OK shocking is a little much, but when Jodi comes home at the end, his father says something like they were looking for him for three days and almost gave up hope of finding him. I mean this is kind of sad, if you were lost or you ranaway from home, wouldn't you be upset if your parents gave up looking for you only after three days? just a thought.
Mrs. White: It's a matter of life after death, now that he's dead I have a life.
He didn't seemed too bothered at all, you'd have thought he'd be crying with joy and stuff, but it was just like, "Oh hello son, are you back then?" He didn't even get any sympathy for 3 days of starvation! Mind you, his over acting was so bad, Mum and Dad were probably glad to get him out of the house for a while.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000071/
thank you I thought i was the only one to see his overacting. God, he pissed me off!
Forget yourself for a moment,
And you may lose yourself forever.
LOL, yeah I did find that a little strange. Oh well. A good movie nonetheless. They're playing this on TCM today.
shareIt could be that death was so much more common at that time and place - the swamp and the poisonous snakes.
share[deleted]
and the loss of all their other children...as my grasnmother said, 'makes ya tough'
shareFrom our perspectives I guess it does seem shocking.
I still can't get past the fact they killed the deer. That was heartless, making the boy finish the job.
If I were the kid I'd have never come back home to those parents.
Life was harder in those days as far as the reality of survival goes.
Always the wedding officiant, never the bride.
Maybe because back in those days if you were lost in the wilderness for 3 days you were more likely to be killed by wild animals.
share"Maybe because back in those days if you were lost in the wilderness for 3 days you were more likely to be killed by wild animals."
Yep! It's not like they could call on the emergency services. It was a dangerous environment for the would - be rescuers too.
This was not shocking at all but very realistic. This is after the Civil War. Heck, you could die of the Flu. And think of all the adults that lost their children to the WAR and never new what had happened to them? At the starting of the movie you see all of the young children/babies that the Mother had lost. There wasn't medicine back then. My own Mother lost her 13 year old brother to 'The Measles' back in the 30's living on an Iowa Farm. When Jodi was gone for days in the swamps etc. I'm sure the Mom/Dad had to accept the fact that he had died. It's simply a protection system that without you'd go crazy back in that day for Parents. Not shocking at all. 'They didn't have Milk Cartons to digitally put Jodi's Picture on' o.k.? As is today, death is a part of Life, but was much more grim for any hope back then. Jodi's parents had to tell themselves that he was gone. Just like their animals, their crops, their friends etc. That's what makes this movie so realistic. And so very sad.... I find this film a fantastic slice of Americana and it states that in the opening that they dedicated it to all of the people (now dust) that made or Country Great.
You're damned if you do and damned if you don't ~ Bart Simpson
The last thing that Jody says to them is that he hopes he "never sees them again".
I think they assumed that he ran away and was gone forever. Not dead. Just gone.
And pa's subdued demeanor was a result of relief mixed with the realization that Jody had learned something rich and useful, through starvation (albeit limited) and had grown up significantly while he was away.
His mom sure changed a lot while Jody was away. She hugged him so tight when he went to bed. It tore me up.
Did anyone else find it hard to believe that Flag could destroy an entire corn crop in one night?
share[deleted]
I found the whole film quite disturbing and depressing. Rather than restraining Flag while the crop grew they decided he just had to die. And forcing a son go through a traumatizing "kill your best friend" experience and then possibly lose that son forever...oh well, we'll just make another kid.
The moral I saw was "Being heartless is good! Hearts are for pussies!".
It's a wonder that Jody went back at all.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Ah, But they couldn't make another child.
The whole story is about plans and dreams and the need to know what can be achieved versus what must be accepted.
Not always accepted with serenity either; sometimes just endured until it can be borne.
That's the worst part so many times, isn't it?
As for the sheer hardship of their existence, well;
That's the whole mixture that perhaps today someone like me, who has had it rough and smooth by turns, but ialways in Southern California, just cannot imagine.
If it was me, if I were Jody, I would've been up to see like a shot! A cabin boy then a sailor set money aside to send home.
But well I should consider this as well; maybe not driven by plot device as The Yearling, this awful drama occurs every time there's a drought or disaster. In Australia, they had a terrible drought. So many people loved their animals, but found themselves needing to kill them rather than have them died of thirst. What a horrible thing to wake up to-what a horrible thing to write down to sleep and dream about each night. And this was real life
I understand that it's a beautiful and cruel life, but this person will be staying away from reminders for a while : -/
I mostly agree. Although I still enjoy parts of the film, some of it lacks logic and/or is disturbing. I would say though, that the parents may not have guessed/known/assumed that they might lose their son forever. Perhaps they thought that Jody would 'understand' their point of view and never imagined he'd react that way. Idk.
As you noted, how about penning up Flag in the barn with the other animals, if you feel he might be a threat to the crops? And please no one say "but Jody didn't want to restrict his freedom"....so the alternative is, risk the fate of your crops (in reality, your livelihood) multiple times and, when that plan falls through, then you will have to kill your best friend? That is the better choice? Yikes. That is idiotic thinking.
What should have happened, once it became clear that Flag was going to be a nuisance, was to pen him up. Or, if it was time to move on, take him deep into the woods/swamp and let him go. He is old enough to fend for himself, and he would soon hook up with other deer and go on with life. They showed that Jody tried to do this once, but he didn't go very far and it was a half-hearted attempt at best. Perhaps it would have been more effective if Penny brought Flag into the woods to release him and not Jody.
The story of "Rascal" written by Sterling North (and it is a true story to boot) dealt with the very same issues, only the animal there was a raccoon. After Rascal caused too much trouble in town, the author led him into the woods and released him back to the wild. He didn't say "well I guess I gotta shoot my pet now!" Neither Flag nor Rascal were so domesticated that they couldn't survive and thrive in their natural environs. Clearly Flag knew how to feed himself, he wasn't reliant on Jody for anything but companionship. It seems pretty clear that penning Flag or releasing him were more viable options.
If you don't like this one, then I advise to stay away from the book "A Day No Pigs Would Die." In that one, the father kills his son's pet pig for food (during the Great Depression I think) and makes the son eat it! The father may even make the son kill it and this is to be taken as some sort of rite of passage. So yeah, if you found this depressing, steer clear of that one.