daoldiges GIANT has lots of both good and not so good to it The best would be the cinematography, sets, and overall look of the film, which is unique, interesting and almost continually engaging. It also has broad reaching and interesting story goals, and even while falling a little short at times and rather drawn out, still kept me involved. I personally have no problem with films that run beyond the customary 2 hours in length but do feel that some editing would have strengthened both the stories and impact. I think for the most part the cast is good and did a fine job, and I would not agree with many that feel this is James Dean's best work, fine yes, great, no. Despite some issues I do think Giant is worth checking out.

wgingery Two very different movies: score '10' for the first half; it has all the interesting characters and incidents The second half is a tedious melodrama and scores a '2,' and there all the positive is due to the sequence "Angel Obregón's Funeral." Hollywood makes very few films like this any more: A-list stars, expensive production values, serious themes. . . . Director George Stevens had been profoundly affected by his experience photographing the Nazi death camps. Rock Hudson is good to look at, but seldom conveys the gravity of a man convinced that the old ways are best and that change means decline. Elizabeth Taylor was 23 at the time and the camera captures her extraordinary beauty. James Dean will be a disappointment to many. His style of acting now seems mannered and fussy. The photography is very good, conveying the immense scale of West Texas as well as the intimate personal dramas.

ElMaruecan82 "Giant" is the word. This is an epic of gigantic ambitions fully achieved thanks to the confident directing of George Stevens, his mastery of the camera as a unique tool of storytelling and the confident performances of the Rock Hudson, Liz Taylor and James Dean's trio.James Dean steals every scene he's in, and even in his most bizarre and awkward moments, Dean actually contributes to the modernization of a tone that would have otherwise been deemed as conventional and old-fashioned. While the film's appeal doesn't rest on the shoulders of Dean (who is a supporting character, not leading, don't be fooled) paraphrasing Bick Benedict (Hudson), Dean is that bit of vinegar in the greens: he gives flavor.It is quite ironic that the sourest character of the film is the one who supposedly exemplifies the American Dream, a young kid who inherited a small piece of land and was bought out as soon as he got it, for twice the value. Whatever awaits him, he knows it's a small price to get rid of a land, which is the only possible wealth (remember what Scarlett O'Hara's father said about it being the only thing worthy dying and fighting for, because it is the only thing that lasts) Jett Rink keeps the land, builds one derrick and then, years of labor pay off with oil gushing from land's womb. He's literally intoxicated with the climax of his efforts, he becomes rich, he gets the power but remains a hapless and bitter man. He didn't have Leslie, Bick's wife, played by Elizabeth Taylor.The way I retell it might echo the line of Tony Montana about the American Dream, there is in Rink's "last supper" scene the surly mood of Tony in the restaurant, the disgust when confronted to the decadence of the one he thought to be his love. And from the visible failure of Rink, the movie ends with Bick telling Leslie that he's a failure because he invested all his time and work to have the biggest cattle of Texas so that his children could inherit it, one became a doctor and married a Mexican, one married a rancher who believes "big stuff is old stuff", and another is infatuated with his archenemy. It takes a wonderful concluding speech from Leslie, to remind him all the journey they went through during these 25 years, and how he started as a traditional rancher who despised Mexicans, and ended up risking his own neck to defend these "people" against racism, to have raised kids who were open enough to embrace other cultures and to have things "their way"."Giant" does close the arc of their characters in such a way that we can only applaud the efforts of George Stevens and the writers who adapted the screenplay from the novel by Edna Faber, to make a powerful social comment about Texas and the many particularities of Texan culture from both a local perspective and an outsider's. The masterstroke is that Bick, the tough and towering rancher comes to buy a stallion in Virginia but comes back with an unexpected and more valuable catch, a delicate beauty who speaks for herself and shows more strength than the usual housewife. It takes a time to adapt to Texas' methods but from the way she handles her tough sister-in-law, played by Mercedes McCambridge, we know that a liberating wind will dust-off the place.Indeed, I was surprised to see issues like racism and feminism tackled in a film that could have easily been deemed as traditional epic family sagas sweeping two decades and half of America's history and of a Texan family caught in the air of social change, there is something of "Gone With the Wind" in the film with the vast deserted plains, the derricks, the cattle and Stetsons as backdrops, and wild and loud "Yee-haw" resonating in the horizon, it only lacks that historical magnitude but that actually fits the tone of the film. Stevens cares for the characters more than the plot in itself and it's from their actions, their words and their interactions that we can sense their evolution, for better or worse. Without being a character study, this is a film driven by people that never feel like individual archetypes, so the conflicts and arguments never lead to 'narrative' resolutions, like life.And it's for this realistic fluidity, this mundane banality directed with pure 50's gusto, that you never feel the length but get carried in the flow of events, some happy, some sad, that affect the lives of these people, even Rock Hudson is effective as the patriarch of the family whose authority is constantly questioned, this is no Richard Dix in "Cimarron", this is a man, who is vulnerable but tries to hide it, a man who is so rooted in the heritage from the past that he doesn't see himself as an individual but as the link between his fathers and his sons. There's a moment where he realizes that his idealistic worship of traditions doesn't amount to a hill of a beans in the modern world, so he just accept Jett Rink's deal in a sort of "oh, what the heck" mindset, it was anticlimactic, but I liked it. The irony is that it improved his life without making Rink a better man."Giant" is a giant film by many aspects, great cast, great story (that Stevens put in "history"), and beautiful sweeping shots that allow us to measure the vastness of Texas, the generosity of its people... and their flaws, too. And like the two other James Dean's movie, it's also part of Hollywood history as the movie that allowed Dean to grace the screen one last time before being swept by a tragic Karma. What an omen that he had to 'age' for the film, he who never aged after that.And the film didn't age either

Kevin-94 Spoilers ahead. So what happens in "Giant"? Or rather, what doesn't? PLOT POINT: Handsome, successful, suit wearing Rock brings Liz back to his ranch, to live forever. Immediately upon her arrival, she meets James Dean, a troubled, boyishly handsome ranch hand closer to her age. QUESTION: Will Liz find herself in a torrid love triangle, forced to choose between these two very different (but fascinating) men? ANSWER: Nope. She has little, if any interest in Dean, and only shares a few minutes of screen time with him. He does appear to be interested in her. But whatever is going on psychologically inside the Dean character isn't well dramatized on screen. He's mostly a mystery, a withdrawn, silent character. He does little if anything to actually try to win Liz's heart. At the end of the film, he seems to suggest that his unrequited love for Liz drove all his actions and ruined his life. But given how little interest Liz took in him, Dean ultimately comes off more like an emotionally immature, lovesick teenager than some tragic figure. And the film doesn't even bother to give us a Liz/Dean scene at the end, to provide closure to this part of the story. PLOT POINT: Upon her arrival, Liz also meets Rock's strong willed sister. She's been the queen of the ranch up until now. QUESTION: Will Liz and the sister fight over who is in charge of the ranch, and Rock? ANSWER: Nope. The sister dies shortly after Liz's arrival, in a completely arbitrary, random horse accident. PLOT POINT: Dean inherits a small patch of land adjacent to Rock's ranch. QUESTION: Will the two rivals, now living side by side wage war with each other in an epic battle for control? ANSWER: Nope. They mostly get along with only minor problems. When Dean's wealth reaches new heights, Rock simply sells out. PLOT POINT: Sal Mineo is introduced as a young man who is interested in ranch life, unlike Rock's own kids. QUESTION: Will Mineo, in time, become Rock's surrogate son, and new ranch head? ANSWER: Nope. Mineo is killed (off screen) during the war. The audience is subjected to a dull, unnecessary five minute funeral scene for his character. (While he was alive, all of Mineo's scenes combined represented about two minutes of screen time. The film inexplicably spends more time on his funeral than it did on him!) PLOT POINT: Once grown, Rock's and Liz's kids want to do things with their lives that are different from what their parents want for them. QUESTION: Will these disagreements create conflict in the family? ANSWER: Nope. Rock lets the kids follow their hearts. PLOT POINT: Rock's Latino daughter in law is refused service in the salon in Dean's huge hotel. Rock takes this as a very personal insult to his family by Dean. The two men fight. QUESTION: Does this represent a satisfying climax to the film?ANSWER: Nope. Technically, Rock is right. As the owner of the hotel/salon, Dean is ultimately responsible for what goes on there. But Dean doesn't seem like a racist. He's never said or done anything racist during the film. Also, Dean seems like an indifferent businessman, more lucky than smart. It's unlikely that he was even aware that these racist policies were even in place. Dean's culpability here is weak at best, and it seems like a tenuous foundation to build the climax of a three hour film on. PLOT POINT: At the end of the film, Rock and his family visit a diner. While there, they notice that the owner refuses service to a Latino family, one that Rock has never met and has no connection to whatsoever. QUESTION: Rock fights the manager, to express his outrage at the manager's racism, and to convince him to change this policy. The music score swells. Does Rock win? Does the final scene offer any kind of satisfactory conclusion to this would-be epic story? ANSWER: Nope. Rock loses and the diner will continue its racist policy. The film attempts to end on a happy note, showing that Rock now cares about people of color. But Rock never expressed any racist views in any prior scene, so this doesn't represent substantive character growth. (His affection for Sal Mineo seemed to suggest a man with no race or class prejudices.) Even if Rock had won, it's just a conflict between two men at a diner. For a three hour film called "Giant," it feels like an oddly inconsequential ending.