Post by Chicago Jake on Jul 4, 2011 0:23:35 GMT -6
Watched on AMC, John Ford's late-career classic, "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance," starring John Wayne, Jimmy Stewart, Lee Marvin, Vera Miles, Edmond O'Brien, Andy Devine, and brief appearances by Strother Martin, Lee Van Cleef, John Carradine, and Denver Pyle.
I had never seen this classic before. John Ford was already very famous, mostly for vast, sweeping westerns filmed in Monument Valley in glorious Technicolor. But this movie, paradoxically, was filmed on back lots in a dull, dish-water sort of black&white.
I often talk about "glorious black&white photography" in movies, and I believe that it is often true. B&W can be stunningly beautiful. But not in this film: the palette was all grays. And the obvious studio (rather than location) filming was also kind of a disappointment. Until, that is, I really grokked what this movie was all about. Then I realized that it was a brilliant move on the part of the director!
The movie is about busting legends. Ford made the bulk of his movies creating legends (frequently with The Duke as the central figure). But this movie was about how legends often have feet of clay. Hence, it was poetic that his cinematography contradict the sweeping beauty of his earlier films, just as his story cuts his previous ones down to size.
Basically, Jimmy Stewart is an old Senator, coming back to his old Western home town for the funeral of a man nobody knows. When asked why, he tells his story, and most of the movie is a flashback, explaining the origins of his career. He was a young lawyer, and John Wayne was, well, John Wayne! The Duke did his Duke stuff, and Stewart got all the glory. Now, later in life, he wants to show that it wasn't his lawyering skills that made him what he became, but the quick fists and dead-eye shooting skills of The Duke.
Okay, this review is already longer than most people will bother to read, but I figured it was necessary to describe the subtleties of this multi-layered movie. I'll just add that Lee Marvin was awesome as the titular bad guy, and that Edmond O'Brien stole the show as the drunken newspaper publisher. If you haven't seen this flick, and if you like Westerns, you should probably check it out.......Jake
PS - one final caveat - this movie takes place both very early, and very late, in the careers of the two leads. Most of the movie is when they are young, like late 20s or early 30s. The beginning and end is when they are much older, like in their 60s. Both actors were in their 50s when it was filmed. And special effects in 1962 weren't that hot. So you have to suspend some disbelief when watching Wayne and Stewart playing youngsters!
PPS - If you are a Jimmy Buffet fan, and always wondered who he was talking about when he mentioned the "autographed picture of Andy Devine," this movie will show you.
I had never seen this classic before. John Ford was already very famous, mostly for vast, sweeping westerns filmed in Monument Valley in glorious Technicolor. But this movie, paradoxically, was filmed on back lots in a dull, dish-water sort of black&white.
I often talk about "glorious black&white photography" in movies, and I believe that it is often true. B&W can be stunningly beautiful. But not in this film: the palette was all grays. And the obvious studio (rather than location) filming was also kind of a disappointment. Until, that is, I really grokked what this movie was all about. Then I realized that it was a brilliant move on the part of the director!
The movie is about busting legends. Ford made the bulk of his movies creating legends (frequently with The Duke as the central figure). But this movie was about how legends often have feet of clay. Hence, it was poetic that his cinematography contradict the sweeping beauty of his earlier films, just as his story cuts his previous ones down to size.
Basically, Jimmy Stewart is an old Senator, coming back to his old Western home town for the funeral of a man nobody knows. When asked why, he tells his story, and most of the movie is a flashback, explaining the origins of his career. He was a young lawyer, and John Wayne was, well, John Wayne! The Duke did his Duke stuff, and Stewart got all the glory. Now, later in life, he wants to show that it wasn't his lawyering skills that made him what he became, but the quick fists and dead-eye shooting skills of The Duke.
Okay, this review is already longer than most people will bother to read, but I figured it was necessary to describe the subtleties of this multi-layered movie. I'll just add that Lee Marvin was awesome as the titular bad guy, and that Edmond O'Brien stole the show as the drunken newspaper publisher. If you haven't seen this flick, and if you like Westerns, you should probably check it out.......Jake
PS - one final caveat - this movie takes place both very early, and very late, in the careers of the two leads. Most of the movie is when they are young, like late 20s or early 30s. The beginning and end is when they are much older, like in their 60s. Both actors were in their 50s when it was filmed. And special effects in 1962 weren't that hot. So you have to suspend some disbelief when watching Wayne and Stewart playing youngsters!
PPS - If you are a Jimmy Buffet fan, and always wondered who he was talking about when he mentioned the "autographed picture of Andy Devine," this movie will show you.