Patton (1970)

“Patton” tells the tale of General George S. Patton, famous tank commander of World War II. The film begins with Patton’s career in North Africa and progresses through the invasion of Europe and the fall of the Third Reich. Side plots also speak of Patton’s numerous faults such his temper and tendency toward insubordination, faults that would prevent him from becoming the lead American general in the Normandy Invasion as well as to his being relieved as Occupation Commander of Germany.

mv5bnmjmzjzmnmitzmjlny00nmu1ltlindutowq5yjdlzgzinzewxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvyntayndq2nji-_v1_

The Classic War Movie

24 June 2004 | by nabor7 (Texas) – See all my reviews

Not much can be said of this movie that already hasn’t been said. It captures the war, the man, and the conflict of the two. I thought the movie was very nicely tied together and I thought the reflections of Patton on the past was very necessary. Patton believed in reincarnation so in looking back at historical battles you can see how Patton developed his strategy. He was a student of great leaders and commanders and the movie developed that thought really well. The movie presented the characters, the actual war history, and the Germans extremely well and it is no wonder this movie received the awards it did. After watching this movie over and over again, I’m convinced that no one could have played Patton any better than George C. Scott. You can tell from the movie that he put everything he had into the character. My father-in-law was an officer under Patton in the 3rd. Army and has said over and again how realistic the movie is. I would recommend this movie to anyone looking for an excellent re-telling of WWII history.

patton

Fascinating portrait of the Allies’ greatest general

9/10
Author: Daniel R. Baker from United States
8 September 1999

A few years ago, I had the pleasure of reading “The Patton Papers,” a collection of Gen. Patton’s diary entries and letters edited by Martin Blumenson. Having seen the movie, I think that no actor has ever better captured the spirit of a man better than George C. Scott, nor has any movie better portrayed that spirit than PATTON.

Patton was a man who lived for war. World War II was the high point and culmination of his life. He didn’t fight for any principles, he didn’t fight to defend freedom or democracy or any abstract idea; he fought because he loved fighting. In his diaries you can read of his fear of flunking out of West Point; the prospect terrified him because he was certain that he would never be good at anything except being a general or a leader of a country.

vlcsnap-2017-02-12-03h38m32s307

As a leader of men, he was exceptional. His speech at the beginning of the movie is vintage Patton, an almost exact reproduction of a speech Patton actually gave to Third Army. It’s tough, and no-nonsense; Patton lets you know in no uncertain terms that he is here to win, to destroy the enemy, and by God you’d better be too. I don’t know if Patton actually directed traffic on the roads as he is shown doing in the movie, but it was a very Pattonish thing to do. Patton did on at least one occasion get out of his staff car and join a squad of G.I.’s in heaving a vehicle out of the mud. Try to imagine Montgomery doing that; the very thought is hilarious!

pattonposter

Patton’s character explains his treatment of his men. To those who had been wounded fighting for him he was always kind and considerate. But to those whose minds could not stand the horrible strain that war imposed on them, he was merciless; he could not comprehend the fact that other people didn’t share his love of violence for violence’ sake. PATTON shows this aspect of his character very well.

Karl Malden’s Omar Bradley is shown in an almost father-like role; he sees and recognizes Patton’s immense talents as a general, and uses them in spite of Patton’s natural ability to antagonize everybody around him. Not shown in the movie is Patton’s unloveable characteristic of turning on his subordinates once they surpassed him in their careers. Patton had nothing but good to say about Bradley, until Bradley was promoted over Patton’s head, whereupon Patton savaged Bradley in his diary. Patton did the same to Eisenhower.

mv5bnjlkmjgymdmtywu0yy00ywq0lweynzetytayztcyogu0ytg4l2ltywdlxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymzawotu1mtk-_v1_sy1000_cr008321000_al_

A general can have no higher compliment than the fear and respect of his adversaries, and as PATTON demonstrates, Patton was more feared by the Germans than any other Allied general, at least on the Western front. As one German officer observes all too prophetically, “the absence of war will destroy him [Patton].” And although mankind’s single greatest stroke of good fortune in the 20th century was that Russia and America never came to blows, it is still hard not to feel sorry for Patton as he desperately seeks his superiors’ approval to carry the war on eastward into the Soviet Union – anything, just to have a war to fight. Patton is like an addict to a destructive drug.

rv-aj110_bkrv_p_p_20121221024849

Hollywood has rarely given us such a textured and human portrait of a great man: cruel, often foolish in his relations with others, rude, and psychopathically attached to violence, but brave, dedicated, and loyal. Certainly those who, like myself, have Jewish blood, or who were otherwise marked for death by the Nazi state, all owe him a great debt of gratitude for his pivotal role in destroying that state. And yet, had he been born German, Patton would surely have fought just as devotedly for the Nazi side. I’m glad he wasn’t.

Favorite war film . . .

Author: jaywolfenstien from USA
2 December 2003

. . . and it’s not even about the war. There’s no wall to wall action. In fact, World War II is merely the setting – a backdrop so to speak – and the battles are all downplayed in favor of giving the audience a glimpse into the brilliance (or insanity) of the historically significant character, Patton. From the script on up, everything plays out wonderfully to bring the famous general to life on screen, and after watching George C. Scott deliver his Oscar-worthy performance, I find it hard to believe there were a number of actors on the list above his name.

mv5bmdjjogq4ywetymuzyi00owrhlwe3m2ytzjblzme0ymu4zgu0xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymtm3nzy5nq-_v1_

George C. Scott’s performance of Patton is one I consider the greatest given of any war film. Patton is a champion for freedom while sometimes equally as much of a tyrant as the ones he’s trying to put down, he’s a monster and a hero, and neither he nor the filmmakers give a damn about political correctness. I found the character to be an overly harsh prick, myself, but in some strange way, very likeable and sympathetic, and when watching the movie again I don’t look at the screen and say, `Hey, there’s George C. Scott.’ Instead it’s, `Hey, there’s Patton.’ Not very many film characters have a personality strong enough to overtake the actor playing them. I appreciate that depth and that degree of realism, this attention to detail on the parts of Scott and Schaffner.

10-patton-1970

Schaffner surprised me by somehow managing to capture my interest on a subject matter I’d ordinarily write off as too silly (Planet of the Apes); two years later, he applied that same technical know how, craft, and intelligent storytelling towards a film whose subject appeals to me from the get go, and once again I’m impressed. There are some great war films out today; however, Schaffner’s take pursued the most unique perspective in all realms, and captured my imagination with such ease . . . I can’t help but come back to it over other war films.

mv5botqxmzmyyzutnmeyns00zmu3ltgxmjetnzu0zdjjngrhnmnkl2ltywdlxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymzawotu1mtk-_v1_sy1000_cr008251000_al_

And I have to comment on the score, which is not only one of my favorite Goldsmith scores but also one of my favorite war-film scores. Jerry Goldsmith matched point for point the brilliance of Franklin Schaffner’s vision, the depth of George C. Scott’s performance, and somehow managed to captured the essence of both musically. A good music score is one that tells the story of the film in its own unique voice. Goldsmith’s score has such a prominent voice in the experience of Patton, that to remove it would be the equivalent of removing Schaffner’s direction or George C. Scott.

Lastly, how accurate is the film? Not a clue, and even if it is completely false, I don’t care. I’ve never been about writing history papers based on cinema experiences. All I know for certain is that Patton is a very entertaining and well balanced movie that holds up very well thirty years later, and it’s a film that can be admired for its craft.

vlcsnap-2017-02-12-03h42m47s856

When the going gets tough, they call for the sons of bitches”…Adm. Ernest King

Author: Puck-20 from Bannana Republic
5 November 2003
*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Patton is a movie about a man who on one hand was one of America’s greatest generals, and on the other hand was only marginally saner than Gen. Jack D. Ripper. According to several vets I got to talk to (who actually served under the real Patton!), George C. Scott’s portrayal was spot-on. A few observations on the movie: Even when I was a kid, seeing Patton when it came out in 1970, I was suspicious of the tanks used in that battle scene in North Africa. Even then, they didn’t look like the classic German tanks…Patton’s speech in the beginning of the movie was edited for content. If you ever read the original version of his speech, it makes the movie version sound like a church sermon.

vlcsnap-2017-02-12-03h39m57s496

I also wished that the movie had pointed out that in WW1, Patton commanded the first ever American tank battalion, and was severely wounded in battle, yet kept fighting until he just about passed out from loss of blood. I thought this should have been brought out that he had practiced what he preached… Gen. Omar Bradley: portrayed in the movie as Patton’s “buddy”, he was nothing of the sort. Jealous of Patton, the real life Bradley would go to Eisenhower behind Patton’s back to stymie George’s success.

vlcsnap-2017-02-12-03h43m28s311
Monty: Sorry, Monty fans, but the movie points out one historical fact. Monty usurped needed gas and supplies from Patton in September of ’44 for his disastrous “Market Garden” attack (watch Richard Attenborough’s “A Bridge Too Far” as a companion movie to “Patton”). Thanks to Monty, the war went on much longer than it probably would have if Patton had been allowed to drive into Germany. Patton’s arrogance helped win battles. Monty’s arrogance gave us the Battle of the Bulge, the fire bombing of Dresden, not to mention countless Jewish lives lost. Patton had the Germans reeling in the fall of 1944, and, as the movie pointed out, had the army in just the right place at the right time to end it. Unfortunately, thanks to Monty’s political pull and crappy generalmanship, the war went on longer than it should have…

screenshot_34

A fine epic about a “pure warrior.”

10/10
Author: Righty-Sock (robertfrangie@hotmail.com) from Mexico
21 October 2002
*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The war epic was revived with Franklin Schaffner’s admirable ‘Patton.’ Schaffner’s control of his film is impressive, and the various campaign sequences are strikingly photographed through an audaciously wide lens…

screenshot_50

George C. Scott was commonly referred to as a ‘character actor’ in view of his remarkably extensive range… Oddly for a character actor, Scott was almost always the same person on screen vigorous to the point of pugnacity, acting with his chin the way other actors do with their eyes-yet revealing, in his own eyes, unsuspected depths of humor and intelligence…

Now few actors have ever been so convincing in such a powerful and colorful character… Only Peter 0’Toole’s eccentric T.E. Lawrence comes immediately to mind… Both, he and Scott, create their characters out of complementary contradictions… Lawrence detests the savagery of war but embraces it… Patton cannot separate the conduct of war from his own personal glorification, and both actors are given large canvases upon which to work…

vlcsnap-2017-02-12-03h42m04s061

Screenwriters Francis Ford Coppola and Edmund H. North and director Franklin J. Schaffner introduce a 16th-century warrior lost in contemporary times… He is a brilliant and military historian, with a hazardous speech…

Magnificently uniformed, and wearing his ivory-handled pistol, George S. Patton steps up, against a backdrop of the Stars and Stripes, before an unseen gathering of soldiers defining himself in unambiguous terms as a man who revels in war… The scene is cut to a close shot of two scorpions crawling across the body of a dead soldier at the Kasserine Pass, Tunisia… The camera then pulls back to reveal a harsh look at American casualties with dozens of Arabs busily stripping more bodies…

vlcsnap-2017-02-12-03h35m33s954

The American Army has just suffered its first defeat at the hands of the Germans… Patton’s first job is to restore the morale and discipline of the dispirited troops of his new command… His experience with tanks led General Dwight Eisenhower to place him in charge of one of the three task forces invading North Africa in 1943…

According to his theory of war, Patton would drive all the way to Palermo on the northern coast of Sicily, slicing the island in half… But his finest moment comes during the massive German counteroffensive in the Ardennes… By the time the Germans feared him above all other Allied generals…

ohldbzm

Schaffner turns to the Germans for comments on Patton’s abilities… They expect him to lead a major invasion… When he was sent to Corsica, the Germans were convinced he would lead an invasion of southern France… When he was sent to Cairo, they feared for an invasion through the Balkans…

Patton is seen reprimanded by Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower for indiscreet political statements… As an able tactician who promotes himself to three-star general before it’s officially approved by the U.S. Senate, Patton proves himself as the most effective American field commander of the European war… Behind his audacity lay an imaginative planning and a shrewd judgment… Patton knows that loyalty to a leader would inspire his men to take on objectives against all odds… His strict discipline, toughness, and disregard of classic military rules, contributed to his advance across France and Germany…

mv5byjc1m2zmntitmtkyyy00mgfmlwi3mmitnddimddim2q3odzixkeyxkfqcgdeqxvyntayndq2nji-_v1_

The modest and conscientious Omar Bradley, commander of the U.S. 12th Army Group, who had served under Patton in Africa and Sicily as a deputy commander, found Patton to be a superb combat general, but hotheaded, profane, and unpredictable… Bradley ends now as Patton’s superior… It was soon apparent that the two make a superb team… Patton’s dash and drive in the field is a perfect complement to Bradley’s careful planning…

With the help of Bradley, Patton prepares to re-engage German Field Marshal Erwin Rommel… After he defeats Rommel’s 10th Panzer Division at El Guettar thanks to his analysis of Rommel’s published strategies, he shouts one of the greatest lines in war films: “Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I read your book!” At the same time, his rivalry with his Field Marshal Montgomery (hero of El Alamein) becomes more intense… Patton was motivated by a pride to reach his target before his British colleague, sometimes not for the purpose of the Allies…

mv5bmtk3ntmzmtqtmmfmmy00owmxltg5ztgtn2vlzgfhogzlogjmxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvyntayndq2nji-_v1_

Karl Malden has the film’s only other significant leading role, as the most capable, yet unpretentious general… Malden could be deduced from the number of major directors with whom he has worked… These include Cukor, Hathaway, Kazan, King, Preminger, Milestone, Vidor, Hitchcock, Brooks, Mulligan, Daves, Brando, Frankenheimer, Ford, Quine and Schaffner… In his best and most personal work he has succeeded in exploring depths of moral ambiguity rare in commercial cinema…

Schaffner illuminates various sides of Patton’s remarkable personality, presenting a dashing extrovert and attractive general, with a compassionate side…

mv5bmdg5mgy3njutytvkzi00mjywlwi1zmqtnzhjmwiyndfiowfhxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvyntayndq2nji-_v1_
Touring an evacuation hospital in Sicily, Patton slaps an enlisted soldier twice calling him a ‘yellow,’ and threatens to shoot him, before two men forcibly remove him from the tent… The incident occurs because Patton’s views of bravery and cowardice are so severely limited… The fighting general who has the imagination to write poetry and to believe that he has been reincarnated, in ancient Greece, at Carthage, and Moscow, cannot conceive of a psychological wound that he cannot see… The incident occurred after he prays at the bedside of one man severely injured… Patton whispers some words in his ear which the audience doesn’t hear, then lays a medal on his pillow and gives him a gentle touch on his head… The portrait is so compelling that it’s easy to overlook Patton’s own final words in the film, “All glory is fleeting.”

Franklin J. Schaffner’s motion picture reveals an effective portrait of three men: Patton, Bradley, and the unseen Dwight Eisenhower… The film is a fine epic about ‘a pure warrior, and a magnificent anachronism,’ who loved war…

mv5bodmxmdizzjetnjnhny00mzm3lwi5otmtntg2odhjmmnizdc2l2ltywdlxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymzawotu1mtk-_v1_sy1000_cr008271000_al_

The Academy Awards saluted ‘Patton’ capturing eight Oscars, including best picture, best director, best actor (Scott declined his well deserved Oscar), best screenplay, best editing, and best production design…

The Deer Hunter (1978)

Michael, Steven and Nick are young factory workers from Pennsylvania who enlist into the Army to fight in Vietnam. Before they go, Steven marries the pregnant Angela, and their wedding party also serves as the men’s farewell party. After some time and many horrors, the three friends fall in the hands of the Vietcong and are brought to a prison camp in which they are forced to play Russian roulette against each other. Michael makes it possible for them to escape, but they soon get separated again.
tdh-buddies

An unforgettable movie.

23 February 2002 | by martymaster (Fredrikstad,Norway) – See all my reviews

This is a movie with a touching story about friendship and most of all in shows the horror of the Vietnam war. This movie has some of the best acting performances I have seen,and I am of course talking about Robert De Niro and Christopher Walken. They really goes into their roles and creates a great atmosphere. This movie also contains one of the most famous scenes in movie history,the russian roulett scene.This scene is so intense and creepy to watch. One of the few great Vietnam movies ever.

the_deer_hunter_2_christopher_walken

In 1968, the record company EMI formed a new company called EMI Films, headed by producers Barry Spikings and Michael Deeley. Deeley purchased the first draft of a spec script called The Man Who Came to Play, written by Louis Garfinkle and Quinn K. Redeker, for $19,000. The spec script was about people who go to Las Vegas to play Russian roulette. “The screenplay had struck me as brilliant,” wrote Deeley, “but it wasn’t complete. The trick would be to find a way to turn a very clever piece of writing into a practical, realizable film.” When the movie was being planned during the mid-1970s, Vietnam was still a taboo subject with all major Hollywood studios.According to producer Michael Deeley, the standard response was “no American would want to see a picture about Vietnam”

screenshot_20

After consulting various Hollywood agents, Deeley found writer-director Michael Cimino, represented by Stan Kamen at the William Morris Agency. Deeley was impressed by Cimino’s TV commercial work and crime film Thunderbolt and Lightfoot (1974).Cimino himself was confident that he could further develop the principal characters of The Man Who Came to Play without losing the essence of the original. After Cimino was hired, he was called into a meeting with Garfinkle and Redeker at the EMI office. According to Deeley, Cimino questioned the need for the Russian roulette element of the script, and Redeker made such a passionate case for it that he ended up literally on his knees. Over the course of further meetings, Cimino and Deeley discussed the work needed at the front of the script, and Cimino believed he could develop the stories of the main characters in the first 20 minutes of film.

screenshot_6

Cimino worked for six weeks with Deric Washburn on the script. Cimino and Washburn had previously collaborated with Stephen Bochco on the screenplay for Silent Running (1972). According to producer Spikings, Cimino said he wanted to work again with Washburn. According to producer Deeley, he only heard from office rumor that Washburn was contracted by Cimino to work on the script. “Whether Cimino hired Washburn as his sub-contractor or as a co-writer was constantly being obfuscated,” wrote Deeley, “and there were some harsh words between them later on, or so I was told.

Cimino’s claim

According to Cimino, he would call Washburn while on the road scouting for locations and feed him notes on dialogue and story. Upon reviewing Washburn’s draft, Cimino said, “I came back, and read it and I just could not believe what I read. It was like it was written by somebody who was … mentally deranged.

tumblr_lxfl9zloem1qdxfb7o1_500

” Cimino confronted Washburn at the Sunset Marquis in LA about the draft, and Washburn supposedly replied that he couldn’t take the pressure and had to go home. Cimino then fired Washburn. Cimino later claimed to have written the entire screenplay himself. Washburn’s response to Cimino’s comments were, “It’s all nonsense. It’s lies. I didn’t have a single drink the entire time I was working on the script.”

Washburn’s claim

According to Washburn, he and Cimino spent three days together in Los Angeles at the Sunset Marquis, hammering out the plot. The script eventually went through several drafts, evolving into a story with three distinct acts. Washburn did not interview any veterans to write The Deer Hunter nor do any research. “I had a month, that was it,” he explains. “The clock was ticking.

the-deer-hunter-6

Write the fucking script! But all I had to do was watch TV. Those combat cameramen in Vietnam were out there in the field with the guys. I mean, they had stuff that you wouldn’t dream of seeing about Iraq.” When Washburn was finished, he says, Cimino and Joann Carelli, an associate producer on The Deer Hunter who went on to produce two more of Cimino’s later films, took him to dinner at a cheap restaurant off the Sunset Strip. He recalls, “We finished, and Joann looks at me across the table, and she says, ‘Well, Deric, it’s fuck-off time.’ I was fired. It was a classic case: you get a dummy, get him to write the goddamn thing, tell him to go fuck himself, put your name on the thing, and he’ll go away. I was so tired, I didn’t care. I’d been working 20 hours a day for a month. I got on the plane the next day, and I went back to Manhattan and my carpenter job.

mv5bmje2ndg2nja3nf5bml5banbnxkftztywnzaxmtc5-_v1_

The Deer Hunter began principal photography on June 20, 1977.This was the first feature film depicting the Vietnam War to be filmed on location in Thailand. All scenes were shot on location (no sound stages). “There was discussion about shooting the film on a back lot, but the material demanded more realism,” says Spikings. The cast and crew viewed large amounts of news footage from the war to ensure authenticity. The film was shot over a period of six months. The Clairton scenes comprise footage shot in eight different towns in four states: West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Washington, and Ohio. The initial budget of the film was $8.5 million.

Meryl Streep accepted the role of the “vague, stock girlfriend”, in order to remain for the duration of filming with John Cazale, who had been diagnosed with lung cancer. De Niro had spotted Streep in her stage production of The Cherry Orchard and had suggested that she play his girlfriend Linda.Before the beginning of principal photography, Deeley had a meeting with the film’s appointed line producer Robert Relyea.

mv5bmje1ndm2nzewmf5bml5banbnxkftztgwndcxnziwmje-_v1_sx779_cr00779999_al_

Deeley hired Relyea after meeting him on the set of Bullitt (1968) and was impressed with his experience. However, Relyea declined the job, refusing to disclose his reason why. Deeley suspected that Relyea sensed in director Cimino something that would have made production difficult. As a result, Cimino was acting without the day-to-day supervision of a producer.

Because Deeley was busy overseeing in the production of Sam Peckinpah‘s Convoy (1978), he hired John Peverall to oversee Cimino’s shoot. Peverall’s expertise with budgeting and scheduling made him a natural successor to Relyea, and Peverall knew enough about the picture to be elevated to producer status. “John is a straightforward Cornishman who had worked his way up to become a production supervisor,” wrote Deeley, “and we employed him as EMI’s watchman on certain pictures.

tumblr_lyqieymnvw1qc409do1_500

It was 1978 and everyone in the audience was about to wet their pants

10/10
Author: yawn-2 from San Francisco, California
6 April 2006

No, this is not the best film about the Vietnam War; it’s hardly about Vietnam at all. The vets who don’t like it have it wrong, as do the Vietnamese who found it racist. It could be any war, with any combatants. But because the (primary) victims here are recognizable American archetypes, Americans will feel this in their gut more than any other war film I know of. This is one of the very few post-war Hollywood films that shows a sincere reverence for the lives of small town Americans.

thhz83l

After seeing it in a very high quality theater on its initial release, I walked out thinking it was easily one of the best movies I had ever seen – and that I never wanted to see it again. But I looked at it today on cable and found that not much had changed about it, or me. I don’t want to see it again…but I want you to see it.

Even now, the Russian Roulette scene (in context, people: watch all that comes before it first) is the single most intense sequence I’ve seen; it makes the end of “Reservoir Dogs” seem like a cartoon. Best Walken performance, period. Meryl Streep glows, DeNiro has seldom been more affecting. A unique classic…it is not surprising that Cimino didn’t have another movie in him after something this wrenching.

mv5bzje0yjy0ntytyzm2ni00zdqzlwiznzatzwmwoge0yzfinwfhl2ltywdll2ltywdlxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvyndaxotexntm-_v1_

It’s been given a fairly bad reputation over the years – undeservedly so, too. One of the greatest films ever made.

10/10
Author: MovieAddict2016 from UK
7 July 2004
*** This review may contain spoilers ***

“One shot is what it’s all about. A deer has to be taken with one shot.”

There’s that particularly infamous scene in “The Deer Hunter” that seems to remain more disturbing each time we view it, when Michael (Robert De Niro), a Vietnam veteran, tracks down a friend of his named Nicky (Christopher Walken), who never arrived home after the war and is eventually found in Saigon, playing Russian Roulette for money, his mind an utter mess. He is unable to fully remember Michael, and refuses to return home, and what proceeds in the following sequence is a haunting example of gut-wrenching film-making.

mv5bmtqwotc4odq0nv5bml5banbnxkftztgwntcxnziwmje-_v1_sy1000_cr007781000_al_

The Vietnam sequences take place midway through the movie, serving as a connection between the beginning and the end, both of which study the lives of the men and not the war around them. Michael, Nicky and Steven (John Savage) are young Pennsylvanian miners drafted into the war. Steven has just gotten married to the love of his life, but has little time to celebrate as he is shipped overseas with his friends. They eventually all find themselves taken hostage in a Vietnamese POW camp where their captors force them to play Russian Roulette. The rules of the game? Put a single bullet in a random chamber of a handgun, spin it, snap it, raise it to your head, squeeze the trigger, and repeat these steps until there’s only one man left standing.

screenshot_1

After a series of fortunate events Michael, Nicky and Steven escape and make their way downriver. All three men are eventually rescued, Nicky via helicopter and Michael and Steven later on. Steven’s battered, infected legs are amputated and he is left helpless in a wheelchair. Michael returns home as well only to find that Nicky is still back in Vietnam. Nicky’s girlfriend back home, Linda (Meryl Street), begins to fall in love with Michael, but Michael soon remembers his promise to Nicky (“If I don’t make it back don’t leave me over there”) and travels over 2,000 miles back into the middle of his own personal hell to find and rescue his best friend. It’s hard for him to understand why Nicky doesn’t recognize him when he finally tracks him down. “It’s me, Mike.” “Mike who?”

Causing mass controversy upon its release because of its alleged “racist” content regarding the Vietnamese, a crowd of Vietnam veterans gathered around outside the Oscars ceremony and caused riots as well, claiming that the film was “not accurate” and somehow insulting to the veterans of the war.

screenshot_18

However as many film historians, authors and critics have already pointed out, the film is never meant to be a 100% accurate depiction of the events in Vietnam. It is not really a Vietnam War picture at all. Instead, it is a focus on the aftermath of war, and how damaging it can be, both physically and mentally, to its participants. Because of the era that “The Deer Hunter” was released in, Vietnam was a recent event, the focus of the nation, and is therefore used as a more convenient — and relative — backdrop (much like “Apocalypse Now”). Unlike “Platoon” this is not a movie relating specifically to the Vietnam War, in fact less than a half an hour is devoted to the war scenes. It is a character study, and accusations of racism — although perhaps justified to some extent — are hardly convincing as the film itself is not concerned with bashing the participants of the war as it is the war itself.

mv5bmtgxmty0mze3nv5bml5banbnxkftztgwmdgxnziwmje-_v1_sy1000_cr0012611000_al_
It is the film’s necessary setup that is often called long and boring and, ironically, unnecessary, but this is essentially where the nature of each character is examined for the audience. To launch directly into the war sequences would be sloppy, and we would have a harder time caring for the characters. Instead, we are given scenes with weddings, discussions, and hunting trips — normal events. Then, the end, a somber reflection upon the past, chronicles the aftermath of the damaging events in the lives of Michael, Steven, Nicky and their loved ones. Michael has a hard time adapting back to his normal life. It would be hard for anyone, after experiencing such damaging events and images.

yy1j6j

De Niro made a few post-Vietnam films during the ’70s and ’80s, the most famous being “Taxi Driver,” in which Travis Bickle was totally unable to find his way in life again after the war and resorted to violence in order to justify his existence and release his anger. “The Deer Hunter” is similar in approach but reveals more background; this would be a suitable prequel of sorts if the names had been changed.

Over the years “The Deer Hunter” has surprisingly gained a fairly bad reputation — most of which stems back to the controversy surroundings its release and protested accolades.

mv5bnwzizdk1ywitmjbhmy00ndhhlwi2mtytodu5yme1zwrizjrml2ltywdll2ltywdlxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvynjuwnzk3ndc-_v1_

Director Michael Cimino’s follow-up (“Heaven’s Gate”) was an enormous flop, bankrupting United Artists, and he had a hard time finding work afterwards. His first feature film, “Thunderbolt and Lightfoot,” which starred Clint Eastwood and Jeff Bridges, was a buddy road movie that was also a sign of things to come in Cimino’ later features, most notably the process of male bonding, which is a huge primal element in this project. Cimino was an extremely talented and visionary director, and it’s a shame that the ambition of “Heaven’s Gate” cost him his career.

mv5bnze1odq4mda2nl5bml5banbnxkftztgwmzcxnziwmje-_v1_sy1000_cr0014921000_al_

And furthermore, despite the negativity surrounding “The Deer Hunter,” it is still one of the finest works of American cinema, a touching, poignant and ultimately depressing film that asks us if the effects of war extend past the physical and into the realm of human mentality. Yes, I think they do.

The Caine Mutiny (1954)

Directed by Edward Dmytryk

Cinematography Franz Planer

The Caine Mutiny is a 1954 American fictional Navy drama set in the Pacific during World War II. Directed by Edward Dmytryk and produced by Stanley Kramer, it stars Humphrey Bogart, José Ferrer, Van Johnson, and Fred MacMurray, and is based on The Caine Mutiny, the 1951 Pulitzer Prize-winning novel written by Herman Wouk. The film depicts the events on board a fictitious World War II U.S. Navy destroyer minesweeper and a subsequent mutiny court-martial.

The film premiered in New York City on June 24, 1954, and went into general release on July 28. Made on a budget of $2 million, it was the second-highest-grossing film of 1954, earning $8.7 million in theatrical rentals in the United States.  It was the most successful of Kramer’s productions some of which had previously lost money, and put his entire production company as well as Columbia Pictures in the black.

bogart-humphrey-jose-ferrer-van-johnson-fred-macmurray-the-caine-mutiny-1954-sheet-music-signed-autograph-theme-i-can-t-believe-that-you-re-in-love-with-me-39-gif

The film got a major pre-release boost three weeks before its premiere when Bogart as Queeg appeared on the cover of the June 7, 1954 issue of TIME. The accompanying cover story (“Cinema: The Survivor”) praised Bogart’s portrayal of Queeg as “a blustering, secretive figure in Navy suntans, who brings the hollow, driven, tyrannical character of Captain Queeg to full and invidious life, yet seldom fails to maintain a bond of sympathy with his audience. He deliberately gives Queeg the mannerisms and appearance of an officer of sternness and decision, and then gradually discloses him as a man who is bottling up a scream, a man who never meets another’s eyes. In the courtroom scene, Bogart’s Queeg seems oblivious of his own mounting hysteria. Then, suddenly, he knows he is undone; he stops and stares stricken at the court, during second after ticking second of dramatic and damning silence.”

the-caine-mutiny-1954

Director Edward Dmytryk felt The Caine Mutiny could have been better than it was and should have been three and a half to four hours long to fully portray all the characters and complex story, but Columbia’s Cohn insisted on a two-hour limit.  Reviewing the film in the New York Times, Bosley Crowther wrote that the job of condensing Wouk’s novel to two hours had been achieved “with clarity and vigor, on the whole.” His reservations concerned the studio’s attempt to “cram” in “more of the novel than was required” such as the “completely extraneous” love affair between Keith and May Wynn that Crowther found to be a plot diversion that weakened dramatic tension. Although he doubted whether the novel had a structure suited for film, he noted that Roberts had “endeavored to follow it faithfully.” The result, he argued, was that the court-martial became “an anticlimax” as it repeated Queeg’s visible collapse seen in the typhoon but still considered the core of the film “smartly and stingingly played” and “though somewhat garbled” was still “a vibrant film.”

4945_1

Herman Wouk had already adapted his novel as a stage play, The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial, which premiered on Broadway in January 1954 and ran for more than a year. The play was directed by Charles Laughton and was a critical as well as a commercial success.Wouk was initially selected to write the screenplay, but director Dmytryk thought his work was not successful. He replaced the novelist with Stanley Roberts, an experienced screenwriter. Roberts later quit the production after being told to cut the screenplay so the film could be kept to two hours. The 50 pages worth of cuts were made by Michael Blankfort, who received an “additional dialog” credit.

4945_3

The film differs from the novel, which focused on the Keith character, who became secondary in the film. The film instead focuses on Queeg. Kramer “mollified the Navy” by modifying the Queeg characterization to make him less of a madman, as portrayed by Wouk, and more a victim of battle fatigue. Studios did not want to purchase the film rights to Wouk’s novel until cooperation of the U.S. Navy was settled. Independent producer Stanley Kramer purchased the rights himself for an estimated $60,000 – $70,000. The Navy’s reluctance to cooperate led to an unusually long pre-production period of fifteen months. Principal photography took place between June 3 to August 24, 1953 under the initial working title of Authority and Rebellion.

968full-the-caine-mutiny-screenshot

Casting and director

Stanley Kramer and Columbia Pictures intended to cast Humphrey Bogart as Captain Queeg. Columbia Pictures president Harry Cohn knew Bogart wanted the part and took advantage of that fact, and Bogart eventually settled for much less than his usual $200,000 salary. “This never happens to Cooper or Grant or Gable, but always to me,” Bogart complained to his wife, Lauren Bacall.

Van Johnson was loaned to Columbia by MGM, where he was under contract. Being cast as Maryk was a breakthrough for the actor, who felt that he had been in a “rut” by being typecast in light rôles. During the filming of the scene off Oahu in which Maryk swims fully clothed to retrieve a line, his life was saved when a Navy rifleman shot a shark that was approaching Johnson. Lee Marvin was cast as one of the sailors, not only for his acting, but also because of his knowledge of ships at sea. Marvin had served in the U.S. Marines from the beginning of American involvement in World War II through the Battle of Saipan, in which he was wounded. As a result, he became an unofficial technical adviser for the film.

the-caine-mutiny-fred-macmurray-1954

Before choosing Dmytryk for The Caine Mutiny, Kramer had hired the director for three low-budget films. He had previously been blacklisted, and the success of the film helped revive Dmytryk’s career.[citation needed]

The Caine Mutiny would be the first part in Robert Francis’s short four-film career as he was killed when the private plane he was piloting crashed shortly after take off from Burbank airport in California on July 31, 1955.

500full

Midway (1976)

Directed by Jack Smight
Cinematography Harry Stradling Jr.

Midway, released in the United Kingdom as Battle of Midway and in the US on video as The Battle of Midway, is a 1976 American Technicolor war film directed by Jack Smight and produced by Walter Mirisch from a screenplay by Donald S. Sanford.  The film features an international cast of stars including Charlton Heston, Henry Fonda, James Coburn, Glenn Ford, Hal Holbrook, Toshiro Mifune, Robert Mitchum, Cliff Robertson, Robert Wagner, James Shigeta, Pat Morita, Robert Ito and Christina Kokubo, among others.

worst-midway-1976

Henry Fonda       Glenn Ford     Robert Mitchum

The film was the second of only four films released with a Sensurround sound mix which required special speakers to be installed in movie theatres. The other Sensurround films were Earthquake (1974), Rollercoaster (1977), and Battlestar Galactica (1978). The regular soundtrack (dialog, background and music) was monaural; a second optical track was devoted to low frequency rumble added to battle scenes and when characters were near unmuffled military engines.

mv5bmtm3njqxndkxmv5bml5banbnxkftztywmtyxndg2-_v1_

Midway proved extremely popular with movie audiences, earning over $43 million at the box office, becoming the tenth most popular movie of 1976. Robert Niemi, author of History in the Media: Film and Television, stated that Midway’s “clichéd dialogue” and an overuse of stock footage led the film to have a “shopworn quality that signalled the end of the heroic era of American-made World War II epics.” He described the film as a “final, anachronistic attempt to recapture World War II glories in a radically altered geopolitical era, when the old good-versus-evil dichotomies no longer made sense.”

robert-mitchum-the-battle-of-midway-1976-bp8mm8

Later studies by Japanese and American military historians call into question key scenes, like the dive-bombing attack that crippled the first Japanese carrier, the Akagi. In the movie, American pilots report, “They’ve got bombs all over their flight deck! We caught ’em flat-footed! No fighters and a deck full of bombs!” As Jonathan Parshall and Anthony Tully write in “Shattered Sword” (2005) that aerial photography shows nearly empty decks. In addition, Japanese carriers loaded armament onto planes below the flight deck, unlike American carriers. The fact that a closed hangar full of armaments was hit by bombs made damage to Akagi more devastating than if planes, torpedoes and bombs were on an open deck.

hqdefault

It’s overall what counts

5 December 2003 | by riskytakr (Chicago, IL) – See all my reviews

This was one of my favorite movies when I was growing up and building models of land, sea, and air craft of the WWII period. Of course we all could have done without the romantic interest, but what counts is the overall telling of the story accurately (even if that includes sideline dramatizations etc.). In a nutshell Midway was a gamble and even though we knew where they’d be, we still took it on the chin with the loss of most of the aircraft and the Yorktown (which left only 2 effective carriers in the pacific and 1 in drydock). In the end we were lucky enough to be able to inflict sufficiently more damage on them than they did on us. This is the story that is told so well.

midway-year-1976-director-jack-smight-glenn-ford-a1j1pp

It doesn’t matter that the special effects were less than stellar (e.g., view of the fleet from the sealevel – obvious miniatures) or that they showed Essex class carriers which did not yet exist getting hit by kamikaze. The film is true in its depictions of gambles, gaffs, and good fortune which in the end allowed us to be victorious and end Japanese expansion. So quit knocking it and enjoy it for what it is!

138572876

Flawed But Still Satisfying

Author: Eric-62-2 from Morristown, NJ
20 September 2003

Of course “Midway” is a flawed movie. The subplot about Japanese-Americans is ridiculous and seems like a forced attempt to be PC during the post-Vietnam 1970s when it wasn’t in fashion to be completely celebratory of America. Of course it’s unsatisfying that the Japanese actors don’t speak Japanese and we have to hear Paul Frees dubbing Toshiro Mifune. Of course the stock footage isn’t going to please aviation and naval buffs who know these details like the back of their hands, but to me this is a trivial complaint that fails to take into account the limits of 1970s technology or budgeting. “Pearl Harbor” ultimately got those details right through CGI and the end result was a far worse film in the final analysis.

midway-1976-3

Because ultimately, for all the flaws that are in “Midway” it succeeds because it does stick to the essential truths when telling the story of the battle, and I know this because when I first saw this movie on the CBS Late Movie around 1979, I got so hooked that I went out and read every book on the battle I could find including Walter Lord’s “Incredible Victory.” The movie had given me a starting reference point and while I was sorry that some key aspects of the latter stages of the battle were not depicted (such as the torpedoing and eventual sinking of the Yorktown), I couldn’t have asked for anything better in terms of getting me to learn more about this great turning point of World War II. As far as I’m concerned, it’s good that Hollywood did tackle this subject in an era when the influence of “Tora! Tora! Tora!”, “The Longest Day” etc. still hung over the proceedings because if it hadn’t been made back then, we would today be forced to see it given the “Pearl Harbor” and “Titanic” treatment that is pure garbage.

screenshot_9

John Williams contributes one of his finer pre-Star Wars scores with two great themes, the “Midway March” (which is only heard in the end credits of the theatrical version and became more popular in an expanded concert arrangement by the Boston Pops) and the “Men Of The Yorktown March” which dominates much of the score and offers great foreshadowings of the Throne Room sequence in “Star Wars” and the Smallville music in “Superman.”

Blast from the past

Author: Philby-3 from Sydney, Australia
5 June 1999

Saturday night TV is a bit of a dead zone down here so I suppose one should be grateful for the odd watchable movie, even if its 20 years old. This one looks older than it actually is, due to the liberal use of stock footage and a cast that’s a retirement counsellor’s dream.

A relatively youthful Charlton Heston is in the lead, but there’s Henry Fonda, Glenn Ford, Robert Mitchum, Robert Webber and even the great Japanese actor Toshiro Mifune. A curious aspect is that every military character with a speaking part is an officer; the grunts just get to grunt. It’s very much the view from the bridge (and the pilot’s seat). Despite this aspect and the attempt at historical realism it’s not made clear quite how it was that the Japanese made the error that cost them the battle, getting caught with their flightdecks full just as the American torpedo bombers arrived. The contribution of the American land-based aircraft is also given scant recognition.

hqdefault

Still you do get a bit of a story, though the less said about the silly sub-plot involving the Heston character’s son and a Japanese-American girl the better. The director, Jack Smight had extensive T V experience, as did many of the younger actors, and this shows up in the rather static dialogue scenes you get when you aren’t allowed to move the cameras much. The Japanese voices are dubbed, so that Paul Free, the voice of Boris Badenov in “Bullwinkle,” (and countless other cartoon characters) is Admiral Yamamoto. The music was written by John Williams who a year or so later did the music for “Star Wars” and you can sense the similarities.

mw3

In the film the military operations side of things abounds with anacronisms, partly due to the liberal use of stock footage as mentioned. I don’t think you can be too hard on the producers (the low profile but financially successful Mirisch Brothers) for not using a real Japanese World War 2 aircraft carrier since they are all at the bottom of the sea, but the crashed jet on the Yorktown’s flightdeck was a bit sloppy. “Tora Tora Tora,” which cost more money, was a better film. Not because it cost more money but because it was more carefully made, more balanced (both side’s story told well) and more honest, perhaps also because it dealt with defeat rather than victory from the American viewpoint. “Midway” has some suspense, plenty of action, and the the patriotism drum is not banged to the point of pain.

500px-battle_of_midway_dvdrip_smp-0105

On The Turn Of a Dime

7/10
Author: bkoganbing from Buffalo, New York
23 July 2007

The film Midway shows in graphic documentary style, the battle that did nothing less than save America and ultimately allow us to win World War II. If the Japanese had prevailed at Midway, they might very well have taken Hawaii and been blockading our continental Pacific coast. We might have had to declare a truce and hope that public opinion would allow us to continue the European and North African war. Remember the USA was brought in to the war because of the Japanese attack at Pearl Harbor, not Hitler’s attack.

kamikaze-pilot-in-aircraft-the-battle-of-midway-1976-bp8mme

There is a plot of sorts with Charlton Heston as the fictional pilot group commander who’s involved in helping his son Edward Albert help a Nisei family who’ve been interred for the duration of the war because Albert is engaged to the daughter. That’s the one weakness of Midway, the story really wasn’t necessary and detracted with the very precise telling of the Midway tale. Had they left it out, Midway had the potential to be a classic like The Longest Day.

Without Charlton Heston and his family problems, the story of Midway is told with remarkable historic accuracy. Henry Fonda who played Admiral Chester W. Nimitz in all but name in In Harm’s Way, gets to play Nimitz again in Midway. Robert Mitchum and Glenn Ford play Admirals William Halsey and Raymond Spruance who between the two of them won America’s Pacific war. A whole lot of fine character actors like James Coburn, Robert Wagner, Robert Webber, Hal Holbrook and many more fill their naval roles to precision.

nwnacpsi84wvrktkbttbmq0bekj

The story of the Battle of Midway should be told and told again in America’s public schools for future generations. Not just because of the sailors and airmen of America’s greatest generation who fought and prevailed at Midway, but because of just how close a run thing the Battle of Midway was. One very fateful decision by Admirals Yamamoto and Nagumo turned the tide of battle on a dime. By the way the oriental players in Midway like Toshiro Mifune as Yamamoto and James Shigeta as Nagumo and others also play very well. The American cinema certainly came a long way from when they previously cast the Japanese as bucktooth primates.

When the viewer sees just how much pure luck played a part in winning at Midway, they will come away with one of two impressions. The first might be that a divine providence is guiding and protecting America. If so, who’s to say that will always be the case. And if not, the second lesson might be that we as a country might not always be so lucky.

If they could edit out the Heston family story, Midway is a great film for history classes studying World War 2

8laysvk

Tora! Tora! Tora! (1970)

 

Directed by Richard Fleischer

Tora! Tora! Tora!  is a 1970 Japanese-American historical war film that dramatizes the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. The film was directed by Richard Fleischer, Toshio Masuda and Kinji Fukasaku and stars an ensemble cast, including Martin Balsam, Joseph Cotten, Sō Yamamura, E. G. Marshall, James Whitmore and Jason Robards.

Veteran 20th Century Fox executive Darryl F. Zanuck, who had earlier produced The Longest Day (1962), wanted to create an epic that depicted what “really happened on December 7, 1941”, with a “revisionist’s approach”.

tora-tora-tora-2

He believed that the commanders in Hawaii, General Short and Admiral Kimmel, though scapegoated for decades, provided adequate defensive measures for the apparent threats, including relocation of the fighter aircraft at Pearl Harbor to the middle of the base, in response to fears of sabotage from local Japanese. Despite a breakthrough in intelligence, they had received limited warning of the increasing risk of aerial attack. Recognizing that a balanced and objective recounting was necessary, Zanuck developed an American-Japanese co-production, allowing for “a point of view from both nations.” He was helped out by his son, Richard D. Zanuck, who was chief executive at Fox during this time.

18815-19838

Production on Tora! Tora! Tora! took three years to plan and prepare for the eight months of principal photography. The film was created in two separate productions, one based in the United States, directed by Richard Fleischer, and one based in Japan. The Japanese side was initially to be directed by Akira Kurosawa, who worked on script development and pre-production for two years. But after two weeks of shooting, he was replaced by Toshio Masuda and Kinji Fukasaku, who directed the Japanese sections.

vlcsnap-2017-02-09-10h16m10s326

Veteran 20th Century Fox executive Darryl F. Zanuck, who had earlier produced The Longest Day (1962), wanted to create an epic that depicted what “really happened on December 7, 1941”, with a “revisionist’s approach”. He believed that the commanders in Hawaii, General Short and Admiral Kimmel, though scapegoated for decades, provided adequate defensive measures for the apparent threats, including relocation of the fighter aircraft at Pearl Harbor to the middle of the base, in response to fears of sabotage from local Japanese. Despite a breakthrough in intelligence, they had received limited warning of the increasing risk of aerial attack.

tora-tora-tora

Recognizing that a balanced and objective recounting was necessary, Zanuck developed an American-Japanese co-production, allowing for “a point of view from both nations.” He was helped out by his son, Richard D. Zanuck, who was chief executive at Fox during this time.

“Why Are The Winds And The Waves So Restless?”

31 January 1999 | by Michael Coy (michael.coy@virgin.net) (London, England) – See all my reviews

On Sunday 7 December 1941, the Imperial Japanese Navy launched a surprise attack on the US Pacific fleet in its moorings at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. At the time, no state of war existed between the two nations. An ingenious pre-emptive strike, as the Japanese ‘hawks’ saw it, was condemned by the world as one of the greatest acts of treachery in modern history.

mv5bmtkyntiynzqxnf5bml5banbnxkftztgwote4mzu3mte-_v1_sx1235_cr001235999_al_

“Tora! Tora! Tora!” meticulously traces the build-up to Pearl Harbor by examining the diplomatic, military and intelligence events and developments on both sides. The film is unimpeachably even-handed, telling both sides’ stories simultaneously, and interleaving the Japanese and American versions with intelligence and an almost total absence of jingoism.

vlcsnap-2017-02-09-10h25m43s050

Japan’s warmongers considered their country to be trapped by history and geography. As the industrial nations surged forward in terms of prosperity and military might, Japan was in danger of being outstripped, having few natural resources of her own. If Japan was to compete with the USA and USSR, she would have to ‘reach out’ for the raw materials available in southern Asia and the Pacific, but this would mean confronting the USA, the great maritime power in the Pacific.

v1-bjsxoduzmdc7ajsxnzewmjsxmjawoze2mda7mtiwma

The film explains all this very well. We learn that the Japanese have an age-old tradition of striking against their enemies without warning, and that air superiority is the new doctrine. The brilliant Japanese planners such as Genda (played by Tatsuya Mihashi) have grasped the lessons of the European war and know the vital importance of naval air power. By 1941, battleships have become a liability – slow, lumbering dinosaurs which invite attack and cannot defend themselves against aircraft. The way forward is mobile air power, and that means aircraft carriers. If the Japanese can catch the American carriers at Pearl Harbor and destroy them, then the war will be won before it has properly started.

vlcsnap-2017-02-09-10h17m34s310

The Americans take a fateful decision to send out their carriers on reconnaissance missions. This strips Pearl Harbor of protection, but paradoxically ensures that Japan cannot win the war – no matter how spectacular the success of the surprise attack, the mission will fail if the US aircraft carriers survive.

mv5bnju3ntk3nje2of5bml5banbnxkftztgwmtm4mzu3mte-_v1_sy1000_cr008121000_al_

Throughout the build-up, the Japanese navy chiefs such as Yamamoto (So Yamomura) have a snippet of classical Japanese poetry on their minds: “If all men are brothers, why are the winds and the waves so restless?” They take this to mean that it is the rule of nature for man to attack his fellow man. By the end of the film, Yamamoto has abandoned this view and now believes that “We have aroused a sleeping giant, and filled him with a terrible resolve.”

mv5bodiwntu2mdi1n15bml5banbnxkftztgwode4mzu3mte-_v1_sx1232_cr001232999_al_

The film catalogues the accidents and mistakes which combined to make Pearl Harbor a worse disaster for the USA than it need have been. American aircraft are bunched together in the middle of the airfield in order to reduce the risk of sabotage near the perimeter fence, but this helps the Japanese bombers to destroy them on the ground. Radar equipment cannot be placed in the best locations to give early warning, and in any event the radar data are misinterpreted when they predict the attack. Because the attack falls on a weekend, it is difficult for middle-ranking officers to contact military and political chiefs, and the contingency plans are inadequate. Radio Honolulu broadcasts through the night to guide a fleet of B-17’s to Hawaii, inadvertently acting as a navigation beacon for the Japanese warplanes.

xb6ihmhojwxpwf4v_baxlgesqivxc4pstfr896gz

If the painstaking build-up to the attack is a little slow and ponderous, it is certainly epic in scale, and when the action erupts it comes as a mighty climax. The tension is palpable as the Japanese planes take off from their carriers, black against the ominous dawn. What follows is a breath-taking cinematic coup as Pearl Harbor is ravaged.

Verdict – A historical account of almost documentary accuracy culminates in vivid action scenes. A marvellous film.

tora03

A definite must for anyone who’s curious about Pearl Harbor.

8/10
Author: Rob Deschenes (kalibur@softhome.net) from Toronto, Ont. Canada
29 May 2001

I will be completely honest with all of you, I saw this movie to prepare for the upcoming 2001 block buster, PEARL HARBOR. TORA! TORA! TORA! seemed the perfect choice. Recent movies these days depressed me, but thanks to TORA! (and Clint Eastwood ‘s HIGH PLAINS DRIFTER), my enjoyment in watching movies returned. TORA! is an absolutely excellent film packed with incredibly well done acting and emotion and an overall feeling that leaves you blown away.

tora-tora-tora1

PEARL HARBOR has quite a bit to live up to after seeing this. The special effects produced in TORA! are completely out of this world (even after thirty years!). More credit goes to how well documented this story goes. The Americans and Japanese did a tremendously exceptional job of recreating the entire events leading up to and including the Pearl Harbor attack. Being a Canadian, I was confused a couple years ago when the local paper announced that the number two (of the top 100) event of the 1900’s was the attack on Pearl Harbor. I completely understand now and quite frankly am amazed at how both sides felt throughout the entire ordeal.

vlcsnap-2017-02-09-10h24m32s641

 

Simply put, TORA! TORA! TORA! deals with all the events, mistakes (both minor and MAJOR), people involved and attitudes leading up to and during the air raid on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. Though not shown, we even have the general feeling of the U.S. President and the Japanese Emperor. Nothing is missed in this movie. It is as close to the actual depiction of Pearl Harbor you can get.

vlcsnap-2017-02-09-10h30m47s175

For 1970, the special effects are absolutely astonishing. Very little looks fake, and nothing looks over done (like many CGI effects do these days). When the first American battletanks are struck, the explosions are incredible. When the Zero crashes into the building, the explosion is eye catching. Everything is unbelievably excellent. The acting is also first rate, how the Americans handle the warnings of a Japanese attack (they’re nuts) was supremely well laid out. How the Japanese carefully planned the attack on Pearl Harbor was frighteningly well thought out.

mv5bmtcwnzm2ntg0n15bml5banbnxkftztgwnjm4mzu3mte-_v1_sy1000_cr0012571000_al_

Next credit must go to the music. Jerry Goldsmith has to be one of the greatest composers of all time. The suspense created on the morning of December 7 just before the attack is still hair chilling thirty years later. Nothing seems to be wrong with TORA! except the fact that it is a little too long. A couple times, I was hoping that the attack would just begin and get over with. My patience quickly subsided with that music score and with the Emperor’s poem. Very little is wrong with TORA! TORA! TORA!. It is a definite must see for anyone curious about how war works, how mistakes are made and how people respond to such attacks.

vlcsnap-2017-02-09-10h25m37s819

Excellent, if not one of the best documentary style movies of all time, as told from both sides, of the event that plunged the United States into the Second World War.

7 December 2004 | by grafspee (Australia) – See all my reviews

This movie reigns supreme over it’s 2001 version Pearl Harbor which is really a fictional love story confined within a true conflict. Tora Tora Tora is based on actual events leading up to this avoidable tragedy, notably the bureaucratic bungling and complacency from the top down which allowed the Japanese attack to succeed.

vlcsnap-2017-02-09-10h30m30s330

Throughout this well done production, the story in true chronological sequence shifts between the two opposing sides with full subtitles giving the role played by each leading actor.

The viewer is given a clear concise unfolding of events with the part of the code-breakers importantly emphasized.

The attack is quite breathtaking in parts with several scenes closely resembling or being actual footage taken.

vlcsnap-2017-02-09-10h21m17s888

Ironically the breaking of the Japanese naval code by U.S. Intelligence gave the Americans every opportunity to correctly contemplate the next move of their adversary, but a desire for utmost secrecy by the Roosevelt Administration and the top brass of the Navy and Army restricted the transmission of clear and proper communications necessary for the Pearl Harbor commanders, Admiral Kimmel and General Short to make sound objective judgments regarding their respective commands.

Both men were treated shabbily by their superiors in the aftermath of the attack, were relieved of their command, and for decades thereafter had to endure the shame and responsibility placed on them in allowing this occurrence to happen.

mv5bmjc3ntm1mzk4m15bml5banbnxkftztgwmzm4mzu3mte-_v1_sy1000_cr0012511000_al_

This movie does a lot to exonerate them from their part in this terrible disaster.

P.S. I had the great honor of meeting bugler Richard Fiske personally, (USS West Virginia) with a colleague of mine when we visited Pearl Harbor in March 1997, (plus autograph),and had our photo taken with him. It is one of my enduring photos of this great sailor who gave his time unselfishly as a volunteer survivor, at the base, to give two second generation Australians the respect of knowing that we met a man who belonged to a nation which contributed to the success of winning the Pacific War.

vlcsnap-2017-02-09-10h20m33s278

 

Battle of Britain (1969)

Directed by Guy Hamilton
Cinematography Freddie Young

Battle of Britain is a 1969 British Second World War film directed by Guy Hamilton, and produced by Harry Saltzman and S. Benjamin Fisz. The film broadly relates the events of the Battle of Britain. The script by James Kennaway and Wilfred Greatorex was based on the book The Narrow Margin by Derek Wood and Derek Dempster.

71_3_screenshot

The film endeavoured to be an accurate account of the Battle of Britain, when in the summer and autumn of 1940 the British RAF inflicted a strategic defeat on the Luftwaffe and so ensured the cancellation of Operation Sea LionAdolf Hitler‘s plan to invade Britain. The film is notable for its spectacular flying sequences, in contrast with the unsatisfactory model work seen in Angels One Five (1952) and on a far grander scale than had been seen on film before; these made the film’s production very expensive.

Aircraft models

Permission was granted to the producers to use the Royal Air Force Museum’s Junkers Ju 87 Stuka dive-bomber (one of only two that survive intact). The 1943 aircraft was repainted and slightly modified to resemble a 1940 model Ju 87. The engine was found to be in excellent condition and there was little difficulty in starting it, but returning the aircraft to airworthiness was ultimately too costly for the filmmakers. Instead, two Percival Proctor training aircraft were converted into half-scale Stukas, with a cranked wing, as “Proctukas” though, in the film, they were not used on-screen.Instead, to duplicate the steep dive of Ju 87 attacks, large models were flown by radio control.

06

To recreate airfield scenes in the film, with the limited number of period aircraft available for the film, large scale models were used. The first requirement was for set decoration replicas. Production of full-size wood and fibreglass Hurricanes, Spitfires and Bf 109s commenced in a sort of production line set up at Pinewood Studios. A number of the replicas were fitted with motorcycle engines to enable them to taxi. Although most of these replicas were destroyed during filming, a small number were made available to museums in the UK.

3f2af410-b4f9-44b4-ae57-dd2bbd962c36

The other need was for models in aerial sequences, and art director and model maker John Siddall was asked by the producer to create and head a team specifically for this because of his contacts in the modelling community.  A test flight was arranged at Lasham Airfield in the UK and a model was flown down the runway close behind a large American estate car with a cameraman in the rear. This test proved successful, leading to many radio-controlled models being constructed in the band rehearsal room at Pinewood Studios. Over a period of two years, a total of 82 Spitfires, Hurricanes, Messerschmitts and He 111s were built. Radio-controlled Heinkel He 111 models were flown to depict bombers being destroyed over the English Channel. When reviewing the footage of the first crash, the producers noticed a trailing-wire antenna; this was explained by an added cutaway in which the control wires of a Heinkel are seen shot loose.

Both the village of Denton and the resident pub, The Jackdaw Inn, appear in the film. The airbase appears in the film looking just as it did during WWII.

0d60d227fe830d80d3c5cb66c271e3be

Aircraft

The film required a large number of period aircraft. In September 1965 producers Harry Saltzman and S. Benjamin Fisz contacted former RAF Bomber Command Group Captain Hamish Mahaddie to find the aircraft and arrange their use.Eventually 100 aircraft were employed, called the “35th largest air force in the world”. With Mahaddie’s help, the producers located 109 Spitfires in the UK, of which 27 were available although only 12 could be made flyable. Mahaddie negotiated use of six Hawker Hurricanes, of which three were flying. The film helped preserve these aircraft, including a rare Spitfire Mk II which had been a gate guardian at RAF Colerne.

During the actual aerial conflict, all RAF Spitfires were Spitfire Mk I and Mark II variants. However, only one Mk Ia and one Mk IIa (the latter with a Battle of Britain combat record) could be made airworthy, so the producers had to use seven other different marks, all of them built after the battle. To achieve commonality, the production made some modifications to “standardise” the Spitfires, including adding elliptical wingtips, period canopies and other changes. To classic aircraft fans, they became known as “Mark Haddies” (a play on Grp. Capt. Mahaddie’s name). A pair of two-seat trainer Spitfires were camera platforms to achieve realistic aerial footage inside the battle scenes. A rare Hawker Hurricane XII had been restored by Canadian Bob Diemert, who flew the aircraft in the film. Eight non-flying Spitfires and two Hurricanes were set dressing, with one Hurricane able to taxi.

Battle Of Britain 1969 Moviestills

A North American B-25 Mitchell N6578D, flown by pilots John “Jeff” Hawke and Duane Egli, was the primary filming platform for the aerial sequences. It was fitted with camera positions in what were formerly the aircraft’s nose, tail and waist gun positions. An additional camera, on an articulating arm, was mounted in the aircraft’s bomb bay and allowed 360-degree shots from below the aircraft. The top gun turret was replaced with a clear dome for the aerial director, who would co-ordinate the other aircraft by radio.[11]

N6578D was painted garishly for line-up references  and to make it easier for pilots to determine which way it was manoeuvring. When the brightly coloured aircraft arrived at Tablada airbase in Spain in early afternoon of 18 March 1968, the comment from Derek Cracknell, the assistant director, was “It’s a bloody great psychedelic monster!” The aircraft was henceforth dubbed the Psychedelic Monster.

177225549

The Luftwaffe armada included over 50 real aircraft. (screenshot)

For the German aircraft, the producers obtained 32 CASA 2.111 twin-engined bombers, a Spanish-built version of the German Heinkel He 111H-16. They also located 27 Hispano Aviación HA-1112 M1L ‘Buchon’ single-engined fighters, a Spanish version of the German Messerschmitt Bf 109. The Buchons were altered to look more like correct Bf 109Es, adding mock machine guns and cannon, and redundant tailplane struts, and removing the rounded wingtips.[13] The Spanish aircraft were powered by British Rolls-Royce Merlin engines, and thus almost all the aircraft used, British and German alike, were Merlin-powered. [Note 2] After the film, one HA-1112 was donated to the German Luftwaffenmuseum der Bundeswehr, and converted to a Messerschmitt Bf 109 G-2 variant, depicting the insignias of German ace Gustav Rödel.

960full-battle-of-britain-screenshot

A good film, unfortunately for Hollywood, WW2 started in 1939!

7/10
Author: jmb3222 from United Kingdom
5 March 2002
*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This film does have its flaws, but is still a great film. It had to be made when it did (sic) if only because the Spanish Air Force still had their Merlin engined Hispano HA-1109 and HA-1112 “Me 109s” and Casa C.2111 “111s” flying in 1968!

It’s good that some “stars” do not have big roles. Michael Caine whilst being “hot box office” is shot down – many pilots who seemed invincible were lost. A number of the parts are based on real characters Robert Shaw’s is based on Adolf ‘Sailor’ Malan – 74 Squadron Ace, Susannah York’s Harvey is based on one Felicity Hanbury (who later became the Commandant of the WRAF). The scene where she has to deal with a bombed slit trench is based on what happened when Biggin Hill was attacked. Being burned and still being alive was one of the biggest risks – sitting next to a tank of 100 octane whislt being shot at was risky.

1969-battle-of-britain-a

It’s chief flaws are i) Hurricanes shot down the bulk of the German losses during the Battle – this “error” is primarily because there were more flying Spitfires available. More serious is depicting “The Few” as a group of equals – in reality the class system was still to the fore in some places more so than others. Officer would not mix with NCOs, Auxilliary Air Force pilots (predominantly from the upper classes) looked down on Volunteer Reserve pilots (predominantly from the working/middle classes). But bear in mind this was made less than 30 years after the event when some of the myths and propaganda surrounding it were still treated as the truth, unlike “Pearl Harbor” and “U-571” and other recent films they haven’t just thrown historical fact out because it doesn’t fit the desired story line!

tumblr_nnt8bi4zm61r9je2ro6_r1_540

Many pilots were killed simply because of the stupid tatics they used – fighting by the 1930s RAF rule book until lessons were learnt. Many didn’t see what hit them. In most other ways the film is by and large correct. The British were very reluctant to use Polish and Czech squadrons; despite many of these pilots being much more experienced than British.

Oh and having read the other comments here – this does not follow just one squadron, Robert Shaw is one, Michael Caine another, The Czech/Poles others, Christopher Plummer another. I seem to remember that the film makers went out of their way not to show any one squadron as being the “winners” hence no squadron numbers are mentioned – all aircraft codes are ficticious.

susannah-york-the-battle-of-britain-1969-bp8h86

A film has to keep an audience’s attention for 100+ minutes real life isn’t like that just showing the fear and boredom of sitting around on hot summers days dreading the ‘phone call would not make a good movie instead compromises are made. When you watch it remember that this wasn’t just dreamt up by some scriptwriter this really happened.

A Classic!!!

Author: tom sawyer (sawyert2003@yahoo.com) from Waterford, Michigan
2 April 2003

The Battle of Britain is a classic movie about one of the key battles of World War 2. It stands up there with the epics The Longest Day, Tora,Tora, Tora and a Bridge Too Far. The all-star cast has well known and lesser known English, Canadian, German and others actors who play their roles well. The movie does a good job of portaying both sides of the battle. The special effects and the air battles hold up well after well over 30 years. The criticisms that people have to me are quite unfair. As for charcter development, the movie is about the battle, much like the Longest Day was and there was no time to develop that part of the movie because it focused on the entirety of the battle. Also this is not like Cross of Iron that someone compared it to. Cross of Iron was a fictious story, while this is done in semi-docudrama style.It is an unfair comparison.

521948573

The best comparison would be with the three previously listed movies. I liked that fact that some big stars characters did get hurt or died just like many of the better pilots did in the the battle and the war. The movie gives an excellent overview of the battle, much like the other movies listed here. I like the fact about the bit of English snobbery concerning the foreign pilots that they were training even if some were as good or better than they were.This is a four star war movie obout Britains Finest Hour. Where if it wasn’t for the Brits holding off the German’s, the Allies would not have been able to launch D-Day against the German’s. The movie showed bravery and courage from both sides men and pilots. It is a great portrayal of young men in battle as knights of the early war skies. Rent it or buy it, because this is a classic.

a262340774e8c78ce6cec55fdfe806e1

Holds Up Well

9/10
Author: Bruce Jones (bl.jones@charter.net) from Southern California
21 January 2002

I recently reviewed this film after having not seen it since it was new. Being a 31 year military veteran I have a somewhat different frame of reference for watching films such as this. I look for things in a film many civilians never will. I don’t think this one has ever been shown on TV in the US, at least not within a couple of decades, so it’s certainly not overplayed here. Luckily, the tape I accessed was in excellent condition so it was crisp and new in appearance. It is still a very excellent film depicting one of Britain’s most harrowing times and the unwavering heroism of those who fought so desperately to secure their victory. The film didn’t enjoy many fine reviews when it was new as it was compared, as most war films are, to the plethora of fiction produced by the movie industry and REAL history usually comes off looking mundane by comparison.

the-battle-of-britain-la-bataille-d-angleterre-year-1969-director-fwmf8y

I have found this a similar oddity for many excellent films of war. This is one film that more than adequately stands the test of time and I would absolutely love to see a wide-screen DVD version of it offered. Although it helps to have an understanding of war in general, and in particular the second world war and the actual battle of britain, one can be ignorant of those facts and still come away well entertained. It is a wonderfully produced film, acted with talent and grace by a cast of performers who are now legendary. The sets, costumes and musical score are wonderful and perfectly compliment the cinematography. If I can find a copy I am going to add it to my library.

Their Finest Hour

Author: Britlaw from London UK
17 January 2000

This has some of the best aerial fight scenes ever – ‘Top Gun’ nothwithstanding. If it has faults it is that it can sometimes be a bit dull as it is very historically accurate, as it was a very well documented battle and presumably because when it was made many of the participants were still alive (and some still are).

7b22f30ca6b23ead96a423f19c20130b

It might have been better if like the ‘Dam Busters’ it had adopted a rather more documentary style, rather than having ground based ficticious sub-plots.

There are no particular stars (save the aircraft) but many cameos and it is even handed to the Germans as well, who lost many brave men.

The bits I liked were, as one other has commented, British diplomat Ralph Richardson telling German Curt Jurgens (over tea of course) that we wouldn’t be dictated to and the scene in the RAF command bunker as one of the biggest daily air battles develops, where Churchill (suggested only by a puffing cigar but very much a hands on war leader), on surveying the plotting board showing hundreds of attacking German aircraft, orders more reserves into the battle only to be told there are none left, everything we had was in the air or on the ground being refuelled.

battle_of_britain_12

If the technology looks dated now, we must not forget that at the time radar was ultra secret and definitely cutting edge – this was the start of electronic warfare.

I believe I am correct in saying the film opened on 15th September 1969, celebrated in the UK as Battle of Britain day and the actual anniversary of the Churchill incident above.

This was truly the finest hour of those young pilots and we did it all without American help or even a Yank guest star……….

PS Christopher Plummer is Canadian!

521948577

Cinema’s Finest Hour

10/10
Author: John Mclaren from London, England
28 February 2003

Top drawer war film (indeed THE top notch war flick), in which our chaps (the Brits) give Jerry what-for over the coast of Blighty. Stiff upper lip rules OK as they scramble their Spits into the blue autumn sky, exchange tally-ho’s over the intercom, bag a couple of Messerschmitts- and then head home for tea and buns.

OK, I’m biased. My grandfather fought in the battle. However it reminds us what really matters is not Holywood celeb tittle-tattle, but real life and death struggles for our world. As usual the Brits do it with class and dignity. Yes, the impression in the film that all foreigners are clearly bloody (except the Yanks, Canadians, and Anzacs) is perhaps a little dated. However it is a tribute to the heroism of a remarkable generation at a truly momentous point in history.

battle-of-britain

Stirring, Beautifully-Done; the Difficult-to-Do Story of Britain’s Blitz in WWII

8/10
Author: silverscreen888
7 July 2005

This dramatized biography to my mind represents one of the most difficult sorts of film to make. I believe the makers of “The Battle of Britain” succeeded in making it a stirring war film, and one that deserves to be watched and remembered often. Many people find the battle scenes in the air in this film among the best ever staged. Cliff Richardson deserves praise for his special effects; and Guy Hamilton, director in charge, has frankly done marvelous work of a very difficult-to-achieve sort. He has interiors, intimate scenes, outdoor lectures, strafings, bombings, aerial battles, airplane landings, group shots and conferences to handle.Wilfred Greatorex and James Kennaway. In addition, Ron Goodwin and William Walton supplied memorable music, veteran Freddie Young the lucid cinematography and Maurice Carter wonderful art direction.

battle_of_britain_large

The story-line chronologically follows the “Battle of Britain”, No aspect is overlooked. The success of Luftwaffe air attacks on forward bases is noted; and so is the lucky decision by Hitler to start bombing Londoners instead that caused a shift it tactics and saved Britain’s radar towers, key to targeting incoming attackers for interdiction by British aircraft. We hear a lecture by an Air Marshal, see firefighting squads and female drivers in action; we see both sides talking in their own languages–the Germans being subtitled; and we see action in the British War Room and at the highest levels of military planning. A couple is followed to illustrate what pilots and their wives, she being part of the war effort also, had to undergo and the pressures they faced.

battle-of-britain-souvenir-programme-x28-1969-x29-2-15145-p

The pilots are also seen waiting between sorties at their bases; and finally when none come, the first phase of WWII, the expedition and subsequent Battle of Britain is over. In the huge cast are most of the leading male actors in England, including Laurence Olivier as Hugh Dowding, chief of the air effort, Trevor Howard as Keith Park, Patrick Wymark as Mallory, their chief opponent within the air corps,, plus Christopher Plummer and Susannahh York as the troubled couple, Harry Andrews, Michael Caine, Ian McShane, Kenneth More, Curd Jurgens, Nigel Patrick, Michael Redgrave, Robert Shaw, Robert Flemyng, Michael Bates, Ralph Richardson, Isla Blair and Edward Fox. This is a splendid, well-paced and beautiful recreation. The music is superb; the combat footage unexcelled and the acting far-above-average. I rate this film on many counts above anything else ever done concerning the defense of Britain by its air forces during the late war.

tumblr_nnt8bi4zm61r9je2ro2_500

A Bridge Too Far (1977)

Cinematography Geoffrey Unsworth, BSC
Directed by Richard Attenborough

A Bridge Too Far is a 1977 British-American epic war film based on the 1974 book of the same name by Cornelius Ryan, adapted by William Goldman. It was produced by Joseph E. Levine and Richard P. Levine and directed by Richard Attenborough.

The film tells the story of the failure of Operation Market Garden during World War II. The operation was intended to allow the Allies to break through German lines and seize several bridges in the occupied Netherlands, including one at Arnhem, with the main objective of outflanking German defences in order to end the war by Christmas of 1944.

mv5bmjizntixnjgynl5bml5banbnxkftztcwody0njazna-_v1_

Operation begins

The airborne drops catch the Germans totally by surprise, and there is little resistance. Most of the men come down safely and assemble quickly, but the Son bridge is blown up by the Germans, just before the 101st Airborne secures it. German Field Marshal Model, thinking that the Allies are trying to capture him, panics and retreats from Arnhem. However, soon after landing, troubles beset Urquhart’s division. Many of the Jeeps either don’t arrive by gliders at all or are shot up in an ambush. Their radio sets are also useless, meaning no contact can be made with either paratroopers moving into Arnhem under Lt. Col. John Frost or XXX Corps. Meanwhile, German forces reinforce Nijmegen and Arnhem. Meanwhile, US Sergeant Eddie Dohun is driving his jeep searching for his commanding officer, Captain Glass. He finds the captain with a bullet in his head and thinking he is alive decides to take him to medical care.

mv5bmta1mda1nzmynzleqtjeqwpwz15bbwu3mdi3ndywmzq-_v1_sy1000_cr006651000_al_

He encounters German troops but manages to avoid them. Arriving at the hospital, Dohun takes the captain to an Army physician (Medical Corps Colonel) who refuses to look at the captain until Dohun threatens to shoot him. The medic manages to get the bullet out of the captain’s skull and says he’ll possibly live. He places Dohun under arrest for 10 seconds as punishment for pointing a gun at him.

XXX Corps’ progress is slowed by German resistance, the narrowness of the highway and the need to construct a Bailey bridge to replace the destroyed bridge at Son. XXX Corps is able to move onto the Grave bridge without much resistance, but is halted at Nijmegen. There, soldiers of the 82nd Airborne Division perform a dangerous daylight river crossing in flimsy canvas-and-wood assault boats. Ultimately, despite heavy casualties the river crossing is successful, and the Nijmegen bridge is captured. The Germans close in on the isolated British paratroopers occupying part of Arnhem at the bridge. Urquhart is separated from his men, and the supply drop zones are overrun by the Germans. German attacks on the paratroopers at the bridge are repelled. British armour continues to fight its way up the corridor, but is delayed by strong German resistance.

mv5bmtkyndy1nzezmv5bml5banbnxkftztcwnzc0njazna-_v1_sy1000_cr006721000_al_

Operation Ends

After securing Nijmegen Bridge, XXX Corps waits several hours for its infantry to secure the town. Finally, Sosabowski’s troops enter the battle, yet they are unable to effectively reinforce the British at Arnhem. The Germans, now on full alert, intercept and gun down numerous Poles during their drop; only a handful survive to reinforce the British. After days of house-to-house fighting at Arnhem, pitted against crack SS infantry backed by panzers, the outgunned paratroops are captured or forced to withdraw. Arnhem itself is indiscriminately razed. Although Operation Market Garden is determined by Montgomery and his High Command to be 90% successful, most of those who actually carried it out feel quite differently. Urquhart escapes Arnhem with fewer than a fifth of his original 10 thousand crack troops; those who were too badly injured to flee stay behind and cover the withdraw, then give themselves up. Urquhart confronts Browning about his personal sentiments regarding the operation: does Browning think it was as well as Montgomery estimates? Browning’s reply (and the film’s last line of dialogue, not counting the Allied prisoners who sing Abide With Me en route to the German POW camp) contradicts his earlier optimism for Market Garden: “Well, as you know, I always felt we tried to go a bridge too far.”

mv5bmja5otcyndq3nf5bml5banbnxkftztcwndc0njazna-_v1_

In the film’s final scene, Kate ter Horst (Liv Ullman) and her children are forced to abandon their bombed-out residence. Placing their belongings in a cart which is drawn by Dr. Jan Spaander (Laurence Olivier), they pass through their front yard – which has been converted to a cemetery for fallen Allied troops – and trek across the countryside to an uncertain future. One of the children brings up the rear, marching with a rifle-shaped branch he has found.

Under-rated war epic.

10 November 2004 | by Jonathon Dabell (barnaby.rudge@hotmail.co.uk) (Todmorden, England) – See all my reviews

Quite a few bad things have been written about A Bridge Too Far. Richard Attenborough’s elephantine recreation of the battle for several strategically valuable Dutch bridges in the winter of 1944 is a star-studded, lengthy and exhausting film (and many critics at the time seemed to be of the opinion that it collapsed beneath its own weight). Almost thirty years on, the film is now viewed somewhat more favourably. It may feel 30 minutes too long, and the need for so many stars in so many tiny parts is questionable, but A Bridge Too Far successfully shows a fierce episode of the Second World War in all its chaotic glory.

mv5bmtmxmjayndyxnv5bml5banbnxkftztcwnjc0njazna-_v1_sy1000_cr006691000_al_

Incredibly, there’s no use of the computer generated effects during the big battle scenes that it is relied upon in modern films like Gladiator and Troy. The scenes in this film were shot pretty much as you see them – so the 35,000 parachutists storming Holland, the river crossing led by Robert Redford under intense enemy fire, and other such staggering combat sequences were filmed with thousands of extras and a good deal of meticulous planning and preparation.

The film is based upon Operation Market Garden, an Allied plot hatched towards the end of 1944 with the intention of ending the war in Europe. The concept behind the plan was to drop 35,000 soldiers into Holland approximately 60 miles beyond the German lines, to seize six vital bridges, and to reinforce the paratroopers by sending in thousands of ground troops. However, various mishaps jeopardised the mission and eventually the Allies were cut off and had to withdraw, suffering severe losses.

tumblr_nsm9bcptw71rp17deo3_400

As stellar casts go, A Bridge Too Far still takes some rivalling. Among the many famous actors involved, these are just a few: Sean Connery, Robert Redford, Laurence Olivier, Dirk Bogarde, James Caan, Ryan O’Neal, Gene Hackman, Michael Caine, Anthony Hopkins and Elliott Gould. It seems pointless for some of the actors to be cast in these roles – true enough, Connery, Bogarde and Hopkins get decent roles and a fair bit of screen time, but was it really worth paying Redford $2,000,000 for his ten minute heroics? Could a decent actor have not handled the role for a fraction of that amount? Is Gene Hackman really the correct choice for Polish officer Major General Stanislaw Sosabowski? Should a light comic actor like Elliott Gould be doing his cigar-chomping “fun” turn in a movie as serious as this?

Luckily, the film is a big success on other levels. The cinematography is extraordinary; the music is suitably stirring; the potentially confusing story is handled with clarity and true-to-the-facts sensitivity; and amid the chaos a number of very memorable scenes emerge. A Bridge Too Far is a very good war film – maybe the biggest war film ever conceived (The Longest Day and Saving Private Ryan included) – and I feel that, although it has a few casting flaws, it is in almost every other department a great, great achievement.

mv5bmtc2nzkznjiwmf5bml5banbnxkftztcwnjgzndaxmw-_v1_sx1395_cr001395999_al_

What makes this movie so good is the realism, shown in every detail

9/10
Author: Philip Van der Veken from Tessenderlo, Belgium
29 September 2004

I’m a big fan of war movies and I already have a nice collection on DVD. One of them is A Bridge Too Far and I can only say that it is one of my favorites in this genre (if you can make a comparison between movies like A Bridge Too Far, Saving Private Ryan, All Quiet on the Western Front, Apocalypse Now… of course). What I really don’t understand is why this movie never was a big success in the cinema’s. Perhaps the people had enough of war movies … and Star Wars was very hip and new at that time of course, but personally I love this movie.

mv5bmtm5mjg0ndu0nf5bml5banbnxkftztcwmtc0njazna-_v1_sy1000_cr006731000_al_

What makes this movie so good is the realism. In most of the war movies of that period, everybody speaks English. No matter if it is a German, an American,… In this movie everybody speaks the language he is supposed to speak. There even is a difference between the English of the Americans and the British. But of course the use of different languages isn’t the only thing that attracted me. Another good example is the fact that they didn’t try to make all the Germans look like brainless killers, monsters without any human feelings. The movie showes them the way they really were: good and hard fighters who cared about their comrades just as much as any allied soldier, but who didn’t just kill for fun. (Just for your information: I’m talking about the soldiers in the Wehrmacht here and not about the SS, even though not all SS-troops where that bad either. There are good and bad people in every army.)

tumblr_nsm9bcptw71rp17deo8_400

The effort which was put in this movie is shown in every detail. The uniforms, the weapons, the landscapes, the cities…, everything really gives you the feeling the director wanted to give an accurate vision on what happened during operation Market Garden. Images from the movie were even incorporated in a documentary on this subject. That probably shows better than anything else how good this movie really is.

You probably ask yourself if there really isn’t anything negative about this movie. Of course there is, but it never really bothered me. Therefore I reward this movie with a 9/10. Perhaps a little too high according to the average IMDb user, but for me it’s sure worth it.

541-2464

“It’s All A Question Of Bridges”

Author: Michael Coy (michael.coy@virgin.net) from London, England
14 February 1999

“Quite frankly,” observes ‘Boy’ Browning, “this kind of thing’s never been attempted before.” But it has. In 1962, “The Longest Day” gave the epic star-studded treatment to the D-Day landings, and here we are, 15 years on, doing the same for the Arnhem debacle. It has to be said, the film looks great. From the gently-tinkling light fittings in the Dutch resistors’ home to the beauty of the tank tracks in perspective, this is a gorgeously-photographed movie.

In 1944, the German armies were being pushed back across the Low Countries. The Allies’ great strategic problem was the Rhine, the wide river which formed Germany’s western border. A daring plan was conceived which would overcome the Rhine obstacle and open the road to Berlin. ‘Market Garden’, as the plan was codenamed, involved parachuting spearhead units onto the great bridges over the Rhine and securing them for the critical few hours it would take for an armoured column to drive up and relieve them.

573e7abd9e9ed0b9706b632516cdad629e34b494

It is easy now to point to the flaws in ‘Market Garden’, but at the time it looked like a daring and viable alternative to slogging it out against the Siegfried Line. No-one had anticipated that the Dutch people would pour out onto the streets in throngs, thinking that they had been liberated, and thus bog down the armour. The intelligence indications of heavily-equipped German units in the zone were ignored because they were inconvenient. Critically, the plan allowed for only one solitary road to be available to the Irish Guards for the all-important northward thrust. The film illustrates very effectively the way in which a plan can develop its own momentum, regardless of the shortcomings which riddle it.

4ea5f7562c058837cb00252d

The sequence of the boarding and dropping of the paratroops is a thrilling spectacle, shot on a colossal scale. The German ambush which delays the rolling of the armoured column is another terrific action sequence. Attenborough keeps tight control of a big, complex story, and interlards the large-scale stuff with ‘human scale’ passages, like James Caan’s rescue of his buddy (incidentally, the tracking shot which follows his jeep through the forest is quite remarkable).

gene-hackman-abridgetoofar-3

The fighting at Nijmegen is brilliantly-filmed. Note how the street on the British side grows increasingly littered with war debris as the battle rages. Robert Redford’s assault across the river is a symphony in olive drab, leading to a wonderful moment of exhilaration.

Whether the viewer finds the singing of “Abide With Me” moving or grossly sentimental will depend on personal taste, but the subdued ending is very satisfying. ‘Market Garden’ may have helped shorten the war and may have achieved most of its immediate objectives, but it has to be seen as a tragic mistake.

The film is slick, professional and very pleasing on the eye. One can’t help wondering, however, if this kind of ‘tank opera’ was worth the effort, given that “The Longest Day” had done it all so splendidly a generation earlier.

tumblr_nqrqmbheyu1tes1e8o1_500

A FAILED GAMBLE

Author: Howard Morley (luke@morleys.demon.co.uk) from LONDON ENGLAND
26 June 2002

This video portrays with great precision in an almost acted documentary way the failed attempt in September 1944 to end WWII early based on the plan conceived by Field Marshall Bernard Law Montgomery of El-Alemain (with Eisenhower’s approval).The Allies by this time had advanced deep into Belgium almost to The Dutch border but the advance suddenly slowed due to their out-running lines of supply and their inability to take a servicable port intact nearer their front line.Supplies were still being transported from the won Normandy beachheads a distance of over 500miles.

The Plan involved dropping British, American and Polish paratroopers at strategic bridges in the Netherlands such as The Son, The Grave, Nijmegen, to be taken by the American 82nd and 101st Airborne and the prize, Arnhem to be taken and held by British paratroops.

michael-caine-edward-fox-a-bridge-too-far-1977-bp8epf

Once all these bridges were captured and held, The British 1st Army would drive up the road linking them, thus giving the Allies a springboard to the Rhine and Germany.It was code-named “Operation Market Garden”, Market being the airborne drop and Garden the drive up the road.That was the theory. The planners overlooked,by ignoring seemingly on purpose aerial reconnaisance photos which indicated that Dieter’s SS Panzers were resting and re-equipping in the Arnhem area. The Allies’ communications equipment had not been tested thoroughly enough e.g. “walkie-talkies” worked in open country but what about in built-up areas?Did they have the right sort of crystals fitted?The daily air drops to re-supply lightly armed paratroops could not work if the paras were not in their coded/designated drop zones. Amazingly after the strategic withdrawal from Arnhem, Montgomery is purported to have said it was “90% successful”!

mv5bmjazmza3ndmyml5bml5banbnxkftztcwmzc0njazna-_v1_sy1000_cr006791000_al_

This film, directed by Richard Attenborough, was made in 1977 with a galaxy of well known stars i.e.:Dirk Bogarde as General Boy Browning,Lawrence Olivier, Liv Uhlman,Ryan O’Neal, James Caan, Robert Redford, Gene Hackman,Anthony Hopkins, Sean Connery and Michael Caine.They all play historical figures but for me the most effective was Edward Fox playing General Sir Brian Horrocks.The latter presented a UK TV series on WWII in the 1960’s and Fox’s mannerisms and speech patterns were unerringly similar.Please bear in mind that since the recent film “The Saving of Private Ryan”, special effects in war films have gone up a quantum leap, e.g. the havoc that bullets/bombs/morters etc can wreak on the human body.So you are looking at 1977 special effects.

a-bridge-too-far

Nevertheless the equipment including the DC3’s and filming of the actual paratroopers drop into The Netherlands was most impressive.Sometimes the dialogue is a little stilted to modern tastes but this is or should be speech patterns from 1944.It was General Boy Browning who stated “…but sir, I think we may be going a bridge too far” when he met with the Allied top brass to oversee the plan which he had to execute.This is certainly one of the seminal WWII war films and the only one which concentrates on this failed strategy to liberate the Low Countries.

If you can forget the famous actors and get into their characters and have a sense of modern history, this long film will stimulate you.

mv5bmjaznzgwntk2mf5bml5banbnxkftztgwmzcynju3mte-_v1_sy1000_cr0012211000_al_


The Longest Day (1962)

Directed by
Cinematography

The Longest Day is a 1962 epic war film based on Cornelius Ryan‘s book The Longest Day (1959), about the D-Day landings at Normandy on June 6, 1944, during World War II. The film was produced by Darryl F. Zanuck, who paid author Ryan $175,000 for the film rights.The screenplay was by Ryan, with additional material written by Romain Gary, James Jones, David Pursall and Jack Seddon. It was directed by Ken Annakin (British and French exteriors), Andrew Marton (American exteriors), and Bernhard Wicki (German scenes).

mv5byziyotu5zjatzdizoc00ngnklwjimmity2jkngrkotllntrmxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvyntayndq2nji-_v1_

The Longest Day, which was made in black and white, features a large ensemble cast including John Wayne, Kenneth More, Richard Todd, Robert Mitchum, Richard Burton, Steve Forrest, Sean Connery, Henry Fonda, Red Buttons, Peter Lawford, Eddie Albert, Jeffrey Hunter, Stuart Whitman, Tom Tryon, Rod Steiger, Leo Genn, Gert Fröbe, Irina Demick, Bourvil, Curt Jürgens, George Segal, Robert Wagner, Paul Anka and Arletty. Many of these actors played roles that were essentially cameo appearances. In addition, several cast members – including Fonda, Genn, More, Steiger and Todd – saw action as servicemen during the war, with Todd actually being among the first British officers to land in Normandy in Operation Overlord and he in fact participated in the assault on Pegasus Bridge.

mv5bnguxmjjjy2etngq0zi00mjmwlwjjntetytljy2rkndgxytuxxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvyntayndq2nji-_v1_

The last good WW2 film made by people “who were there”

12 April 2004 | by Terry Rodgers (Edinburgh) – See all my reviews

This is perhaps one of the most ambitious, epic WW2 films to have been made; certainly it is the last of the classic B&W films made about the subject. Featuring an all-star cast (John Wayne, Richard Burton, Kurt Jurgens… even a cameo by Sean Connery!), it comprehensively details the build-up and execution of the Normandy landings in 1944, taking care to show how the event was perceived by Allied and Axis soldiers and commanders, as well as the Free French resistance. This is a film that takes great care in documenting the events of the day, without lapsing into sickly sentimentalism or getting distracted with fictional characters’ personal lives (a failing of many WW2 movies since about 1970), or over-emphasising any one nation’s importance in the operation (although, admittedly, Canadians may feel a little short-changed).

mv5bn2u5njdjndutmgyxys00mmzmlwe3yjktntiyzdgzmzrmnzyyxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvyntayndq2nji-_v1_

Classic moments abound, notably the landing at St.Mere-Eglise and the soldier who gets caught in the church steeple, the frustrations of the front-line German commanders and fighters, and the numerous cameos for film nerds to keep track of.

If you want a wartime romance, or an appearance by Matt Damon or Ben Affleck, or long, loving shots of the Stars & Stripes in slo-mo, or a gritty blood’n’guts fest, you’ll be disappointed. This film has broader concerns, and was made with much more thoroughness. There is no agenda at work here, pro-war or anti-. It is solely concerned with documenting Operation “Overlord” for the film-going public, and succeeds brilliantly; a shame then, that it has not made the top 50 war films list.

mv5bztmyyjc5njqtodi0ni00zgmzltkwnmqtm2vkoda1yzdkmddkxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvyntayndq2nji-_v1_

An absolutely remarkable film…

10/10
Author: Righty-Sock (robertfrangie@hotmail.com) from Mexico
1 October 2002
*** This review may contain spoilers ***

‘The Longest Day’ is June 6, 1944, the day the Allied assault on Hitler’s Fortress Europe… And when it came everything went much according to plan… But fighting through the tough country of Normandy took much longer than had been expected…

Dwight D. Eisenhower, the four-star Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Forces, made up the force of some two million men massed in England for the strike at Europe…

tumblr_m8y0y7eyzn1r8pud7o1_250

Combined American, British, Irish and Canadian forces assault the beaches of Normandy in an effort to gain a foothold on the continent… From the viewpoint of the Americans and Germans involved, the story unfolds through numerous episodes highlighting the ‘Longest Day.’ We see the commands posts occupied by the Germans; Caen, the starting point; the French underground network; Omaha Beach; Utah Beach; Ste-Mère-Église; as well as sites and camps in England…

493642eae34db010c649594d7c49e71f

The film is a clear examination of D-Day looked at from almost every viewpoint, particularly from that of the Germans who are overwhelmed by the forces brought against them… It is in fact Field Marshal Erwin Rommel (profiled against the French beach thoroughly planted with mined obstacles) who looks out to where the invasion fleet will appear later-or sooner, and gives the film its title: “The first 24 hours of the invasion will be decisive… For the Allies as well as the Germans, it will be the longest day.”

In the first half, much attention is focused on the weather, as the troops… American, British, Irish, Canadian and French are poised on board their boats and ships, waiting for the rain to stop… In the key scene when Gen. Eisenhower (David Grace), makes the decision to go ahead with the invasion on June 6, more than 5,000 ships moved to assigned positions… The importance of time is emphasized by increasing the ticking of a clock… On the other side of the channel, the German generals, who know the invasion is imminent, see the same nasty weather and decide to take some time off for war games…

l3

French Resistance fighters receive their coded instructions from BBC radio and increase their sabotage activities… Much of the early going is also devoted to some of the Allies’ more unorthodox ideas, the kinds of things that make more sense cinematic ally than militarily: the use of metal clickers by paratroopers for identification, and parachuting mechanical dummies loaded with firecrackers behind German lines to create confusion…

The film reaches its peak when the two sides in the battle are finally engaged…

The first assault wave hit the Normandy beaches at 6:30 A.M. on June 6… The soil of France looked sordid and uninviting… Planning has been as complete as possible, but in the vast confusion of invasion under enemy fire, so many men fell uselessly when they left their landing craft, and stepped into water… Others fell into underwater shell craters and drowned…

mv5bytm4zjqyyzatyjqxoc00mwq4ltljztgtyzg4zwzin2q1mjjixkeyxkfqcgdeqxvyntayndq2nji-_v1_
The Allied air bombing that was to have knocked out German beach defense guns had not been accurate, especially on Omaha Beach where the bombs had been laid down too far inland to do much good… As a result, the gunfire that met American troops there was more murderous than anything they had been prepared for..

Today it is difficult to watch the invasion scenes and not compare them to the opening of Steven Spielberg’s ‘Saving Private Ryan,’ but that really is unfair… Zanuck manages to display the image of thousands of young soldiers who were killed fighting to liberate France…

A long aerial shot from the point of view of a German pilot Josef ‘Pips’ Priller (Heinz Reincke) strafing Normandy Beach reveals a shore-line of successive waves of men running for their lives trying to secure Omaha Beach… This awful waste and destruction of war: scores of trucks and boats hit by shells, or sunk by mines with their crew lost… Trucks overturned and swamped, partly sunken barges, and many jeeps half submerged…

rommel

Field Marshal Rommel set to work to do everything possible to make the beaches if not impregnable, very uninviting indeed… ‘The war will be won or lost on the beaches,’ he states… The German command was slow to react to the invasion… They had been misled by the weather and the Allied deception plan that Normandy was a diversion and the main landing would be at Pas-de-Calais…

Shot in CinemaScope and in black-and-white, ‘The Longest Day’ captures the history of the moment… The film tracks the book very closely, shifting the viewpoints from German to French to American to British throughout… In three hours Zanuck and his staff expand on the scope of one day, to tell mostly everything, with an exceptionally strong cast playing cameo roles… The cast could not be better, in spite of the brevity of their roles:

1542978397-hans-christian-blech-in-the-longest-day

– Bourvil is the French Mayor of Colleville who welcomes the British soldiers with a bottle of champagne…

– Irina Demick is Janine Boitard, the sexy good-looking Resistance member…

– Henry Fonda is Theodore Roosevelt Jr., the Brigadier General who limps ashore with the first of the assault boats landing on Utah Beach…

– Christian Marquand is Philippe Kieffer, the French Commander in desperate situation in Ouistreham…

– Robert Mitchum is Norman Cota, the Brigadier general who chops on his cold cigar, and walks along the beach and rallies his men… Mitchum gets some great lines and delivers them with the right amount of idealism and cynicism…

file31_zps53c78b95

– Richard Todd is John Howard, the major who lands by glider at Bénouville to capture the canal bridge over the Orne River…

All the characters speak in their own languages… The motion picture is Winner of two Academy Awards for Cinematography and Special Effects, Zanuck’s ‘The Longest Day’ is one without doubt an absolutely remarkable film, one of the most impressive and most authentic documentation of war ever put on film…

Allow Yourself A Long Day To See This All-Star War Pic…

7/10
Author: Donald J. Lamb from Philadelphia, PA
12 April 1999

Darryl F. Zanuck’s THE LONGEST DAY is indeed long, has over 48 international stars, 3 directors, and took about 2 years to make. 1962 was the year of the epic as far as the 1960’s were concerned and this exceptional film is no exception. No cost was spared. Some good war sequences mixed with stock footage of WWII effectively present a version of D-Day, June of 1944. We see it from the German perspective (in sub-titles), the American plight, and the rest of the Allied forces. One problem: If you are seeing the film for the first time AFTER watching SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, you may come out disappointed. The war scenes are well-crafted, however, the piercing reality is missing. I tried to watch it as objectively as I could, but it is hard, considering the impression Spielberg’s version of D-Day left on me.

389_3

The soldiers are led by a variety of huge name actors. John Wayne is a no-holds-barred Captain who will fight, broken foot or not. Henry Fonda plays Teddy Roosevelt, Jr. looking not to be treated as the son of an ex-president. Bob Mitchum is great as a cigar-smoking officer of the U.S. raid on Omaha Beach. The only problem is authenticity. The actors look good and realisticly war-like, however, they are kept in frame to showcase their talents and they never seem to be near death. This is by no means an anti-war film like RYAN. It can be harrowing at times, but watching Richard Burton, Sean Connery, and Rod Steiger deliver cameo-like performances (meaning they know they are only on-screen for a short time) was a bit contrived and distracting.

Overall, I did like the movie. It is greatly detailed and it lets you know exactly who each actor is playing. This is pure American propaganda, but it is still exciting. Too many fearful war experiences are handled with kid gloves. The grand spectacle of the top-notch production values as well as non-stop action make the picture watchable, if only once.

RATING: 7 of 10

s5rp9nq6fqvhkrpbee4jrsrmmof

Shaving Ryan’s Privates

9/10
Author: giorgiosurbani from Italy
26 November 2007

True, the first half an hour of Spielberg’s “Saving Private Ryan” is truly mesmerizing but then it degenerates into a soap opera of sorts and all the angst and horror of war evaporates until the truly sentimental finale. “The Longest Day” doesn’t depend on special effects but on the minute by minute horror of its moment. It’s also, if I’m permitted to say it, a lot of fun to watch. Strangely enough the all star cast is not distracting at all. It was much more in “Saving Private Ryan” with a cast of up and comings headed by Tom Hanks himself. In “The Longest Day” there are real moments, film, cinematic moments that are intimately connected with the profoundest sense of drama: The clicking of the rifle. Richard Burton, Richard Beymer and the boots of the dead German. Red Buttons hanging from the Cathedral. Paul Anka, Fabian, Robert Wagner, the landing in Normandy. This film remains one of the best, from every angle, films of its kind.

the-longest-day-poster3

“Gentlemen, We Start the War from Right Here.”

10/10
Author: bkoganbing from Buffalo, New York
7 August 2006

Simply put if things had gone differently on June 6, 1944 we would be living in a very different and very much uglier world than we have now. The Longest Day is Darryl F. Zanuck’s tribute to all who were involved in Allied invasion at Normandy.

Even viewing it now as opposed to the theaters back then back then I am staggered at Zanuck’s incredible eye and grasp for the detail of the Normandy invasion. He did the smart thing and not only bought Cornelius Ryan’s standard account of D-Day, but got Ryan to write a very coherent screenplay. Even one who has absolutely no grasp of military history will be able to follow exactly what was going on.

Several of the people who are portrayed in the film also served as technical advisers of it. When you Peter Lawford as Lord Lovat or Robert Ryan as General James Gavin and many others these people aided in recreating the project.

henry-fonda-the-longest-day-1962-bpa87n

Zanuck may have had the largest movie set in history to work with, at least up to that time. You are seeing the film photographed in the places it actually happened. The beaches, the towns of St. Mere Eglise and Ouisterham, even the embarkation areas in the UK. I doubt you could do The Longest Day today because of the changes in all these places now. Lots of cooperation from the British and French governments was necessary.

You also couldn’t do it because the budget would be the size of the U.S. national debt today. This was the last days of the all powerful studio system and even with a lot of the stars free-lancing at that point, Darryl F. Zanuck was still a most powerful man in Hollywood with a lot of favors owed. One example was Richard Burton who was shooting Cleopatra at the time The Longest Day was also shooting. For his two brief, but memorable scenes as an RAF pilot, they shot around him on Cleopatra also a 20th Century Fox production while he filmed his part for Zanuck.

30a613c651d145549e9e98b1a980cede

Even the Germans came in for a portrait of them as human beings. Curt Jurgens as General Blumentritt, who was also a technical adviser, put it philosophically best about how after he can’t convince Chief of Staff Alfred Jodl to wake up Hitler to move the Panzer Divisions, breaks open a bottle of cognac and decides to drink it before the Allies arrive.

I have several favorites in The Longest Day. Richard Todd who actually was at D-Day and was a decorated hero himself, plays commando leader, Major John Howard who is asked to paratroop into France and capture and hold a key bridge intact. Todd is channeling his own as well as Howard’s war experience into the film and gives a performance of unusual depth.

werner-hinz-til-kiwe-the-longest-day-1962-bpa296

Norman Rossington and a pre-James Bond Sean Connery who was just making his debut as Bond in Dr. No, give some good comic relief as a cockney and Irish soldier landing on Sword Beach. So does Kenneth More as a British beachmaster with his bulldog Winston.

The French are well represented by Arletty, Bourvil, Christian Marquand and by Irina Demich. Being that three of these play civilian roles they get the only two women’s parts of any substance in The Longest Day. I do like the scene where some Germans checking Irina out in a low cut dress, fail to properly search her. Irina also demonstrates how much the women were equal partners in the Resistance. Marquand as a captain of a Free French company is involved in a particularly bloody battle for a coastal town.

tumblr_mixipas3oh1qf6o97o1_500

Of course the American cinema is well represented. Charlton Heston was to originally play the part that John Wayne does, but he couldn’t get free of some commitments of his own and when Wayne became available, Zanuck grabbed him. Heston was later quoted as saying Wayne did a better job than he would have in any event. Wayne’s best scene was when he saw some American bodies dangling from roofs in St. Mere Eglise. As I’ve said many times, John Wayne had one of the best faces for movie closeups ever. One look at the horror expressed in his face tells you all you need to know.

MBDLODA FE008

Henry Fonda plays General Theodore Roosevelt, Jr. who would within a month after the invasion die on Normandy Beach. Had he lived, Roosevelt might have picked up the pieces of a stalled political career. But that was not to be the case. Roosevelt was found dead of a heart attack in his tent after the invasion when the Allies were trying to break out of the beach.

The heaviest casualties on D-Day were on Omaha Beach where Robert Mitchum plays General Norman Cota a division commander. Mitchum is involved at the climax of the film where American GIS after being hung up for hours, break through and insure the invasion’s success.

The Longest Day is not only great drama and a great war film, but it is as accurate a film as you will ever get depicting the Normandy invasion, good history as well.

annex-burton-richard-longest-day-the_02

Sands of Iwo Jima (1949)

Directed by Allan Dwan

Cinematography by

Reggie Lanning

Sands of Iwo Jima is a 1949 war film starring John Wayne that follows a group of United States Marines from training to the Battle of Iwo Jima during World War II. The film also features John Agar, Adele Mara and Forrest Tucker, was written by Harry Brown and James Edward Grant, and directed by Allan Dwan. The picture was a Republic Pictures production.

vlcsnap-2016-10-25-07h56m13s612

Compared with most combat films of its time, Sands of Iwo Jima was fairly nuanced in its view of war and military people. Ironically, many references to it in mass media and popular culture depict it as the quintessential “flag-waving” World War II film. This may have less to do with the movie’s actual contents than with star John Wayne’s later identification with conservative politics.

Several of the actors were re-united in the 1970 western Chisum (1970): John Wayne, John Agar, Forrest Tucker, and Richard Jaeckel.

The 1982 Academy Award nominated comedy short film The Great Cognito makes an implied reference to Sands of Iwo Jima. The only character to be seen onscreen is an entertainment impersonator, who actually changes into the people and events he talks about in his comic patter, using Will Vinton‘s technique of stop-motion claymation. In the end, while talking of Iwo Jima, Cognito breaks down in tears and leaves the stage, blubbering about how “…John Wayne gets shot.”

vlcsnap-2016-10-25-07h56m22s801

Exploiting A Symbol

8/10
Author: bkoganbing from Buffalo, New York
9 November 2006

Although Clint Eastwood’s recent Flags of Our Fathers has told the real story about the flag raising at Iwo Jima, it hasn’t diminished any of the impact that Sands of Iwo Jima has, either back when it was released or viewed today.

In fact because the three surviving flag raisers, Joseph Bradley, Rene Gagnon, and Ira Hayes all were in this film it’s even more proof of how the symbolic flag raising has become mythologized.

Of course the real heroism was in capturing the island that was less than a 1000 miles from the main islands of Japan and the airfields on Iwo Jima that could be used by our bombers for land based flights. It took about a month to do that, the flag was raised on the fifth day.

vlcsnap-2016-10-25-08h08m22s279

I read a history of the United States Marine Corps from it’s formation during the American Revolution. Over the course of its history it was interesting to learn that the Marines many times were threatened with extinction, to be folded into either the army or navy right up to and including World War I.

Right after World War I a very farsighted man named John A. Lejeune became the Marine Corps Commandant and he saw that we would be in a war in the Pacific with the Japanese as our foes. He also saw that the survival of the Marines as an entity involved them training for a very specialized kind of mission, amphibious warfare. He started training them for that and come World War II they were certainly ready.

John Wayne as Sergeant Striker got one of his most memorable parts of his career in Sands of Iwo Jima. Striker is a tough as nails Marine Corps lifer whose got a job to whip a lot of recruits into shape for the later Pacific landings after Guadalcanal. He’s also got one lousy personal life as his wife’s left him and taken their son.

sands-of-iwo-jima-john-wayne-1949

Wayne got his first Oscar nomination for Best Actor in this part. There’s a couple of other films he should have gotten a nomination for, but that’s another story. Among his competition in 1949 was Kirk Douglas for Champion, Richard Todd for The Hasty Heart, and Gregory Peck for Twelve O’Clock High. Note three of the nominees were for World War II related films. But the winner that year was Broderick Crawford for All the King’s Men. At least Peck and Wayne both got Oscars later in their careers.

John Agar who was trying to carve out a reputation as being more than Mr. Shirley Temple back then plays the son of a former commander of Wayne’s who has a problem with his Dad and takes it out on Wayne attitude wise as a surrogate father. Julie Bishop and Adele Mara play women drawn to both Wayne and Agar respectively.

Of the supporting cast who play members of Wayne’s platoon, my favorite is Wally Cassell, the wisecracking city kid who finds a tank to help his platoon out during a sticky situation.

mj-618_348_sands-of-iwo-jima-1949-best-war-movies

Flags of Our Fathers teaches us about how the flag raising symbolism became part of the Marine Corps heritage. Sands of Iwo Jima exploits that symbol in the best sense of the word. After almost sixty years, it’s still a fine film with a grand performance by the Duke.

William Manchester notwithstanding

Author: inspectors71 from Fly-Over Country
13 March 2005
*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I remember seeing this film as a child and wondering if combat looked as antiseptic as it does in Sands of Iwo Jima, then the Japanese soldiers dropped into a foxhole of Marines and started bayoneting them. The scene still frightens me, regardless of how many times I’ve seen Saving Private Ryan or Band of Brothers.

vlcsnap-2016-10-25-08h00m08s523

The great William Manchester wrote about being a Marine in the Pacific in his memoir Goodbye, Darkness. He talked about how phony the movie was, how John Wayne-ish and Hollywoodized it portrayed the sort of in-your-face combat he experienced. He and a friend were thrown out of a theater for laughing so hard at the histrionics and the clichés.

Yet, the average viewer would be hard-pressed not to feel for John Wayne’s broken, alcoholic Marine non-com, and the squad he commands. The best moment of the film isn’t the tragic, inevitable ending, but Wayne’s discovery that his love interest is just as damaged and as hurt as he is.

With that in mind–and William Manchester notwithstanding–this is more than just a war movie, and that’s why it’s so good.

142625

Classic war film with a magnificent John Wayne as tough sergeant fighting Japanese

7/10
Author: ma-cortes
22 November 2007

This is a flag-waging and patriotic tribute to US marines .Very decent war scenes along with documentary footage that convey us the assault troops establish on the Pacific islands, but like the navy, the US army fought its way from island to island in the Pacific. Striker(Wayne) and his squad(Forrest Tucker, John Agar,James Brown,Richard Jaeckel,James Brown,Richard Webb, among others) are responsible for the capture of the Pacific islands. And, of course, the picture brings to life one of the most famous images of the Second World war- Joe Rosenthal’s photograph of US marines raising the flag at Iwo Jima, on the morning of February 23, 1945 and with special appearance of the three living survivors of the historic flag raising of Mount Suribachi. John Wayne is top-notch as valiant but deranged sergeant Striker training rebellious recruits and soldiers in this believable war film . Wayne won his only Oscar nomination, before his obtaining in ¨True grit¨. Supporting cast is frankly magnificent. The motion picture is well directed by Allan Dawn.

90452997ae03102f61bf8b0981c685cf

The film is based correctly on Iwo Jima battle in a hard-fought US operation, one of the most difficult campaigns of the Pacific theater . US capture of Japanese-held island in the Bonin group , about 1450 km south of Tokyo after intense fighting Feb-March 1945. Fortified by the Japanese, it held two airfields, with a third under construction, and was a valuable strategic target for US forces as it would provide a base for land-based bombers to raid the mainland of Japan. It was assaulted by US Marines 19 Feb 1945 after a prolonged air and naval bombardment. The 22000 Japanese troops put up a fanatical resistance but the island was finally secured 16 March. US casualties came to 6891 killed and 18700 wounded, while only 212 of the Japanese garrison survived.The film is dedicated to the United States Marine Corps whose exploits and valor have left a lasting impression on the world and in the hearts of their countrymen . Appreciation is gratefully acknowledged for their assistance and participation which made this picture possible.

sandsofiwojima-2b

A Great Classic triumphs over age and minor flaws.

Author: Cleon from United States
18 August 2003

Yes, today some of it seems campy and jingoistic, but Sands of Iwo Jima, is such a classic that it can’t help being a worthy way to spend 100 minutes.

First of all, there is John Wayne as Sergeant Stryker. Stryker was the model on which virtually every screen portrayal of a tough sergeant is based. The character’s angst and intensity also give us a rare glimpse of John Wayne’s true acting ability. In most movies he just portrayed himself, but there is no swagger in Stryker, just loneliness, fear, and hope. He is by far the most convincing character in this movie, and one of the top from any war movie, period.

0115f36a87a725b73f613a54339b5489

Next: the history. Ok, the actual characters have no basis in fact, but the battles certainly do. The battles for Tarawa and Iwo Jima were very important to the war and tragically costly in lives. They deserve to be remembered. The production mixed a lot of actual footage taken at the actual battles and mixed it in with the regular film. The two look fairly similar since both are black and white, but you can tell what is real and what was shot for the movie. One’s first reaction to this might be that the production went cheapskate, but, in a way, the use of real stock battle footage was more moving than an epic legion of extras like in The Longest Day. You just can’t beat reality for realism, and seeing the real islands and the real marines is an eerie reminder of how many men died in those horrific battles.

hsiwophoto1

Finally: the supporting cast. Ok, I can’t rave about them all, but most were entertaining, especially Wally Cassell. Also, Forrest Tucker puts in a fine performance, the only one remotely close to Wayne’s in its depth.

Some of the anachronisms are a bit funny, but my only real complaint in the whole movie was John Agar’s character Peter Conway. I don’t know who was at fault for it, Agar or the writers, but his character is hard to take. I think we are meant to like him, but for about the first 90 minutes that is pretty much impossible.

Otherwise, it’s a great movie. See it!

sands-of-iwo-jima-john-wayne-adele-nara-1949

Reunion in France (1942)

Directed by Jules Dassin
Cinematography Robert H. Planck

Reunion in France is a 1942 American war film distributed by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer starring Joan Crawford, John Wayne, and Phillip Dorn in a story about a woman in occupied France who, learning her well-heeled lover has German connections, aids a downed American flyer. The film was directed by Jules Dassin and Ava Gardner has a tiny role as a Parisian shopgirl.

36720010

Just have fun with it

24 July 2015 | by calvinnme (United States) – See all my reviews

John Wayne is second billed to the other lead, Joan Crawford, because after all this is MGM, Joan’s studio, at least for awhile longer. This is a film that was obviously targeting a wartime audience with the objective of building patriotism and morale, so you have to look at the miscasting in the context of the times. Joan Crawford plays a French woman who seems to be plumbing the depths of shallowness in her high-rolling lifestyle until the Germans invade. She returns to Paris to find her fancy home confiscated, her boyfriend helping the Germans, and her inner patriotism aroused. She runs across an RAF pilot (Wayne) who has been shot down, and she must play up to her boyfriend and his German friends in order to help Wayne evade capture. Forget the fact that the actors playing Frenchmen don’t sound French, that Wayne doesn’t sound British, and that the Germans are portrayed as not being smart enough to find Berlin on a map, and just have fun with it. If you are a film history buff like myself, you will see much worse and weirder material about WWII particularly in the early war years.

thismanismine1934_1618_470x264_07252016044622

Getting The Duke Out Of France

6/10
Author: bkoganbing from Buffalo, New York
19 January 2007

Reunion in France finds Joan Crawford as an upper class French woman happily engaged to industrialist Philip Dorn and confident that the French army will defend the Maginot Line and the Germans will be defeated once they make a move west. Of course history and the film both tell us it didn’t work out that way.

When she arrives back in Paris because she’s away in the country when the surrender happens, she finds that the Germans have taken over her house to use as office space, but they’ve permitted her to occupy one room on the ground level with its own entrance to the street.

3eda16aa2aba677cc6c10ab8d3e9c735
That’s a minor inconvenience compared to when she learns that her fiancé is collaborating with the Nazis.

Around that time a young flier with the RAF Eagle Squadron, John Wayne, accosts her in the street and gets her to take him in. He’s escaped from Nazi custody and looking to get back to Great Britain.

This is a minor film in the credits of both John Wayne and Joan Crawford in there one and only film together. Crawford was being slowly eased out at MGM and she knew it. Still she was a professional if nothing else and gives the role her best. The part called for her to look chic and those Adrian gowns were in play again.

John Wayne doesn’t even get into the film until almost 40 minutes into the story. When he does get in, even though he makes a play for Crawford, the Duke has some real problems as Crawford in order to help him has to play up to Dorn and his Nazi friends. It’s not the John Wayne we’re used to because it really isn’t his film.

tchy7

There’s been some criticism by other reviewers that Crawford doesn’t sound French. Then again neither does anyone else in the film. The rest of the cast. The cast in fact has a variety of European and American accents, Frenchmen weren’t in good supply at that point in Hollywood, either that or they were otherwise committed. Surely Crawford was no more French sounding than Humphrey Bogart in Passage to Marseille.

Albert Basserman is the commanding general in Paris and the fellow who Dorn cultivates. John Carradine may be the best one in the film as the Gestapo agent who knows there’s something fishy with Crawford, but can’t quite prove it.

Both the Duke and Joan Crawford had better days ahead of them. Still the film is a curiosity and worth a look.

wayne372

Joan as patriot

7/10
Author: blanche-2 from United States
12 September 2005

Decked out in gowns and outfits designed by Irene, Joan Crawford plays the French version of Scarlett O’Hara with her “Oh, war, war, war” grumbling until she has to duck a bomb while on vacation. Returning to Paris, she finds her house commandeered by the Nazis. She gets only one room for herself and those gowns. In the meantime, her boyfriend, played by Philip Dorn, seems to have gone over to the dark side and is living high. Once she realizes that, she refuses to have anything to do with him. Her patriotism for her country comes to the surface when she helps an RAF pilot on the run, played by John Wayne. Despite some of the other comments on the film, I rather enjoy the handsome Wayne out of his spurs and boots. Because of Wayne, Crawford has to make it look like she’s reuniting with her old beau, who has the power to arrange to get him out of the country.

Very entertaining.

607387430

Interesting story of patriotism and suspense.

8/10
Author: bfm_1017 from East Coast, USA
26 December 2008

I found this film on TCM one day recently, and decided to check it out mostly because it was made during the war and had John Wayne in the cast. I’m not much of a Joan Crawford fan, but she did a very good job in this story of patriotism during German occupation of France. The lead actor was very handsome and hard to figure out until later in the movie. Wayne was not the star of the movie, and did a very good acting job as the RAF American volunteer downed pilot. While the story seems implausible, most war films do. Of course there were a lot of heroic people in WW II, on all sides, and in the ‘occupied’ countries such as France. The fact that the Germans were not completely one dimensional gave some depth to the movie. As any German from that time will tell you, not all the German people were in lock step with the regime, but they had to stay alive. Many fought on several levels, many of those we will never hear of. I do think the caricature of the Gestapo was perhaps a little cartoon like in the movie, and John Carradine epitomizes that caricature. From what I have read over the years, the Gestapo was a very dangerous organization and usually left nothing to chance. I love the twists and turns in the movie, and will not spoil it for others. Suffice it to say I recommend this movie for its storyline, and its acting. A great wartime film in my book.

reunio10

The second half is fabulous, worth getting through the long set up…

7/10
Author: secondtake from United States
11 April 2011

Reunion in France (1942)

First important fact: this movie, about the first year of WWII when Hitler took over France, was released a month before “Casablanca.” It does not compare in most ways with the drama, the humor, the writing, the music, the velocity, and the legendary actors of the more famous movie. But it is a very good movie with an interesting early pro-American, pro-French message. Joan Crawford crackles as much as she can in a topsy turvy role, going from spoiled and frivolous rich woman Michele de la Becque to (briefly) a refugee to, finally, an ordinary woman fighting with all her heart for France.

reunion-in-france-images-7a1a965b-4f89-45f4-88d8-d7a2f3a5e65

There are two male actors with important roles and they couldn’t be more different. One is Michele’s lover and fiancé, played with a cultured perfection by Philip Dorn, a Dutch actor who pulls off the pan-Euro, mostly French aristocrat and businessman well. Opposite him in every way is the homey, tough, humble American who shows up halfway through the film, John Wayne. I don’t know if this really makes sense in the film, but I can see it on paper, since Wayne played a non-cowboy merchant seaman in the terrific John Ford film which prefigures this one in some ways, “The Long Voyage Home.” He doesn’t seem as wily and smart as a fugitive from the Nazis would have to be, behind the lines in occupied Paris, but he at least plays the role of an ordinary American ready to help the French, and this is the political message throughout.

14601545ec3

In fact, the movie borders on a brilliant propaganda device, putting message ahead of plot now and then, just perceptibly. Crawford is so good even her speeches make a convincing case, and I’m assuming American audiences cheered her on by December of 1942 when it was released (on Christmas day). The scenes of the Germans taking over Paris are always horrifying, and they are again here. There is even a deliberate homage to Soviet director Eisenstein when a baby carriage runs off after the mother is killed by gunfire.

But back to “Casablanca.” It’s an interesting problem to solve, feeding the American audience worried about the war and about U.S. involvement. Because Hollywood was both a symptom of public opinion and a shaper of it, and these are two rather different kinds of films with very similar messages. Director Jules Dassin, who is not French but American, had just started making films in 1941, and there is a sense of expertise at the expense of intuitive magic. “Reunion in France” is strong, smart, and convincing. But it doesn’t sizzle or build the aura of the time like it could. And yet, in its defense, it has no perspective at all on the events, since it was made while they were unfolding, even before they were unfolding since it has to anticipate to some extent how the film will settle six months after being written and shot. Watch it. It’s really good.

42reunionpub11oct1

Doing its Part Against Nazi Germany

4/10
Author: nycritic
23 August 2005
*** This review may contain spoilers ***

If Joan Crawford had hopes of reviving her career at MGM following the successes of THE WOMEN and A WOMAN’S FACE, she was disillusioned once again and it shows in this badly produced Hollywood melodrama posing as a war film with its “patriotism” message. It’s probably not her fault that she was being given such poor material – or better yet, material more suited for any of the given rising starlets of her time – it was clear that MGM wanted her out; Norma Shearer and Greta Garbo had reaped the benefits of the better scripts the previous decade and had retired, and actresses such as Greer Garson were on the rapid rise and literally forcing her out, and at thirty-eight, the Adrian seams were coming apart leaving her basically naked for the savaging.

43above13sep1

But, professional as she reportedly was, she made this film about a Frenchwoman (with an American accent and fabulous dresses) coming to terms with her own patriotism once Nazi Germany invades Paris. It’s just too bad that nowhere is there really an “antiwar sentiment” throughout the film, full of stock footage, bad editing, and fluff; if anything, the duplicity of her leading man (Phillip Dorn) as he portrays a collaborator to the Nazi’s (but then it’s revealed he’s working covert, probably to add to the suspense) and then the appearance of John Wayne, of all people, playing an American aviator, was only for the sake of playing the worn out love triangle her films endlessly presented, and by the time this movie came around, it was basically over. One more film, ABOVE SUSPICION, would have her cancel out her contract to MGM and begin her Warner Bros. phase, which would be more productive.

mv5bnjuwodkxnjq3nf5bml5banbnxkftztcwndg0ntuynw-_v1_sy1000_cr0012791000_al_

Joan Crawford in occupied France during WWII…

6/10
Author: Neil Doyle from U.S.A.
19 January 2012

Wearing a stunning array of gowns by Irene and photographed with glossy MGM care, Joan Crawford is a French woman (with a cultured American accent) who doesn’t think France has to worry about the occupation of her country by Hitler’s Nazis until they take over her home while she’s vacationing elsewhere.

With the reality of war, comes the realization that her husband (Philip Dorn) might be collaborating with the Nazis. She loves him dearly but is beginning to despise his affiliation with so many Nazi friends. Then along comes an American pilot (John Wayne), whom she hides in her apartment until she can get him safely out of the country. That’s the set-up in this basically suspenseful melodrama which, while unconvincing and full of twists and turns in the plot, is played by a competent team of actors, all of varying accents, who keep the story moving toward a not too surprising climax.

mv5bmja3mjuzmdc2ov5bml5banbnxkftztcwmtg0ntuynw-_v1_sy1000_cr007891000_al_

Among the good supporting players are Reginald Owen, Albert Basserman, Natalie Schaefer, John Carradine, Howard DaSilva, Henry Daniell and J. Edward Bromberg.

And yet, the whole film has the air of a minor B-film despite such extravagant settings and Crawford’s never-ending wardrobe changes. It also has the air of artificiality which works against sustaining the sort of suspenseful atmosphere it seeks to gain throughout.

Philip Dorn rates special mention as Joan’s true love. He gives a colorful, nuanced performance that is interesting to watch.

mv5bmtg0ntgzntg1nl5bml5banbnxkftztcwmzg0ntuynw-_v1_sy1000_cr0013011000_al_