MovieChat Forums > High Noon (1952) Discussion > I hated this movie, for many reasons...

I hated this movie, for many reasons...

posted 15 years ago by tarena02
76 replies | jump to latest

Hate is a little strong, it had a great cast, strong performances, especially by Cooper. But the story is absurd. This man is supposed to be some kind of town hero, they give him a big sendoff after his wedding. Then they turn their back on him the very same day? Did he not know these people? Was he that clueless about them? Its just not realistic that a whole town would act that way. Its simply not human nature to do so, the film makers had it backwards.

As to the production itself, it was made on the cheap, and looks it. The gunfight at the end was terrible by western standards. And these outlaws come to town with a plan to kill the Marshall? Some plan, easily allowing one man to pick off each of them, one at a time.

And to the whole blacklisting thing, most of those blacklisted were at the least sympathetic to communism, a great threat at the time. The HUAC (House Committee on Un-American Activities) and Joe McCarthy? McCarthy had nothing to do with it, he was in the Senate. As to McCarthy's claims that there were communists in the state department? He was right. Look up the name Alger Hiss and the Venona cables, enough said.

[–] nimstic 9 years ago

There is a serious mob psychology at play here, and it was so foresightedly and cleverly used by Zinnemann in this film. The town wouldn't fight with him because:

1) They had to question themselves against the threat of Miller
2) Kane is no longer a marshall
3) Kane leaving town was their hope, if you can see most them liked him and didn't want to see him die

And lastly and most importantly, its erratic to assume a crowd would behave like an individual (Let's say, an individual thinks something is "wrong" so he decided act against it while others are not. He can do it, but a mob does not function that way). There has to be much more serious tension, an impending doom that's unavoidable. You know the psychology of public lynching? That happens at the brink of a crisis and out of severe desperation. Not when the crisis can be averted (ie, Kane can leave town & problem solved, at least in the townsfolk's POV)

Kane knew the town. The town loved Kane. And he expected them to stand up for him, but they couldn't. He himself stayed after many reconsiderations, remember? He himself struggled to justify why he had to stay and endanger himself when he still had a chance to go, especially him just marrying the woman of his life only moments ago. Then how can you expect the entire town to actually decide this that easily? It wasn't surprising at all for me.

What a fantastic premise from start to finish. To me, it did not matter who Miller was, and if he's got killed in the end or not. I enjoyed every scene in the film. The tension; every scene was a stroke of a genius. What a class act from Gary Cooper. At first, he didn't seem very impressive to me. I thought James Stewart would have been a better choice but he came out incredible. Well deserved Oscar. IMO, one of the best westerns ever!

Also, Tarena: This is one of the earliest of Westerns. Please do not compare it to a more technically sound and superior fighting scenes in the films that came out much later. This is one of the best films IMO especially if you consider the time it was made in.

[–] jadedbaby 9 years ago

"This is one of the earliest of Westerns."

I appreciated your post, but you're wrong on this. The Western goes back a long, long, time, since the advent of film itself in the late 19th century. 1952 could be considered quite late, really, when you consider how the genre started declining in the 60's.

[–] king_cooler 9 years ago

This is one of the earliest westerns

Stagecoach was the first modern western back in 1939 and westerns had been going for a lot longer than that. High Noon came along late in the game.

[–] king_cooler 9 years ago

I hated it. Cooper was emotionless, Grace Kelly was pathetic, the dramatic music was just constant along with that repetitive annoying theme song, and overall worse than all that, it was just boring.

[–] SSteveL 9 years ago

But the story is absurd. This man is supposed to be some kind of town hero, they give him a big sendoff after his wedding. Then they turn their back on him the very same day? Did he not know these people? Was he that clueless about them? Its just not realistic that a whole town would act that way. Its simply not human nature to do so, the film makers had it backwards.

Like most people, the townsmen were "fair-weather" friends and apathetic bystanders.

It's one reason why the comparatively tiny number of politicians and bureaucrats can control/extort the majority. It's why a person who values freedom can't realistically stand up to--or even ignore--the state: he stands alone.

________________________
This signature has been deleted by the poster

[–] mightymac101 9 years ago

Neither Howard Hawks nor John Wayne liked this Western. Both director and star felt that the film's defeatist spirit severely deviated from their idea of what the “Real West” was all about. I so agree. I dislike it as well.