The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962)

 

John Ford’s ‘The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance’

Thematic Elements: James Stewart’s character is a lawyer who comes to town bringing with him the ideas of law, education, free press, and democratic idealism, his mannerism and ideas seems very akin to John F. Kennedy (who was president at the time of the film’s release). Liberty Valance seems to have fascist ideologies. He believes that everyone should obey him because he is the one with the gun and the lawlessness to use it. He does not believe in law, education, freedom of the press, or democracy. The only thing he believes in is his control over the town. John Wayne’s character seems to be caught between these two competing ideologies, a more conservative individualism. In the end, it is believed that Stewart must act outside of the law and kill Valance to save the townspeople from fascist rule. Everyone believes that he does, at least that’s what it looks like. However, it is John Wayne character who shoots Valance. Perhaps this suggests that we need both individual freedom and all the positive things that come from a society. Ford has grappled with the ideas of individual vs society over his body of work. And in one of his final pieces, he seems to make a compromise in suggesting that perhaps both are required.

 

Camerawork: Ford arranges characters in the frames to show power dynamics. Each character represents a different ideology and set of political perspectives. As each of these characters interact with each other, the power dynamics are shown through action and physical motion to suggest which ideas are overpowering the others.  

 

Best Shot: The shot that best illustrates this is the shot in which John Wayne and Liberty Valance are in a standoff because Valance has tripped Stewart, causing Stewart to drop Wayne’s steak on the ground. Wayne and Valance are quite literally and opposite viewpoints, Valance believing that everyone should bend to his will and Wayne believing that the individual has the freedom to take action in one’s own self-preservation, even if this means acting outside of the laws of society. These two are literally separated in the image by a pillar on the wall. In front of this pillar and between these two characters is Stewart, the lawyer, who believes that this dispute should be settled lawfully in a court. This belief is appearing to be insignificant to the two characters standing off in that Stewart is still on the ground, as if to suggest that his ideology appears smaller and weaker than the robust and seemingly unstoppable ideologies of the other two.