a memorable film with fine performances. The story of cattlemen vs. homesteaders is a familiar one, but it is told here with originality and feelings. The characters, whether good or bad, are vivid and deep. I'll never get tired of watching it. I only wish they'd make a wide-screen version available.

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.

A lonesome stranger rides on to a homesteader's farm looking for water and right after him comes the big cattle baron with several riders issuing the latest of several warning to this particular squatter about getting off 'his' range. Something about the man's bullying attitude rubs the stranger the wrong way and he decides to stay and lend a hand.

So begins the classic western Shane which has entertained millions since its release in 1953. It gave Alan Ladd his career role and resulted in Oscar nominations for Jack Palance and Brandon DeWilde in the Best Supporting Actor category. It could have revived Alan Ladd's career, but for a fatal career decision by his agent/wife Sue Carol.

Shane was shot in 1951 completely on location in the Grand Teton mountains in Wyoming. Another reviewer pointed out that director George Stevens seem to meticulously shoot the same scene from many angles. He did just that and spent a year editing his masterpiece.

But in the mean time Sue Carol made a decision for her husband to leave Paramount and sign with Warner Brothers. Had she held out and waited for Shane's release, she might have gotten a great deal from Paramount that might have included better parts. As it was Paramount had no reason to push this film at Oscar time, so Ladd got no nomination for Best Actor which he could have with some studio backing. By the time Shane was out, Ladd was with Warner Brothers and doing some of the same routine action adventures films that he was doing at Paramount. No classic roles for that man any more.

The rancher versus homesteader is an old western plot story and there have been many films made from both points of view. Shane leaves no doubt that the homesteaders are in the right. The cattleman's point of view is eloquently argued in Elia Kazan's Sea of Grass by Spencer Tracy. That western icon John Wayne's been on both sides of the fence, in McLintock he's a cattle baron, in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance he's a small rancher and protector of the homesteader.

Even Emile Meyer as Rufe Ryker does make a valid point that his kind settled the west when it was really wild. Van Heflin as Joe Starrett argues equally eloquently that doesn't give him the right to say no one else has any rights in the territory.

Shane marked the farewell big screen performance of Jean Arthur. A talented, but terribly strange woman with a whole lot of issues, Arthur delivers a good performance as Van Heflin's missus. She felt she was miscast as a farmer's wife, in westerns she saw herself more in the frontier woman roles she did in The Plainsman and Arizona. And at that she much preferred screwball comedy to any western. They weren't making her kind of films any more as she saw it, so she left.

When Shane's done doing what fate brought him to do in the valley he has to leave. For the community to grow there must be no more guns in the valley as he well realizes. So he leaves to an unknown fate, living in the hearts and memories of the Starrett family and the rest of the small farmers, especially young Brandon DeWilde.

And in the hearts of all lovers of the western genre including this little cowpoke who saw him as a small lad on the big silver screen so many years ago.

"Shane" is one of my favourite novels and so I've always been a bit disappointed in the movie. The book has so many subtleties missing from the film e.g. in the book Shane rides onto the Starrett ranch not wearing a gun, which automatically tells us something about the man.

And in the book, Shane silently reveals the pain of his past when he's showing Bobby (pointlessly renamed Joey in the film) how to shoot.

Apart from this I think my main problem lies in the casting. Besides a suitably menacing Jack Palance (in part apparently due to his fear of horses), none of the cast impress. Alan Ladd looks too wimpy in his frilled top to look significant and Jean Arthur, normally one of my favourites is frankly too old and reserved to be a believable source of the sexual tension that appears between Marion and Shane in the book.

A fine western; but it could have been a great one.

Shane[1953] is a masterpiece on so many levels that it is truly difficult to know where to begin. I could start by comparing it with "High Noon", a deserving and highly-praised effort which really cleaned up at the Oscars the previous year[1952], but which now seems very dated and somewhat artificial in my opinion. By comparison, Shane feels as if it could have been made last month, by all of our best film professionals working together on what can only be described as a labour of love - - music, cinematography, screenplay, acting, production design - - everything.

I saw Shane first when I was 8 or 9 years old, in the Daylight theatre in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, back in 1953 when it was first released. I have since seem this moving and beautiful parable at least a dozen times since then, and it keeps getting better each time, like a truly masterful piece of symphonic music with many layers and textures. The imagery in Shane is so deep and the story so full of mythological archetypes that the experience evoked in the viewer is timeless - - it is really about the "hero's journey". And the dialogue in Shane is every bit as authentic, noble and powerful as it was when I first saw it as a wide-eyed little boy who was knocked right off his feet. The experience keeps getting deeper and deeper, as I get older.

Shane is much more than a Western. It has more in common with the Saxon myth Beowulf or Homer's Odyssey than it does with other Westerns, or for that matter with most other movies. Shane is really an epic, an inspiring and beautifully made epic, which speaks to the very deepest parts of us, of what is means to be human - - - and to stand up on your own and be counted.

Bravo to George Stevens! Bravo to Alan Ladd and the rest of a stellar cast. Without a doubt one of the best dozen or so movies ever made.

That character referred to in the title is obviously Joey Starrett, played by Brandon de Wilde. Kids in main roles in movies is generally a bad idea and it has only been succesful so little times, yet it has been done ( To Kill a Mockingbird, Jurassic Park, The Sixth Sense, Taxi Driver to name a couple of movies featuring excellent children actors in lead roles ). But unfortunately in Shane this was not the case.

Ofcourse, the good points of such a mixed film should be mentioned first. The cinematography is obviously the greatest part in this film. The scenery in Wyoming coupled with the excellent camera angles showing beautiful plains and mountains in the distance result in a breath taking visual experience. This results in many beautiful shots, such as the one with Ryker first appearing under the beautiful scenery. The acting of Alan Ladd as Shane, Van Heflin as Joe Starrett & Jack Palance as Jack Wilson especially was excellent, and seemingly could not have been better. Character development seemingly is also fine in order, with the audience slowly getting a better view on what kind of person Shane is, because that seems to be a bit of a mystery at the start, frequently getting startled by sudden sounds while quickly reaching for his gun. The music is also an excellent addition to what could have been a great film.

Unfortunately even though the film succeeds on most primary accounts on what a movie should have, one annoying and irritating or badly acted character can ruin it all, and Brandon de Wilde managed to do just that. His repeated forced phrasing of the word 'Shane' just makes you cringe and regret every time he comes on the screen. The entire movie i was hoping there would be more scenes between Shane and Wilson and less with Shane and the terribly acted kid. Every word out of his mouth just has a terrible delivery and comes across as incredibly forced. Compare his acting to the raw natural acting of the two main kid characters in To Kill a Mockingbird for example. It is just such a gigantic gap in acting quality. Also combine it with the fact that Jean Arthur as Marian Starrett also gives off a pretty weak performance and Elisha Cook Jr. ( While being a great actor ) is simply miscast as i could never take him seriously as the tough guy that isn't scared of anything in the face of danger.

While it is a film that has its great moments ( Most of these are ones where Brandon de Wilde is absent ) and has beautiful scenery, it is unfortunately a display of how one character can bring a movie down, which makes my verdict a mixed one.

This is a decent movie, but nothing like the book I fell in love with years ago as a junior high kid. I see this movie on cable so often and I just reread the book so I can't help but comment. The SHANE Jack Schaefer describes in his great book is a dynamic, mysterious figure, not like the unimposing presence of Alan Ladd. Equally disturbing is the boy, Joey (Bob, in the book). The book is written in first person through an intelligent, perceptive young boy's eyes. The kid in the movie is a simpleton. While the family faces a huge life-threatening crisis, this moron kid is running around pretending to have a gun, yelling "Bang, Bang, Bang..." Wow. The setting may have picturesque, but it was unimpressive to me that while Joe and Shane had their battle in near darkness, an hour later daylight is very evident. Still, an entertaining film with a moving story. But if you enjoyed this movie, I strongly suggest the book to tug at your heart.

Touching western has a perfectly-cast Alan Ladd portraying a soft-spoken gunslinger on the verge of retiring, happening upon an innocent Wyoming farm family involved in a range war. Appealing picture in which all the good, decent folk fall under Shane's laconic charm (everyone gets a crush on him!). The bar fight between Alan Ladd and Ben Johnson is wonderfully crisp and exciting, shot and edited for maximum impact. Director George Stevens' pacing isn't always smooth, the film has some sound and continuity problems, and the second-half doesn't quite live up to the promise of the first, but the performances are all excellent (particularly by super child-actor Brandon De Wilde). Besides, it's a hardened man who doesn't tear up at the finale. *** from ****

If George Stevens' goal was to make the most boring, slow, uninteresting, and dreadful western ever, then he absolutely succeeded. I'm a fan of classic movies so I decided to give this "timeless classic" a watch. It was one of the worst movies I had ever seen. Sure, the cinematography is gorgeous but that doesn't make it a great movie. It seems Stevens tried to use extra stunning backgrounds to make up for the fact that he did not have a good story nor good characters. The dialogue is bland and incredibly corny...like when Jean Arthur sees her husband take out a gun and screams, "NOOO!!! You can't kill him!! That's so wrong!!" Plus I noticed quite a few continuity errors, which is not uncommon in movies but still.

I honestly can't think of a single thing I like about this movie. I looked up a few clips on YouTube so I could browse the comments and see what other people thought of it. I was shocked that so many people loved it. One person mentioned having watched the movie "over a hundred times". Geez, I could barely sit through this movie once, let alone watch it a hundred times. I think the only way somebody could enjoy this movie is if they really love home-on-the- range scenery or have a crush on Alan Ladd or something. I'm not sorry I watched the movie though; it teaches a good lesson. The lesson is that a true masterpiece lies in the eyes of the beholder. While I despise this disaster of filmmaking, it has nonetheless been awarded the "greatest western ever made". But in my mind, this only proves that the audience had extremely poor taste in films.