MovieChat Forums > Wild River (1960) Discussion > Confused

Confused

posted 12 years ago by SataiDelen
3 replies | jump to latest

OK, I just saw this movie for the first time. I liked it, but I'm confused on one part. If the government was flooding the land, why the need to chop down the trees, and burn the house down? Why does it matter whether the trees and house just sit there underwater? The house would eventually rot away, and the trees might actually have stood a chance of continuing to live, wouldn't they?

I'm just honestly not understanding the need to pre-destroy what's already going to be destroyed by the water.

[–] hobnob53 12 years ago

The river wouldn't be that deep, and would still rise and fall somewhat, as is normal. The house and trees, if left standing, could become a hazard to navigation. Debris could also break free and become a problem drifting on the surface.

[–] odo5435 12 years ago

As to the removal of the timber, part of the TVA's charter was to provide employment and the lumber thus produced would be put to good use.

That wasn't very sporting, using real bullets.

[–] mdonln 9 years ago

I wondered about the same thing. I don't think it was explained in the movie, if so, I missed it. I figured it was to keep the force of the water from carrying away any debris like weakened trees or loosened slats, etc. Who knows?

Woman, man! That's the way it should be Tarzan. [Tarzan and his mate]