Too much of everything

Just perfect...

A Masterpiece!

Close shines in drama with strong language, adult themes.

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.

Recently watched for the first time.Visually stunning and innovative at the time ,it now feels dated.The relationship between Joey and Shane works well and is the saving grace of the film.Alan Ladd convinces as an uncle figure with Joey but is physically too small to convince as a fighter. I suppose my benchmark for a good film is whether I would watch it again and the sad fact is I wouldn't watch this film again.. The Gunfighter was a much better film

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.

One of my all time favorite westerns. Alan Ladd, Van Heflin, and Jack Palance give fine performances in this classic. Jean Arthur is the wife trying to save her husband and Elisha Cook, Jr., is the heroic but outgunned homesteader. Heflin is the righteous husband who has the courage, but not the fighting skills, to confront his enemies.Palance steals the show as the vicious hired killer. His confrontation with Cook is riveting as he humiliates and then shoots him down in the street mud. Palance's every move is sinister He is so evil that even the dog slinks away from him. Jack meets his end at the hands of Shane in an epic gun battle. Shane challenges, baits him into drawing, and shoots first. His commentary on the dead man is "He was fast." Shane then blasts the rest of that evil family who is about to ambush him. The movie ends as Shane, wounded, rides off into the twilight, and little Brandon de Wilde, who has witnessed the battle, calls after him wistfully to no avail.