The Yearling

Entertaining,we'll acted story of growing up and facing life's choices.

Another user compared this to the original. Actually, I think this adaptation of "The Yearling" is better than the original ... but the original is by far the better film. While the acting in this version is very good - superior to many films made today - there is simply nothing to compare to Gregory Peck and Jane Wyman from the original. It is not that this version is in any way lacking, it is that the original set the bar so high that it's not really fair to compare the two.

I thought Wil Horneff captured the part of Jody very well. I thought he was absolutely believable. Peter Strauss was very good as his father, but I thought Jean Smart was lacking as his mother. She had the emptiness that the part calls for, but needed a little more of the coldness that Ora Baxter showed in the book.

Jared Blancard completely missed the target as Fodderwing, in my opinion. The character should have a sense of mystical wonder and awe at nature which Jared simply didn't show. The part isn't large (relatively), but it is pivotal. Don Gift had it down perfectly in the original.

All in all, this is a very good film. It's great for the family and stands on its own.

This is the first version of this movie that I have ever seen. Because it was so enjoyable, I decided to check out the original. I must tell you that this is a good movie, but after seeing the original (1946) version, this is a big let down! This version will do (if you have not seen the original), but it omits the essential quality that would make it a classic (like the original) and that is the 1 hour of family life and the expression of a child dreaming.

A couple (Peter Strauss and Jean Smart) and their young son (Wil Horneff) face the challenges of life in the Big Shrub, aka Ocala National Forest in north-central Florida. The things they deal with include a troubling bear, a rattlesnake bite, a flood, and their moonshining neighbors (Philip Seymour Hoffman, Brad Greenquist, etc.).

"The Yearling" (1994) sticks close to the 1938 classic novel by Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings, except for two things: It transports the events from the post-Civil War years to the Great Depression and it (wisely) omits Jody's attempted canoe trip to Boston at the end.

While it's a wilderness drama/adventure, it's reminiscent of a Western in ways. Speaking of which, 1966's "The Night of Grizzly" featuring Clint Walker was obviously inspired by Rawlings' book. While I like that flick, this is the better film, regardless of whether it was made-for-TV.

What makes it so good? For one, it successfully puts the viewer in that time and place with authentic locations (no studio sets or SoCal locations like in the 1946 version with Gregory Peck). The cast members really get into their characters, augmented by their grubby clothes and discolored teeth; they're totally believable.

Furthermore, amidst the depressing happenings are warmhearted bits, like the love of the father and son. Plus, the melee at the town party perks up the story and is well done. I've been to such get-togethers in real life where the locals assemble for food & drink and things like what transpires in the story really happen. Consider Lem Forrester (Greenquist), we all know troublemakers just like him.

It runs 1 hour, 39 minutes, and was shot in the Ocala National Forest area at Silver Springs State Park and Juniper Prairie Wilderness.

GRADE: B+/A-

Caught some of this on TV. Compared to the '47 classic Hollywood version, which I have seen many times over the years, it comes across as a more realistic portrayal, in some respects, of the likely people in this backwoods central Florida habitat of the post -Civil War. It's 30 min. shorter than the original, in its adaptation of the '38 popular novel of the same name. Both were shot in color, and both clearly were shot on location in the real habitat described in the novel. The actors seem more realistic as backwoods pioneers, lacking the glamor of Gregory Peck, Jane Wyman, and cherry-cheeked Claude Jarmin, as the main characters. Claude, although new to Hollywood, was the final choice in a nationwide hunt for the perfect child to play Jody. Clearly, he was younger and more child-like than Wil Horneff, who played Jody here. Despite many criticisms of Claude's acting and characterization at the IMDb site for that film, I find him much more endearing than Wil. On the other hand, Peck's Penny comes across as from too genteel a background to be satisfied with such a hard-scramble life. Peter Strauss seems a much more believable Penny. Jean Smart plays a more vocal and animated, less traumatized, Ora than Jane Wyman's largely silent character, who seemed resigned to the fact that Jody, as the last remaining of 4 children she birthed, would likely also die before reaching maturity. Thus, through most of that film, she was set on withholding her motherly affection toward Jody, having seen it wasted on her other 3 children. The actors who here portrayed the distant Forrester neighbors portrayed them as generally more uncouth than in the original.

The traumatized encounter with Slew foot: the marauding bear, was equally well done in both films: a difficult shoot....The implication that the deer liver treatment of the rattlesnake bite was probably effective enough to allow Penny to barely survive it's effects is suspect. I assume this was a local folk remedy that the novel author picked up, but I doubt if it is effective, even if applied soon.

As far as the screen play, taken from the novel, is concerned, I find it difficult to believe that there weren't other deer in the forest who would be as destructive of the their crops as Flag, not to mention probable feral swine. However, the point is well taken that cherished pets and habits must sometimes be discarded when they become a severe threat to your well being.