I, for one, am...

...absolutely amazed by how much I enjoyed this next film. (SPOILER!)

This is a highly ranked film on the AFI Top 100 (10th Anniversary Edition), and if you haven't seen it before, you might wonder why...

Like I did.

No more.

Film 60

60. "High Noon" (AFI Rank #27)

There are 6 Westerns on the AFI list, which is at least 3 more than I'd expect, just based on the titles and what they represent to me in my prejudiced mind.  I'm not a fan of the genre, generally, as White Hat/Black Hat bores me to no end.  I like my villains to have the choice about how they act, and I like my heroes to be full of doubt, or vulnerable.  So many westerns give me neither, as the good guys are just good, and the bad guys are just bad.

Then I watch a film like "High Noon," in which the good guy actually wears black (and a black hat), and the bad guys, while appearing to be intrinsically evil, are clearly making the choice to be so.  They actually chastise one of their bunch for his reliance on liquor.  Let me run that by you again.  The bad guys get after a guy for drinking.  Beyond that, the innocent townspeople also show both sides, but show especially...fear.

Earlier, while doing this list, I found some quote or thought online which basically said that plot has nothing to do with the story.  That is especially true of this film.  The plot of this film is that a US Marshal, on his wedding (and retirement) day is drawn into deciding between his brand new bride, a Quaker, and the town he has served with such distinction for so long, as one of the criminals he jailed has been released on a technicality, and is coming back with the expressed purpose of revenge against the town...and the man.  His train is due to arrive at 12 o'clock sharp. The marshal then goes to all the people of the town to ask their help in fighting this man, and is abandoned by all.  Finally, he has to face the gang of 4 alone.

That's the plot.  The story, however, is about cowardice, and self-reliance as it related to...the McCarthy era.  The script was written by Carl Foreman, who was blacklisted for his decades-prior involvement with the Communist Party.  The allegory is thinly veiled, and the story that we watch makes us feel, deep down in our soul, what it must be like to be a person of honor facing an impossible situation while being abandoned by those who should be helping us.  It's about the choices we make in those times, and the inevitability of our own "demise" in those situations.  John Wayne hated this film - without actually seeing it, it appears - because it was Un-American.  I find it laughable, given our current political situation, with so much insanity from the formerly conservative, but now radically reactionary, Republican party that anyone would ever consider this Un-American.  It's decidedly American.  Yes, it shows weakness, but America has great weaknesses.  It's ignoring those that makes them stronger.  I think Mr. Wayne was a fine one for ignoring those.  Whatever.

Directed by Fred Zinnemann, whose resume is stuffed with tremendous films, "High Noon" essentially takes place in real time.  The movie is 84 minutes long, and starts at 10:35 in the morning, finishing at about quarter after 12.  It is my understanding, through research, that the last hour is actually in real time, but I didn't realize that when it ended.  I'll check that the next time I view it.  That's a radical idea, and it gives a necessary sense of pace to the film.  As time goes on in the film, we sense desperation take over, as Marshal Will Kane (Gary Cooper) quickly realizes that he's on his own.  The camera takes beautiful pictures throughout the film, especially the shots of Kane and the town as he's left alone and walking down the street.  It's a little odd, as Westerns are famous for rolling vistas, that this is really an interior piece, taking place in the homes and public gathering places of Hadleyville.

The film here is the thing.  The acting is good enough.  Cooper is terrific, his Kane is a wonderful character, acted well, and Cooper delivers as natural a performance as a "Good Guy in a Western" can give.  Grace Kelly is...as bland as you'd expect a Quaker newlywed to be.  This is Grace Kelly's second appearance in a film that I've watched as part of this quest, and rumor has it that she was quite the character...if you will...offscreen.  I wish some of that translated onscreen.  She always feels like a cipher on screen, devoid of passion, devoid of emotion.  Maybe that's what she was, but she seduced/loved a lot of Hollywood...and I find it hard to believe that they were in love with her lack of passion.  Lloyd Bridges does a nice turn as Kane's Deputy, as does Thomas Mitchell (him again?) as the Mayor.  The bad guys are bad guys.  Lon Chaney, Jr. is magnificent as retired Sheriff Martin Howe.  Here's a piece of trivia...Cooper was nearly 5 years older than Chaney, Jr. in real life, but in this film...Chaney is absolutely convincing as an old man, weary of it all.  Also noteworthy is Katy Jurado as Helen Ramirez.  A former lover of the Big Bad Guy, Kane, and the deputy, she's a compelling character, if Jurado's performance is, at times, a little shallow.

Folks, this is a terrific film.  Exciting, politically charged, innovative, and decidedly not formulaic.  I...well...I was astounded.  I found it odd that so familiar a Western would be in the Top 100, let alone this high on the list.  I'm not entirely certain, if I was to sit down after this was over and rank the films, that I might not rank it higher.  Some of that may be because of my shock as to how good it was, but I gotta believe that the film is responsible for that.


And that's what this is.  A great FILM.  It's all parts, put together.  I've been watching a bunch of films lately that seem to feature some portion of filmmaking more than the others.  This film never actually excels at anything that makes you say it's special, but the overall package makes it so.  It's worth your time.  It really is.

Ebert didn't post a review of this film online anywhere, and reportedly didn't think it aged well.  I guess I look at things with perspective.  The "yeah, yeah, yeah" phase of The Beatles seems so trite now, but if one stops and listens to what was happening alongside of that, one realizes how magnificent those uncomplicated songs were.  Perspective is something that is lost on a lot of us.  Bah.  No Ebert link this time.

Correct that.  I'll link to an interview in which he talks about "High Noon."  And for a certain long ago friend, "Road House" is mentioned, also.  Here's that interview.  Roger and I see this film differently, and he gets after people like me who feel the way I do.  That's awesome.