Coat of Arms
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Law VS Order
In the movie "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance", one of the main characters portrayed by James Stewart played a big part in the movie. However, if you were to remove him from the script, the movie would have taken a completely different route. If Stewart's character were to not have shown up in the small town, they would have never seen democracy. Liberty would have continued his reign of terror, and eventually the big cattle ranchers who employed him would gain huge amounts of power in the territory. If Jame's portrayal of the sense of Law and Order had not been present in the movie, it would undoubtedly have turned out different.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I think this is very interesting. But i Don't think it is as interesting as the nfl combine and the draft! I'll tell you what if I were in the sports and gaming blog I would be all over the Tebow and Ndamekong Suh potential team prospects. Such awesome and versatile players could only be truly utilized on one team: Da BRONCOS. 'nuff said
I think that it is necessary to have a ballance of law and power. One without the othe would be nothing but meaningless effort. Those who hold athority need rules and laws to create a stable and fair environment. Those who create laws need enforcers who make sure their laws are being abided.
I also agree if Ransom didnt come to the town everything would have been different. I figure that Liberty would keep doing what he was doing and might have lived. But i also do believe that there would be a possibilty that WAYNE would have got fed up and shot him anyways. With out law and order which ransom added to the story, the fat sheriff would have kept eating and not detain the bad guys. And most of all vigilante justice would have been more effective, especially when its vigilante justice been served on a cold dish by JOHN F'INN WAYNE!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TljIfAjx-eI&feature=related
Post a Comment