The War List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

[domino harvey]

I feel like the rest of the board has already gone all pacifist on this List Project :-"

A Matter of Life and Death (Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger 1946) Charming, visually outlandish fantasy concerning British pilot David Niven's miraculous survival after jumping out of a burning plane without a parachute, only to be told by Heaven that a mistake's occurred and the only defense that can be made is that he's fallen in love in the short time since his accident. There are some nice flourishes here and there and the courtroom showdown between British and American representatives in the finale is more interesting than camera tricks or the lackluster romance at the heart of the film, but there's something a bit off about how cavalier the film is about everyone's death except Niven's (especially when one character dies specifically to benefit Niven [and the third act] and is apparently A-OK with it). Overall I enjoyed the film, but you can't count me among the feverish disciples and it won't make my list.

Back to Bataan (Edward Dmytryk 1945) Mediocre Philippines-bolstering John Wayne flick that has lots of explosions but little excitement. During the Japanese invasion towards Corregidor, brave Philippine peoples die for symbols of America (well, of course they do) more than their own culture, and while as ever I don't mind the propaganda, it's pretty flat and eye-rolling rather than heartbreaking or whatever was supposed to be evoked here.

Cry 'Havoc' (Richard Thorpe 1943) Deeply depressing, even for a wartime drama, this female-centric and driven film (there are a few men scattered around, including a young Robert Mitchum in his first onscreen appearance, but the entire credited cast is female only) finds a handful of volunteer non-military nurses brought in to help out with the wounded in the last days of the Bataan struggle. Personality conflicts emerge and "types" become apparent, as you might expect, but I admired how the film pretty much refused to let any of the characters off the hook and every character (save maybe the one-note matronly cook) is given their share of both positive and negative attributes. It becomes clearer and clearer that everyone involved in the nursing is more or less on a suicide mission, and there's something to be said for how everyone handles facing certain death day by day without directly addressing it-- in this the film especially gets at something the best war films highlight, the inevitability of death and not personal valor or victory while caught in a war. Great cast too. Recommended.

Mata Hari (George Fitzmaurice 1931) Greta Garbo is Mata Hari. I suspect the filmmakers started and stopped their creative minds rolling at that surefire premise, and as a result we get a weak early Hollywood melodrama with poor performances all around (though Lionel Barrymore is at least amusing in his over-the-top role) and a hilariously artificial ending wherein the entire country of France appears to bend to the will of a spy so as to aid her in deceiving her lover. Not a good movie despite almost no one's effort to make it one.

the Producers (Mel Brooks 1967) I think I can officially toll the bell on trying to appreciate Mel Brooks' alleged humor. My God was this torture to sit through! I saw it when I was a kid and didn't like it then either, but that means nothing so I hoped this, his most acclaimed non-parody film, would have more to offer to me now. It does not, and I like it even less than I recalled. Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder's grotesque and endless histrionics, the stale parade of gay jokes, hippie jokes, sexy Swedish secretary jokes, randy old lady jokes, and whatever else I'm forgetting add up to a pretty miserable viewing experience on my end. Also, for whatever reason, the opening credits to this thing are nearly eight minutes long-- that's about a tenth of the film! As for the moneyshot centerpiece of the film, the "Springtime for Hitler" number… eh. I get it, I can appreciate it, but it's not especially amusing. A few of the reaction shots from the audience were worth a smile, but that's about it. Brooks won the Oscar for his screenplay, perhaps as part of some sort of larger bookmaking scheme behind the scenes at the Academy?

[knives]

City of Life and Death
This is such a fascinating and unique film that surprises in such a non-narrative way I feel like I should just tell people to watch this and nothing more. Preferably doing so in a theater because at home it begs more than anything else to be viewed in a larger form. I'm not sure that I would even call it a deep film, the narrative is stripped down to just actions with character making only a limited impact. The film isn't without its flaws mostly due to its style which desensitizes the violence very quickly and leaves the characters in a hopeless state without any indication that anything outside that state exists (I'm thinking of Rossellini's Il Generale as a counter to that) though where it does work makes it essential viewing if not necessarily great. I'll definitely have to ponder on this more.

Why We Fight (Litvak and Capra)
This was my first time sitting down to watch the whole series (in one sitting if you can believe) after only seeing the first episode and fractions of the others. The series is fascinating for a lot of ways, but the most immediately striking is Capra and Litvak's growth as artists. Obviously they were masters by this point in their career, but this task possesses something new for them. The early parts as cinema are a bit dull and more comfortable in discussing things broadly as if they forgot what storytelling was. But slowly they get how propaganda works and start telling stories and developing the visuals away from the odd mix of platitudes and statistics which plagued the early portions. While The Battle of Britain bores out this growth it's really with the epic The Battle of Russia where the series becomes real cinema. The incorporation of more and more stock footage also helps. It's also as is often the case with these opinion of the moment films to look at how the party line must have changed almost immediately and how it connects to the present day reality which I suppose is another reason why the Russia segments are the most compelling. It's also interesting to see how the films started by talking about the axis, but by the end who everyone is fighting becomes less important to that 'why' than the quality of the people that fighting would defend. It is always a defensive series, but it becomes more so in appearance over the course. Even the last episode seems to argue entirely out of a paranoid idea that America was the new Russia, Britain, and China combined.

On the side are we considering this one or seven films?

Coriolanus
This is a tough one to pick apart since the proto-fascist nature of the text seems to be the subject of the film, but Fiennes can't fully commit to making Coriolanus the villain in the way, say, Richard III always has. If I get everything that the modern dress was suggesting the film is shifting Shakespeare's Roman hero to a Torry villain connected to the Falklands and maybe Balkans. Fiennes doesn't seem entirely up to his own challenge though especially in the second half after his exile since he depends entirely on the aesthetic to shift the meaning of the text. I admire the film a great deal, but I can't call it a success.

Defiance
If nothing else this is easily the best Zwick film (damning with faint praise right there) I've seen. Some of the early camera work is a bad showcase of the worst tendencies of the era, but as the movie goes on things get better. I'm not entirely certain I'm comfortable with the film sidestepping the war crime nature of the brothers, but it works with the themes which seems more concentrated in exploring ideas of Jewish pacifism and freedom which connect with the idea of them as war criminals in a way that matters to that community rather than the actual laws of war. Sometimes the film is too direct on this account (at least for me; I'm curious what the film's probable intended audience would react with) such as with the warriors listing as heroes. My biggest problem with the film though is with language. It's unclear what the english is supposed to be, but I assume it's Hebrew or Yiddish. This leads to a lot of the typical problems with translations particularly with the biblical stuff of it being the christian variation rather than Jewish. This is really obvious with the wedding sequence which uses the Greek translation of terms. It doesn't hurt the film severely, but it reduces the validity of its concerns.

Ballad of a Soldier
I suppose the quickest summary of this film is that it's an above average example of the type of Soviet film that was popular as Soviet cinema to foreigners at the time. The stretches of politics and poetics seem clear and straight forward enough with nothing to add that hasn't been said about such films before. That said watching one thing that I found interesting is that it is Mikhail Kalatozov, not Eisenstein, Vertov, or any of the more popular names who has his influence all over the film. This might be just because of Kalatozov's long lasting career compared with his contemporaries, but he has to be one of the quietest victors in cinema. Every odd angle and weird piece of lighting seems traceable to Salt for Svanetia or any other measure of before The Cranes are Flying (which is too obvious a comparison point I suppose) film. That said while this is one of the most blatant knock-offs imaginable it's an effective one that clearly knows how to best accomplish what it needs to.

[swo17]

On the side are we considering [Why We Fight] one or seven films?

It was eligible as one film for the '40s list (though nobody voted for it).

[Lemmy Caution]

I think I voted for the Battle for China film, but would have to check to make sure. I like the way maps, animation, voice over, documentary footage and other elements of propaganda and film are woven together. They are also interesting products of their era, such as casual racism. The anti-Japanese film calls them buck-toothed schemers or something along those lines.

[swo17]

Do people think that this constitutes a war for purposes of our list? As the link suggests, I'm specifically thinking about the film Matewan, which perhaps feels more like a western than a war film, but which nonetheless features some bloody battle sequences.

[domino harvey]

I've never heard of that (Haven't seen Matewan yet, obviously) but if I understand correctly, "Yes" if a group of people actively tried to secede from the union, "No" if it's just another workers versus bosses fight. And speaking of fight, Why We Fight will be one movie unless people feel strongly about counting them separately (realizing that at that point none will be likely to list with that degree of separation)

[swo17]

It is "just another workers versus bosses fight," though one that escalates into something more I suppose. My question mainly arose because reading about the historical incidents on which the film was based, apparently they are commonly referred to as wars. Clearly not nation vs. nation wars, but not really conceptual wars either.

[Gregory]

Without knowing more about the context, I'd probably be reluctant to consider Matewan a war film, but for me, the context does show it to be one. The Battle of Blair Mountain showed that the "West Virginia Mine Wars" were not wars in some metaphorical sense, as the conflict escalated to full-on warfare conditions, culminating in early September 1921 when President Harding declared martial law and sent in two thousand federal troops with machine guns, planes for aerial bombardment, and so on to destroy the insurrection. The only major limitation of Matewan is that it was impossible to have two more hours for a super-epic treatment, or a sequel, to show more of this chronology in the detail the story would have needed, but the historical context remains what it is.

[swo17]

Stretching your definition of "War" to include...Warren G Harding is willfully missing the point of the compiling exercise

[Gregory]

It's not anyone trying to secede from the union, nor was it just another workers vs. bosses fight. Those two options wouldn't be enough for me, I guess, and I think there are ongoing domestic conflicts in the world that reach the level of warfare but are not about secession.
Many labor struggles were violent, and the company operators often had private armies, and local police forces such as Sheriff Chafin would deploy state police, deputized armies, makeshift armed forces such as private planes dropping bombs left over from WWI. Then, Harding declaring martial law and bringing in U.S. troops to escalate the violence in order to "pacify" the area, I think shows it to be a mine war (in a very different sense from the drug "war") and not a mere labor struggle. Matewan depicts some of the events that led up to that eventual level of conflict.
Just my two cents—I'm not trying to question anyone else's criteria that they've settled on for the list project.

[domino harvey]

Worth pointing out that "Vote for it" applies either way!

[knives]

The Two of Us
I think this is the first French film I've seen that highlighted the collaboration element with no counter to this extent and more for that than the cute kid who is Jewish because we keep saying he is Jewish I found this a worthwhile experience. The film only bothers to highlight his otherness in the most obvious way possible and doesn't really seem interested in fulfilling its mission statement of showing the events entirely as him beyond a generalized objective eye with him as protagonist. Michel Simon though as the ornery and ignorant face of that collaboration spirit (or at the very least someone who readily accepts what the propaganda tells him) is legitimately amazing carving out a sympathetic and pathetic character who in ordinary circumstances would probably be a great person. It's a tough act, but one he commits to so fully and so without airs that it really lifts the film above mediocrity.

The Desert Fox
This is just a disappointing slog. The premise is brilliant, reimagining Rommel's final days as a Citizen Kane styled noir. Unfortunately it doesn't have the gumption to stick to its genre bending nor the style (which given Hathaway I should have expected but even by his standard) to follow through on that potential. Even as a basic character study the film is overly concerned and fussy about presenting him as not Hitler that it doesn't really get to the man beyond what James Mason brings forth. Even then his villainous madman variation on the general in The Desert Rats is more amusing. The film itself does get better in the second half when it plays up the mystery aspect and develops a plot to assassinate Hitler which actually works well within the structure smartly as the question is to how Rommel dies rather than anything directly to do with the assassination. Even the cinematography works better in this section. If only the film had cut the fat and didn't try to play as an ordinary war film and apologia for its subject then maybe, just maybe it could have been one of the good ones.

Innocent Voices
Director Mandoki seems infinitely more comfortable relating the day to day scenes than the action sequences which are very poorly edited and foreshadowed to the point of comedy. That said when ignoring that (and the fairly horrible performance by the lead actor) the movie is fairly good. The mixture of a very weird situation and the casual approach the characters have to their reality is played very genuinely and with the right sort of empathy. Some of the attempts to play up the mundane aspect against the war's backdrop like the marble sequence are a bit overwrought, but the film works so quickly that those moments are fairly easily forgotten.

King Rat
It will never cease to amuse me that not only was George Segal once a major movie star, but that he was a serious leading man taking parts in roles of absolute machismo. That said he does it so well that I'm glad history was mad enough to allow it to happen. The film itself is great with Forbes going beyond what I thought him capable of. There's a lot of the DNA of Seance here, but I think the style actually works better in the context of this brooding fatigue. The film itself posits war, or at least POW camps, as nothing more than a test of survival in which case the movie couldn't excel more. There's a heat on the faces of the actors which makes each frame an effort in itself let alone the troubles the camp puts them into. What really makes this impressive is how the survival game is just a pretext for some culture clash stuff which as a main text probably wouldn't be as interesting. The Japanese themselves are barely present because, as the film states at the start, they're not needed to make this a terrible trial. Instead it's America against Britain (seemingly exclusively English) again with manners, speech, class structures, and all other manner of conduct building a bomb that prevents a new culture to come about. These allies become their own worst enemies. The film dos get a little too grotesque at times (puppy chow) though it never comes across as out of the realm that the first frames suggested. It also helps that the black and white shadows that spray the scenes promises something more horrifying than ever comes about.

Is Paris Burning?
It is probably not a good idea to start your three hour movie saying that time is terribly short. Time must be pretty short though as this film features a parade of actors who disappear after the time for recognition is over. There's no characters here and barely even a story. The film seems to be aiming for being The Longest Day for the French resistance, but comes across more as Around the World in 80 Days. There's no information given on the resistance with everything being treated as an assumed known leaving just scenes of people yelling at each other and blowing each other up. This probably comes across more negative than I intend because this isn't an actively bad film. It's pretty and well done for what it is, but what it is is not very interesting. Also, and this is incidental and has nothing to do with the film itself, but the dubbing is truly and honestly awful on this in a way that suggests that Clement didn't shoot for the possibility.

War Photographer
This is the last film I could have hoped this to be. The possibilities it suggests even in just its title gives the possibility for insight into art, audience, war, and ethics. Instead the film chooses to go the most middling route possible showing a quiet man working and doesn't even have convictions to that. We never really get to know James Nachtwey outside a mid film monologue he gives in voice over and that frankly suggests a person less interesting than his art. With the same mild attitude the film switches style several times suggesting even the filmmakers recognize that they're not doing it right. As to the art itself which the film seems to be suggesting is the main point there's not much there either with Frei glossing over the actual work leaving the probably wrong impression that Nachtwey just randomly and without any consideration for what is captured. The film is just a dullard.

[domino harvey]

Yep, despite James Mason's game presence, the Desert Rats and the Desert Fox are just the movie equivalent of those instant use cameras-- decent enough in the moment but disposable and soon forgotten

[domino harvey]

Fort Algiers (Lesley Selander 1953) Silly, inconsequential c-minus b-picture about Yvonne De Carlo Mata Hari-ing a nefarious sheik played somewhat suspectly by Raymond Burr. Using nondescript "arab-y" backlot sets leftover from a kids' serial, there is so little to cling to here of interest that, having finished the film within the last twenty-four hours, I can barely even remember anything else about it other than that its two aforementioned stars were indeed in the picture.

the Great Escape (John Sturges 1963) Probably my biggest blind spot for this list is unseen no more! It's not that I didn't want to see it earlier, but man, it's hard to schedule in those three hour movies! And the film certainly goes slow burn as it cycles through the ups and downs of a somewhat futile mass escape attempt (not to undersell the real-life story but, uh, I don't know if it was worth the 50+ lives we're reminded of as the film fades to black). Steve McQueen leads a cast of charming enough familiar names and faces through the motions. I enjoyed it and was always engaged in the narrative (always a feat for any three hour flick), but I came away with it all without much else than it being a pleasant enough way to spend three hours. So, definitely not in any danger of motoring its way onto my list, but not due for a trip to the cooler either.

Love Nest (Joseph Newman 1951) Scripted by frequent Billy Wilder collaborator IAL Diamond, this is a minor programmer about discharged serviceman who finds out once he gets out of the service that his wife June Haver's bought a NY tenement building with his GI checks! Do I even need to say that it turns out to be a money pit occupied by an assortment of colorful characters? One of those colorful characters is played by Fox contract star Marilyn Monroe in an early role, which is the only reason this thing made it to pressed DVD way back when. But the real star of the film is clearly Frank Fay as an elderly smooth-talker who manages to charm the bloomers off every woman he encounters. Fay steals the show (and money from his marks) with his wonderful performance and the film is so clearly taken with him that it even jumps through circles to actually endorse and prop-up his polygamist con man! I was surprised I wasn't familiar with Fay beforehand, since he's so charming in the film, but a quick perusal of his Wikipedia entry shows he was apparently a self-destructive asshole who seemingly alienated everyone he encountered in the biz. Too bad for all of us.

Underground (Vincent Sherman 1941) Sherman's first film and, according to the interview on the DVD, the one that won him his vaunted place at Warners for some time after, this is a fine but unexceptional programmer about anti-Nazi propaganda being distributed in Germany pre-US involvement in the war. It hits the expected notes and comes out strong against many of the ills we'd soon all hear about from just about every media source, so it's nice to refute the oft-repeated myth that pre-involvement no one wanted to go after the Nazis in the US. Also, the head Nazi looks like a doberman pincher.

War Hunt (Denis Sanders 1962) Deadly serious Korean War drama featuring Robert Redford's film debut as a newbie soldier who can't quite acclimate to the conditions of war. Redford shows immediate star presence, but he and everyone else is overshadowed by John Saxon (who was obviously a student of Method Acting, something I def did not pick up from his numerous phoned-in horror flick roles). Saxon plays a rogue soldier who has the blessing of his commanding officer to do whatever he wants-- he sleeps during the day, keeps an illegal Korean orphan with him as his right-hand man, and sneaks off every night to brutally murder as many Koreans as he can under the cover of night, relaying back the details of their troops &c afterwards. Everyone in the unit is terrified of him, the commanding officer is oblivious to the fairly obvious fact that Saxon is mentally unhinged and using the war as an excuse to kill as many people as he can, and the chief dramatic conflict comes as the film climaxes with the real-life ceasefire and the American troop has to deal with the consequences of having one of their own so used to breaking all the rules. The film is chatty, self-important, and self-serious in the style of a lot of the late 50s / early 60s "serious" TV aping films, but it perseveres in spite of itself because the performances are strong and the central narrative conflict fascinating. It's an unrelentingly negative war film, and the sense of hopelessness about the American effect on Korea is striking.

[Dr Amicus]

The Four Just Men (Walter Forde, 1939) Dastardly Johnny Foreigner comes up with a sneaky plot to destabilise the glorious British Empire, and only the Four Just Men (and one plucky gal) can save the day. Entertaining nonsense, just barely sneaks into the project - not least thanks to its rerelease a couple of years later which explicitly ties it in to the war. The villains are clearly Germans - but never explicitly named as such, presumably due to censorship restrictions on abusing foreign governments. It's all quite lively and fun, found on the second volume of Network's Ealing Rarities collections if you're interested, about the same level as the Saint or Falcon series.

Fifties British War Films: Days of Glory (Hans Petch, 2013) BBC documentary, written and presented by Simon Heffer, a right wing commentator, defending the British War film from, errmm, Lindsay Anderson. The main problem (apart from a complete absence of Kenneth More, a key star of the genre and period) is that what he has to say about the films is fairly conventional - along with surprisingly restrained digs on contemporay mores - and doesn't really delve beyond the core canon. As a primer on the films, it's OK, but nothing more than that. Also, I personally find the films from the forties more interesting and questioning than those from the later decade.

Daleks: Invasion Earth 2150 AD (Gordon Flemyng, 1966) The first Doctor Who film, the previous year's Doctor Who and the Daleks (source of my avatar) is a brightly coloured, frankly camp, post apocalyptic romp. The second is a more muted rerun of WW2 tropes in the guise of futuristic invasion - although nowhere near as grimy as the TV serial it was based on. The Nazi Pepperpots have conquered the world, and the resistance seems to be based in the London Underground making homemade bombs and planning raids on Dalek spaceships. The reason for the invasion is, frankly, utterly bonkers:

Spoiler

the Daleks are mining underneath Bedfordshire and plan to remove Earth's core, replace it with an engine and thus create a giant planetary spaceship.

Surprisingly decent special effects, an impressively high body count for a children's film (the first one apparently provoked the feedback that there was not enough Exterminating) and the presence of the wonderful Bernard Cribbins as a 20th Century London Bobby who inedvertantly joins the crew makes this one my easy favourite of the two. Expect this to take the number 50 slot in my list.

[Steven H]

I have a ton of blind spots within this genre so I'm going to be going back and looking at all the recommendations / discussions to jump in with some serious viewing. In the meantime there are a couple of war films that I'll make some quick recommendations for. The first is Play Dirty (1969) by Andre de Toth, set in North Africa during WWII about a ragtag group sent to blow up an important fuel depot. There are a lot of things to love about this film from the charismatic leads (Caine, Davenport and Green) to the tense and satisfying action sequences, but what really stands out is the dark sense of humor. The black humor isn't just apparent in the dialogue but it's in the bones of the film itself. The ending will always resonate in its mocking and callous disregard for audience expectations, especially considering it was the director's "last" film (not really the last, but close. kind of). I don't think this film will be knocking on anyone else's Top Ten, but I've probably seen it more than any other war film I can think of.

Another one I love is a backchannels-available flick called The Human Bullet aka Nikudan (1968) by Kihachi Okamoto. I suppose there are some similarities with Play Dirty in that it has a dark sense of humor as well, but it is additionally cryptic and abstract. Nikudan is about the final suicide mission of a nameless Japanese soldier during WWII, which is dense with flashbacks to his training and earlier life. Okamoto made it with the Art Theatre Guild because the themes and story were too personal for the studios (well, not just "too personal" probably "too absurd" as well). It's narrated by Tatsuya Nakadai and stars tons of familiar faces to those who enjoy Japanese films from that period. This film also probably has some of the most arresting imagery (gorgeously filling out the 1:33 frame in black and white) in the director's oeuvre, which is saying something.

[knives]

After this I really need to start investing in good movies for this list.
Only the Brave
It's unfortunate considering how rare it is to see a primarily Japanese cast in American cinema that this film is so achingly mediocre and full of trite of cliche. At the same time that scarcity let's some of the better moments come across stronger than they would without that ethnic context backing things with the Pat Morita cameo being the prime example.

Run Silent, Run Deep
Robert Wise has to be the most boring well liked director I am aware. I'd say worst, but that would suggest anything of interest to be scanned from most of his work. I legitimately don't understand why people take him as some sort of sacred cow. Like, I get the history of it, but it's not like people haven't ignored Scorsese before so why this guy with so many invisible films like this is the one that people stay with? Why not somebody like Henry King who at least has more than one worthwhile film to his name. The fact that I've barely alluded to the film supposedly under discussion should say it all though.

No Time for Sergeants
This might be the most random thing I've ever seen credited to Ira Levin. There's basically nothing identifiably him here. But perhaps that's for the best considering how unfunny and completely unlikable this geek show of Alfred Uhry quality is. I suppose Andy Griffith's manchild could be considered a good performance given what's asked of him, but it also feels like the first time I've seen him talk down to this kind of character. There's none of the intelligence his best roles (and stand up) hides under the hick sheen. The film isn't any further aided thanks to the stiff and awful direction by Mervyn LeRoy. Now while I don't expect Elia Kazan level work from him LeRoy isn't a talentless director so such lifeless television work came as a complete surprise. It is just a cardboard failure.

No Man's Land
This was surprisingly funny which benefited the whole affair a lot. It's not great with a pretty basic style, message, and story. The cynicism and laughable situations the characters observe themselves in though ensure that the film seems very intelligent and unique. Though I suppose it helps that the filmmakers lived through this nonsense and can see it as such.

Three Kings
This is such a contemporary film that it pretty much begins with an apology from the studio for having been made in the '90s and about the first Persian Gulf conflict instead of in 2007 or something else it feels like. Even the casting and crew feel right for a decade later with Clooney as an elder statesmen giving advice rather than some cool pretty boy or Wahlberg as the cool father everyone looks up to but is morosely unconcerned with what happens. I suppose there is a misfortune in history repeating itself causing the film to loose a lot of funny for the addition of a lot of political. That's fine though as the comedy seems such a minor thing that the film would be a bit useless without the later political reconfiguring. It's so gross that these guys are so greedy that can't even pretend to be Team America World Police even when warranted. The scene early on where the woman is shot is so physically revolting that the cowboy attitude Clooney swaggers with even as he does something technically good and certainly heroic in most movies comes across as just petty and useless. No matter what is done these guys will only make matters worse. Actually the film most reminds me of Spring Breakers with a group of American imperialists casually playing a game without any real regard to the cost.

U-571
I apprecieted that this movie was willing to say everything about itself in the span of about two minutes. Early on there's a sequence which sets up a guilty half German sailor followed by McConaughey talking with not just a black man, but an enlisted black man as an equal. I thank Mostow for admitting he is just making a big, dumb, nonsensical, anachronistic Das Boot knock off in such a succinct way. Now if only he could throw some entertainment into that mix.

[colinr0380]

The problem with Three Kings is that it doesn't really have much to say about the first Gulf War, perhaps because its main plot is just a warzone-changed version of Kelly's Heroes.

[knives]

I don't think that's a problem per say as the characters' total ignorance of the world they're occupying is such an important point. Dealing with the war in any meaningful way seems to just be reflecting this aspect of the characters.

[Mr Sausage]

I thought the movie had quite a bit to say about how the odd nature of the war kept its troops at such a distance from the reality of the situation as almost to foster a delusion. Hence it's noteworthy that the Wahlberg character has even shot someone, and hence the movie goes from wild, cartoonish heroics to a sobering depiction of the sufferings of the other side and the horrors of combat.

[Dr Amicus]

How I Live Now (Kevin MacDonald, 2013). I really wasn't looking forward to this - the sneak preview featurette I'd seen made it look like the very worst YA adaptation. The reviews were more interesting - and the film never made it anywhere near a cinema over here. Catching up with it on DVD though, it turned out to be extremely interesting - reminiscent of 70s British SF TV (and yes, that is a good thing). Saoirse Ronan is an American teen staying with her cousins in Scotland when a (limited) nuclear war breaks out. The resulting chaos separates her from her cousins (one of whom she has fallen in love with) and a major government crackdown / rounding up takes place. Much of this happens off screen - not least for budgetary reasons, but it does have one particularly interesting result:

Spoiler

Given the way the War on Terror has panned out, and governments taking greater powers, it really looks as though the whole "war" could be a mirage. It seems not to - the film isn't fully clear on this - but the possibility remains, especially as very little is told about the "enemy".

Saoirse Ronan is predictably excellent, and the whole thing is definitely worth catching. It won't make my list, but it's a solid film.

The Wipers Times (Andy de Emmony, 2013). A BBC film about the WW1 trench satirical newspaper, cowritten by Ian Hislop and Nick Newman, editor of and contributor to Private Eye respectively (cue gratuitous dig at Punch...). Making the most of a BBC2 budget, this works mainly due to an amusing script and likable performances by Ben Chaplin and Julian Rhind-Tutt as the editor and his assistant. In addition, filming the satirical stories in the paper as black and white cabaret routines gives a flavour of the content of the paper - decidedly black humour generally rather rude about senior officers, as might be expected. Indeed, you can see why the whole thing appealed to Hislop and Newman - if you're familiar with the Eye's comic pieces, these are very similar. Michael Palin turns up as a sympathetic general and, although effectively a mouthpiece for the "authors' message", is rather fun - much like the film as a whole. Again, nowhere near my final list, but a pleasant way to spend 90 minutes.

[domino harvey]

Friendly reminder that lists are due two months from tomorrow. I moved the deadline a couple weeks to ensure it strikes at a time when I know I'll have the time to tally ballots, but it won't throw off any of the longterm list project plans. If more than the same four people want to weigh in with viewing thoughts, that'd be cool of course, but I have to admit I'm pretty disheartened by the overall response so far for this List Project.

[domino harvey]

In a show of leadership by example, I will be heading the charge into watching as many war films as possible from now until the submission deadline. If this is to be my last stand at getting people talking about war films, let it not be said that I didn't do my part for Uncle Sam!

Charlotte Gray (Gillian Armstrong 2001) Failed Oscar-bait that nearly bankrupted Film4, though of course the lousy reviews and lukewarm legacy are proved to be awfully far from the mark (to the surprise of no one). Cate Blanchett is wonderful (as she generally is) as the titular character, a Scot living in Blitz-era Britain who volunteers to undercover in Vichy France for the Resistance in order to secretly track down her Brit flyer boyfriend shot down over France. This is not an edgy or innovative film, but it tells its compelling story with the requisite simplicity of the best Hollywood studio system products on which it is modeled, and I appreciated the lack of "rescue" allotted to some of the inevitable victims of the Nazi campaign's anti-Jewry acts. Recommended, though a cursory internet search reveals I might literally be the only one to ever speak up for it.

I Wanted Wings (Mitchell Leisen 1941) Godawful melodrama about cocky flyboys trainin' for the sky. Ray Milland is someone I generally like in films but he gives what must be his worst performance (and if he was ever worse, steer me clear pls) as the central sadsack figure who develops a friendship/rivalry with a young-looking William Holden. The only reason anyone remembers this film is because it's the first movie to feature Veronica Lake in a central role and it's no surprise the film made her an instant star, as she absolutely walks off with every second she's on screen. If you've never understood why Lake immediately became a sex symbol onscreen despite her early resume being littered with more amiable fare like Sullivan's Travels and I Married a Witch, your answer lies within this film. Happily, her silky presence has lost none of its sexual allure, and I'm guessing whichever studio exec was in charge of approving wardrobe either looked the other way or didn't look the other way in order to get some of her outfits onscreen. But surely one can ogle Lake in films which are actually good, so I still can't recommend this mess.

Man in the Middle (Guy Hamilton 1964) Rote courtroom flick with Robert Mitchum's military defense counsel trying to provide an insanity defense for Keenan Wynn, a lieutenant guilty by everyone's admission of murdering a British soldier. Will Mitchum face backlash from higher-ups when he actually tries to launch a defense for a man the American Army corps desperately need found guilty and hanged to maintain intratroop morale? No spoilers, but have you ever seen a movie? This is TV courtroom drama stuff, shot in 'Scope for no reason, and with a superfluous romance between Mitchum and France Nuyen shoved into the proceedings that's not even half-assed, more like maybe 3/16ths-assed tops. This is an inoffensive film, but for a movie where Wynn literally barks out the "N" word several times, that's all the more damning, isn't it?

the Real Glory (Henry Hathaway 1939) Gary Cooper is a heroic doctor in the Philippines sent to keep local mercenaries and soldiers alive as they struggle against a local warlord and his cronies. (Checks watch) This film was released right around the time Hitler invaded Poland, and the allegory is there, but at what cost? (Checks watch) This is a tedious film, exhibiting the worst tendencies of classic Hollywood's weakest decade, and there is not a single thing to recommend about it. (Checks watch) Avoid.

Sailor of the King (Ray Boulting 1953) An entire film built around a five minute sequence in which Canadian sailor Jeffrey Hunter hides up in the rocks of a cove and starts picking off Nazis with a rifle while they try to repair their destroyer in order to delay their departure from a makeshift repair-dock. Everything else, including a prologue starring Wendy Hiller for some reason, is just biding time in an uninteresting fashion. Even stretched out to a rather slim eighty minutes, this is a long, dull slog.

Sea Wife (Bob McNaught 1957) This film has the misfortune of being a mashup of two superior films, Lifeboat and Heaven Knows, Mr Allison. Four disparate people are trapped on a lifeboat after the Japanese bomb their ship out of Singapore: Richard Burton (given no characterization beyond being Richard Burton), Joan Collins (as a nun who is for unconvincing narrative purposes a Secret Nun), a virulent racist, and a black porter. Referring only to themselves in nicknames, the four make their long journey through the waters to an uninhabited island, at which point the film becomes briefly compelling for a couple minutes until one realized the film isn't interested in exploring its premise: the black man, a subject of scorn from the racist "Bulldog," finds a machete washed up on shore and immediately declares himself Captain of the island and the survivors, refusing to ever let go of the knife and ordering the others around with his newfound power. I was impressed that the film went in this direction, as until this point it mainly consisted of Burton trying to rape Collins in an ostensibly romantic fashion, but alas the film really isn't interested in providing racial commentary and quickly diffuses the situation in as silly a way as possible. Also, not that anyone will ever watch this movie, but get used to hearing this every forty seconds: "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife" "Sea Wife"

Tora! Tora! Tora! (Richard Fleischer / Toshio Masuda / Kinji Fukasaku 1970) An over-reverential treatment of the Pearl Harbor bombing from both the American and Japanese side yields polite and entirely uninvolving theatrics from everyone. Though things get nice and blown up in the second half, as expected, it hardly seems worth sitting through the countless dry, dull military interactions on either end of the quarrel.

U-571 (Jonathan Mostow 2000) Fun, old-fashioned submarine flick about a group of US Navy members who climb aboard a Nazi sub to obtain the Enigma machine, only to have the American sub get torpedoed during the transfer. The idea of an American crew having to navigate itself back to safety and avoiding both Allies and other Nazis while in a Nazi sub is a great premise, and the film has lots of fun with it (even if the film does have an inordinately invested interest in scenes involving depth charges). This would have been fluff in the forties and is still fluff decades later, but I enjoyed it regardless, even if it's no danger of making my list.

Where Do We Go From Here? (Gregory Ratoff 1945) More like Where Did This Film Come From? I can't even remember how I stumbled upon this one via back channels as I've never heard it mentioned in discussions of either musicals or wartime propaganda (even though it is a superior example of both), but thank God I did, as it will surely make my list (and could readily make my Musicals 2.0 List as well). Fred MacMurray is a poor schlub who just wants to join the military but he's 4-F. He's hot for June Haver's local USO tramp, the local good girl Joan Leslie is hot for him, and the discovery of a genie in a bottle (while working in the war effort scrap metal drive!) enables MacMurray to finally enter into military service. Only, wouldn't you know it, his genie's not very good at his job and keeps sending him to fight during the wrong era in time: the Continental Army, mercenary aboard Columbus' ship, etc.

The film is immediately striking as its two opening musical numbers both unfold in a single take. The first, a lowkey ditty with MacMurray absently washing dishes in the USO kitchen, eventually flooding the joint, is passable but fun, but then the second number happens, an all-out barnstormer of the "Pass the Peace Pipe" variety as Haver dances with and around and between soldiers from all of the branches across the entire plane of the USO joint-- it's a literal jaw-dropper, and changes the stakes of the film from small little trifle to game-changer. Nothing in the film ever matches it, unfortunately, but what's left is quite charming, with MacMurray trying to navigate the Revolutionary War (and running into doppelgangers of both of the women in his life) and be a hero for once. In the most surreal moment of the film, MacMurray infiltrates a group of Germans working for the British and wins their favor by doing a lengthy Hitler impression! This is one of the most flamboyantly weird pieces of wartime morale-boosting I've ever seen, and I loved it. Highly recommended.

[knives]

Having watched it yesterday I've got to admit confusion over your praise of Charlotte Gray which seemed like a ho-hum sub-The English Patient effort that never fully decides on what it wants to be. Sure, Blanchett gives a good performance, but that's like complimenting vodka for its high alcohol content. That is an element so typical as to not be worth hanging a hat on. Where you see simplicity, something I agree is a very under appreciated virtue, I see as taking a style of importance, but with an indecisiveness on what is it about this story that's important (or to repeat the start of your review failed Oscar bait). It's not bad per say, certainly I don't disagree to the degree I do on U-571, but it lacks any point of connection to the degree I couldn't before reading you believe anyone greeting it with more than a shrug. Mrs. Miniver this is not.

[domino harvey]

That's an interesting reaction, but I don't see Charlotte Gray's simplicity as either a product of self-importance or indecisiveness, I think it's just a small film with small means to an end (there's a studious avoidance of anything but intimate moments, as we don't even get no-brainer Screenwriting 101 scenes like an insert shot of Blanchett or a body double parachuting into Vichy France) and the opposite of bloat-a-thons like the English Patient. But as I've said, I'm resigned to the minority on this one!