FORGOTTEN GEM? The Real Glory (1939)

 

 

                    “The Real Glory” is a curio from the 1930’s set in the forgotten Moro Rebellion of 1906.  It was dedicated to the Philippine Constabulary which was “always outnumbered – never outfought” by the Moro rebels.  The movie was based on a novel by Charles Clifford.  It was directed by Henry Hathaway (“The Desert Fox”).  Gary Cooper was chosen over Joel McCrea.  David Niven beat out Walter Brennan, but felt he was miscast and did not bother with an accent.   The movie cost $2 million which was supposedly more than the actual campaign against the Moro cost.  1,200 Filipino extras were used, although the movie was shot at the studio.  The movie was done with the cooperation of the Philippine government, but when it saw the result, it had problems with the portrayal of the Filipino soldiers as cowards.  At first, Samuel Goldwyn refused to edit, but intervention by James Roosevelt (FDR’s son) led to some cuts.  In 1942, it was reissued as “A Yank in the Philippines”, but pulled when the Office of War Information realized it was a negative portrayal of our allies the Moros.

                    In 1906, the Moros (Muslim rebels) are attacking villages on the island of Mindanao in an attempt to take over the island.  They are described as “pirates” and “Vikings” to give the audience an analogy.  At U.S. Army headquarters in Manila, it has been decided to withdraw American soldiers and turn defense over to the native militia.  Americans will serve only as advisors to train the Constabulary.  Five men are sent to a village to replace the American soldiers there.  As the Americans evacuates, the padre pronounces: “We who are about to die, salute you.”  The main characters are three amigos.  Lt. Larson (Broderick Crawford) has never disobeyed an order.  Lt. McCool (David Niven) has never obeyed an order.  Dr. Canavan (Gary Cooper) is a warrior/doctor.  It does not take long for them to see what kind of shit storm they have marched into.  A suicide machete wielder kills the commanding officer.  It takes several bullets to give him his ticket to paradise.  Capt. Manning (Russell Hicks) is not going to fall for this provocation.  The evil Alipang is trying to lure the garrison into the jungle for an ambush.  Training montage.  Canavan, the DOCTOR, insists on a more aggressive policy toward the rebels.  He befriends a short round named Miguel (or Mike as he calls him).  They go on a recon mission to Alipang’s camp.  He uses a bolo to capture a rebel.  He’s a DOCTOR.  He tells the others not to be afraid of the fanatic because “he has 25 feet of intestines just like you.” 

                    Manning’s wife and daughter Linda (Andrea Leeds) arrive.  The daughter becomes the apex of a love quadrangle involving Larson, McCool, and Canavan.  Pity poor Broderick Crawford, although the script gives his character orchid growing as a seduction plus.  Normally, you would bet on Niven, but this is a Gary Cooper picture.  Thankfully, the romance does not suck the air out of the jungle.  The amigos are going to have to deal with another suicide attack, a cholera epidemic, the cutting off of their water supply, an ambush, and a mole in the mix.  This builds to the big attack on the village.  It features Moros being literally catapulted over the wall!  It’s the Alamo redux.  McCool uses a Gatling gun.  Linda helps in the defense while Canavan rides a raft to the rescue.  Anticipate a happy ending, but half of the love quadrangle will not be around for “We who are about to live, salute you.”

                       “The Real Glory” is basically a Western set in the Philippines.  The Indians are attacking the fort.  But this oater throws in the kitchen sink.  Not surprising for a film that had nine screenwriters.  Apparently, each contributed a plot development.  Hey, how about if there’s a cholera epidemic?  Thankfully, the quantity does come with some quality.  It’s not predictable.  The characters have some nuance, and not just by growing orchids.  Manning is set up as a stick in the mud officer, but turns out to be brave.  And when he reams Canavan for disobeying orders and going off on his recon, he is right (although I don’t think the viewers were supposed to agree).  Keep in mind, Canavan is the only DOCTOR they have.  Linda becomes a Disneyesque heroine.  She was well ahead of her cinematic time.    Each of the main roles is distinctive and the cast makes them memorable.  Crawford plays against type.  Niven is Niven.  I imagine the character’s name was changed to match him.  Speaking of which, it seems Canavan was expanded to include action hero because Cooper could not just be a doctor.

                    The movie was criticized for its depiction of the Filipinos.  They are not caricatured, but they do have to be pushed to overcome their fear of the Moros.  The way the movie depicts the fanaticism of the Moros, it would be natural to be afraid.  Actually, the Filipinos come off in a positive light overall.  The leader of the militia named Yabo proves in the end that the Filipino soldiers are trainable and can fight their own war.   As far as the Moros, they are the Indians from a 1950’s movie.  However, the movie does not go overboard in demonizing them.  Alipang is a stereotypical villain, but he does not twirl his mustache.  He is a good strategist, like Sitting Bull was.  Keep in mind, Miguel is a Moro, so they aren’t all bad.  Still, the portrayal of the Moros comes off as offensive today.  But then again, modern movies depict the Taliban worse.  Speaking of which, the movie has some Afghanistan vibe to it.  Let’s hope the current pullout has a happy ending too.

                    It is definitely a war movie.  The action is spaced through the narrative and concludes with a long and rousing battle that is only slightly ridiculous.  It’s worth the wait.  The movie is reasonably accurate on guerrilla warfare.  And this being the Philippines, we get machetes, bolas, and punji stakes.  The suicide attacks must have been shocking to audiences weaned on Westerns.  There is some interesting discussion of counterinsurgency, but in the end it still comes down to the storming of the Alamo.

                    Is it forgotten gem? Both.  It’s well worth the effort to see it.  (It’s on YouTube.)  I doubt you are going to read up on the Moro Rebellion, so here is an old-fashioned tutorial on it.

GRADE  =  B-

HISTORICAL ACCURACY:   When the U.S. acquired the Philippines as a result of the Spanish-American War, it inherited the Moro problem.  This led to the Moro Rebellion (1901-1913).  The Moros were Muslims who had been fighting foreign occupiers for centuries.  They were especially a problem on the island of Mindanao.  At first, the U.S. wavered between conciliatory and punitive.  Capt. John Pershing was an exponent of diplomacy, but others believed that “the only good Moro was a dead Moro”.  This group’s motto was “civilize ‘em with a Krag”.  This was a reference to the Krag rifle that American soldiers were equipped with. (The movie has great product placement for Krags.)  In 1903, Major General Leonard Wood (of Rough Riders fame) took command and ruled in favor of the punitive approach.  Until 1906, punitive expeditions were launched.  Wood’s forces would bombard Moro villages and then storm them with little quarter given.  Thousands were slaughtered.  Although he never lost a battle, his strategy had little success in defeating the insurrection.  Sound familiar?  Hint:  I’m not talking about the Indian Wars.

                    The Moros practiced guerrilla warfare similar to the Viet Cong.  This would be a closer analogy than to the Indians.  They controlled areas of the countryside and made raids on settlements.  It was these raids that drew the ire of the American army.  The use of juramentados aggravated the situation.  These “swordsmen” were the suicide bombers of the time.  Only they used swords to assassinate foes.  Before their assignment, they underwent a ritual called “sabil” which involved taking an oath, shaving all their body hair, and binding their bodies to protect against wounds until they accomplished their mission.  Fanatics, they were very hard to bring down.  It took several shots from the standard Army-issued Colt .38 caliber revolver.  Because of this lack of stopping power, the Army adopted the .45 caliber Colt M1911.

                    In 1906, Maj. Gen. Tasker Bliss stopped the punitive expeditions, but he increased the psychological warfare using Muslim beliefs.  Juramentados were buried in pig’s skin or with their mouth’s stuffed with pork.  (This was acknowledged in the movie when Canavan threatens to bury his captive in a pig’s skin.)  This was actually pretty effective in lessening the attacks.  I was not able to find evidence of the policy of replacing American forces with the Philippine Constabulatory, but it seems logical.  It’s not like the screenwriters were referring to Vietnamization.  In 1909,  Pershing took over and continued the policies.  He specifically mentioned displaying a body in a grave with a dead pig. However, there is no truth to the accusation made by some (including Donald Trump) that he executed prisoners with bullets dipped in pork blood.  This was besmirching a man who actually treated the Moro fairly.

100 BEST WAR MOVIE: #68. 1944 (2015)

 

                    “1944” is an Estonian film directed by Elmo Nuganen.  It highlights Estonia’s participation in WWII.  Some of its young men fought with the Germans and others were in the Red Army.  Each considered the other group to be traitors.  The movie is set in 1944 on the Tannenburg Line.  The Soviets are pushing into Estonia on their drive to Berlin.  Estonian units on opposite sides meet each other in combat in their own country.  The movie was a huge success in Estonia.

               The movie begins with a title card explaining that in 1940 the Soviet Union annexed Estonia and conscripted 55,000 Estonians.  In 1941, Germany took the country during its invasion of the USSR.  72,000 Estonians joined the Wehrmacht, mostly the Waffen-SS.  That’s all the background we get as the movie jumps to July 27, 1944.  Estonians are holding a trench line for the Germans.  The first explosion in the movie comes within the first minute.  It’s going to be a combat movie.  The narrator is Karl (Kaspar Velberg).  He and his mates have to fend off a Soviet horde attack featuring T-34/85’s.  They use their Panzerfausts and MG42’s effectively in a nice scene with realistic deaths.  We are then introduced to the squad.  Karl and his comrades are in a bunker in the trenches.  There are a variety of personalities, with the focus on Karl.  He is haunted by the fate of his parents who were taken away by the Soviets.  He and the others have reasons for fighting the Soviets.  That doesn’t mean they are fans of Hitler.  In a revealing scene, a government official comes to the front to pass out photos of Hitler.  When he says “Heil, Hitler”, one of the men responds with “Why Hitler?”  Later, they discuss the war and the possibility of facing countrymen on the battlefield.  This happens half way through the movie and we get a twist that shifts the focus to an Estonian soldier named Juri (Kristjan Ukskula) who is in the Red Army.  The second half of the film follows Juri and his squad. He delivers Karl’s letter to his sister and romance ensues.  Unfortunately, the war intrudes. And Juri has to interact with a despicable commissar.  

ACTING:                      A

ACTION:                      A+  (8/10 in quantity)

ACCURACY:               N/A

PLOT:                           A

REALISM:                   A+

CINEMATOGRAPHY:     A

SCORE:                        spare; not distracting

BEST SCENE:  the battle between the two Estonian units

BEST QUOTE:  Aino:  “The innocent feel guilt. The guilty feel nothing.”

                    I had not heard of this movie until I started looking for foreign combat movies to fill out my Non-English Combat Film Tournament.  The title did not give me much hope for the film.  It is a terrible title.  My apprehension was wrong.  This is an excellent war movie.  The cast is strong and it is well-acted, especially by Velberg and Ukskula.  Their characters, Karl and Juri, are very appealing.  You really care about both, even though they are on opposite sides.  The movie is effective in creating empathy for both sides.  It does not take sides on which Estonians were the traitors to their country.  The men are portrayed as young men caught in a situation they did not bargain for.  Their masters may be Nazis and Communists, but they are simply Estonians.  It’s their “allies” that are the villains with a stereotypical evil commissar being the only weak character. 

               “1944” feels authentic in its depiction of Estonian soldiers.  They are cynical, reluctant warriors.  No one tries to be a hero.  They question orders.  Karl and the others fighting for the losing Germans are fatalistic.  When one asks his commanding officer how many Russians are coming, he responds:  “A couple.”  The dialogue is terse like that.  The debates are brief, but you learn the reasons why they are fighting. 

               The film has some noteworthy combat and there is a nice variety.  There is the Soviet tank assault on their trench, the mission to take back a trench, defending a road, and the attack on the German farm.  There is an impressive array of appropriate weapons.  This enhances the reality of the battle scenes.  The tactics make sense.  There is a scene where Karl and some others crawl through a minefield to take out a bunker.  They enter the Soviet trench and throw grenades before going around corners.  Juri’s men use fire and maneuver to attack a farm.  The coordination with the tanks is good.  The scene is one of the best for buffs who like to see rampaging armor.  Best of all, the deaths are random, unpredictable, and heart-tugging.  One of them is one of the most shocking deaths I have seen in a war movie.  The movie really packs an emotional punch.  This is partly through an implausible romance that connects Karl and Juri.  It’s pure cinema, but it adds a female character (Maiken Schmidt) to make the movie a more rounded cinematic draw and not just a high testosterone ammo-fest.

               In the tournament, “1944” tied “Unknown Soldier” in its match.  I advanced “Unknown Soldier” because it has a little more combat.  However, it could be argued “1944” is the better movie.  It is certainly the more unique.  Where “Unknown Soldier” does an excellent job as a small unit combat film, it does not break new ground.  “1944” covers two small units and they are on opposing sides.  There are plenty of war movies that give both sides of a conflict, but “1944” spends the first half on one side and the second half on the other.  The connection between the two halves is adept and the transition is awesome.  You will not see it coming.  This is a must-see movie!