The Sea of Grass (1947)

Clever and entertaining enough to recommend even to members of the 1%

Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

The movie is wonderful and true, an act of love in all its contradictions and complexity

Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

Young woman in 1880 St. Louis marries a cattle-baron who wields a powerful, occasionally unpopular and unfeeling hand. The couple settles into their New Mexico ranch-house, where she soon has a child, but the days and weeks of loneliness get to her and she shares in a flirtation with the smitten local attorney. Conrad Richter's novel becomes somewhat misbegotten vehicle for Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn, though the stars do make valiant attempts to lend believability to these characters. Richter's story is full of stop-and-start melodrama, which nearly sabotages the central relationship (particularly since screenwriters Marguerite Roberts and Vincent Lawrence have given all the best dialogue exchanges to the supporting players, many of whom ultimately fare better than the leads). Melvyn Douglas works very simply with Hepburn and they have an easy rapport; Robert Walker (as the grown son Douglas fathered with Kate) brings along a nice swagger; Edgar Buchanan (as the cook) and Harry Carey (as the local doctor) have seldom been so endearing. It's difficult getting a handle on Tracy's reserved, unimpressed Colonel. Blank-faced and slack jawed, Tracy puts a great deal of thought into this complicated man but walls himself up from the audience in the process. Hepburn, in her early scenes, radiates nervous warmth and good will, but turning her into a black-wearing drudge filled with regrets was probably a mistake. Overlong, not particularly satisfying...yet the film has something. It's handsomely-made, reasonably well-paced and is certainly unusual coming from this high-powered star-duo. **1/2 from ****

Elia Kazan regretted making The Sea Of Grass, and it's easy to see why. Instead of a focus on cattlemen vs. homesteaders, we get a marital soap opera stretched out over twenty years between a never-changing stern-faced Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn and in an unusual role as a maternal figure. Kazan specialized in films highlighting great dialog and characterizations, and this film has neither. The social concerns are lost regarding the conflict between the feuding cattlemen and homesteaders without conflict development and plot progression independent of the Tracy/Hepburn soap opera. Within a half hour, one begins to realize this is all there is to the story (based on Conrad Richter's novel). The viewer gets enough stereotyped scenarios predating actual soap operas on television by more than a decade. The rejected wife has an affair, gives birth to a son of questionable birth, is rejected again by her husband, and watches helplessly as her rebellious son lives a ruinous life. Yikes! What nonsense! Hepburn, while more likable than Tracy in the film, is not really a sympathetic character, and the ending is very contrived to say the least. The Tracy and Hepburn teaming overwhelms the story, and it sinks beneath the weight of a burdensome script lacking in the realism, psychological aspects, and characterization found in later Kazan films. Robert Walker and the beautiful Phyllis Thaxter liven things up a little as the adult children, but it's too little too late. Walker only appears on screen for about twenty minutes. Edgar Buchanan and Harry Carey offer able support as Jeff, the cook and Doc Reid respectively. Melvin Douglas tries hard as the homesteader's lawyer and secondary love interest of Hepburn, but he too seems saddled by the plodding nature of the film. The film benefits somewhat from its outdoor scenes, framed in precise period detail. The film is possibly the worst of the nine Tracy and Hepburn pairings with absolutely no chemistry between the stars whatsoever. ** of 4 stars.

In Michel Ciment's book " Kazan par Kazan" which is actually a very long interview (à la "Hitchcock by Truffaut"),the director recalled how painful the filming of "sea of grass " was for him:first of all,he complained for a subject like that SHOULD have been filmed on location and we can find little fault with his opinion;besides ,he had to use the Tracy /Hepburn pairing,two actors he admired but who were miscast here;"Tracy did not like horses and horses did not like Tracy either" .His wife should have been a frail young girl,which Hepburn was not :"she was clever but she was part of the high society.." The one thing Kazan seemed to appreciate was her crying;but reportedly Louis B Mayer watching the rushes complained: her tears does not flow from her eyes ,but from her nose;it looks like snot!" Among all my movies this is the one I like the least" he concludes.With hindsight,the film retains qualities and I do not think anyway that it is worse than the disastrous "last tycoon" which IMHO,is Kazan's absolute nadir.Hindsight displays its charms.Considering the limitations Kazan was working under,it's a wonder that the scene where Hepburn and Tracy are in front of the "sea of grass" listening to the noise and to the silence (of the Buffalos -now they are gone- and of the Indians -now in the reservations-) is really poetic.We can also save the scene of the storm ,where the farmer (David) has to fight his wealthy neighbor (Goliath).The historical context ,the end of the prairie of grass and the coming of the farmers ,is interesting.Robert Walker's character ,an unstable boy ,predates James Dean in "East of Eden" by eight years:too bad the part is underwritten.The fact that he was born of adultery is almost passed over in silence ,except for one scene or two.It is not my Kazan's favorite or even among my favorites,but it's a film to watch if ,like me,you are interested in the director's oeuvre..Like this? try this......"Giant" Georges Stevens 1955

It is unfortunate that Spencer Tracey was cast in the pivotal role of the Colonel, as he sleepwalks thru the entire picture! The emotional fireworks come from the relationship between Katharine Hepburn and Melvyn Douglas, as the illicit lovers. As for Robert Walker in the role of the illegitimate son(and that was quite a stretch in the 1940's), he walks away with the picture! What a pity that Spencer Tracy was cast-it would have been a much better picture without him! It is also a great pity that such a noted director as Elia Kazan was not allowed to film on location, which would have added so much to the ambiance of this picture. As it is, Kazan is able to interject great tension is some of the scenes, most notably in Robert Walker's death scene. A pity Mr. Tracy was not up to the challenge.