No doubt that this is one of the best movies ever made pitting good against evil and showing the struggles in making honorable decisions when making dishonorable ones would be much easier.

I haven't bothered to write any reviews in a while, mostly because they've already been well covered, or hardly worth the trouble. How is is possible that people spend so much money to produce such really bad films?I had never seen this film before. I'm not sure why because I like the stars and well-made Westerns. I won't go into the overall story since many others have already done so. This film even with its interesting twists was overall, still another Oater. What helped was all the character actors. Strother Martin has always been a favorite and who didn't like Andy Devine? There were too many to mention.But now to my real motive in writing this review. I've always liked Edmond O'Brien. My favorite, until now was D.O.A. but as Mr. Peabody, the owner, and editor of the local newspaper, he stole the show. Move over Wayne, Stewart, Miles, and Marvin! This drunken newspaperman literally stole every scene he appeared in and I was so captivated that I still marvel today at his range. That was an Edmond O'Brien I never realized existed and never expected to see.This film is worth watching just to see the drunken antics of Mr. Peabody! Do it!

With a remake in the works, it's time now to re-evaluate The Man who Shot Liberty Valance. Wikipedia informs us that the iconic film director John Ford considered it his favorite film. And critic Roger Ebert wrote that each of the ten Ford/Wayne westerns is "... complete and self-contained in a way that approaches perfection", and singled out Liberty Valance as "the most pensive and thoughtful" of the group.It begins with a much too long expository scene. Senator Ransom "Ranse" Stoddard (played by James Stewart made up to be well into his seventies) along with his wife Hallie (Vera Miles) return to the frontier town of Shinbone, to attend the funeral of Stoddard's old cowboy friend, Tom Doniphon (John Wayne). Oddly, the town newspaper editor never heard of Doniphon, despite his legendary reputation, made clear by Stoddard, who then relates both his and Doniphon's story, at the editor's behest.The presence of a telephone at the railway station in the opening scene suggests that the story begins a little after the turn of the century, possibly 1905. Stoddard relates how he came to Shinbone years earlier as an idealistic young attorney, where he immediately was drastically assaulted by Liberty Valance during a stagecoach robbery. Can we assume this might have occurred 25 years earlier, perhaps around 1880? Stoddard, as a young attorney, would probably have been about 30 years old (Stewart is miscast here, as he was a little over 50 when he acted in Ford's picture).Now the location of the story is never revealed, but a big part of the plot revolves around "homesteaders" and "big ranchers." The homesteaders (which include small landowners, small farmers, etc.) are in favor of statehood and the moneyed interests (cattle barons, etc.) oppose them. While historians inform us that for the most part the wild west was relatively non-violent (especially in comparison to what's happening today, particularly in the big cities), there was one bloody conflict, the Johnson County War, which occurred in Johnson, Wyoming, between 1889 and 1893, which may have been the model for the conflict alluded to in Liberty Valance.One glaringly major omission we notice right away is that the hated "big ranchers" are never seen during the entire narrative. Instead, the sadistic criminal, Liberty Valance, is made out to be their enforcer. It's hard to buy that idea since historically, the moneyed interests banded together and created an organization, the Wyoming Stock Growers Association (the WSGA), which hired detectives to police the range—going after rustlers who were poaching on their land. But even if you buy the idea that a criminal like Valance might have ended up as some kind of private contractor for the WSGA, the idea that everyone in the town of Shinbone was a milquetoast (epitomized by the bumbling sheriff played by Andy Devine), and was afraid to stand up to someone like Valance is absurd. Here, only Tom Doniphon has the guts to stand up to Valance, along with Stoddard (who advocates a non-violent approach).After some small ranchers were falsely accused by WSGA detectives as "rustlers," and were killed, the homesteaders formed their own organization, the Northern Wyoming Farmers and Stock Growers' Association (NWFSGA). As Wikipedia informs us, the WSGA hired 23 gunmen and 4 cattle detectives and ended up assassinating the head of the NWFSGA. Various dignitaries including a State Senator joined the gunmen and in response (now read this!) the Sheriff in the nearby town of Buffalo GATHERED A POSSE OF 200 MEN and ended up cornering the WSGA men at a ranch where there was a standoff for two days. Only the intervention of Federal troops on orders from President Benjamin Harrison prevented further bloodshed. So much for wimpy homesteaders!The cowardice of the townspeople in the film is contradicted by history, and the idea that Doniphon is the only man in town who can stand up to Valance, is absurd. There were tough characters on both sides of the range war, and a character like Valance would never have been allowed to get away with terrorizing the populace as is depicted here. Why Doniphon doesn't take Valance out before the climactic duel with Stoddard, makes little sense, considering Valance is already wanted for murdering two people during a robbery (not to mention the robbery of the stagecoach and Stoddard's brutal beating, recounted by the elderly Senator as the beginning of the "break into Act 2").Another plot contrivance which I find hard to swallow is the idea that a Senator from the frontier would have taken up the mantle of pacifism during that time. The wimpy Stoddard is such a pacifist that he walks out after being nominated to represent the pro-Statehood forces in Congress. Why does he walk out? Because he feels guilty that he violated his pacifist precepts by shooting Liberty Valance. It's only AFTER Doniphon reveals that it was he who shot Valance, that Stoddard has a change of heart. Now his guilt is assuaged and he can accept the nomination. The only thing good about this film is the twist that it was Doniphon and not Stoddard who shot Liberty Valance. After the duel, the rest is anti-climactic. Wimpy Stoddard goes on to become Senator and Doniphon takes to the bottle, after he fails to "get the girl." It's odd that macho John Wayne accepted the Tom Doniphon part. Perhaps he liked the idea that the macho Doniphon was a flawed character who could so easily self-destruct. I can't but help also suggest that "Liberty" is a parable about McCarthyism considering the film's release in 1962. Doniphon might have been a stand-in for McCarthy who took to the bottle after being censured by the Senate. The fight might have been justified but the methods weren't. Doniphon must pay a price—and it's the pacifist, Stoddard, who is ultimately rewarded.

No matter what, he will be always remembered as The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. This is how legends are born."The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance" (1962) is a superbly solid movie, but not a traditional western. It lacks recklessness and action of previous westerns, and it is more a solid drama set in old west. This movie sort of reminded me "Unforgiven" (1992), another superb movie set in west, but not a western in usual sense. Both movies deals with a legend status, and a true grit and reality beyond the legend. Although they are very different in style and mood, both share similar feeling of change of times in the old west, when old gunslingers were replaced by law and modern times. Overall, not going into plot details, "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance" is an very entertaining motion picture from start till the end. It is not a traditional western, but it a very entertaining drama set in the old west. James Stewart is great in here, while John Wayne is more or less like usual John Wayne except for the ending, nevertheless he is a joy to watch. This film also deals with a lot of great ideas which are not presented openly, but are kinda hidden in context. All in all this a great movie.