kijii This is a great movie! It was nominated for several Oscars including: Best Actor (Gregory Peck); Best Actress(Jane Wyman); Best Director (Clarence Brown) and Best Picture. Claude Jarman, Jr. did receive a special Oscar as a child actor. I have read the book, and it is better. I consider Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings's novel to be one of the best coming-of-age novels ever written. It is full of symbolism. But, one can easily relate to Jody at any age, and even without the symbolism. Any slight reservations I have about the movie are only related to my comparison between the greatness of the book over the greatness of the movie. It is hard to capture literary symbolism in a movie, but this movie, comes close to "hitting the mark." Jane Wyman is very good as Jody's hardened mother, Orry Baxter, who has learned to be disappointed with life and its hardships. Gregory Peck plays Jody's father, Penny Baxter, who wants to let Jody (Claude Jarman, Jr.) enjoy the joys of childhood as long as he can before facing hardships of the world. Flag, Jody's adapted fawn, is the joy of his life. The movie may overplay the traits of these three characters a bit to them drive home. That is, near the beginning of the movie, Wyman may seem a bit too hard, Peck may seem a bit too interested in Jody's happiness, and Jody may seem a bit too romantic about life. But, one soon overlooks any of these exaggerations and becomes involved in the story. Claude Jarman, Jr.won a Special Oscar for this role as a young boy of 12 when this picture was made. The character of Fodderwing strikes me as something of a Christ figure in this movie.

calvinnme ... so completely depressing I would rather jab my eyeballs out with forks rather than ever watch this again. I watched it once all the way through just so I could write the review. That's it. Same for Old Yeller, and that had Likable adult characters! I get that Jane Wyman is playing the part of the mother as cold and hard because all of her other children have died and she doesn't want to get too attached to this one. But she goes too far in my opinion. Any kid raised this way will have no attachment to mom whatsoever when he reaches adulthood. It is said that Gregory Peck is supposed to be making up for mom's coldness by being close to son Jody. But why doesn't he call him by name? Why does he weirdly keep calling him "Boy". Have I accidentally wandered into a Tarzan film? And then into this sweet boy Jody's dismal life comes a pet - a fawn. But all does not stay well. The yearling becomes destructive to the crops and must be killed, and what's worse is that Jody is made to finish the job! His best friend Fodderwing, a cripple, dies as a child. So everyone Jody is really attached to is dead. He is gone three days after the fawn's killing, and then dad acts puzzled and even somewhat indifferent when he returns? As for mom, she hardly looks away from her housework to notice Jody's return. At least if mom dies ,embalming will not be an issue - if they had that at the time - because ice water does not coagulate.For those of you who say this is a classic, I agree only from a standpoint of it being finely crafted and timeless. For those of you who said it warms your heart, see your doctor immediately. The only explanation can be a coronary.If you want to see a tale of how hard life can be that did warm my heart try to track down a copy of "Mrs. Mike" with Dick Powell as a Mountie trying to get his wife, who comes from a civilized place, accustomed to the death, disease, and starvation that accompanies life in the great white north. That one DID warm my heart.I know this review will not be popular, but it is how I see it. I give it a seven for fine craftsmanship only, and I would never let a child under ten watch it unless I was prepared to stay up all night with said child while he or she has nightmares.

SimonJack This is an early Technicolor film that dazzled audiences with its scenes of nature in all its splendid colors in 1946. It is also one of the many successful efforts in Hollywood's first half century that turned very good or noted books into very good or great movies. The novel source of this film by the same name was penned by Marjorie Rawlings in 1938. The setting is the flat wilds of north-central Florida around the turn of the 20th century. Rawlings' Cross Creek homestead today is a state park north of Ocala. "The Yearling" is an enjoyable, moving tale about a young boy growing up in a pioneer family. At times humorous, at times serious, the story never gives a sense of despair but is always filled with hope. It has great depth of characters in the central cast. Theirs is a heartfelt closeness that is hidden just below the surface for the propriety of the times. But the audience is always aware of this close bond between Ma, Pa and son. Few who have commented so far mention the strong work ethic within the family. That was a necessity in pioneer families of the time, and this film captures that important aspect of early American times before the advent of automation. Indeed, it is a part of the formation of character we see in young Jody as the movie story unfolds. I don't think there are many films that show this, so "The Yearling" has some historical value in that regard. Others have commented on the beautiful story and the cast, especially the new child star, Claude Jarman, Jr. Jarman became a child-star over night with his role, which he "won" in a nationwide talent search by MGM. All aspects of this film are excellent, and it received seven nominations for Academy Awards, including Best Picture. It won two Oscars for production, and Jarman received a special junior Oscar for his role. Both Gregory Peck and Jane Wyman were nominated for lead role Oscars. But 1946 was like many other years in the early and mid-20th century. Actors, directors and technicians competed for awards with outstanding work in many films that went head-to-head at the Oscars. That year's films included "The Best Years of Our Lives," "It's a Wonderful Life," "Henry V," "The Jolson Story," "To Each His Own," and "Duel in the Sun." What prompted me most to write this review, with so many other comments, was the performance by Gregory Peck. Another reviewer, bkoganbing from Buffalo (2 March 2008), said that he wasn't sure that Peck and Wyman gave better performances than in "The Yearling," where both later won Oscars for roles in other films. I agree. Peck surely deserved his Oscar for "To Kill a Mockingbird" in 1962. But I think his Penny Baxter in "Yearling" was much broader, deeper and touching than was his very good Atticus Finch in "Mockingbird." Most actors over time develop a very identifiable film persona. There is nothing wrong with that – it's a reality of the trade and of time, experience and habits. The audiences become familiar with stars on that basis. No doubt, producers and directors cast parts based on such characteristics. By the time Gregory Peck had a few more years under his belt in front of the cameras, he had developed a persona that audiences knew him for. In nearly every role he played after his first few years, his characters were serious, studied and thoughtful. That surely describes Atticus Finch in "Mockingbird." But in "The Yearling," we see a Peck who smiles often, who shows a sparkle in his eye and speech – even when matters are most serious He has a subdued humor that surfaces just at the right times. He has an energy and vitality of movement that springs of youth. It isn't in later roles in which he played characters of the same age. He had not yet developed a mold of a persona, and his performance had greater breadth and range. It was the freshness of his acting and his relative newness to Hollywood. This film is the best of a fine actor who had several nominations in his life for excellent roles in some great movies.

bob-790-196018 Always start out positive. The were three things I really liked about this movie. One was an exciting bear hunt, with fierce-looking simualted fighting between the bear and two dogs. And then there were two really cute baby raccoons. And finally, the first glimpse we have of the deer Flag as a very young fawn. If you were actually there in real life, you'd want to pick the little guy up and hug it and take it home--which would be a mistake.Other than that, I thought The Yearling was a waste of time. If the novel was anything like the movie they made from it, I pity the generations of school kids forced to read it for literature classes. English teachers often don't seem to know what fiction is really for. Instead they see it as a sort of secular Sunday school for imparting life lessons. Boring! In the movie, that long last speech by Gregory Peck as the boy's dad really tried my patience. The interludes of choral music were downright embarrassing.The movie wants us to think it's about hard truths--hence the shooting of the deer. But come on! For a family of backwoods folks, they seemed mighty naive to take the deer into their household in the first place. No way you can domesticate such a creature. Eventually it will start eating the crops, as any suburban homeowner will tell you. The real hard truth would have been to tell this to the kid at the start and refuse to even consider trying to tame the deer.But this movie is built around the genteel person's idea of hard truth. Such a person would not even think to ask about the problem of deer droppings and urine in the house--let along in the kid's bed. (Yes, the deer sleeps with the kid!) Gregory Peck provided his usual stolid persona. Jane Wyman was enjoyable as an embittered woman. The boy was made to seem so endearing it made me ill. The cinematography was admirable.