Hottoceame The Age of Commercialism

Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece

FirstWitch A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Allison Davies The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

atlasmb "It's a Big Country" is a significant film. Created only a few years after the victorious effort of WWII, it was delivered to an American public that was exercising newfound powers, economic and political. It was a society undergoing rapid change for the same reasons and also due to changing mores in gender and race relations (caused by war experiences) and due to changes in technology and infrastructure (the car, interstate highways, etc.). The film fairly pleads for factions of the country to remain united despite their tendency to seek their own identities.This film feels like a moving representation of Norman Rockwell paintings, displaying a homespun, good-natured respect for traditions and the values that drove the United States to become successful. From the viewpoint of the 21st century, some of these values seem naïve. In our post-Watergate world, fewer Americans see government authority and other established authorities as innately benign. But it is simplistically easy to view this film as merely propaganda or naïve.Most of the episodes in this collection of vignettes champion values that were and are important to embrace: Racial understanding. The American melting pot. The Constitutional freedoms. But reading some reviews of the film, it is clear that some viewers also see the film as a documentary on American exceptionalism. And it's a subtext that cannot be ignored. Various individuals have always promoted the idea that America is the greatest country that ever existed--teachers, politicians, the military, the clergy. The thing that is exceptional and unique about the U.S. is its Constitution. Sometimes that message is lost in the nationalistic clamor.The film has an exceptional cast (Frederic March continues to amaze), exceptional writing that stirs the heart and summons tears, and solid production values. For those of any age, it can serve as a marker designating the state of the country circa 1950. So many complex factors have affected the evolution of the U.S. from what it was to what it is now. I like being reminded of the optimism of that time, however naïve. And it can remind us of the values we need to preserve and the viewpoints we have thankfully left behind.

jjnxn-1 Collection of stories to show the melting pot aspect of the USA. The film is blessed with an array of talent that only could be pulled together in Hollywood at its peak. Episodic by nature and all the vignettes have their charm but the first three are really the best.William Powell and James Whitmore breeze their way through a lively discussion of the ever evolving nature of the country. Their reactions to each other are what makes the skit.Next up is a little story about not being lost in the crowd made charming by Ethel Barrymore's gentle performance. The next segment is a tribute to notable African Americans which is nice in and of itself but that's also why it's a bit problematic. Considering the time it was made the isolated state of the short would have made it easy to snip out in the South. Of course the same could be said for any of the stories but since their are not people of color in any of the other segments it's rather obvious that was the intention at the time. Still it's a nice opportunity to see the significant Americans it spotlights.The other sections all showing various slices of life, aside from Gary Cooper's star bit simply representing Texas, are pleasant but are on the sticky side of sweet.

mountainkath I wanted to like this film. I really did. But, I could not. The premise was a great idea, but it was poorly executed. The only reason I kept watching was because of the amazing superstar cast.My favorite stories were the first one with the gentlemen on the train discussing America and the Gary Cooper segment where he was talking about Texas. Both of these segments held my attention and I thought they were very well done. Sadly, this was not the case for the rest of the film.I enjoyed the Nancy Davis plot about the boy needing glasses, but it went on a bit too long and seemed to get quite bogged down. I'm a huge Gene Kelly fan and wanted to enjoy his segment more than I did. However, I couldn't help being totally distracted that he and Janet Leigh decided to marry after knowing each other just a few minutes. I know this is a common plot to classic movies, but it still distracted me. Another distraction was Kelly romancing a woman much younger than him but again...this was a common theme in classic movies (and Kelly movies).I enjoyed Ethel Barrymore's segment solely because of Barrymore. The plot was so thin and dragged on much too long.I'm glad I watched this movie (seeing so many stars over the course of just 90 minutes was a real treat), but I doubt I'll ever watch it again.

benjweil This movie seems like a good idea -- debunking myths and defusing prejudice, showing us all how diverse America is -- but it also begs the question of why nearly all the main characters are WASPs (okay, except for S.Z. Sakall)! Janet Leigh is lovely in the Hungarian-Greek love story, but why not cast someone Hungarian, or at least Eastern European? And Gene Kelly as a Greek (speaking, by the way, with a perfect American accent, but a few stiff phrases thrown in to show he's a foreigner)? Fredric March as an Italian father (named Esposito?) ... and the list goes on. All wonderful actors, but miscast in this. Not only are all the actors as white as snow, the rhetoric is pretty heavy-handed, too. I love many of the old Hollywood movies, but this one could have used a more realistic approach. The '50s were a strange time in American film, as in American life. Everything and everybody were supposed to be sparklingly clean and chipper all the time. We had to wait until the '60s for a wrench to be thrown into those oh-so-smoothly-functioning works ...