MovieChat Forums > The Big Country Discussion > Would the film be as effective if the Te...

Would the film be as effective if the Terrills were more sympathetic?

posted 8 years ago by DarthBill
3 replies | jump to latest

Neither family can claim to be innocent victims which is part of why this film works so well, but consider for a moment if the Terrills were portrayed more sympathetically with some more human traits, would the film still be as effective?

Say if towards the end of her screen time Patricia Terrill starts to understand that she and Jim McKay really aren't suited for each other and starts wondering aloud if it would be better to just break up and let him go back to the East, where she believes he belongs, feeling that he just isn't hard enough for the old west (strictly her opinion)? Would that undermine the character and the film?

Or Major Terrill was portrayed as genuinely wanting to end the feud while still using the same flawed tactics shown in the film (the impression I always got from him was that he enjoyed the feud on some level)? Would that undermine the conflict and film?

[–] turtletommy 8 years ago

I dunno if anything the screenplay tries to play with the viewer's emotions by portraying the Terrills as the good guys- the more well-bred "civilized" folks compared to the rougher appearing (and acting) clan of the Hannaseys. The Hannasey son Buck is the big uncouth bully of the area. But other than him who else in the family acts as badly as he does? Who else besides the Major in his family is as consumed with the kind of inner burning hatred as him? In a neat twist the speech by Rufus establishes some questioning by the viewers as to who really is right or wrong in this conflict. It's more shades of gray than an outright clear baddie or good guy. I like how the film deals with this.

[–] johnmiller (3944) 7 years ago

I think that's the point: Neither side is "good." They both have members consumed by hate.

[–] jriley555 (8224) 7 years ago

all those tinkerings would pretty much either sap the drama, or render the characters less compelling (same thing, really). this important film's principle theme, as i see it, is the impact of class upon perception, privilege, power.

part of that class demonstration is the striving for status. the captain already has it, the foreman wants it (and her). hence, conflict.

Wyler very skillfully uses that reality to challenge viewers preconceptions about the 'propriety' of the two families, and the foreman. perhaps in different directions. the sea captain gets to be the noble patrician, confident in his place, well-armed to defend it. all of it emblematic of the confidently elitist, yet moralizing, humanistic can-do uplift of that era.

Sorry for all the p's. I can't help myself.