Mon grand

Showcase for Barbara Stanwyck who gracefully ages from a young woman to a mother in her late 40s. Barbara stands for hard work (on the farm) and the recognition of beauty in life (even cabbages are beautiful). Her understated portrayal shines as one of her best works. Story of her son, (who Barbara said was "So Big" with hands spread wide apart) is that of a privileged offspring who ignores his mother's advice and takes the easy way to money, ignoring the beauty in creativity, and hides his mother's career from society ladies. When he finally meets a good woman (a good Bette Davis) who appreciates someone with "bumps," he reveals his past but it is not bumpy enough to impress her. Instead Bette goes off to Paris and meets with celebrated sculptor George Brent who as a boy had lived with and loved the older Barbara. Interesting portrayal of two contemporary actresses with one playing the part of a woman old enough to be the other's mother and neither obviously updating the other. Good messages, good role models, with Barbara staying down on the farm as a success without having taken the easy road. A quiet gem to inspire depression-era audiences.

My favorite Barbara Stanwyck movie is her turn as a self-sacrificing mother in Stella Dallas. So Big! feels like her audition for her 1937 Oscar-nominated role.

Once again, Barbara is a poor woman who longs for a better life. She gets a job tutoring a wealthy boy, and then marries a poor farmer and starts a family. Her son becomes the light of her life, and she nicknames him "So Big!" because he's her only reason for living. She sacrifices, scrimps, and saves, in order to give him a better chance at life. If you liked Stella Dallas, you'll probably want to rent So Big! on a weekend. It's a Pre-Hays Code film, so there will be some moments when you gasp and ask, "How did they get away with that?" before you remember the release year of 1932. And you'll get to see a young Bette Davis and George Brent, as well as Alan Hale, who joined Barbara Stanwyck in Stella Dallas. While I like the later film infinitely better-because it's hard to compare any film to the tearjerker-this one is fun to watch because it's very obviously a precursor. If you like Barbara, add this to your list!

Edna Ferber's novel of the same title has been brought to the screen in several remakes. This 1932 film, directed by William Wellman, is a curiosity piece in that two of the best screen actresses of their generation appear in the same cast. Although it's clear this was a Barbara Stanwyck vehicle, Bette Davis is seen in a small role.

"So Big", adapted for the screen by J. Grubb Alexander, in this version, is a rather intimate picture where some of the epic aspects of the novel doesn't come into play. It's basically a story of riches into rags back to riches, as Selina Peake, its heroine, sees her fortune change from the high times to almost poverty when her dear father is fatally shot.

Selina is clearly a survivor. She projects a larger than life shadow over everything in the story. Her arrival at High Prairie under conditions she has never seen, makes her stronger. Selina sees beauty in the land that is going to serve as her home. She is a clever woman who inspires others, especially young Roelf Pool, the young boy who seems to be doomed to stay in the land of his ancestors, to strive for greatness.

Barbara Stanwyck makes the most out of Selina. She gives a controlled performance in sharp contrast with other characters she played in the movies. Bette Davis and George Brent, only appears shortly in the film. Alan Hale, Dickie Moore and Hardin Albright are seen in smaller roles.

"So Big" shows a slice of life in America at the beginning of the last century, a world, that alas, is gone forever.

Barbara Stanwyck is a young woman who becomes a teacher in a farming community. She gets married, has a son and tries to teach him the true value of life--which is beauty and nature. But he's more interested in money and position. Can she make him see her way?

Very well-done with another great Stanwyck performance and a young Dick Winslow giving a fine performance as Roelf...also a very young Bette Davis shines as a young artist. Very lavishly done...but the film is seriously lacking. The film is very short (80 minutes) and the story seems extremely rushed and lacks focus. I've never read the book but I know it runs over 300-400 pages--there's no way that can be condensed to 80 minutes. So I do recommend the film (I'm giving it an 8) because it is very well-done and the entire cast is great. If only it weren't so short!

This is an extremely condensed version of Edna Ferber's Pulitzer Prize winning novel. It moves much too fast, missing the epic scope of Ferber's writing, but it works on its own small terms, establishing characters, filling them out, though in miniature, and telling Ferber's story. I wonder what she thought of this version!

Stanwyck is wonderful in this, simple and straightforward, really playing the character. This was an amazing performer. The more I see of her body of work the more impressed I am. She could do anything, comedy, serious drama, playing all kinds of characters from good to bad, "dames" to ladies.

Bette Davis shines in this early performance. She was only twenty four years old here, and without tricks or gimmicks (the kind she would use increasingly as she got older and the passion for acting faded) she plays a character, inhabits her, plays in the scene and really holds your attention. She looks lovely by the way, even with her platinum dyed tresses.