This post contains all the spoilers and discusses the movie with the assumption that you've seen it. It's not so much a review but more an analysis and commentary on the ideas presented in the film. You can watch the trailer at the bottom of this post.

The Credits

High Noon is a Western film directed by Fred Zinnemann and starring Gary Cooper, Grace Kelly, Thomas Mitchell, Lloyd Bridges, Katy Jurado and Ian MacDonald.

The Plot

This movie seems to take place in real time. Three men on horses meet on a hill before riding into town. With foreboding music, the townspeople look on in fear. The town's marshal, Will Kane (Cooper), is getting married to the Quaker Amy Fowler (Kelly) and preparing to retire. It'll be another day before the new marshal arrives. The three men on horses go to the train station and await the arrival of their leader, Frank Miller (MacDonald), who has just been released from jail after having his sentence commuted. Marshal Will Kane is the one who sent him to jail. He was supposed to hang, but juries and judges "up north" often let people go.

Discovering Miller is returning, everyone, especially the pacifist Amy, urges him to leave town. He changes his mind and decides to face the men in town rather than have them give chase when he is alone with Amy. He puts his badge and gun back on, assuming that he can raise a posse, as the town will surely help defend him. But few people offer their help. His deputy, Harv Pell (Bridges) resigns, angry that he did not get promoted to Kane's former position as marshal. He thinks Kane is upset because he is dating Kane's ex-lover Helen Ramirez, owner of the local saloon. Amy decided to leave town rather than stay and see people die. Helen decides to sell her stake in the saloon and also leave town. Kane tries to recruit men at the saloon, but many were once friends of Miller. Kane goes to the church but people are reluctant to help with what they believe is a personal matter between Kane and Miller. It is revealed that before Kane, Helen dated Miller. Kane rejects the offers of a one-eyed man and a 14-year old boy to help. One man offers to be deputized, but quits when he realizes he is the only one. In the end Kane faces the four men alone in empty streets. He kills two easily. One man is suddenly shot in the back by Amy, the pacifist. Miller takes her hostage. When Kane tries to make a trade, Amy claws at Miller, allowing Kane to shoot him while distracted. The townsfolk come out of hiding to celebrate. Kane throws down his badge and gun. He and Amy hop on a wagon and leave town.

Thoughts on the Film

It was some years after this film when people started writing the about the bystander effect, or the "Genovese syndrome," after the murder of Kitty Genovese. While there were many who heard Ms. Genovese's screams as she was raped and murdered, nobody did anything to help her. Everybody expects somebody else to act and so nobody does. Yet even without a name, it was a familiar story. Most people out of fear would at least be expected to call the police when they witness an ongoing crime committed against someone. In this film, the lawman is the one who is expected to act. It is doubly likely that nobody might aid him in this scenario.

People want peace, but they don't always have the convenience of justice first. Once this confrontation between Miller and Kane was over, they would hope for everything to return to normal. They would be as satisfied no matter who won the battle as long as none of them became additional victims. In their view, peace will be the final outcome although it would have been better if Kane had left town to avoid any conflict there in the first place.

That of course raises the question, "at what price peace?" Peace can mean not fighting to make things right. It can mean avoiding war despite abuses by a tyrant or an occupying force. It could mean those who did nothing reap the rewards while the losers, however right, may lose their own lives in the battle. One can tolerate bandits as long as they are not the victims. But they will gladly take the lawman's side providing he wins. It's an odd thing about the Old West, at least as depicted in film; the law is only as strong as those who are willing to impose it.

Manfred Weidhorn writes that it has had both liberal and conservative interpretations over the years. It could be interpreted at showing the difficulty of getting people to stand together as one. It was deemed at one time a defense of communists who refused to back down and name names. To me, that interpretation seems odd watching it now. It seems a bit of a stretch but may allude to the writer's intentions. Weidhorn goes on to say that it has lately been embraced by conservatives who see it as showing the need for a strong individual to defend the townspeople against evil (source). People see the judges and juries "up north" as a reference to a tyrannical federal government or more literally the northern states. Perhaps that is just a natural modern interpretation. Still, how can they ignore that he turns his back on them in the end, just as they turned their collective back on him? Shouldn't a conservative audience think there should be more than a few willing to protect law and order in their town? Besides, the lone strongman as judge, jury and executioner can be seen as symbol of fascism, often a criticism directed toward superhero comics.

The film does not come off that realistic but is engaging. Is everyone really so selfish as to worry more about getting their money's worth from law enforcement that they won't in turn defend their town from criminals? What would they expect from the next marshal who might arrive after the death of the previous marshal? It seems extra brutal that the movie's pacifist shot someone in the back , usually the mark of a coward. I feel maybe my interpretation might be wrong on this one. However, history seems to place this as a movie seen differently depending on one's point of view.

This trailer is the property of United Artists.

I use vote promotion services from Smartsteem and Minnowbooster. Both have approved me for their whitelist based on the content of my posts. I don't use bidbots that sell votes for low quality content. To sell your vote on Minnowbooster, use this referral link for an added bonus.