Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

Just when "A Streetcar Named Desire" made me think more caution would have prevented Blanche's descent into madness, Elia Kazan provided a perfect counter-example with "Splendor in the Grass", a passionate high-school movie about teenage love, but also a harrowing psychology study of the devastating effects of social and parental rules.Indeed, for all its evocative title (it's a quote from Wordsworth' poetic ode to youth memories), the film can be summarized in one word: frustration... of the sexual type. This is not the least original theme for a movie directed in 1961 but is that surprising from Kazan? It's interesting that Natalie Wood starred in another story about forbidden love the same year, but here, the 'music' isn't quite the same, as the love isn't even forbidden in the first place despite something horribly unavoidable about its heartbreak.Kazan's movies have always centered on characters with a devouring need, the strongest torment being to please someone. James Dean wanted his father to be proud of him in "East of Eden" but in a heartbreaking scene, he couldn't even reach him for a hug. Terry Malloy wanted to please his friends until he realized it was at the expenses of his self-esteem (remember how he called himself in that taxi). Blanche Dubois was sexually attracted to a brutish man while she more depended on kindness.And these characters all found walls of misunderstanding that filled their hearts with guilt and resentment. Some triumphed over their demons, some didn't... but the main symptom was the fear of rejection, one would rather reject himself than being rejected. In "Splendor in the Grass" love is mutual and undeniable but it plays both the role of the driver and the obstacle, so guilt is self-inflicted despite the fact that the blame can be easily put on the parents or the gossips of 'good' people. Would you see today two young adults being forbidden to express their love? It was still difficult in 1961 but the film is set in different times, at the dawn of the Great Depression, for the kind of depression that even money can't solve. The story is about Bud Stamper (Warren Bearry) and Wilma Dean Loomis "Deanie" (Natalie Wood) and starts with the peak of their love, no courting or flirting, these two youngsters love each other, they're in the car and are making out. Deanie can't go "further" but there's a hint we're not dealing with any predictable scenario. Bud is angry, needs to take some fresh air before driving Deanie home. They know they have to wait, but we know they're in a hurry, look how violently Deanie throws her teddy-bear as if she was tired of being a child. The following scenes indicate that they might wait a little longer as we see both of them being treated as their parent's children, not as adults. Deanie's mother (Audrey Christie) is less concerned about being late than being spoiled, embodying the norm about good girls waiting for marriage, though her passionless description of sex doesn't make it a patience-rewarding achievement. The idea that "men don't love like women" is also brought up differently by Bud's boorish (and nouveau riche) father played by scene-stealing Pat Hingle. He tells him to wait till he finishes Yale, which means four years, and tries to have good time with the other girls. Poor Bud couldn't even wait four days! The "there's two kinds of girls" idea have always been a darling for Martin Scorsese, and given Kazan's influence, I'm pretty sure "Splendor in the Grass" inspired his debut "I Call First" but the case of Bud is more heartbreaking because he doesn't even care about "bad girls".From our perspective, the parents' misconceptions are wrong but the Oscar-winning screenplay from William Inge shows that even by the time's standards, these kids were victims. Bud idealizes Deanie too much to have physical contact with her, and she loves him too much to imagine sex with someone else, and in that magnificent moment where she literally begs him for sex, I could feel the passion killing her from inside. At the end, the two lovers could only resent each other as the sources of their frustrations.But I don't think the film idealizes love, because there's no doubt the parents love their kids, though in a destructive way, it doesn't even put sex on a pedestal as it's mainly associated with debauchery or the slutty behavior of Bud's sister. What the film does is highlighting the hypocrisy of society and parents who regard sex as impure, ignoring its crucial importance in one's development. We have two parents who unknowingly crush the soul and spirit of their children in the name of some idealization, leading the most vulnerable one to a harrowing breakdown. Natalie Wood was rightfully Oscar-nominated for her spectacular performance. Bud's confusion and existential dead-end could only count on the Karmatic effect of the 1929 crash ... which ironically, didn't have much impact on the Loomises for reasons that show the script's brilliance. And the certitude that the film was less about the kids than their parents is that the saving moment for both Bud and Deanie came from Deanie's father (Fred Stewart) and allowed the film to conclude on a bittersweet note, sweet underlined. Now, I know I have a good film when it psychologically involves me and the performances of the two leads did justice to the legacy of Kazan who knew how to get the best acting. But there's a moment near the end where I was like "didn't the mother learn?" I was about to hate the film but the father made me applaud and repeat "bravo" several times. That the best gesture came from a parent proved there was a light of hope after all.

When I first saw this movie during the 1960's, I thought it was something special; more than fifty years later, I still do.The intensity of Deanie Loomis' emotions for Bud Stamper, clashes with the strictures and inhibitions of her emotionally burnt-out parents. Natalie Wood as Deanie was never more luminous than in this film and never better. Warren Beatty in his first film plays Bud with a hesitant intensity that became his trademark. His character yearns for something he can't define and this brings him into conflict with his father, Ace (Pat Hingle), who only seems to want a replica of himself. All this is played out in Kansas in the late 1920's where youthful passion, hormones and zest for life seem thwarted at every turn. And what an ending this film has; one that leaves you sitting in your theater seat long after the curtains close.The critics weren't too kind to "Splendor" when first released. It occasioned much sarcasm. The New Republican's Stanley Kaufman thought it, "an Andy Hardy story with glands". He also added, "a Martian who saw this film might infer that all adolescents deprived of sexual intercourse go crazy." Well maybe not, but doesn't unrequited love and unfulfilled passion drive people a little crazy, or at the least make them very unhappy? The power of William Inge's screenplay, and Elia Kazan's direction, expresses those feelings through the heightened actions of the characters - Inge rarely resorts to narration or voice-over to reveal their thoughts, it all plays out in their interactions with one another. Anyway, the public certainly got it; the film was a huge success. This film made me want to know more about William Inge. He's in the movie and plays the thoughtful, sad-looking minister. However, he was a troubled man, after early success: "Picnic", "Come Back Little Sheba" etc., there was a slow decline complicated by alcoholism and depression. Finally, he went to his garage, closed the door, got in his car and turned on the ignition. But he wasn't going anywhere - or maybe he was taking the greatest journey of all - for William Inge had finished with this life. You often read that the screenplay for "Splendor in the Grass" was written for the most part by director Elia Kazan, based on a novella by William Inge, Kazan states as much in his autobiography. However he also reveals that the key themes and that powerful ending are indeed William Inge's. "What I liked about this ending", he says, "is its bittersweet ambivalence, full of what Bill had learned from his own life: that you have to accept limited happiness, because all happiness is limited, and to expect perfection is the most neurotic thing of all; you must live with the sadness as well as the joy." Kazan also said, "It is not my favorite of my films, but the last reel is my favorite last reel, at once the saddest and the happiest".The performances of Natalie Wood, Warren Beatty and all the others, are locked forever in this moving film. Like many movies that are set decades before they were made, "Splendor in the Grass" is rather timeless - it will probably stay that way now.

Splendor in the Grass is my fourth Elia Kazan film, the other three being A Streetcar Named Desire, On the Waterfront and East of Eden. All three of those are wonderful films, On the Waterfront even being one of the best films of the 50s, and-apart from it being a little too long and psychologically simplistic in places-so is Splendor in the Grass. It looks absolutely beautiful and is technically accomplished, with the 20s setting actually looking like the 20s, and David Amram's score is romantic, lyrical and emotionally searing while allowing the drama to speak for itself. The script rightly won an Oscar, it is a very intelligently written film with no padding, it's both thought-provoking and poignant and it draws and develops the characters remarkably- bringing humanity and flesh-and-blood-quality to potential stereotypes- the most interesting being Deanie. The story takes its time to unfold but it's all worth it, it is done so gracefully, the romantic elements are sweet without being cloyingly so and it is also one of the most moving films I've seen. Especially the ending which is heart-breaking. Kazan's direction is remarkably sensitive, more so than his occasionally heavy-handed direction in East of Eden. The powerful performances in Splendor in the Grass also help, the standouts being Pat Hingle and especially Natalie Wood. Hingle is quite terrifying as the formidable father figure and Wood has never been more tender and it is a contender for her best performance(the bath-tub breakdown was another truly moving moment in the film, and the emotion felt genuine and not forced). Warren Beatty makes a most credible feature debut, acting with understated poise, while Audrey Christie dominates the screen while giving her maternal character depth and Barbara Lodon relishes her role too. All in all, a splendid film that is beautifully made and really tugging at the heart-strings. 9/10 Bethany Cox

An innocent young couple (Wood & Beatty) experience a painful break-up because of repressive norms and insensitive parents in 1920's Kansas, after which the girl goes mad.After about an hour of Pat Hingel shouting his lines, plus heavy emotions spread on like a dump truck, I was ready to chuck the movie. But then when Deanie (Wood) starts to go a little haywire, Wood's extraordinary talents come to the fore, so I stuck around. I'm glad I did. The movie is really a Wood showcase. Catch her subtle and not so subtle facial expressions, certainly one of the most expressive actresses in the business. I just wish Beatty (Bud) could register something besides a deadpan. I know he's supposed to be over-awed by his tyrannical father (Hingle), still it's hard to know what he's thinking at any point.Playwright Inge clearly bore a lifetime stamp of his Mid-West upbringing. And judging from some of his works, his regard for the period is not very favorable. Here the problem, for Deanie especially, is sexual repression, a not unknown factor for that time (1920's) and place (Kansas). The conflicted Deanie reacts to the stifling norm in one way; Bud's sister (Loden) reacts in another by becoming a loud and uncaring tramp. Either way, they're both reacting, but in different ways, to the same social norm. Then there's the young man, Bud (Beatty), who reacts by becoming a good obedient son, likely because of his scandalous sister's shenanigans. Trouble is he's not sensitive enough to Deanie to realize the effect their heated make-out sessions are having on her. After all, if he were to do what he wants instead of what Dad wants, they would marry and settle down on Dad's neglected farm. But he only gets a will of his own once he's freed of his family's influence, (and so much for Mid-Western family values among the Stampers). Dad Stamper (Hingle) is quite a case. He acts like he's god and everybody else is hard of hearing. But his quick riches from oil have given him power that his unrefined ways haven't prepared him for. So he rides roughshod over everyone else, including his son. But like many newly rich he wants his son to rise on the social scale. So he insists that Bud go to Yale and meet the right people. Naturally, that means dropping Deanie who's just a local girl from an ordinary Kansas family. Dad's advice to Bud is that if his hormones are acting up, there's a type woman who'll take care of that. Dad really doesn't care what Bud wants. After all, Dad's newly-found riches prove he's a man of superior judgment.In Deanie's case, it's not a tyrannical father that plagues her; instead, it's a foolish mother who can't seem to get past her own need for a "little girl" and realize that her daughter has her own needs and feelings. Mom's just too consumed by her own needs to recognize Deanie's, who cares nothing about social climbing and only wants to marry her true love, Bud. So what if they have a little premarital sex; they are going to marry, she thinks. Dad Loomis recognizes the problem, but is too passive to challenge his insensitive wife. So a difficult situation for Deanie goes from bad to worse, also because of a selfish family.To me, the ending is one of the more challenging on record. Is the story finally a tragedy or simply an expression of "splendor in the grass". It's hard to tell which, since both can be argued from what appears on screen. Either way, it's one of the more wrenching closings of that period or any period. Class and sex, two of America's most consuming factors, enter crucially into the outcome, showing that Inge was indeed a master of his Mid-Western background. Anyway, if you can put up with a sometimes dawdling pace and Hingle's egregious over-acting, the payoff is an unusually thoughtful one, and a showcase for the fabulous but ill-fated Natalie Wood.