I like Shane much better.
The score in this movie was memorable but I thought Shane had more natural acting and a better pay off. What do you think?
shareThe score in this movie was memorable but I thought Shane had more natural acting and a better pay off. What do you think?
shareShane is a better western. High Noon is a western for libs. The Duke hated this film.
shareWhat does the Duke have to do with it? He was not in either film.
shareWhat does the Duke have to do with it
Most westerns are for libs. Big powerful rancher or the guy who "owns the town" is the bad guy. Lone hero sides with the underdogs. People who created their power base in absence of government don't want law and order. In Shane you also have the wife who wants gun control.
The past is a series of presents. The present is living history we are privileged to witness
I can't watch Shane a second time because of the whiny brat.
shareI had never seen High Noon in its entirety until recently. I was pretty disappointed. I don't get all thee hype about this film. Shane was way better.
~~the coins in the jar are for charity,~~
~~the coins in the tray are for sharing~~
I don't get all thee hype about this film.
Oh yes, Shane is much, much better movie. In fact, I would have loved to see Alan Ladd as Will Kane. Would have been much better movie
No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn ..... JM
Shane had the Wilson character. prove it. That was tough to match.
shareThis is a great western but Shane is one of the greatest films ever made.
share