THE CONSENSUS 100 GREATEST WAR MOVIES

This is my attempt at a statistical analysis of the greatest war movies.  Here is the methodology.  I found four 100 Greatest War Movies lists that I feel are knowledgeable on the subject.  Two of those lists (Military History magazine and Channel 4) rank the movies.  The others are Film Site and the book 101 War Movies You Must See Before You Die.   I also used three books that rate war movies:  Video Hound’s War Movies, Brassey’s Guide to War Films, and The Belle and Blade Guide to Classic War Videos.  (Since I did my research I received my copy of War Movies by Brock Garland.  I did not redo the data, but I have included its grade in the ratings list.)  The reason why the list is limited to only movies from the 20^th Century is because not all of the sources include 21^st Century movies. 

 I won’t bore with the details, but basically I used a combination of the average rating from the ratings books and a rating based on the ranking from the two ranked lists (on a scale of 1-5).   I grouped the movies based on how many lists they made so only movies that were in both Military History magazine and Channel 4 made the top 43. 

 I must emphasize that this list does not reflect my opinions.  In fact, I find some of the positions ridiculous.  I have seen and reviewed all of the movies on the list.  Some are not war movies, in my opinion.  Others are very overrated.  It is also apparent that foreign movies got short-changed.

#100 – THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE (1962)

SYNOPSIS: "The Manchurian Candidate" is a Cold War thriller. An American patrol is captured by the North Koreans and brainwashed. One of them (Laurence Harvey) is the step-son of a rabid anti-Communist Senator. He becomes an unwitting sleeper agent when he returns to America after the war.  His mother (Angela Lansbury) is part of a plot to use her "hero" son to assassinate the President so his step father can take over the Presidency. One of his brainwashed comrades (Frank Sinatra) is in a race against time to foil the plot.

BACK-STORY: “The Manchurian Candidate” is a political thriller released in 1962 during the Cuban Missile Crisis which is appropriate because it taps into the Red Scare hysteria of that time. It is based on a novel by Richard Condon and is faithful to the book. It was directed by John Frankenheimer and showcases his style of unusual camera angles and symbolism (notice all the images of Lincoln). The movie was supposedly taken out of circulation because of its proximity to the Kennedy assassination. There is also the possibility that Oswald saw the film and was inspired by it.  It was remade in 2004 starring Denzel Washington in the Sinatra role.

TRIVIA - mentalfloss, imdb, wikipedia

1.  United Artists did not want to make the film because of the political controversy.  Frank Sinatra went to Pres. Kennedy who was a big fan of the novel.  Kennedy contacted the studio head and got him to change his mind.

2.  Angela Lansbury was only three years older than her “son” Laurence Harvey.

3.  The movie came out in the midst of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

4.  When Marco visits Raymond in his hotel room towards the end of the film, Sinatra is filmed out of focus.  Critics lauded this cinematography for showing Raymond’s distorted perspective.  Actually, the assistant cameraman screwed up the shot and director Frankenheimer was upset and wanted to reshoot it, but he could not get Sinatra to duplicate the performance.

5.  Sinatra wanted Lucille Ball for the Angela Lansbury role.

6.  Sinatra broke a finger in the fight scene with Henry Silva.  Later, when he was up for “Dirty Harry”, he could not grip the pistol properly and had to drop out.

7.  When Laurence Harvey jumped in the lake in Central Park, it was so cold that ice had to be broken.

8.  The myth that the movie was pulled after the assassination of Kennedy was not true.  It was shown, but rarely because there was not a lot of interest in the film.

9.  In the novel, the relationship between Raymond and his mother is more incestuous and she even seduces him.  The movie could only go as far as a kiss on the lips.  (Surprisingly, the 2004 remake does not even have the kiss.)

10.  Mrs. Iselin is #21 on AFI’s list of 100 Heroes and Villains.

11.  It was nominated for two Academy Awards:  Editing and Supporting Actress (Lansbury).  She lost to Patty Duke in “The Miracle Worker”.

Belle and Blade  =  3 

Brassey’s              =  4 

Video Hound       =  5

War Movies         =  4.4 

Military History  =  85 

Channel 4             =  not on list

Film Site                =  yes

101 War Movies  =  no

OPINION: I am not sure if “The Manchurian Candidate” is really a war movie. It certainly fits more comfortably in the political thriller genre. As such, it has the usual unrealistic plot twists and unbelievably fortuitous occurrences (e.g., Joycelyn showing up in the queen of hearts costume). What would be faulted in a war movie is par for the course in a thriller. As a political thriller it is cracking entertainment full of suspense and great acting. As political satire, it is a devastating indictment of McCarthyism.

FORGOTTEN GEM? "Time Limit"

     “Time Limit” was released in 1957 and is one of the few decent movies about the Korean War. It falls in the prisoner of war genre. It is also an example of a court room drama similar to “A Few Good Men”. It was the directorial debut of Karl Malden and was the only film he directed. It is based on a play and much of it looks stage-bound as much of the action takes place in a JAG office. It makes a good companion to “The Manchurian Candidate” as both are about Korean War brainwashing.


     The movie opens in a North Korean prison camp. A prisoner is shot trying to climb the fence ala “The Great Escape”. From there we cut to the JAG office where Col. Edwards (Richard Widmark) is prepping for the Cargill case. Cargill (Richard Basehart) is accused of signing a germ warfare confession and making anti-American radio broadcasts. It seems to be an open and shut case as Cargill does not dispute the facts and refuses to testify. A general whose son died in the camp insists on swift justice.

     Edwards does some investigating and discovers that the truth is more complicated. Several survivors recite identical stories about deaths of comrades (a device used in “The Manchurian Candidate”). As to the general’s son, his death was not exactly heroic. In fact, he is strangled by a fellow prisoner because he ratted out another prisoner who was planning an escape. The Communist commander (played by who else but Khigh Dhiegh) gets Cargill to cooperate by promising not to harm any more of the prisoners.

     When the general is told the shocking news about his traitorous son, we have an interesting exchange between the general and Cargill. Cargill argues that there is a “time limit” to how much a man can be expected to take. “You can’t ask a man to be a hero forever, there has to be a time limit.” Interestingly, the general’s rebuttal is also persuasive, leaving the viewer to ponder the issue. The general argues that there is a sound reason for the military code section that applies to cooperation with the enemy. Cargill was looking out for 16 men, but think of the thousands that were adversely affected by his confession to a crime that the U.S. Air Force did not commit and it was used for very adverse propaganda against the U.S.

     Although a work of fiction, “Time Limit” does touch on some history. The Communists did coerce American airmen into admitting to fictitious germ warfare. There is a “Code of the U.S. Fighting Force” (known as “the Code”), but it was not issued by Pres. Eisenhower until after the Korean War and obviously in response to it. The code insists POWs resist to the best of their ability, try to escape and aid others in their attempts, and not accept favors from their captors. They should also avoid answering questions “to the best of their abilities”.

     This gem should not be forgotten. The acting is outstanding and the plot deals with moral dilemmas that need to be confronted not just by the military, but also the public. The ambiguous ending lends strength to the film. It leaves you thinking.

#85 - The Manchurian Candidate

BACK-STORY: “The Manchurian Candidate” is a political thriller released in 1962 during the Cuban Missile Crisis which is appropriate because it taps into the Red Scare hysteria of that time. It is based on a novel by Richard Condon and is faithful to the book. It was directed by John Frankenheimer and showcases his style of unusual camera angles and symbolism (notice all the images of Lincoln). The movie was supposedly taken out of circulation because of its proximity to the Kennedy assassination. There is also the possibility that Oswald saw the film and was inspired by it.

 

 

 

 

OPENING: A truck pulls up to a bar/brothel and the unpopular Sgt. Raymond Shaw (Lawrence Harvey) ruins the fun by demanding his men accompany him on a mission. On the mission, their South Korean guide (Henry Silva) walks them into an ambush. Although Bennett Marco (Frank Sinatra) is skeptical of the tactical foolishness of proceeding single-file, he inexplicably follows the guide’s advice! The ambush is unrealistically easy with no shots fired.

SUMMARY: Back in the States, Shaw returns to acclaim as a Medal of Honor winner. His manipulative mother (Angela Lansbury – only three years older than Harvey!) and his buffoonish stepfather intend to use him to further the stepfather’s quest to become Vice President. Sen. Iselin is a Joseph McCarthy clone and in case you can’t figure that out he accuses the administration of harboring card-carrying communists (eventually settling on 57 because of a Heinz 57 bottle).

Marcos, now a Major, is having nightmares and begins to question whether the unlikeable Shaw is really “the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known in my life”. Another of the survivors, a black soldier (the first significant moment in Hollywood that a black actor has a non-specific black role) is having the same nightmare. This results in the famous tour-de-force brainwashing scene where Frankenheimer intercuts shots of the evil commie brainwashers with a ladies’ garden club that the hypnotized men are perceiving. Shaw robotically strangles one of his mates on command from the garden club lecturer.

<> </>

Shaw murders on of his squad while under hypnosis

The trigger mechanism for Shaw is the queen of hearts playing card. His brain-washer (Oriental villain-for-hire Khigh Dhiegh) gets him to prove himself by murdering his boss. This proves that normal Americans are weakened by “guilt and fear”, but not Shaw with his dry-cleaned brain.

Marcos meets a pretty blonde on a train. They have one of the strangest conversations in movie history. (Surprisingly taken directly from the novel.) She must be a communist operative, right? Wrong! Or maybe she is? But then again, … Oh hell, let’s just say that was one weird conversation. So weird that she falls in love with Marcos and immediately breaks up with her fiancé. This is apparently for real!

Marcos goes to Shaw’s and gets into a vicious karate fight (supposedly the first in screen history) with his valet who happens to be the guide. He does not recognize the guide, he just recognizes that Henry Silva is always a bad guy in movies (just kidding). (Sinatra broke a finger in the fight). Marcos gets Shaw drunk and Shaw pathetically recounts his romance with his mother’s most bitter political enemy’s daughter, Joycelyn Jordan. The pinko Sen. Jordan happens to be a neighbor of the red-baiting Iselins. It’s a small world. Mrs. Iselin breaks up this Romeo and Juliet union.

Shaw after walking off a pier

Mom invites Shaw to a costume party to trigger him via the queen of diamonds. Shocker – she is a communist agent and is going to use her son to overthrow the government! At the climactic moment of playing solitaire with him, she is called away. Guess who appears improbably costumed as the queen of hearts playing card? Joycelyn, wearing the most popular Halloween costume of 1953. Ray and Josie run off to marital bliss and they live happily ever after. Not really.

In another plot contrivance, Shaw returns home to confront his loathsome step-father which, of course, allows his mother to resume the solitaire game leading to Shaw murdering Sen. Jordan and guess who?

Marcos has figured out the card-connection and uses it to break the spell on Shaw, but then he unbelievably allows him to part company. Nothing to worry about, he’s cured! Shaw goes to his mother who outlines the assassination plan. She plants a decidedly unmotherly kiss on his lips (which is a lot less than she does in the novel).

the Queen of Hearts

FINAL SCENE: At a chaotic nominating convention in Madison Square Garden, Marcos frantically searches for Shaw. He is disguised as a priest and perches in a sniper’s nest high above the floor. He suspensefully waits for his cue to assassinate the presidential nominee thus propelling the gallant Sen. Iselin ("the Manchurian candidate") into the White House. Will Marcos get to him in time? I don’t recall. The scene is justifiably acclaimed as Frankenheimer parodies American conventions and our messy democratic process and channels Hitchcock to boot.

RATINGS:

Action - 5

Acting - 9

Accuracy - 6

Realism - 5

Plot - 8

Overall - 8

WOULD CHICKS DIG IT? This movie is less of a war movie than it is a political spy thriller. This means it would be more appealing to most females. There are three major female characters – a rarity for war movies. Each represents a different type of female. Momma Iselin is your typical incestuous bitch traitor. If your significant other can relate to her, break it off. Joycelyn Jordan is the girl next door who is too good to be true. Jenny is your enigmatic stranger on a train/enemy agent who falls madly in love with a shell-shocked ex-POW/her pawn. You could argue that all women fall into one of these stereotypes. Women viewers should be able to relate to one of the three.

CRITIQUE: Although lots of things have to fall into place, this is still an intriguing movie. There are some interesting plot twists that come as surprises to even the most jaded viewers. It is a perceptive indictment of the McCarthy era even though Sen. Iselin makes Joseph McCarthy look like a brainiac. One wonders if the producers would have had the guts to make the movie when McCarthy was at the height of his power.

The movie features two bravura scenes. The brainwashing scene is amazing. Cutting back and forth from the old ladies to the communist puppeteers is very effective. The cold-blooded murders of two comrades is chilling given the bonding that typically occurs in small combat units. The convention scene is very tense and suspenseful. Edge of your seat worthy. The film also leaves you with two memorable questions: what the hell was up with that train conversation and who the hell wear’s a queen of hearts playing card costume?

The acting is outstanding, especially Lansbury. She steals the show and justifiably was nominated for a Best Supporting Actress Oscar (losing to Patty Duke of “The Miracle Worker”). Her character is one of the great villains in movie history. She is truly scary and despicable. If she reminds you of your mother, go immediately to a psychiatrist! Sinatra is better than usual and gave a finger to the movie. Wait, that did not come out right.

ACCURACY: The movie reinforces the belief that American POWs in Korea were brain-washed by their Chinese captors. This is a common misconception. In reality, the communists did not use the technique shown in the movie. There were American POWs who collaborated with their captors, but they did so mainly because of horrible conditions that could be mitigated by cooperating. This cooperation did not rise to the extremes of political assassination, but instead resulted in the famous false admissions to germ warfare. Some political indoctrination succeeded in the form of continuous monotonous lectures which resulted in parroting of communist dogma, but once the POWs were restored to an American environment the “brainwashing” was rinsed away. No POW is known to have pressed his new found love of communism on his homeland, much less used violence against the capitalist system. It is true that 21 American POWs refused repatriation after the war because they wanted to live under communism, but all but a couple eventually returned to America and not as sleeper agents.

With that said, the movie is not meant to be a tutorial on Korean War brain-washing. It is totally fictional and entertainingly so.

CONCLUSION: I am not sure if “The Manchurian Candidate” is really a war movie. It certainly fits more comfortably in the political thriller genre. As such, it has the usual unrealistic plot twists and unbelievably fortuitous occurrences (e.g., Joycelyn showing up in the queen of hearts costume). What would be faulted in a war movie is par for the course in a thriller. As a political thriller it is cracking entertainment full of suspense and great acting. As political satire, it is a devastating indictment of McCarthyism.