INCHON (1981)

 

                       “Inchon” is generally considered the biggest box office bomb of all time and also considered to be the worst war movie ever made. It won Golden Raspberries for Worst Picture, Actor (Laurence Olivier), Director, and Screenplay. It has a 0% on Rotten Tomatoes which makes it the only major war movie to achieve that low score. It has a 2.9 on IMDB.  It was famously financed by Sun Myung Moon, founder of the Unification Church. He’s the guy who would marry thousands at a time. He thought about doing a movie about Elvis or Jesus, but psychic Jeanne Dixon talked with the deceased Douglas MacArthur and he urged a biopic be made about him. Moon liked the idea because MacArthur “loved God and loved people.” He fought against tyranny and communism. Moon demanded three love stories. One with two Americans, one with two Koreans, and one with an American and a Korean. The movie cost $46 million (the original budget was $18 million), which was a huge sum back then. It made less than $2 million.(This would be equivalent to costing $150 million and making $17 million today.) At the time, it was the biggest money-loser in history. It was directed by Terence Young, who made the first four James Bond movies. He also directed some war movies: “The Red Beret” and “Triple Cross”. He filmed in South Korea, California, Italy, Ireland, and Japan. The shoot was difficult with a typhoon destroying the lighthouse that is central to the invasion of Inchon. David Janssen died during the shooting and expensive reshoots had to be done.  Some of the reshoots were done by Sun Myung Moon himself with disastrous results. He was credited as a “special adviser”. Star Laurence Olivier was 72-years-old and he was not in the best of health. Makeup took 2 ½ hours. Olivier deserves credit for watching many recordings of MacArthur to get his accent down pat. Embarrassingly, the movie includes part of MacArthur’s “Old Soldiers” speech in which he sounds very different from Olivier’s attempt. He was candid about why he took the role. He did it to get money for his heirs. He was paid $1 million which came to $50,000 per day. When the shoot overran, he demanded his bonus salary be delivered to the set in a suitcase by a helicopter. I hope his heirs appreciated it because it was a very difficult shoot for him as he suffered from heat stroke and exhaustion. He had to rest between takes. The US Department of Defense provided 1,500 soldiers and Marines as extras. It allowed filming on a US Navy ship. However, the DoD demanded that its cooperation be removed from the credits when it saw the inaccuracy of the movie.

                       The movie starts with a disclaimer: “This is not a documentary. The screenwriters have used historical license.”  Thanks for the honesty and why don’t more war movies do this? A narrator describes the situation in Korea after WWII. (To prove the screenwriter were truthful about disregarding historical facts, WWII is called “the war to end all wars.”) A map is overlaid with combat footage. The background is good and it emphasizes Soviet military support for North Korea. Then we are immediately in a battle with lots of tanks and hordes of commie infantry. Barbara Hallsworth (Jacqueline Bisset) is the wife of a major (Ben Gazzara). She gets caught up in the stream of refugees fleeing invading North Koreans. Along the way, she picks up some orphans who are sooo cute. Frank Hallsworth’s affair with a South Korean is interrupted by the crisis. He heads north to find his wife. He is accompanied by Sergeant Augustus Henderson (Richard Roundtree). Meanwhile, Gen. MacArthur learns of the invasion and realizes he is the only one that can save South Korea. In one scene, he stands next to a bust of Julius Caesar. Subtle. In this small world, David Feld (David Janssen) is a cynical journalist (like he was in “The Green Berets”). (Has there ever been an uncynical journalist in an American war movie?) These characters have a destiny destination called Inchon. That date with history will be the capture of a lighthouse that is crucial to the success of the landing. And a great opportunity to reunite Hallsworth with his Korean girlfriend and her father! It’s hairy, but God is with MacArthur and America. We win and this time they do the running. The End. Don’t worry about the next two years.

                       Let me lead my critique by stating that “Inchon” is not the worst war movie I have ever seen. That does not mean it’s a good movie. It has numerous weaknesses. The plot is choppy with some scenes leading nowhere. The movie jumps several months to get to the invasion and yet, the main characters are still in the same places. There are several cliches. Hallsworth is torn between loyalty to his wife and love of his girlfriend. As usual, the love triangle is solved by killing off one them.  The characters are all stock. The Feld character is only mildly critical of MacArthur and is given little to do. Janssen did not go out in a blaze of glory. The action scenes are poorly done combat porn. Lots of tanks and lots of explosions. This is a loud movie. And several massacres and strafings of civilians because commies are bad. As per war movie rules, no one is just wounded. The deaths are from the somersault school of overdying. Jerry Goldsmith did the soundtrack. The music is pompous, although commended by some and it was released as an album.

                       It is clear the movie was just a money grab for all the stars. Their performances are wooden, especially Olivier who is creepy as MacArthur. (He was 74 at the time of the shooting. MacArthur was 71.) Gregory Peck was much better in “MacArthur”. Richard Roundtree was thrown in just to have an African-American character.

                       The movie is not the propaganda you would expect. The communists are not demonized. There is a villainous North Korean officer, but he is just thrown in because that box needed to be checked. There is not a lot of anti-communism talk. The movie is more pro-Christian tban anti-communism. MacArthur prays and at one point proclaims “God wills it!” Just like Pope Urban II before the Crusades. The moments where religion rises up are ridiculous.

                       I’m not going to go into detail on the historical inaccuracies. After all, the movie admits it’s not accurate. The movie floats along with some minor flubs and it does give a trite feel for the chaos at the beginning of the war. The role of Russian tanks is a theme that is fairly realistic. And it does have a good scene where MacArthur makes his case for the risky Inchon invasion. But the movie limps towards one of the most ludicrous finales in war movie history. I have no idea who thought up the lighthouse idea, but he deserves a special Razzie Award. Spoiler alert: Hallsworth and Henderson go on a commando raid to take the lighthouse. That light is crucial to the success of the invasion. They do this easily with the help of Hallsworth’s Korean girlfriend. A problem arises when it is discovered that there are mines in the harbor. The girlfriend’s father gets in a boat, connects the mines by a wire and then sets them off! Hilarious. Then there is a hip-shooting firefight as the North Koreans try to take back the lighthouse. The light goes out. MacArthur has to call off the invasion. He gives a long speech taking responsibility for the failure. The speech is long enough for God to intervene and turn the light back on. God blessed MacArthur! We get an impressive number of landing craft and amphtracs, and they aren’t cardboard cutouts. Here come our tanks! Tables turned. Look at them run this time. The movie ends before MacArthur tarnishes his reputation with his boneheaded handling of the Chinese intervention. I guess we’ll never get that sequel.

                       In conclusion, “Inchon” is far from being the worst war movie ever made. It is not laugh out loud funny as the dialogue is not atrocious and the stars do not overact. Other than the lighthouse, it is not atrociously inaccurate. It is not in “Braveheart” territory. It was hard to find, but you can now watch it on YouTube. I won’t warn you against doing that. However, I will warn you that you won’t get those 137 minutes back.

GRADE  =  D

Sailor of the King (1953)

 

               “Sailor of the King” is based on the 1929 novel by C.S. Forester.  It is also known as “Single-Handed”.  The director was Roy Boulting who co-directed with Frank Capra the famous documentary “Tunisian Victory”.  Although it has only one American in the cast (Jeffrey Hunter), it was an American production.  It was the first American film to use British ships.  Producer Frank McCarthy used his relationship with Lord Mountbatten to get Royal Navy cooperation.  The HMS Cleopatra played both the Amesbury and the Stratford.  The Cleopatra deserved some screen fame due to its participation in the Battle of Sirte where it and three other light cruisers took on the Italian battleship Littorio and a heavy cruiser.  The minelayer HMS Manxman played the German cruiser Essen.  The movie was dedicated to the Royal Navy, in particular the Mediterranean Fleet.  It starts with a quote from Horatio Nelson:  “I will be a hero -  and confiding in Providence,  I will brave every danger.”

               In 1916, Lt. Richard Saville (Michael Rennie) meets a British girl named Lucinda on a train and it is love at first sight.  They have a fling and he proposes, but she has seen enough war movie to know his career will come first.  Will her refusal to fall for that old trope figure in what happens twenty-four years later?  Stick around.  In 1940, Saville is a cruiser captain on convoy duty in the Pacific along with two other cruisers.  Saville decides to send the other two warships after the German raider Essen.  The HMS Amesbury is sunk, but manages to put a torpedo into the Essen.  The Essen rescues the only two survivors of the Amesbury, one of whom is Signalman “Canada” Brown (Hunter).  The Essen pulls into a secluded bay to do repairs, meanwhile Saville’s ship HMS Cambridge is hot in pursuit.  Someone needs to slow down the repairs so the Cambridge has time to get there.  Is there a sailor of the king available for that job?

               Remember when Jeffrey Hunter was a big star?  Well, he was, mainly because he was quite the hunk.  Ladies, he is shirtless through most of this movie.  Hunter was making only his second lead role in this movie.  He had earlier appeared in a supporting role in “The Frogmen” and over his long career, he made a lot of war movies, including “The Great Locomotive Chase”, “Sgt. Rutledge”, “Hell to Eternity”, “No Man Is an Island”, and “The Longest Day”.  He stands out in this movie, partly because he is the only American.  The acting is good overall by a good cast.  The roles they play, with the exception of Brown, are stereotypes.  The Brits are unflappable and the Germans are worthy adversaries.  The Essen’s commander is one of those “good Germans” you see in movies in the early Cold War.  Good enough to rescue a sailor who eventually leads to the sinking of his ship.  Moral of the story:  don’t rescue opponents. 

               The plot is certainly unusual.  I know of no other naval war movie that features a sniper.  It is unpredictable, other than the obvious come-uppance for the Essen.  A naval war buff certainly would not have predicted that the Amesbury would suicidally take on a superior warship instead of simply maintaining contact until reinforcements arrived.  But plenty of dots have to be connected to get Brown on a hill above the Essen with a Mauser in his hands.  It’s all to the purpose of creating an entertaining film.  It has an intriguing ending involving Lucinda who (depending on what ending you get), is either reunited with Saville to honor her live or her dead son.

               Although clearly fictional, Forester did base his book on two WWI battles.  In the first, British light cruisers took on a German heavy cruiser in the South Pacific and lost and then in a later battle, with reinforcements, got revenge off the Falkland Islands.

               I recommend this movie even if you are not interested in seeing a shirtless, sweaty Jeffrey Hunter.  Call it a date night movie, if you have the confidence to be compared to him.

GRADE  =  B-   

                   

"Spartacus: Film and History" by Martin Winkler

 Today is the anniversary of the release of one of my favorite movies. I have seen it possibly more than any other movie because I showed it in my Western Civ classes for years. 

1.  The Catholic Legion of Decency put pressure on Universal to cut shot of severing of limbs. drowning in soup, blood spurting on Crassus when he kills Draba, and hints of homosexuality (“oysters and snails”)

2.  Scenes that were cut and lost included several scenes of Gracchus and Ceasar.  So much of his performance was cut that the irascible Laughton sued.

3.  Kubrick disavowed the film because he felt he did not have enough control over the story.  However, he did insist on the final battle scene. 

4.  Douglas insisted the theme be “a slave whose vision of freedom almost overthrew the Roman Empire”.  He also bumped up the love story.

5.  The original plan was for an expanded battle with Glabrus, a battle montage of the subsequent battles, and a small version of the final battle.

6.  After Trumbo’s critique of the first rough cut, scenes were added including:  the first meeting with Tigranes, Spartacus’ speech at the gladiator school, Spartacus’ speech on the beach, the duel with Antoninus. 

7.  Universal cut the Battle of Metapontum, leaving only a reference made to the loss at the public bath.

8.  Kubrick wanted the cause of defeat to be moral weakness of the slave class and the Crixus split.  Douglas overruled him, thankfully.

FIVE FINGERS (1952)

 

            “Five Fingers” is a spy noir movie along the lines of “Notorious”. It was directed by the famous screenwriter Joseph Mankiewicz (“The Quiet American” (1958)). The film is based on the book Operation Cicero by Ludwig Moyzisch. The book and movie are the true story of Albanian-born Elyesa Bazna. He was the valet to the British ambassador in Turkey. Bazna would photograph top secret documents from the ambassador’s safe and sell them to the Germans. It was filmed on location in Ankara and other sites.

            The film begins in 1944 in neutral Turkey. Polish Countessa Anna Staviska (Danielle Darrieux) offers her services to German Ambassador Count Van Papen (John Wengraf) as a spy. Surprisingly, he turns her down. And then he turns around and agrees to let Ulysses Diello (James Mason) play amateur spy for money. Diello has access to British secrets and sells them. He may be an amateur, but he has the moxey of a James Bond. Because there has to be a dame in a movie like this, Diello falls in love with the downtrodden countessa and shares some of his payments with her. The British get suspicious and sent a counter-intelligent agent to Ankara. Colin Travers (Michael Rennie) starts snooping around Ulysses and Anna. The couple plan to escape to Argentina or so Diello thinks), but they need one last big score. It involves the plans for Operation Overlord. Don’t ask why those plans are in the British Ambassador to Turkey’s safe.

            “Five Fingers” is better than expected. It is not in a league with “Notorious”, but it is a true story so it has one up on the Hitchcock film. (Both films star the always reliable Mason.) Mason is great as Diello. His character is not a Nazi. He’s just in it for the money. Carrieux is not on the same level of acting as him, but she does well as a femme fatale. Their relationship has some interesting twists.

            Dialogue is crucial in this type of film and “Five Fingers” is strong in this area. Some of it is crackling. The plot rests on the usual cat and mouse format. The movie is unpredictable and that is saying a lot because the subgenre of spy movies is rife with cliches. The score supports the movie well. It is a well-crafted film. It is entertaining, but how educational is it?

            The movie adds a lot of historical license. Banza did get a job as a valet to Sir Hughe Knatchbull-Hugessen. If the name gives you the impression that the ambassador was a daft nobleman without a clue, you would be right. Banza was hired with the flimsiest of background checks. His Lordship made Banza into a glorified butler and dressed him like a guard in a harem. Banza hooked up with his bosses nurse-maid, but she was not his partner in crime. The true story has no one equivalent to the Countessa. Banza was adept at picking locks so he easily got into the safe. Knatchbull-Hugessen was very careless with security. Banza passed on information about the Teheran and Cairo Conferences. Nothing earth-shaking. He was paid a lot, but it was mostly counterfeit money. Ha ha! The money came from Operation Bernhard. (Covered in the film “The Counterfeiters”.)  Banza’s biggest theft was documents about Operation Overlord which ironically, the Germans failed to use. The British did suspect someone in the embassy was passing secrets, so they sent a Cornella Kapp to catch the mole. She was not successful. There are several historians who think Banza was a double agent and there is evidence supporting this. I bet Knatchbull-Hugessen prayed that was true. He didn’t get a lot of party invitations after the war. Banza also had a depressing post-war. The money was discovered to be counterfeit and he spent some time in prison for passing it. He did not go to Rio.

 

GRADE  =  B+