ground cover. i saw the tree of wooden clogs again, restored, with documentary extras. it's an amazing movie and if not for a couple things that stick out it'd be a seamless creation. maybe it's just me, but i thought no peasant who found a gold coin would hide it in a horse's hoof which has to be cleaned or it'll get hoof rot. and then no peasant would beat the horse and accuse him of stealing the coin when it gets lost. at least i don't imagine a peasant being so dense. these are minor caveats in a film that is full of great integrity, beauty and grace, but they stick in my mental craw so to speak, and i feel a little petty remarking them, but i have to wonder, if these scenes are realistic, how they contributed to the peasants' demise. oh yeah, the other scene which is crucial to the whole film, is when a kid cracks his wooden clog and his dad cuts down a pollarded tree along the landowner's carriage lane to make a new clog. a tiny clog for a tiny kid, and the father cuts down a whole tree!? insane, and like the asshole landowner's not going to notice!? couldn't he have got a scrap of wood somewhere, or cut a hidden tree, or a wild tree? this seems a plot contrivance just to bring about the destruction of one peasant family by the evil landlord, when we already know he's evil and simply exploiting the tenant families until automation renders them obsolete.