Posted on

HIGH NOON (1952)

 

high-noon

On the day of his wedding and retirement, Marshal Will Kane all of a sudden must face gangster Frank Miller, who was released from prison instead of being hanged and has gathered a gang of three to kill him.

This psychological western directed by Fred Zinnemann won Academy Awards for Best Actor (Gary Cooper), Best Editing, Best Music and Best Song (Dimitri Tiomkin), and was also nominated for Best Picture, Best Director and Best Screenplay. On a budget of 750,000 US $, it made 18,000,000 US $ in the theaters worldwide in 1952.

The film was very popular despite some mixed reactions, because of it’s political implications. Oddly enough, many of those views feel paradox today: In the communist Soviet Union the film was criticized as “a glorification of the individual.” Actor John Wayne who was a supporter of the Motion Picture Alliance for the Preservation of American Ideals (MPA) stated that High Noon was the most un-American thing he had ever seen in his whole life.

The film was shot in the times of the “Second Red Scare“, and writer/producer Carl Foreman (who won an Academy Award for his screenplay for “The Bridge on the River Kwai” in 1957) ended up being blacklisted.

The film’s stars are Gary Cooper as the Marshal, Grace Kelly as his Quaker bride, Lloyd Bridges as Deputy Marshal and Katy Jurado (who won as first Mexican actress ever a Golden Globe for her role) as Helen Ramirez. Look out for “Wolfman” Lon Chaney, Jr. as Martin Howe and Spaghetti Western cult star Lee Van Cleef as one of the bad guys.

“I will always think of myself as a Hollywood director, not only because I grew up in the American film industry, but also because I believe in making films that will please a mass audience, and not just in making films that express my own personality or ideas.” (Fred Zinnemann)

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044706/?ref_=sr_1

Advertisements

25 responses to “HIGH NOON (1952)

  1. Richard Specht ⋅

    I found High Noon to be a very enjoyable movie. I thought it was cool to see a hero figure get scared and ask for help like the marshall did in this movie. I found it funny when Professor Karl told us that John Wayne had a dislike for this movie because of his thoughts of the hero having to be an all American bad ass. Anyways, I thought the movie was pretty interesting in the fact that it was almost real time. It is a pretty interesting concept for a movie that I do not recall having seen before. They did a smooth job of incorporating at 90 minute time period into this 80 something minute movie. I felt like a lot of people did not care for this movie because it was a black and white film, but I did not really seem to mind that. I just enjoyed the fact that it was a western film and like with Jesse James, I really enjoy watching western films. I thought the plot was very good. There was no action the entire time up until the end of the film. It is always nice to have a lot of action and shooting and killing, but it was a nice change of pace to see that they saved the good stuff for the ending of High Noon. I give High Noon two thumbs up. I definitely found it enjoyable and I can see myself watching this movie again in the near future.

    Like

  2. Chaitea ⋅

    Marshal Kane is the good hero, of 1952 film High Noon, about to fight without the support of anyone, against a notorious but mysterious enemy. As discussed in the class, it was interesting that this mysterious enemy was not revealed till the very end of the movie and I thought it was very clever, the way the film builds up a lot of tension by not revealing the enemy.

    Kane’s character was what really interested me in this film. He had no ones support. His wife was about to leave him, his friends and mentors have abandoned him and he was facing possible death. He was alone in the world in all ways possible and the film does a very good job of portraying this through the wide shots where he was made to look small and alone in the town. He had many opportunities to leave the village and escape death but ends up always choosing to stay to protect the town from the evil returning to it, even though the town itself has forgotten about its evilness of the enemy. High Noon portrays a more real, scared and hesitating hero than traditional American western heroes. I found him easier to relate to as he is scared but still chose to do the right thing, as opposed to the traditional image of the fearless, brave American hero- who is far out of reach from average people. Therefore, even though some didn’t like him nor found him a hero as discussed in class– I personally thought he was one of the most courageous heroes I’ve ever seen in a film because courage is not the absence of fear, but choosing to do something even though you’re afraid to do it.

    Kane’s wife was also of interest to me. She was initially a Quaker and refuses to see any blood shed but ends up killing man to save her husband. This was the first time I heard about the religion called Quaker.
    I also found it interesting to note the play with colors when portraying Kane’s wife as an innocent woman next to the Mexican lady using the lighter white colored wedding dress to convey innocence while the Mexican lady’s black dark dress with more cleavage was used to convey independence and rebellion against conventional norms of society for women.
    Another thing that interested me was how everyone was willing to sacrifice Kane. Saving their own skin was more important to them rather than helping friends when there’s a sure possibility of death looming ahead. It made me think of a connection to the red scare.
    All in all, I enjoyed this movie a lot.

    Like

  3. ken032192

    When I first heard about watching another western film in this class, which was High Noon, I honestly did not expect much of it. We already saw Jesse James, which was quite and entertaining and decent western film featuring America’s famous outlaw, so I did not think that this film would be as nearly remarkable in a way. However, while my opinion still holds true for how this film was not as enjoyable as Jesse James, High Noon was still quite an impressive western film, with a few unexpected twists as well. The fact that the main hero was actually not very brave and seemed quite scared in demeanor was one thing that caught me by surprise, as I believed most western films are known for having brave, fearless, and badass characters as heroes. However, this change in the hero was quite interesting what that despite his fearfulness, he still tried to protect the town and the people in it with determination, and did not give up until the very end while trying to do the right thing. I also noticed that there were hardly any chase, violence, or even any actions scenes compared to Jesse James, which also threw me off a bit. While I expected a lot more action and shooting like what happened in Jesse James, it was not until the end of the film that had the action in question, which made up my doubts slightly. Lastly, I liked how the film did not reveal the mysterious villain until in last part of the film also. It built up the suspense in the plot as the identity of the villain was never known until the very end, which made me curious of how this mysterious threat could ever be. I enjoyed that as the mystery aspect of the film, and thought it was a quite a cleverly done twist as well.

    All in all, I enjoyed watching High Noon in class. While it wasn’t as engaging and didn’t have that much of an impact nor even as enjoyable as Jesse James, it was still a decent western film in its own right. It was nice to see a decent change in pace and twists in its own storyline that would be difficult to imagine for me in this western film. If we were to see another western film in this class though, I hope it would be more action-packed and entertaining like Jesse James for my own tastes.

    Like

  4. Jordan ⋅

    This film definitely aligned with my idea of what American Western cinema is all about. Although I’m not particularly fond of this genre, and I felt the film was so-so, there were definitely a few things about the film I enjoyed, that could be seen as innovative for the time. Firstly, and arguably the most notable was that this film takes place completely in real time. On the top of my head I can’t really think of many modern full-length feature films that can achieve that story-telling technique with the level of success this film did. Secondly, the “hero” of this story was so atypical to most cinema it was rather refreshing. His flawed actions made him seem relatable to the average person; I think audiences would much more easily identify with a hero like this, rather than your typical action star. My strongest dislike with the film was the intentional unanswered question to the history between protagonist and antagonist. It’s almost as if the filmmakers thought mystery is a more powerful tool than exposition. Perhaps its because I’m accustomed to modern cinema where typically, a story is fully fleshed with no questions by the time the credits roll.

    Like

  5. Kris ⋅

    The movie isn’t as bad as I initially thought. The big problem is the acting. It’s just so stiff that it actually detracts away from the storyline. But once this is overlooked, the film lives up to some merit. The plot was edgy at the time. There’s no action until the end and most of the film relies on the build up of the impending doom of the small town. Clocks play a re-occuring motif which is interesting for the film seems to move in real time. THis is a departure from traditional Hollywood Classism in that High Noon leans very heavily on the realism side of the scale. Classism, in my opinion, would have mixed things up quite a bit more to keep an even mix between realism and formalism.

    Also a comment about the editing. It was very smooth continuity editing. It actuality had be because if the film felt like it dragged on for two hours with nothing happening, viewers may have gotten bored ad walked.

    All in all it wasn’t bad. I marked poor on the vote because it’s the worst film we’ve seen so far as class in concerned, especially backed up against Sunset Boulevard. Plus it’s 1952. So we’ve already had films like Gone with the Wind, Jesse James, Wizard of Oz, so great examples of film were well established by this point.

    Like

  6. hanaji0 ⋅

    This film was new to me. What surprised me was the begging scene. Most romance movies finish with happy wedding scene; however, High Noon, on the contrary, starts with wedding scene. Right after I was surprised, I noticed that this is not a love story. It is a western movie. Also, at the same time, it makes me wonder why the characters in western movie always wear those hats? Since I don’t usually choose to watch western movies personally, this movie makes me wonder the importance of the cowboy hat in western movie. After the wedding, Gary Cooper takes his hat before he leaves the town. Although he is in a hurry, he does not forget to wear his hat. The meaning of Cowboy has been changed. Although it was originally used to describe those people who did cattle-tending work. And then, the term was used during the American Revolution to describe American fighters who opposed the movement for independence. In the 1880s, the term was used to describe men who had been implicated in various crimes, such as smuggling cattle, alcohol, and tobacco. Since the beginning of 20th Century, Cowboy was used to represent nostalgia and romance in western movie and novel. Gary Cooper in this film is not a criminal, bad person or man who worked as a cowboy. Indeed, he is a hero. Therefore, the meaning of the hat, as the symbol of western movie, is very interesting to me, and this film brought me a question and an opportunity to learn more about the history of western films.
    After the wedding, the story goes fast. The couple leaves the town and come back to town. However, the story after that sequence seems to move a little too slowly. This film itself is not a long story. It is only 85 minutes length. Compared to the length, the climax seems to start too late. The main character tries to gather people to fight with him for about less than two hours but he fails. The actual fighting scene is less than ten minutes. In some way, it is good because the viewers can see it as if it is a real event because of the time duration which moves along with the story and shows each process the main character goes through. The only concern is that there are not so many action scenes which makes people excited.

    Like

  7. maiorengi

    The film starts off with the wedding scene. This is what makes the film quite unique from other films. Of course, Kill Bill also begins with the wedding scene with a bit of the western taste in it but this is whole different story when it comes to this film. Watching the two getting married in the screen makes me feel to be in an awkward situation. A big age difference never seems to care people around them and themselves. Or perhaps, it was quite normal back then to get married to someone who is old enough to protect her (the wife). What about Jesse James though? He is married to the one who is similar to his age.
    When it comes to the storyline, it seems the entire story goes too slow. There are almost few slightest things happen in every fifteen minutes. As soon as the climax starts, however, the story suddenly moves unbelievably fast. This may be the first time I was actually involved in watching the film. The last climax of the film, the wife became a hostage of one of the cowboys, disappointed me the most. The whole sequence moves almost too easy for the western film! The hostage scene should have established a tension between the three. It seems that I am too accustomed to watching blockbuster action film such as James Bond or Spiderman, it was not easy for me to understand the structure of the film..

    Like

  8. michi1st

    High Noon (1952) was an amazing film. It was interesting how “real” the film felt. It was told in real time and the audience only knew what was necessary. There was no extraneous dialogue that was unnecessary to the story. Everything was concise and to the point. I guess the way to describe this film was “natural.” There was of lingering tension throughout the entire movie. Even though I was sick and was actually planning to leave the film early, I needed to know what happened at the end. I felt like I had invested so much time into this world that I had to keep watching.

    Helen Ramirez was probably my favorite character. She was a woman and minority but the only person in the entire film with any real balls during a time of crisis. She was decisive and strong, and while everyone else was freaking out or getting depressed. She has so much resolve and was really interesting to watch.

    The setting itself was really nice. I found it interesting how there were at least three different things going on at the same time. Jumping from location to location, you could get a real idea for the town and the chase scene really spread some light on the set.

    Lastly, the communist movement and how it relates to the film. I kind of see how this was a commentary on the “red purge.” The fact that people got mad about it is kind of ironic. Maybe because they knew it was wrong they didn’t want a masterpiece of a movie telling them that they were wrong.

    Like

  9. janey ⋅

    Fred Zinnermann’s High Noon was and interesting film. I have only seen a few westerns so far, but comparing this film, to the previously screened Jessie James, High Noon seems to be occurring in real time.

    I didn’t particularly feel connected to the characters throughout the movie. Towards the end of the movie, I thought that Kane would actually die, and that didn’t bother me. Other characters talking about him and his psychotic tendencies revealed the film’s villain, Frank Miller, but I felt that I didn’t get to see him actually be psychotic in the film, to make me feel like he needed to die.

    The picture and shots in this movie were very smooth and well edited. I thought it portrayed an accurate sense of the small town in the grasslands.

    One thing that I was confused about throughout the movie was why they were waiting for the train. It wasn’t made clear that Frank Miller was going to be arriving on the noon train. I thought that the 3 men where waiting to get on the train to get to the town where Kane was. It was very confusing with the were all actually in the same place, and all along, just waiting for Frank Miller to arrive.

    I think I can see how this film could have stirred up controversy. But it seems like Zinnermann was saying something that no one else would dare to say, that real hero’s have flaws and won’t always have the support of the people around them, and that takes real courage.

    Like

  10. When I heard that we would be watching another western, I wasn’t too excited, to be honest. While I did enjoy Jesse James, I am still not exactly a very big fan of westerns.

    High Noon was quite interesting, I must admit. It showed the pseudo-relationships that people put up in order to keep peace but come crumbling down when it counts the most.

    Kane, at first, was portrayed as a brave hero who resurrected the town from a horrible place to one that is very decent. They built him up to seem like he was loved by all and that he would continue to be a hero and live happily with his quaker wife.
    But then we hear about Frank Miller, who was sentenced to death by Kane, returning to town to get his revenge. It is when word gets out, the towns people, even Kane’s good friends, scatter and hide behind their closed doors.
    Unlike Jesse James, in which Jesse would go out and face anything by himself, we see Kane scrambling around town trying to find people to fight with him. This, of course, is something anyone would do, and that I am ok with. But when he comes out empty handed, and the only person who was willing to fight with him also leaving, we see Kane shivering in the corner, scared. To me, this was quite unappealing. For Kane is supposed to be the hero, the main character in this film. He is supposed to be brave and confident. Yet, we see him scared and accepting his death.
    This is not something that you want to see in a hero-movie. At least, I don’t. So I did not enjoy this very much.
    Also, I felt that the acting was much more stiff and unnatural than the past films. Especially after Sunset Blvd.
    This wasn’t a film I enjoyed too much and, to be honest, I was a little disappointed in this all together.

    Like

  11. Nemokenza ⋅

    High noon was a great western. It’s not simply a great western because it’s in black and white, or has a gun battle. No it’s a great western because of its story of good verses evil and doing what’s right. Before we ever seen Frank Miller we are made aware that he is in fact evil. His reputation certain precedes him at all points in the film. People either love him or hate him. Bust most people fear him. Unlike the colours in the film, the movie doesn’t simply leave things as black and white. There are people in this town that actually enjoyed the time when Frank Miller controlled the town. And while there are those who would support Will Kane, most are afraid to do so and are happy to leave the weight of the issue on his shoulders. Will Kane does the right thing because it’s the right thing to do. He isn’t asking for accolades or anything of that nature, he’s simply asking for a few good guns to help him. However he is only met with skepticism, cowardice, and fair weather friends and supporters. Everyone else is happy to let Kane take on all the work, without realizing that, whatever outcome comes out of Kane and Miller’s confrontation, they’ll be affected more than he would be. Ultimately right ends out over wrong and Kane and his new bride (who had redeemed herself) ride off into the afternoon sun to leave everything behind them.

    Like

  12. Hosta Mahogey ⋅

    High Noon is a great movie. As we discussed in class, it is very unique for a western at the time. The most noticeable difference to me is the protagonist. He isn’t the stoic hero of few words. Instead, this man is scrambling pretty much the entirety of the film.

    There are multiple scenes in the movie where the town citizens tell Kane to just leave it all behind. For if he leaves town, there won’t be any problems with the outlaws. Kane has an internal struggle of whether or not to let his personal demons get in the way of the town’s safety, and also his own newly formed marriage.

    I found this struggle very intriguing. Along with the real-time nature of the film, I was completely invested in the outcome. When the clock struck noon, I was very nervous.

    The acting was pretty good. Gary Cooper takes a much more realistic acting method, as opposed to the over-the-top which is common. He often tends to mumble and be curt, which I found pretty interesting.

    Overall, I loved High Noon. It is a well paced, well directed, unique western.

    Like

  13. Tim ⋅

    First of all, I am not the biggest fan of Westerns, as I usually found them very straightforward and way too predictable to enjoy, but after watching this film I must admit I felt a bit embarrassed about my prior perception. This film is without a doubt a classic, especially having two of the biggest Hollywood stars of all time – Gary Cooper and Grace Kelly, whose talent I hugely admire. However at the same time, I feel like this film wasn’t the best example of their performance.
    Again, I will fully acknowledge that the film is very well done. It might be my disinterest in Westerns, or that I like character studies and intertwining stories and than a straightforward plot, but High Noon just isn’t my cup of tea. The character development is non existent and the acting seems to be very stale. Moreover the story development is super slow, as we had to wait until the last minute to see the bad guy come over from somewhere else on that train, and the next minute you know he is dead.
    Despite of that, I think that this is the best western I have ever watched, however I wouldn’t really call it a proper western, since it is more of a drama film than an action film. I enjoyed the fact that it was more about human interactions, fighting their inner selves and making crucial (sometimes silly) decisions; rather than a film that is just filled with a lot violence, bloodshed and protagonist shooting as many bad guys as he can.
    All in all, a good solid film, different to your usual proper western type, and that’s why it is enjoyable and highly recommended to watch.

    Like

  14. Marya ⋅

    Prior to “High Noon” we watched Jesse James, in comparison to that “High Noon” had more close depiction of what I thought would be included in a traditional western setting and wardrobe. However, to be completely honest, I didn’t really enjoy this film as much I’d have wanted to. I personally thought it lacked impact and minimal

    Regardless my initial reaction, I liked how well the director used the shot of the clock to create a dramatic and tense feel to the whole story. Each minute passing, getting closer to noon, the closer the shot got. Although the shot itself is very simple, it conjured up the feeling of anxiety, chased (by time) and anticipation.

    I really like the character Helen, not only for her very bold and unique look but also for her powerful aura and her strong, independent mentality. In contrast to her, the Quakers bride is vulnerable, dependent and unsupportive of Kane’s decision. I found her character rather selfish and irrational. But in the latter half of the film Helen’s ideology, values and passion in commitment and support, greatly influences the Bride’s behavior in the very end where she shoots the gangsta Frank Miller to protect her husband.

    I somewhat found the setting of the story very realistic for example, despite Kane’s popularity and the villager’s admiration for his achievements; when it came to a situation where he needed help no one would be volunteer. Typically in may films involving the good and the villain, people would unify and fight as one show the beauty of courage and establishment of bound amongst people. However, I felt the film kept it real, since in real life, people would fear death and wouldn’t want to take such a risk if isn’t something personal. You could say it was fairly precise projection of how people may act in the real world in situation like these.

    Like

  15. Lynn

    I highly enjoyed High Noon and thought it was an unconventional example of a western film. I thought it was a good example of a film that shows how the people we thought we could trust turn their backs on us in our time of need. The main character was a different type of western hero, one not traditionally seen in the genre, he seemed very much a real person and fallible like real people are.

    A character I felt was very interesting was Helen Ramirez, who was a female minority portrayed in a very strong kind of role. She was shown to have a certain amount of influence and respect in the town, and a fierce nature that commanded a sense of respect. I found this interesting based on typical portrayals of women that I have seen in this genre and especially women of minority groups.

    The end where his wife becomes a killer despite being a quaker in order to save his life was very interesting to me. I thought it was good character development and I thought the concept of the woman saving the man was very thought provoking when considering the context of when this film was made.

    All in all I thought this was a very powerful film that was sharp and unconventional.

    Like

  16. tatsuya ⋅

    “High Noon” has good plots and atomosphere to project the Western culture but is actually not one of my favorite films. It is because I liked “Jessie James” better than this film in terms of storytelling, timeline, and atomosphere.

    In the film “High Noon”, the time goes as real time and the story dramatically developed in it. The entire story was about 1.5 hours, that was interesting. I felt that the story lack punch or action scenes to compare to the other like “Jessie James”. And it is because I was expecting more action scenes in the Western film. However, many people like how the story develop and the time goes by in the film.The fighting scene only comes at the the end of the story and is about 5 minutes.

    The main character Marshal Will is not one of the characters I ususally see in the Western films. Marshal retires his job at the day of his wedding and is supposed to stay away from his work. But Frank Miller was released from the prison and he plans to revenge Marshal. I liked the background of the story how this developed to the end.

    Overall, I like this film how it was directed and has its own atomosphere in the story.

    Like

  17. Roger Murdock ⋅

    While watching High Noon, I could not shake Clint Eastwood’s chilling voice from A Fistful of Dollars saying, “Get three coffins ready.” Confident, yet brash, Eastwood has the unmistakable confidence of a fearless hero who knows he will triumph over his enemies. Gary Cooper, playing Will Kane in High Noon (1952), has anything but the cockiness and guts that I expect from a protagonist in a Western movie; however, he is just as virtuous, if not more courageous. There is an existential beauty in a fearless approach to death that other American heroes have exhibited, such as Eastwood’s figures, however, there is a remarkable courage in facing death despite your fear which Cooper is able to convey. Faced with a decision to leave town when he learns that a man he put away got out of jail and is on a mission to hunt him down, Cooper goes against the desires of his newly-bride and returns, to face death, and accept his fate, but doing so as the opposite of a coward. As the marshal of the town, it is his duty to face danger, no matter how pressing and threatening.
    High Noon successfully captivates in this anticipation. The audience is tested as well, almost forced to input personal agendas into the decision of fleeing or staying. In a straight forward manner, the film depicts characters, each representing the possible virtues and morals that Cooper’s character Kane can adopt. As he continuously is told to flee for his own safety, he is tested and must face death. When his wife Amy declares, “Don’t try to be a hero! You don’t have to be a hero, not for me!” Kane realizes that he needs to be a hero, not for the town, not for his wife, but himself, as a man. In this vice, he becomes enlightened and can face death knowing that he is courageous in the face of danger, which ultimately, defines the Western hero.

    Like

  18. satchi ⋅

    Technically, I really enjoyed this film. I really liked how the shots helped to influence your image of the characters; at the beginning the camera angles made the main character look really big and important, and by the end made him look really small and alone. I also really liked how the film started out with only the visuals and the theme song which narrated the plot and also played throughout the rest of the movie. I also liked the portrayal of Ramirez. It was really interesting to see a minority female playing such a strong role. I didn’t expect to see that at this time.

    Plot wise I really have mixed feelings about it. On one hand, I really liked how it was done basically in real time, and how everything was leading up to the title and theme of “high noon”. However, I was a tad disappointed at the reason why the main character so stubbornly stayed behind. Literally EVERYONE was telling him to leave, but he refused……I know it was inferred that it was his love for the town that made him stay but he was so stubborn and they made it seem like such a personal reason that made him stay behind the actual reason they gave just didn’t fulfill my expectations. But then again, I’m a huge fan of really intricate and elaborate backstories and personal character development so this difference mainly just doesn’t fit my preferences.

    Overall I thought it was a good movie though.

    Like

  19. I really enjoyed this film. The way it built up the tension until the end was great. Things just kept getting worse. Not only was his life in danger, but his new relationship as well. We don’t know much about what’s going on at the beginning of the film, so that helps keep the suspense. We are thrown into the story and all that we know is that a dangerous man and his gang is coming. Slowly we see the town turn against their former sharif who had done so much for the town. Even his friends are too afraid to help. Frankly, I don’t know why though. It was only four guys, and they seemed to go down pretty easily.
    The most interesting element if this film in my opinion was the characters. The lead characters are very strong and well developed.
    I also really liked the female characters. They were not weak, frail, submissive wives to their men like many women in film at that time. His wife came back to actually save her husband’s life which is impressive considering she is a Quaker. I like how information about the characters was subtly presented in the dialogue without some kind of painfully long monologue or something.
    My only complaint is that they overused that same song. I think everyone knows what I’m talking about.

    Like

  20. Firstly, I love westerns. High Noon was a very entertaining film for me, it was one of my favorites thus far. Right at the beginning, the soundtrack is very amazing. The theme song was great how it told the full story of the film. At first, I didn’t realize that the story was being told, so I wrote some notes down, and in the end I was like, oh wow it WAS the story. 

    The film begins with Miller’s gang riding into town. From the people’s reactions, I could tell that they were the antagonists of the film. While they are riding in, the marshal of Hadleyville, Kane, is being married. He is supposed to retire from the job, but when he hears that Miller was pardoned, he decides not to leave with his new wife. 
    The film is mostly just Kane trying to find more deputies to swear in to aid him in his upcoming shootout, but nobody wants to die for a fight that they are nt a part of. Sadly though, everybody should be obligated to help him since he’s te one that changed Hadleyville into a safer environment. 
    In the end, Kane’s wife is the one that saves him. Throughout the film, you think that somebody will come in at the last minute to save Kane, but only his wife does. It was a bit shocking, but after hearing about how this film is referring to the communist scare, it’s understandable.
    I loved this film and I hope to screen more westerns in this class, but I doubt we will…

    Like

  21. Chroma ⋅

            I find it difficult to word how I felt about this film. I enjoyed it, but at the same time, I didn’t find it notably striking. If I had to choose a western film to watch, “High Noon” wouldn’t be my first pick. Someone else had mentioned that it appeared more like a drama, and I agree – based on the way the film progressed and the character development. It wasn’t until the end when the Quaker wife changes her morals for the sake of her husband’s life. Same goes for the storyline; the real action didn’t take place until the movie’s end. For me to take more interest, it needed something to break up the quiet drama.

            “High Noon” was very well-done, as far as editing and directing goes, I will admit that. The use of the clocks gave the film a bit of a unique edge; they added tension to the situation.

            Like many other people, Helen Ramirez was my favorite character; she was bold and respectable – especially being a woman from a minority. She was incredibly admirable. I appreciated how she remained a consistently strong character throughout her role in the film. The contrast between her and the Quaker wife was interesting, not just in the differences in their personalities. While Helen was dressed in dark-colored dresses, the wife appeared lighter, maybe to seem more “innocent?”

    Like

  22. Yuki ⋅

    I found High Noon was personally the best film I’d ever watched in our class. This was because I was attracted the personality of the main character. Will Kane was a hero who was not like a hero.
    Marshals in Western films usually are fearless and extremely strong. Will Kane was not. Most of the film was about him looking for people who would fight with him. He was not strong enough to fight without having fear. This his characteristic which made him become not like a hero added a realistic feeling into the story.
    Of course he had a characteristic which matched the image of typical hero. He was very single-minded. Once he decided to fight, he never changed his mind. He didn’t escaped since he believed that it was his duty as a marshal.
    He never escaped but was scared at the same time. It well emphasized his braveness I guessed. The true hero is the one who is brave enough to stay while they want to escape I think. In this sense, he might be the best hero in the film history. He IS the best in my mind at least. The wide shot which he stood still in the middle of the town was just epic.

    Like

  23. Tad ⋅

    High Noon was an interesting movie for the western genre and an interesting film in general. I liked the more realistic portrayal of the characters in this film. Kane who wasn’t a one man army, he was a man who needed the help of his deputies and his town’s citizens. I also liked Pell’s portrayal, the fact that he was willing to throw his Kane under the bus in order to get the promotion to marshal. Another interesting character was Ramirez, I liked how she was shown to be this kind of well respected, successful, business owner in the town. It is surprising because ramirez’ character was both a woman and a minority, so for her to be in this high position was a nice surprise.

    I also liked that the amount of time that passed in the movie was roughly the same as the length of the movie itself. I liked it because even though it might seem like doing something like that would leave a lot of “dead time” which might be boring, in High Noon everything felt like it was supposed to be there.

    Like

  24. Carl ⋅

    “High Noon” was a refreshing film. The plot for this story was very entertaining. “This psychological western directed by Fred Zinnemann won Academy Awards for Best Actor (Gary Cooper), Best Editing, Best Music and Best Song (Dimitri Tiomkin), and was also nominated for Best Picture, Best Director and Best Screenplay. On a budget of 750,000 US $, it made 18,000,000 US $ in the theaters worldwide in 1952.” All the awards in which this film received were well earned. For the time the editing skills of this film were splendid. The musical aspect of this film blended well with the perspective scenes and played a substantial role in displaying the energy of each. The villain of the film Frank Miller did a fantastic role of playing the bad guy. Every movement he made reflected that of a villain. In my opinion the film lacked a lot of action scenes. The bulk of the action scenes were displayed towards the end of the film in which I didn’t like. However what the movie lacked in action scenes it made up in with a fantastic cast selection, story board and witty lines. In conclusion, overall I am contempt with the film and would recommend it to anyone who will like to get into Westerns.

    Like

  25. tbrenji

    High Noon is probably not one of the better movies we’ve watched this semester in my opinion. Although the acting was not that bad, the storytelling was a bit lacking. There was minimal action for a western. The actual action wasn’t until the end after the arrival of Frank Miller. Before that, Miller’s posse seem to just linger around in the movie and were on their best behavior. In my opinion the posse could have made a bit more of a ruckus. In the beginning the townspeople were supportive of Kane and believed him to be a great Marshal. But after the news of Frank Miller it seemed everyone in town turned their backs to Kane a bit too soon. Although this showed the impact and danger that Frank Miller presented, it still seemed a bit rushed. The film could have done better to show that the townspeople wanted to help Kane but became hesitant because of Miller. Instead, they just gave up on Kane in almost an instant. The same feeling occurred when Kane’s new bride left him to fend for himself so quickly. Even after explaining his reason for staying, she seemed to just want him to do as she wanted. Refusing to understand that they would be chased down for the rest of their life, her vision was very short-sighted. Even though she stuck around and ended up helping in the end, the character would have received more sympathy and admiration if she went around the town pleading with others to help. The film also spent over an hour on Kane walking around searching for his own posse. Just to end with him fighting alone, with the exception of his wife. Even his deputy wasn’t involved. One aspect of the movie that I did like was after the arrival of Frank Miller, Kane was shown in the town alone. The camera tracked back and elevated to a higher angle. This exposed the entire town and the empty streets. This shot by itself explained just how isolated and alone Kane was right before his confrontation with Miller and his posse. I think the film spending a couple of minutes on Kane trying to form a posse and then using this shot would have been sufficient in showing just how alone Kane was at that moment. In turn, the film would have had more screen time to develop the story and maybe the villains would have more character development.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s