The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance was a 1962 western based on a 1953 short story written by Dorothy M. Johnson and was directed by the incredibly influential John Ford, who was responsible for movies like Stagecoach, The Searchers, and The Grapes of Wrath. With such an expansive filmography which started in the silent era and continued to flourish until the late 1960s, his experience and ties to the Western genre (even being responsible for introducing John Wayne) no doubt assisted and elevated the story, resulting in a critically and financially successful film even though it should’ve just been another on the pile. Sometime in the early 20th century, U.S Senator Ransom ‘’Ranse’’ Stoddard (played by James Stewart) arrives in the frontier town of Shinbone with his wife, Hallie (played by Vera Milles) to attend the funeral of an old friend, Tom Doniphon (played by John Wayne). Due to his pedigree, the local newspaper editor inquires why a senator would attend the funeral of an old rancher, and Ranse goes into further detail about how this town took him in when he was a young fresh lawyer after being robbed and beaten by infamous outlaw, Liberty Valance (played by Lee Marvin). Saved by Tom and his handyman, Pompey (played by Woody Strode), Ranse is taken to Hallie (who was Tom’s girlfriend at the time) so his wounds can heal, where he says that he wants to find a non-lethal way to take Liberty Vance down, which is laughed at by the very gun-happy Tom and the inept and incompetent local marshal, Link Applegate (played by Andy Devine). After Ranse sets up a law practice and a school to teach the children and illiterate adults, Vance returns and tries to intimidate the locals into voting him in as a delegate, but he is drowned out by the overwhelming support for Ranse and newspaper office editor, Dutton Peabody (played by Edmond O’Brien). Ranse learns that Liberty will continue to attack the town to get his way, so he has to decide if he is willing to follow Tom’s mindset and be the one to finally shoot and kill Liberty Valance or do things by the book and run the risk of Valance shooting his way into a position of power. Frequently cited as the last truly great film of Ford’s career, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance won over critics and audiences as well as made its money back, and while it doesn’t entirely escape the errors of its then dying genre, the competency behind the acting, directing, visuals and even a few of its ideas, make it one that is still perfectly enjoyable.

The western genre was just on the cusp of being irrelevant as it wasn’t a big draw anymore, and despite still being made throughout the 20th century, many could argue the novelty had already worn out past the silent era (when they were at their most popular) and were more commonly viewed as enjoyable junk food that could steep into occasional genius with the correct handling and directing (ironically much like the comic-book movie phase of nowadays, which is also heading towards overexposure). Despite this, Liberty Valance didn’t suffer this hesitance, with a majority of critics praising the film for deconstructing the heroic western archetype (proving how even then, it had already grown tiring to play it straight), and while it definitely does contain a thoughtful edge that provides more of insight into an otherwise mindless environment, it’s hard to say it is a proper deconstruction of the genre, but rather just pointing out poor ideals and dashing in stronger ones to make it flow better. Honestly, the strongest aspects of the story are when it’s not trying to be a western and instead act as a fish-out-of-water tale that involves political machinations and the evolution of the west from uncivilized and anarchic to respectable and societal. Despite the obvious message of violence vs law, it is interesting to see someone who is incredibly law-focused be thrown into the easily corruptible and wild western landscape during this time period where everything was run by a different code, seeing this ideology evolve the town for the better is refreshing, the fact that the expected shoot-out is more a conflict of integrity and morals rather than a climatic triumph is pretty nice, and all of this comes from a pretty decent screenplay written by James Warner Bellah and Willis Goldbeck. The best scene is when Stewart is teaching the people of the town about American history, as it’s a moment that has a charming and genuine quality to it as well as some quiet poignancy when examined a little closer.  With that said, the actual western stuff, while done fine, is pretty predictable and bland by comparison, feeling largely uninteresting, outdated and even a little unlikeable, with the only thing keeping it from growing any sourer is Ford’s capacity to structure the movie in a solid enough way. While it is an acquired genre, the best ones know how to win people over with spectacle and cinematic flair, but since this film doesn’t really have that, it’s fighting an uphill battle. Either way, the effective scene work and gripping dialogue is strong enough to hold people’s attention and make it stand apart from others in the genre.

The movie actually houses a decently large list of characters and does some fun things with a few of them even if they’re not fully explored. Highlighting the lack of education within this western town and how some of the townsfolk are affected by it either due to their upbringing or heritage is a nice touch, ties into the message of progressing past the outdated past and makes for engaging material when they start to learn (again, that school scene is pretty good). The original short story carried quite a few differences from this adaptation (John Wayne’s character was actually called Bert Barricune) and most of the layout is either heavily truncated or bolstered to the point that they feel like entirely different animals. In terms of comparison, the book seems to handle its leads a little better, as the film portrayals are much more black and white in comparison to the short story, as Ranse in the book is much more dirty, pitiful, lowly, and aggressive than the sensitive and soft-spoken Stewart, and Burt/John is actually more understanding and soft-spoken against the typically in-your face and ‘’manly’’ demeanor of John Wayne. Neither character is especially interesting or even very likeable as a lot of it only relies on the acting to save them. James Stewart does put in a lot of effort whenever he gets a role, and while his sunny and usually spotlessly cheery persona can conflict with his character and feel a little bit much during the opening act (especially when he tries to speak like a cowboy), the rest of the performance is perfectly decent and does play to Stewart’s strengths as an actor. John Wayne has played the exact same role his entire life, and while he did it fine, it’s a role that isn’t very engaging or even that likeable(it has a lot of misogynistic and prejudicial qualities that would never fly today and feel pretty uncomfortable now) so his character here is just as one-note, very unsympathetic and kind of a waste of a role when you think about how little he does. Even ignoring how old they are in comparison to their chosen age in the film (making two men in their 50s try to play 20-year-olds isn’t very smart), they don’t offer much sadly. Some of the side characters like Vera Miles, Woody Strode, Jeanette Nolan, John Qualen and John Carradine are okay in parts and are likeable enough faces for their relatively small screen time, but people like Edmond O’Brien, Andy Devine and especially Lee Marvin are a little too over-the-top and come across as one-note stereotypes who are incredibly annoying to be around.

There’s been a lot of debate to why the movie was shot in black and white as it’s hard to say whether it was because of an artistic choice or a budgetary reason since nothing about the film seems to require it. Some say it was because Paramount wasn’t offering enough money so Ford didn’t have a choice, others say it was to mask Stewart and Wayne’s ages (which wouldn’t have worked in the slightest, but whatever), others say it was to make the old west feel ancient and like a bygone era, there doesn’t seem to be a concrete conclusion behind this choice and it’s a strange enigmatic component of this picture. Regardless of intent, the movie does still look quite nice and uses the black and white to get some nice shots and moments of lighting. Because Ford had been working in film since the silent era, he would undoubtedly have worked with and know how to shoot black and white in the best, most effective manner, making this specific period and environment still look cinematic and cool through the use of camera work, lighting and staging, it never feels like a gimmick when watching and just comes across as a natural choice. You can’t recognize any familiar Western tropes in this movie in terms of visual layout, as even the way the film is shot and presented by cinematographer William H. Clothier is more straightforward and unlike the more sweeping presentation of a typical western. There’s more usage of tracking motion when there’s a fight scene rather than overly dramatic close ups and still shots of faces, it feels alien in that sense but in a good way, like providing a new sense or feeling to a familiar trope. The sets as well as the costumes make the environment look authentic and like a traditional western, as does the score handled by Cyril Mockridge, but because of this, they don’t really stand out by comparison and just feel like more of the same.

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance makes for a decently enjoyable feature that honestly works much better when it’s not stuck being a typical western and talks about political drama, which is an ironic statement and a sad showcase of how the western genre already started to lose its footing way before it stopped being relevant. The short story seems to have more going for it in terms of what its message is supposed to represent and uses its characters a bit more effectively, as even when this movie makes adjustments that feel right on paper, the execution veers too far away from the original intent which results in some characters getting too much screen time and others not enough. With that said, some of the characters are still good and memorable, it looks nice and unique for a western, and the learning process of this town is the stuff worth checking out, so it will provide something a little atypical at least. See for yourself who Shot Liberty Valance and realize why it was stupid that it needed to be a secret in the first place (at least in terms of the marketing).