My major criticism of this 1953 film was that it should have run longer. It should have shown Dirk move back gradually into the field of architecture and get the girl portrayed by Nancy Olson. When the picture ends, neither has occurred.In the 1950s Jane Wyman was in somber mode. After garnering the Oscar for "Johnny Belinda," in 1948, she followed that up with another nomination for the all-time tear-jerker "The Blue Veil," in 1951 and the remake of "Magnificent Obsession," the year after 'Big.' "All that Heaven Allows" came in '56 and "Miracle in the Rain" completed her tear-jerking screen performances.In this film she suffers the heartbreak of the losses of her father and husband, the latter a dirt farmer. As her husband, Sterling Hayden captured the essence of the simplistic life.I wonder if this picture were trying to emulate O.E. Rolvaag's "Giants in the Earth," a marvelous book about mid-western farming with its trials and tribulations.As taught by her father in the film, Wyman becomes a rugged individualist. She is a strong, firm believer in achieving by yourself what you are destined to do. She teaches those principles to her son who disappoints her by going into the sales portion of architecture instead of the profession itself after college.Wyman never lets son Steve Forrest know of her disappointment and he comes to realize how right she was. Martha Hyer is her usual upper-class matron with values consisting of making the big dollars.This is still another of Wyman's gut-wrenching performances, but she had better in the films mentioned above. Still, this is a story of perseverance, hard work, and endurance.

While practically nobody else was doing so, Edna Ferber was writing women who didn't accept their lot in life, challenged men, proved more mature and responsible than men, and maintained their femininity while doing so. An archetypal Ferber woman is the heroine of "So Big," played, a little monotonously, by Jane Wyman. (She's too old to be convincing as a young girl, and too young to be a convincing timeworn old woman.) Sprawling through decades of American history like so many Ferber doorstop novels, it's fine melodrama, though oddly shaped--many years of Selina's existence are just missing, and the third act, with son Steve Forrest chasing after Nancy Olson, feels like an afterthought, as do many of the supporting characters, played by a mostly no-name cast. Sterling Hayden, as the love of Wyman's life, is an odd character, too--he clearly loves Selina, yet laughs at her attempts at betterment and is a terrible chauvinist; you feel Ferber kills him off because she honestly doesn't know what to do with him. An uncharacteristically unmemorable Max Steiner score grinds in the background, the photography is a black-and-white eyeful, and the biggest surprise is how good young Richard Beymer is, as an adolescent with a crush on Wyman--eight years later, again under Robert Wise's direction, he starred in "West Side Story," and was terrible.

This is a remake of the 1932 version starring the great Barbara Stanwyck. Not quite a shot-for-shot remake. This version is longer and includes some material the original left out and has a slightly more cynical ending than the original. All you need to know about the first version is Warner Bros./ First National/ Vitaphone, which equates to a mass produced, assembly line product running typically 60-80 minutes in length. That's just how most Hollywood films were in the early 30s. And often times, the movie suffered, as a result. All that being said, this version is considerably better.Jane Wyman is great as always, and by this time in her career, she was able to be much more selective of the types of roles she chose. Sterling Hayden is pretty much the same in every role he ever appeared in: stoic; regardless of the material. Nancy Olson does a good job, but is not on screen hardly at all. The biggest problem, however, is Steve Forrest as Wyman's son. He's stiff, bland, and doesn't appear to have any acting ability whatsoever.The most curious aspect of this picture, however, is it's director,... Robert Wise. Wise first made a name for himself early on as the editor for Orson Welles' first two films, "Citizen Kane" and "The Magnificent Ambersons". This is one of only a few directors (the other 2 who come to mind: Howard Hawks and George Cukor) who made a movie in every genre. And to go a step further, he made masterpieces in every genre except perhaps comedy and western (horror- "The Body Snatcher", "The Haunting"; sci-fi- "The Day the Earth Stood Still", film noir- "The Set-Up", "Odds Against Tomorrow", musical- "West Side Story", "The Sound of Music", drama- "The Sand Pebbles", "Somebody Up There Likes Me") Does this sound like someone who should be directing a remake of "So Big"? (He already had "The Set-Up" and "The Day the Earth Stood Still" under his belt.) That's not to say there's anything wrong with this picture. It is what it is: an above average melodrama. The point is a much less talented director could have handled it. It always amazes me how such a brilliant man like this wasn't appreciated more. His career was filled with films just like this, sandwiched in between his great ones. It was quite common at that time for directors to be assigned to direct something, often without even having a chance to read the script before deciding whether they wanted to or not. Saying 'No' to the studio bosses wasn't much of an option either, if you wanted to keep working. And I can't help but wonder if that was the case quite frequently with Wise as well, directing whatever he was told to. As a result, he's never mentioned with the great directors, and that's very unfortunate. If you haven't already, make it a point to start watching his movies. Not just his masterpieces, all of them. This is a great director who deserves to be more recognized.

I enjoyed the movie, not just because of the cast, but because of the faithfulness to detail, r/t the actual book, "So Big" by Ferber. It shows the values of responsibility not just to our work, but to people, and to the beauty that is all around us, if we would just open our eyes and see it.