Talk:The Yearling (1946 film)

Separate article
Should there be a separate article for the The Yearling (The Novel)? It's a pullitzer prize-winning novel and remains a popular work. I know this article is listed under novels but it primarily deals with the film. If there is a positive consensus, I'd be willing to write it.--Daul21 12:21, 8 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes - it neads doing - this article is just not enough surely. :: Kevinalewis  :  (Talk Page) / (Desk)  14:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes. In fact, this article's current revision should be moved to The Yearling (film), and the main article should be used for the book. Cribcage 17:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The article has been moved. Cribcage 19:57, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Artwork
One of the best things of the movie is how the artwork from the novel is used to storyboard the movie. For example, the artwork shown on the first page of this wiki of the boy Jody, with his arms full with the fawn he loved from the first moment he saw it. That scene is reproduced to a tee in the movie. So are many other memorible picture plates from the book, such as the sleeping, snake-wounded Penny in bed as Jody lies on the floor asleep, in the midst of a roomful of the family's rascally neighbors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.219.241.179 (talk) 20:13, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

shoulda been a tagline
"Jody... you gotta stop sleepin' with that fawn" 70.15.116.59 (talk) 20:35, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Original movie poster for the film The Yearling.jpg
Image:Original movie poster for the film The Yearling.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

The Yearling "2009"
I understand the history of this movie but I see it in a different way now. When I was kid, I was excited to know that a child could have a deer as a pet but today I would see it as a chance to expond on the story line. I would have changed the ending and allowed the young buck to live on in age, escaping hunters for years. He would have been drawn away by a young doe. often he would be seen in the forest and swap woods fighting for the herd of his choice,and returning to the young boy until he became a young man with his offsprings. The site to see his rack mature would make the hunters go crazy...Ending only by saving the young man's child or offspring from a mountain lion. They (hunters) would have become wise on how to protect their crops and leave just enough for the deers they respected and harvested over the years. It would make a great story line and box office hit across all ages

R.Critney II —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.14.40.150 (talk) 18:13, 7 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Your proposed ending may be pleasing to modern city-dwellers, but for those who are familiar with wildlife and the nineteenth century frontier, it is completely unrealistic. First, a domesticated deer would not be smart enough to escape hunters.  That's why game wardens even to this day don't allow people to keep deer and other wildlife as pets.  When game animals are domesticated, they don't learn to fear people, and this makes them easy prey for hunters.  Second, farmers in the nineteenth century shot deer for reasons other than protecting their crops (ever heard of venison?).  Third, if they had left "just enough for the deers (sic)", that would have only been an open invitation for other wildlife to come and ravage their crops.  Do you really think a frontier farmer who was struggling for survival would have done any such thing as that?  I know movies aren't known for being realistic, but this kind of ending would insult the intelligence of every farmer, hunter, and conservationist in America.97.73.64.160 (talk) 14:30, 9 April 2012 (UTC)