Blucher One of the worst movies I've ever seen

Ploydsge just watch it!

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Staci Frederick Blistering performances.

evanston_dad "The Yearling" is one of those movies I had stayed away from because of my misguided perceptions about what it was going to be like (maudlin, sentimental, "family friendly" in all the worst ways). How wonderful to have those perceptions proven wrong and to discover such a beautiful, moving film.Most people know the plot of this movie. It takes a tough, matter of fact attitude about death and the natural world and doesn't offer a lot of cornball platitudes to soften the blow the way you might expect a movie from the 1940s to do. I wonder if this is largely because it came out right after the end of WWII, when films could begin allowing themselves to be honest and jaded rather than peppy morale boosters. At the same time, it's not a depressing movie; far from it. It captures perfectly one of those experiences -- of which there are many -- that mark the transition from childhood to adulthood. Much is to be gained from being able to experience the world as an adult, but much is lost too.One of the things I liked best about "The Yearling" was its visual style. Art directors Cedric Gibbons and Paul Groesse along with cinematographers Charles Rosher, Leonard Smith, and Arthur Arling use Technicolor to create an almost expressionistic version of the Florida swamps and an isolated farmstead. Parts of the film almost look like they're happening in a dream. The effect highlights the beauty and wonder of the natural world, but it also serves the purpose of making the men who populate it seem even smaller and humbler in comparison to all the grandeur.Gregory Peck and especially Jane Wyman give lovely performances as parents, and Claude Jarman, Jr. won a special juvenile Oscar as the young boy who adopts an ill-advised pet. The film deservedly won the Oscars for Art Direction and Cinematography in the color categories, and brought nominations to Peck and Wyman in the Actor and Actress categories, respectively, as well as to Harold Kress for his editing, Clarence Brown for his directing, and MGM for Best Picture of the year.Grade: A+

wes-connors In 1870s Florida, pioneering Gregory Peck (as Penny "Pa" Baxter) and Jane Wyman (Orry "Ma" Baxter) raise both corn and children. But, growing children can sometimes be a problem. Their first son dies before reaching age two, the next child doesn't make it to age three, and a third is born dead. The pain hardens Ms. Wyman's defenses, while Mr. Peck takes it easier with surviving fourth child, cute Claude Jarman Jr. (as Jody Baxter). The boy optimistically declares, "I'm eleven years old. I'm a-way past the age of dying!" And, so he is - but, that doesn't mean "The Yearling" is done with tragedy.The boy raises a fawn, after cutting out its mother's heart to draw poison from his snake-bitten father.Of, course, you know where this story is going - but, you've got to admit, it's done exceptionally well.Every frame is staged for the maximum amount of heart-tugging cinematic beauty possible. Guided by expert movie makers Sidney Franklin and Clarence Brown, the film is distractingly gorgeous. But, the unnatural quality of picturesque art is balanced by fact that all the animals act like animals; and, Peck anchors it all with an inspirational performance. The only living creature given truly "magical" qualities is Donn Gift (as Fodder-wing), the boy who learns to fly like an angel. This character seems to embody much of the lyricism present in writer Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings' original tear-stained pages.The story puts everything in perspective. Everyone has to get their "insides tore out" sometimes.********** The Yearling (12/18/46) Clarence Brown ~ Gregory Peck, Claude Jarman Jr., Jane Wyman, Donn Gift

stldjen I'm very confused as to how this book won a pulitzer prize, was voted best book of the year (1938) and was then made into a popular film when it is nothing but a very blatant story about animal cruelty. It would have been better titled as, 'How to kill your innocent family pet.' I have never read the book but I did see the movie, and I think any parent who would choose to make their child watch this film has got to be as insensitive as the woman who wrote the book.It is a story about a struggling floridian family who have bad luck thrown their way (the loss of their children from infant deaths, crop failures, and how poor, poor Ms. Baxter doesn't have a thing to wear because her clothes are being worn out from treading to a source of water because she doesn't have a well).Enter the doe, who is killed by Mr. Baxter so that he can use its heart and liver to draw venom from a recent rattlesnake bite.Enter the fawn, who the boy finds, and later decides to adopt (it's only fair, his father killed it's mother), because he wants a pet. Mr. Baxter is all gung ho about this at the idea of seeing his boy prance around with a wild animal.Well, the fawn, when growing up to be a yearling, bonds with the boy, who tries desperately to keep it out of mischief, which he fails to do.It eats away at Mr. Baxter's tobacco cash crop (not because it's evil, but it is a hungry animal). It gets into their corn crop and eats the shoots (again, not because it is a malicious and evil thing, but because that's what deers do when they are hungry).All of a sudden All the family woes are blamed on this animal. The BURDEN of their failures fall on this poor animal who has bonded with the family, loving and trusting them. The parents decide to execute the animal and in the process, make the boy emotionally suffer, INSTEAD of being responsible to the animal and locking it up at night so that it won't get into their crops, then watch over it during the day, making sure it gets fed other things that deers eat.What kind of a moral is this? The Baxters were having problems before the deer showed up, and most likely had them after the poor deer was slaughtered.When the boy ran away, I said, go for it. Get away from that stupid, creepy family.Is this teaching your children to kill the family pet, because a family has misfortune, or what? I was sickened by it. And that so many people thought this was a wonderful story, well, that makes me even sicker. If anything, it teaches the lack of responsibility.If you think you are doing something wonderful for your child by subjecting them to this, that's very sad. I suggest you open your mind and think, before you praise this kind of story.

dbdumonteil Nobody spoke of children like Clarence Brown ,at least in America !Remember "national Velvet" and the last minutes of "the intruder" ,the long conversation between a lawyer and his son..."The yearling" is learning about life .A young boy in a hostile wilderness ,his everyday life,his small joys and his big griefs ...It could be a mushy melodrama,it's never so: If it never falls in the trap of sentiment and it's entirely due to Brown's natural feeling for economy and sparseness which precludes all forms of conventional sentimentality: three children died? He shows three graves and that's it.Jane Wyman's part is certainly the most difficult:when she finally smiles,the viewer feels happy that this kind of scene can be possible. But my favorite scene has always been Peck's speech in the little cemetery ("because we do not know any prayer") where Fodderwing is being buried :it echoes the crippled boy's dreams when he and Jody spent the night in a tree -one of those magical moments of childhood-.Today's children are used to action-packed violent movies: I hope they will enjoy "the yearling" all the same.