This movie is filled with wonderful stars doing some of their best work. The story is wonderfully tragic. The music is great though it sounds oddly familiar to me. My only issue is a lot of the scenes have these awkward beats to them. It's as if they didn't know where to end them. For instance, at the end, immediately after a tragic murder, our two main characters just look on awkwardly for a minute before deciding to get on their horses and leave. But other it's definitely worth a watch.

I haven't seen every western in the world, but I've seen my fair share, and in my opinion The Big Country is one of the best classic western films. If you haven't seen this oldie yet, go out and buy it now. Trust me, you'll want to watch it over and over again.William Wyler, director of another perfect American classic The Best Years of Our Lives, helmed The Big Country the year before using Charlton Heston again in Ben-Hur. Charlton Heston plays the antagonist in this movie, and it's great to see him in that rare role. The lead, the out-of-towner with a strong moral character, is played by Gregory Peck, the very portrait of American integrity. Greg comes to the open country to reunite with his fiancé Caroll Baker. He's an outsider, and he isn't welcomed with open arms by everyone. Along the way, he builds a friendship with Jean Simmons, who appreciates his high morals, and he finds himself in the middle of a decades-old family feud, led by Charles Bickford and Burl Ives.Jerome Moross wrote one of the greatest film scores of all time to The Big Country, but of course, lost the Oscar that year to a far less deserving rival. It's such a beautiful score, romantic, equestrian, and adventurous in all the right places.Every wonderful element that makes a classic western is found in The Big Country. There's a slow but steady pace set by a gentle director, grizzled old men with memorable one-liners in their bickering, a clash between country folk and city folk, love triangles, an untamable horse, a shootout, and beautiful music.

THE BIG COUNTRY is a grand old American western pairing William Wyler and Gregory Peck. The film is best known these days for its excellent and stirring theme music which has gone down in film history as one of the best of all time. Other than that, it feels largely dated as a western, a film more in line with the types of genre movies that John Ford was making in the 1940s rather than the action-packed offerings that, say, John Wayne churned out in the 1950s.This certainly isn't a bad film and there's plenty to recommend it here, not least Wyler's sweeping vistas and the all-star cast. The film's sole problem is the running time; at nearly three hours, this is just way too long and gives the movie numerous pacing issues. I think if they'd lost an hour of the romantic scenes and the endless non-furtherance of the plot with Jean Simmons' character, it would have been a lot better.Still, fans of Gregory Peck will be rewarded by another dependable turn from the star, and the supporting players are to die for. I only know Burt Ives from his sweet Disney roles but he makes for a fine and imposing villain, supported well by Chuck Connors playing his son. Charlton Heston appears on the cusp of stardom with BEN HUR to follow shortly, and Carroll Baker brings feistiness to her part. There are plenty of memorable set-pieces here, it's just that patience-testing running time that's at fault.

This is in response to the many critics who have slated the "The Big Country" for being too long (a famous cry of derision) and for dragging along without the proverbial action. What I cannot understand is how many of these same critics wax lyrical about so many other films that "drag on" for well nigh three hours. I am thinking about some of David Lean's epics, for example ("Doctor Zhivago" and "Ryan's Daughter") which come to mind here. I am not for one moment suggesting that these films are boring or lacking in artistic merit. I am simply curious as to why "The Big Country" is constantly singled out in almost the all the opening lines of the commentaries that have been written.Is this tendency, perhaps, attributed to the fact that the film is a western? Is the western, then, supposed to adhere strictly to the time honoured formula of blood and thunder, hell and leather bang-bang served up in the customary ninety-minute time capsule? Strait-jacketed? Comparisons, I concede, are odious. Pray, allow me a moment to allude to another Western purely in an attempt to illustrate my point.A fellow reviewer on this forum, in his denunciation of "TBC" ("boring, boring") drew comparisons with Sergio Leone's "Once Upon A Time in the West" (a brilliant film, no doubt). In the words of respected critic, Leonard Maltin, the film is, "a languid operatic masterpiece". Maltin however, dismisses "TBC" as "an overblown western". And herein lies the rub!Both these films are thematically rich and complex, layered with gripping sub-plots emerging in all the respective stages of development. Both films are enrich by stellar performances from star-studded casts. There is never a dull moment in each. Even though the viewer may guess the outcome of "TBC", he or she is intrigued as to how the plot will finally resolve itself. This is what sustains the heart and soul of the picture.There is not a single flawed performance in "TBC". The actors remain true to the script. The action, like in "Once Upon a Time ..." and in Lean's masterpieces, is measured and seamless. It represents a study in the concentrated stream of consciousness (personified in the character of James Mackay). This is diametrically opposed by the smouldering temperments of many of the other characters in the fabric of the work; a classic case of antithetical counter-balancing, here. Pound for pound, ounce for ounce, "TBC" stands up to "Once Upon a Time ..." and its counterparts. Why then this prejudice against, "The Big Country"? It intrigues me!