RyothChatty
ridiculous rating
PlatinumRead
Just so...so bad
Sameer Callahan
It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.
sol-
Stranded behind enemy lines, an American lieutenant tries to steer his troops to safety amid scattered sniper attacks in this Korean War movie starring Robert Ryan. The film feels heavily influenced by Sam Fuller (think 'Fixed Bayonets!'; 'The Steel Helmet') with a heavy emphasis on dialogue and the non-combat aspects of war. The movie also bears some similarity to John Ford's 'The Lost Patrol', though it is a decidedly more an episodic affair, with seeming every imaginable wartime horror (at times awkwardly) squeezed in. Episodic as the film may be, it remains a potent experience the whole way through. It is hard say what the film's most powerful scene is: a "sleeping" soldier discovered to be dead, a soldier driven mad after seeing a land mine, a close-up on a soldier's eyeball moving back and forth as he hears a sniper approach him from behind -- it is all very potent stuff. A subplot involving Aldo Ray as a soldier from another outfit obsessed with driving his shell-shocked colonel to the nearest hospital is initially jarring but ultimately blends in well too as we gradually see the genuine affection he has for his mentor, reluctantly forced by Ryan to postpone his quest to drive the sick man to safety. The film additionally benefits from a rousing if seldom used Elmer Berstein score and Ernest Haller's sumptuous black and white photography is very immersive.
davidgarnes
By good luck, I came across a VHS video (good print) of this 1950s Anthony Mann film. It was well worth watching. It is stark, unflinching, and offers an altogether convincing depiction of how soldiers behave in a harrowing, no-win situation. Robert Ryan and Aldo Ray, both truly fine actors, are excellent in their symbolically contrasting roles of two kinds of military men. Robert Keith and Vic Morrow are standouts in supporting roles. Keith is especially wonderful in an essentially non-speaking,though key, part...his face says it all. The music by Elmer Bernstein and the cinematography by the great Ernest Haller are perfect...the soundtrack creepy and other-worldly, and the cinematography capturing the "no man's land," confusing, deadly landscape in longshots, as well as the emotions of the soldiers when photographed close-up. See this film!
generalz-1
For me this movie goes back a long way!! I saw it when it was first released in 1957, in "Ann Arbor"!! I was 10 years old! "Ann Arbor", at that time showed only "1st" run movies!! Even back then, I felt that something was wrong with, the scene with "James Edwards" I was 10 years old, and I felt that I would have never done, what "Killian"(the part played by "Edwards"), would have done! I also saw this scene in saving "Private Ryan", with "Ken Vesel", remember?? Even in the "tv" series "combat", you see it again!! What it is,is a "reluctance", "inability" or,"outright refusal" to portray "black" soldiers in a positive, competent light!! But then again, "who was writing the scripts"!! If you know what I mean??!! I enjoyed the movie none the less, then and now!! I saw this movie at the "Michigan" theater, when it was first released in "Ann Arbor"!! Just as an aside!!
dougdoepke
I recall seeing the film on first release and being much impressed. It compared well to other war films of the 40's and 50's in terms of what I understood to be combat realism. Besides, the great Robert Ryan could make a one-man invasion appear believable. Now, it looks like an extension of the war films of that pre-Vietnam era, cut basically from the same triumphant cloth. Yes, there are the casualties, the guys we see and the guys we like. They die in a variety of inglorious ways—knife, gunshot, explosion. But they die cleanly, no screaming, weeping, or fetal positions. And, of course, the star survives, the guy we most identify with. Sure, the medal ceremony suggests certain ironies, but the sacrifices are not in vain—the objective is gained and the enemy annihilated.My point is that in terms of combat realism and resolutions, the movie is very much a creature of its time. That's not to say the production lacks in dramatic values or entertainment. Running the artillery gantlet is genuinely nerve-wracking (though no one seems concerned with shrapnel spray) and so is the treacherous minefield (though that trails off inexplicably). However, I'm with the reviewers who find the assault on the hill poorly done, lacking in basic military intelligence on the enemy's part. And I agree that director Mann is much better at staging noir than at staging battle. Nonetheless, it's an excellent cast. Ray and Ryan play off one another very effectively, and there's none of that cutesy WWII banter that was so Hollywood. Other good touches for the time include the depiction of racial harmony (Morrow & Edwards) and passing glimpses of a fully human enemy.However, fifty years have passed and I now better understand the gap between what's on the movie screen and what isn't, and, most importantly, why. Director Mann and the screenwriters worked as best they could within the constraints of budget and Cold War requirements. After all, too much realism or futility and people would be less ready to march off to war. Anyway, as a whole and within those limitations, the movie remains an entertaining artifact of its time.
