Edna Ferber's novels weren't treated very well by Hollywood. This was partly due to censorship. Her characters and plots had to be sanitized. The other problem was trying to digest novels which were grand in scope down to less than two hours of film. This movie is another example of a poor transition of one of her novels to film.
It seems that a lot of the film was spent showing scenes of timber being cut, rolling down the mountainside and floating down the river. Who cares!? The time would have been better spent on plot development and characterization.
All of the actors did just fine with what they were given. Actors can't do much with a weak and dull script.
However, Joel McCrea's part is so small that his talent is completely wasted in the role. Any contract player could have portrayed the character, although I'm sure McCrea's name had box-office value.
It's my opinion that this film is just not that good. There are many other films of that age which are much better and stand up to the passage of time. The best that can be said is that the print recently shown by TCM was in excellent condition.
It seems that a lot of the film was spent showing scenes of timber being cut, rolling down the mountainside and floating down the river. Who cares!? The time would have been better spent on plot development and characterization.
All of the actors did just fine with what they were given. Actors can't do much with a weak and dull script.
However, Joel McCrea's part is so small that his talent is completely wasted in the role. Any contract player could have portrayed the character, although I'm sure McCrea's name had box-office value.
It's my opinion that this film is just not that good. There are many other films of that age which are much better and stand up to the passage of time. The best that can be said is that the print recently shown by TCM was in excellent condition.