100 BEST WAR MOVIES #82. The Dirty Dozen

 

“The Dirty Dozen” created the template for an entire genre of motley crew, suicide mission movies.  Its influence has been substantial.  The movie was released in 1967 and was part of the wave of more realistically gritty war movies like “Patton”.  Director Robert Aldrich adapted it from the bestselling novel by E.M. Nathanson, but made substantial changes.  The film was made in England and took seven months to complete.  Production included the construction of a chateau that was 240 ft wide and 50 ft high, surrounded with 5,400 sq. yds. of heather, 400 ferns, 450 shrubs, 30 spruce trees and 6 weeping willows.  It turned out to be so substantially built that it could not be easily blown up so they had to construct a flimsier section for the climactic scene.  The cast was all-starish.  The studio wanted John Wayne for the Reisman role, but Aldrich wisely insisted on Lee Marvin (Wayne made “The Green Berets” instead).  Jim Brown was still playing football, but when the owner of the Browns gave him an ultimatum – football or moviemaking – he announced his premature retirement.  A huge mistake admitted by the owner later.  Trini Lopez was cast because he was a hot pop singer at that time (“Lemon Tree”).  When he decided his singing career was more important than the completion of the movie, his character suffers a premature death.   When Clint Walker refused to do the impersonating the general scene, the unknown Donald Sutherland was tabbed and parleyed it into higher billing and a role in a little film called “MASH”.  Many of the cast were WWII veterans:  Marvin (Marines – wounded on Saipan), Telly Savalas (Army), Charles Bronson (Army), Ernest Borgnine (Navy), and Clint Walker (Merchant Marine).  The movie was a huge hit with audiences and with some critics.  It was nominated for four Oscars;  Best Supporting Actor (John Cassavetes), Editing, Sound, and Sound Effects (won).

                A maverick major (Marvin) is assigned twelve military convicts for a secret mission behind enemy lines.  All of the 12 are sentenced to long terms in prison or death by hanging.  The suicide mission is their chance to avoid their sentences.  The twelve are not model soldiers and need to be broken in by Reisman.  He has them built their training camp.  There is a lot of dysfunction in the group, mainly from the insane, religious bigot Maggot (Savalas) and the incorrigible Franko (John Cassavetes).  But some of the men take their chance at redemption seriously.  This group is led by Wladislaw (Bronson) and includes Posey (Walker), Jefferson (Brown), and Pinkley (Sutherland).  Reisman is tough as nails and has a worthy second in command, Sgt. Bowren (Richard F’n Jaeckel).  The unit  has to overcome obstacles put in their way by a villainous foe of Reisman, Col. Breed (Robert Ryan).  They have to win a war game to prove the mission should get the green light.  They win by cheating.  They are parachuted into France to go to chateau being used as a fancy leave spot for German high command and their lady friends.  Each of the twelve has a part to play in the plan.

ACTING:                       B  (great by the stars, wooden by the others)

ACTION:                       A  7/10

ACCURACY:                 N/A

PLOT:                             A

REALISM:                     D

CINEMATOGRAPY:    B

SCORE:                          B

BEST SCENE:  the war game

BEST QUOTE:   Red army soldier being captured:  “But you’re wearing red force insignia.”  Jefferson:  “That’s right.  We’re traitors.”  

                “The Dirty Dozen” has several strong aspects to it.  The acting is very good by the stars.  Marvin is the perfect Reisman.  He plays him with the right amount of bravado and steely insubordination.  The scene where he is briefed on the mission by Gen. Worden and his lackey establishes him as an intriguing character.  Reisman is very much a 1960s war movie archetype.  He reminds me of Steiner from “Cross of Iron”.   Savalas is very creepy as Maggot.  It shows his range since his other famous role was Kojak.   Bronson is charismatic and likeable.  Brown does a remarkable job in his first major role.  He does not look like an amateur.  Richard Jaeckel gets a well-deserved turn as Reisman’s second in command.  Cassavettes steals the honors with his characterization of Franko.  You can tell he is trying to steal the camera’s attention away from the others.  It is obvious he created his own character beyond the script. He deserved the Academy Award nomination.  With all this said, beyond the big names, the Back Six (with the notable exception of Sutherland) are in over their heads and should be very thankful they are in this movie.

                As far as the plot, you know going in that you will have to suspend disbelief.  Very little of what happens has any foothold in reality.  It was fun to listen to Dale Dye’s commentary which takes the movie to task on numerous issues.  Basically, the movie would not have been made if he had been the technical adviser.  And yet, he is a big fan.  The whole Maggot subplot is beyond ridiculous, but fun.  You could really say that about the whole movie.  In this respect it does not differ from “The Guns of Navarone” and other movies of this genre.  And truly, it is less ridiculous than its most recent descendant -  “Inglourious Basterds”.

                The movie has the theme of military planners can sometimes be lunatics, but if you put an ass-kicking, rule-breaker in charge, the plan will be successful.  Another theme is even incorrigible criminals can be molded into a team (if the choice is join or be hanged).  One theme that is not apparent is that war is Hell.  This is the rare major war movie that is not clearly anti-war.  It basically glorifies in the warrior ethos.  Aldrich’s statement that he wanted people “to know that war is hell” is a crock of crap.  Most of the target audience did not leave the theater detesting war.  If they were teary eyed, it was because of Jefferson’s failed run (reminiscent of Von Ryan’s, by the way), not due to the slaughter of trapped German officers and their paramours.  That slaughter is a troubling aspect of the film.  The unit is not conflicted about this task.  In fact, the best word for their facial expressions is gleeful.  It’s a bit perplexing that few critics focused on this war crime.  To paraphrase, if you win the war, there is no such thing as a war crime.  That usually refers to avoiding a trial, not to depicting the “good guys” committing one with no consequences in a movie.

`The film is technically sound.  The cinematography is workmanlike, but not outside the box.  There are no wow visuals in the film.  The score is perfect for a macho film like this.  It is not pompous or overly patriotic (although it does make use of some familiar martial music).  It does not dominate any of the scenes and is used to punctuate rather than pontificate.  The sound effects are outstanding.  I’m referring to the explosions, of course.

One strange thing about the film is the lack of graphic bloodshed.  The deaths are not “signal touchdown as you twirl” style, but they are not splatteringly realistic either.  Interestingly, “Bonnie and Clyde” came out the same year.  One of them was revolutionary in depicting gunshot wounds.  Similar to this issue is the unsoldierly tame language.  Regular Gis, let alone thugs like these, must have snickered at the curses issuing from the dozens’ mouths.  “Dirty” does not refer to their vocabulary.  Some of their curses include:  creeps, pig face, crumb, slob, bum.  Apparently, “lovers” substituted for “assholes”.  This was the late sixties, for gosh darn sakes!  Take off the gloves.

                  In conclusion, “The Dirty Dozen” is one of the great guy movies in the war movie genre.  It is required viewing for men of my generation.  It created a template for numerous imitators and some of them are superior to the original.  I feel that “Kelly's Heroes” and “Where Eagles dare” are better and more entertaining.