“The Naked and the Dead” is the film adaptation of
Norman Mailer’s bestseller. Mailer
served in the Philippines in WWII and his experiences inspired a 721 page
novel. Many thought a novel of that size
could not be brought to the screen at a reasonable running time. But you know Hollywood was willing to
try. Warner Brothers purchased the
rights to the novel for the astronomical sum of $250,000. Raoul Walsh (“They Did With Their Boots On”)
was assigned to direct. Screenwriters
Denis and Terry Sanders adapted the book and took out all the four-letter words
and added “tits” (as studio head Jack Warner demanded) in the form of a strip
tease. The Jewish character Roth was
downplayed. Some of the deaths were
altered. Mailer’s themes of abuse of
power and the ideological conflicts in warfare were downplayed.
The movie jumps the shark immediately with the bar
scene. It starts promisingly with the
appearances of Richard Jaekel (Gallagher) and L.Q. Jones (Woody) and the
top-billed Aldo Ray (Sgt. Croft). In
case you are wondering if Ray will be stretching, Croft spits beer in the face
of a woman. (Later, he bites the cap off
a beer bottle and kills a baby bird.)
Beware that before the strip teaser can truly tease, the MPs break it up. Boo!
Why was this added? To frustrate
the males in the audience?
Headlines on newspapers are used for background on
the war situation. Incredibly, two of
them are: “New Guinea Falls” and “Coral
Sea Battle Disastrous”! Christ, the
movie was made in 1958. Had people
forgotten the basics by then? Croft and
his charges are below deck off an unidentified Pacific Island. We get cursory soldier banter and
behavior. No cursing, of course. The beach landing is the opposite of “Saving
Private Ryan”. They move inland. Croft scouts ahead and spots a mortar. He returns and leads the men forward without
bothering to tell them! Croft murders a
prisoner even after looking at a picture of his family and is about to kill a
bunch more when the bleeding-heart Lt. Hearn (Cliff Robertson) arrives. Damned liberal! He doesn’t stop Croft from taking gold teeth,
however. In his defense, he does not
have an ear necklace. After five minutes
of combat, the unit is pulled back to a camp (they already have a camp?). We are introduced to the third leg of our
character tripod. Gen. Cummings (Raymond
Massey) is a tough-love type who sides with the Croft types over the Hearns. Hatred makes men fight harder. If so, Croft is great leader and Hearn is
naïve.
The movie settles into a pattern of combat scenes
(which are not as often as you would think because they are an intelligence and
recon platoon that is not used much), camp life (e.g. building a still),
discussions between Hearn and Cummings, and flashbacks to explain Croft and
Hearn. This leads to the big mission to
go behind enemy lines and set up an observation post. And to get some of them killed. And to play out the command dysfunction
between Croft and Hearn. The mission is
rife with head-scratching moments. Don’t
expect any semblance of realistic tactics. I would think an intelligence and
recon unit would be more competent.
Veterans must have chuckled.
This is a weird movie. The message is murky. For instance, Cummings is supposed to
represent the tendency toward fascism in higher command, but he comes off as
insane. He explains that we fight wars
because countries have “latent powers” and they may be our allies in the
future. Power flows downward. Huh?
Neither of the command conflicts (Hearn/Croft and Hearn/Cummings) works
well. The characterizations are too
stereotypical. Croft is actually more
realistic about the war than Hearn and Cummings, but his character is just too
bonkers for this to stand out. The movie
certainly gives us and his men ample reason to hate him. The acting is average, by an average
cast. The script does them no
favors. The banter sounds like it was
written by a nonveteran. I do not know
how much was pulled from the book, but I assume not much. It hurt that the bad language was omitted and
thankfully the four-letter words were not substituted for (no “loving” like in
“A Walk in the Sun”). The actors do not
behave like soldiers. No boot camp for them. Apparently, no technical adviser,
either. Hearn carries a carbine, a
private carries a Thompson. The combat
is underwhelming.
“The Naked and the Dead” is a disservice to the
novel, but more importantly, it is a disservice to the men who fought in the
Pacific. Even worse, it is inferior to
the similar “The Thin Red Line”. It’s good for some unintended laughs. At least its not predictable. Except that it will leave you shaking your
head a lot.
GRADE
= D
TCM celebrated Aldo Ray's birthday with Battle Cry, The Naked and the Dead, and Men in War.
ReplyDeleteI just watched TNATD on the DVR. I've seen it several times. I read Mailer's book a long time ago. The movie is much softer. Mailer, like several post-WW II war novels implied some "fascists" were in the American military.
In the movie, the General is just a bumbling nut. The "Croft" character is similar to the book version, or is intended to be.
Not much realism, with footage (and some cast members) borrowed from Battle Cry, which Raol Walsh also directed.