SHANE: 50 Furious Westerns Series

Every now and then we at Furious Cinema turn to one of our favorite classic genres, the western. We’ve previously posted a list of 50 Furious Westerns, and to build on that, we’re launching a series of in-depth looks at some classics of the genre. No rules. First up is a guest post by Simon Gelten (one of the most active writers on The Spaghetti Western Database).

“Do you remember Dick Tracy, Do you remember Shane?”

This is a line from ‘The Pros and Cons of Hitch-Hiking’, a song by Roger Waters, of Pink Floyd fame. To Waters, and many others, Shane is a dear childhood memory, to be cherished a life long. Shane tells the story of a boy’s adoration for a mysterious stranger who comes to the aid of his family, the Starrets, small farmers who have settled in a valley, way out West. They’re menaced by a rancher called Ryker, who wants to chase the newcomers. Ryker tries to break the farmers’ resistance by hiring a professional killer, Wilson, who sets an example by provoking an older man to a ‘fair’ duel. Stimulated by Shane, Starret organizes the farmers in their struggle for survival, but it’s of course Shane who faces Wilson in a final duel.

Shane is idolized by the boy Joey, who doesn’t understand what effect the stranger has on his immediate surroundings. When Shane rides off into the proverbial sunset, Joey runs after him, shouting his name, begging him to stay. He seems to realize that his mother loves the stranger, but not what the consequences of her affections are. Shane was based on a short novel by Jack Schaefer. The novel is not a great work of art, but it works rather well, thanks to the literal trick to make us readers understand the events better than the person telling them. It’s a first-person narrative, told by the boy Joey. We see the events through his eyes, but read different things into them. First person narratives are always difficult to translate to film, and this novel turned out to be particularly difficult. In it Shane and his opponent Wilson, the gunslinger hired by Ryker, are both described as menacing and mysterious persons. We understand much better than Joey that that his past has been brutal and that he is a violent man too. Shane and Wilson are almost interchangeable characters: they have the same ability and readiness to kill if necessary. What makes Shane ‘good’ and Wilson ‘bad’, is Shane’s decision to side with the weaker party, the farmers.

Alan Ladd as Shane

In the film things are very different: instead of dark and menacing, Shane is all buckskin and goldilocks. And although Alan Ladd turns in a good performance, some have suggested that Montgomery Clift, director Stevens first choice for the part, would have been a better Shane. Still, there are moments that a glimpse can be spotted from the complex character suggested by the original story. Take, for instance, a close look at these scenes: Shane reaching for his gun and turning around when he hears the sound of someone loading a gun behind him, his horror when he notices it was the boy…Shane and Wilson silently examining each other, judging each other’s skills…Shane telling Starret that he might be a match for Ryker, but certainly not for Wilson…

The story of Shane alludes to a specific historical background, the Johnson County War of 1892, in which the big ranchers, still believing in free grazing, tried to chase the fast growing number of small farmers limiting their possibilities. It’s often seen as a pivotal moment in American history, marking the transition from an anarchic state to a democracy in the making. The film never tries to be a history lesson but still director Stevens manages to evoke some of the horror and fear this violent conflict must have provoked among the small farmers, who were constantly under the threat of being killed if they didn’t move to somewhere else. Fistfights really seem painful and bloody events here, and Elisha Cook’s backward jump when he’s hit by Wilson’s bullet, was a very daring shot at realism, considering the time of making. Actually, Shane is quite violent for a fifties western and the action scenes – two elaborated fistfights and the final shoot-out – are among the best ever filmed.


With Alan Ladd as the proverbial guardian angel and Jack Palance as the evil incarnate, Shane became the blueprint for numerous westerns about the lone gunman coming to the aid of defenceless people. Ladd’s buckskin and Palance’s black gloves (and sadistic smile) became recurring elements within the genre. The mud covered streets of the little western town, and Loyal Griggs breathtakingly beautiful (and Oscar winning) cinematography of the Wyoming landscape, were equally important for the way the genre would look like in the future as John Ford’s glorification of Monument Valley. And once you’ve heard his name echoing through the valley, you’ll never forget the name of



Simon Gelten

One of the most active contributers and senior reviewers of the Spaghetti Western Database (SWDB), Simon saw all Leones and several of the Corbuccis in cinema, most of the time in Eindhoven, the city where he was born. Currently Simon is living in Turnhout, Belgium.

You may also like...

4 Responses

  1. Great text for a great film. The first time I saw Shane I was 10 or 11, with my father, and some of those poweful images along with the feelings I had remain in my memory to this day. Truly one of the classics. Thanks for bringing those memories back.

  2. Peter Roberts says:

     superb review for one of the best westerns!

  3. Cajarman says:

    Great accessment of a great movie! Im looking forward to see if your
    list includes the westerns I own (and it most likely will…)
    Like Mr Menezes, I, too, saw this film with my father, along with
    alot of others I’ll never forget and thank my dad for introducing
    them to me.

  4. 100patrz says:

    this film has one of the best bar fight scenes ever

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *