As John Ford’s ‘The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance’ turns 60, it’s time to revisit it with a fresh perspective

Legendary American filmmaker John Ford’s Western classic, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, turns 60 this month. It’s based on a screenplay by James Warner Bellah and Willis Goldbeck, adapted from a 1953 short story of the same name, written by Dorothy M Johnson. The film’s central theme is the clash between the gun and the book. In the film, a frontiersman picks up a gun in order to guard a town newbie and aspiring lawyer, who firmly believes in the power of books (a source of knowledge) and looks down on guns (a manifestation of violence), against a vicious outlaw. In the end, the bad guy gets eliminated only because of a righteous man who understands the importance of the gun as a keeper of peace. In the light of what’s currently happening in Ukraine as well as Taliban’s return to power in Afghanistan, I think it’s important to revisit a film like The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance while trying to understand Ford’s true vision behind the film. In 2007, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress, being described as “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant.” Other than the film’s unique casting that brought together two of America’s biggest movie icons, John Wayne and James Stewart, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance is particularly famous for Ford’s choice to make the film in black and white in contrast to his earlier Western classics such as The Searchers (1956) and She Wore a Yellow Ribbon (1949), which he shot in colour. Anyone who has seen The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance can easily tell that it wouldn’t have had the same impact in colour. Ford knew deep down that it was going to be his darkest film yet. He was also aware that the moody interplay of light and shadows during the most crucial scenes in the film would not manifest well in color. So he made a conscious choice to shoot the film in black and white. It has also been argued that with the film, Ford was trying to present a more realistic portrayal of frontier life, as opposed to his earlier films which somewhat romanticised it, hoping for a fundamental reimagining of the mythic West that his previous western classics had helped create. Some critics also feel that the decision was based on a conscious attempt to cut costs, especially since Ford had cast two big names, Stewart and Wayne, as the film’s two leads. Now while it is true that often black and white cinematography helped with the budget (not only the stock was cheaper but it also helped reduce the spending on the sets, locations, consumes, and lighting), it is also true that major filmmakers like Hitchcock and Ford could always count on the studios, if they ever wanted a little extra money they. But if that’s the case why did Hitchcock make Psycho in black and white even though he had the choice of making it in colour (remember, Hitchcock had been making colour films starting with the late 1940s). Well, the answer is simple. Hitchcock knew he would never be able to get the film through the censors had he made it in colour. Just think of that famous shower scene from the film. It would never have been cleared with all that blood flowing through the drain. Interestingly, Hitchcock used Hershey’s chocolate syrup for the purpose as it helped in getting that dark colour right in black and white. Coming back to The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, why is it regarded as a very special film in Ford’s formidable filmography? Well, for starters, it’s a film that a young John Ford couldn’t have made. It’s a film that marks a departure from the ideals of the Old West. Throughout the movie there is a clash between the gun and the book. The Old West is dying and so books are going to pave the way for a better future but who would protect the man carrying the book? Of course, the man with the gun! While Ford wouldn’t offer any definitive answers, he wanted the audiences to know that the foundations of the modern world would be dependent on both the books as well as guns. When one thinks of the Indian students who were stranded in Ukraine as Russia launched a war on Ukraine, it’s not very difficult to understand why an ageing visionary like Ford chose to make a film like The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, during the tumultuous Cold War days of the early 1960s. Wayne is exceptional as Tom Doniphon, which arguably is his greatest screen performance in a stellar career that’s studded with so many unforgettable performances. And, of course, there is Stewart who looks ever so charming as Ransom “Ranse” Stoddard, even at a fairly advanced age. Also, let’s not forget Lee Marvin who brings unforeseen savagery, essaying the part of the film’s notorious antagonist, Liberty Valance. The film also features Vera Miles as the strong-willed but kind-hearted Hallie, Lee Van Cleef as Valance’s sidekick Reese, and Woody Strode as Doniphon’s handyman Pompey, among others. Now, few films over the decades have managed to redefine a genre like The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance reinvented the western genre. The early Western classics of John Ford and Howard Hawks lack the haunting quality of The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. It was perhaps Hawks who started it all with his 1948 Red River and Ford followed it up with his 1956 masterpiece The Searchers. But, it’s really with The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance that Ford went the furthest, paving the way for the Spaghetti Westerns of Sergio Leone and Sergio Corbucci, which in turn would inspire Sam Peckinpah to make the ultimate anti-Western The Wild Bunch in 1969 that laid the foundations for what are today referred to as revisionist Western films. The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance offers so many memorable scenes. There is one in which Wayne’s character roughens up Stewart’s in order to prepare him for his big fight against Valance and Stewart’s character punches him in the face in retaliation. There is another in which Lee Marvin’s Valance humiliates Stewart’s character who manages to demonstrate his stoic resolve, winning many hearts in the process. But, above all, there is the scene when a reporter tells a senator, “This is West, sir. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend”. Now, Stewart was considered the star of the film as per the general opinion at the time, based on the notion that the people like Stoddard were the future whereas those like Doniphon were like an old relic. But, Ford knew better and ensured that Wayne got the top billing in the film’s credits as well as on theatre marquees and not Stewart. Yes, the world needs the bearer of books who wants to lay the foundations of the future on the pillars of knowledge and wisdom but what good can he do without the righteous man who must pick up the gun in order to maintain the much-needed peace for the human society to function freely? It’s something that most critics failed to read at the time. And so as the film turns 60, it’s important to revisit it with a fresh perspective and with the knowledge of hindsight. That’s the only way to truly fathom Ford’s true vision behind the film. The author is an Indian critic and journalist who has been covering cinema, art and culture for over 10 years. Views expressed are personal. Read all the Latest News , Trending News ,  Cricket News , Bollywood News , India News and Entertainment News here. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.