Interesteg What makes it different from others?

Stevecorp Don't listen to the negative reviews

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Jenna Walter The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

JohnHowardReid Roy Chanslor's screenplay of the John and Ward Hawkins story, "The Saboteurs", is, as we might expect, war-time propaganda concerned with the enemy's attempts to sabotage Californian shipyards. It's now somewhat dated. Worse still, the script is inclined to be too talkative, even though producer Phil Ryan has tried to offset this problem by engaging a first-class cast, including always reliable Pat O'Brien, plus two lovelies in the form of Carole Landis and Ruth Warrick, to do most of the talking. Alas, generally speaking, both Eddie Sutherland's direction and Franz Planer's cinematography are undistinguished. But fortunately, the action scenes have a fair amount of credibility, and there is an adequate climax.

utgard14 Government agent Pat O'Brien goes undercover at a shipyard where his estranged brother Chester Morris works. Pat's trying to root out Nazi saboteurs. Part of his cover is that stunning Carole Landis pretends to be his wife. Something tells me they didn't have to twist Pat's arm to take this assignment. The look on Pat's face when he comes home to see Carole in her tight-fitting dress is priceless. Well paced WW2 espionage movie with a decent script and likable leads. Very nice supporting cast includes Ruth Warrick, Barton MacLane, Tom Tully, and Wallace Ford. One of those little hidden gems you come across on TCM every once in awhile. A must-see for Carole Landis fans.

tedg These things generally are more interesting for their social history than the cinematic experience. But that history is hot and heavy here.Its a strange thing to witness, how Hollywood toes the line on perceived social needs, sometimes taking the lead from Washington.The US entered the war with a strategy not based on valor, or military prowess. It was simply based on outproducing the bad guys. We could make stuff faster than they could blow it up. So industrial sabotage was a real worry. We weren't worried about the Japanese because we simply locked up anyone who looked Japanese.It was the Germans who "looked like us," that were the worry.So Hollywod ginned up some stories to fit, and this is probably the best of the bunch. The interesting thing here is how far the Irish had come as the prototype American. Only a few decades before, Irish (with Jews) were considered slime. They were quite literally the "other," the non-American. Its anyone's guess why they rose so quickly. The common theories don't hold much water because we see other groups who behaved much the same way and never achieved the exalted status of the Irish as movie icons. But here we have it in spades: brawling is an honorable, friendly thing. Booze is never mentioned. All the hard working, patriotic, tough souls here are Irish. They win the war with pluck and expect no reward or recognition.Now, that's a story. Incidentally, though the story, sets and action are pure hokum, that acting here is pretty modern and realistic. I think that's related to the Irish story.Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

groening-2 "Secret Command" wastes what must have been a fairly large budget and high-power cast on a predictable story with little suspense or drama.Pat O'Brien is miscast in the leading man role, failing to convey the quiet masculine strength and sexuality called for here.The home-life scenes, with the European orphans, designed to tug at our heart strings, don't quite work either, and detract from the drama of the hunt for Nazis in the shipyard. And our hero is never really put in any danger.I have a fondness for the World War II propaganda flicks, but even I didn't warm to this one. What I generally like about the propaganda films is that they have some edge to them, since they are dealing with life and death stuff. "Secret Command" seems to go light on these elements.A posted comment questioned "Secret Command" winning a special effects Oscar, and I found myself wondering about that as well. I concluded that the underwater shots, and the (apparent) location shots on the crane were considered "special" effects in the 1940s. (Today we assume special effects relates to only fabricated shots or images.)