CONSENSUS #75. The Tin Drum (1979)

SYNOPSIS: "The Tin Drum" is an extremely bizarre movie about a young Polish boy who does not age. He is uncommunicative other than playing his tin drum. He and his family live in Nazi-occupied Danzig. He and his dysfunctional family go through some incidents with the war as the back drop. (I strongly suggest you go to my blog and read the summary so you can see what I am talking about.)

BACK-STORY: “The Tin Drum” is a 1979 German war movie based on the novel by Gunter Grass. The movie is set in WWII Danzig. It was directed by Volker Schlandorff. It is one of the most critically acclaimed war films of the 1970s. It shared the Palme d’Or with “Apocalypse Now” at Cannes and won the Best Foreign Language Film at the Academy Awards.

TRIVIA:  Wikipedia, imdb

1.  The movie was filmed mostly in West Germany.  The Soviets allowed only brief filming in Gdansk, Poland because the book was banned in the Eastern Bloc.

2.  It was the first German film to win the Best Foreign Film Oscar.

3.  There is a controversial underage sex scene that caused an Oklahoma County District Judge to rule the movie contained child pornography.  Without search warrants or a court order, Oklahoma City police raided libraries and rental outlets to confiscate copies of the VHS.  They got addresses of customers and went to their houses to get the copies.  The District Attorney threatened to arrest anyone with a copy.  The ACLU got involved and federal courts ended the censorship. 

4.  The movie was also banned in parts of Canada.

5.  David Bennent had a condition that caused him to age slowly.  He was an 11 year old playing a 16 year old.  The sex scene was with Katharina Thalbach, who was 24 at the time.

Belle and Blade  =  N/A

Brassey’s              =  4.0

Video Hound       =  N/A

War Movies         =  N/A

Military History  =  #60

Channel 4             =  not on list

Film Site                =  yes

101 War Movies  =  no

OPINION:  I am glad to report that “The Tin Drum” is not a bad war movie because it is not a war movie. It is an odd tale set in a war.  I hate this movie.  I can’t even see how generic critics like it, much less war movie critics.   In my opinion, it belongs nowhere near this list.

PICTURE, QUOTE, MOVIE QUIZ #56

1.  What movie is the picture from?

2.  What movie is this quote from?

We're responsible for the protection of 100,000 square miles of territory. And against us are ranged thousands of the finest light cavalry on earth. I found that out this morning. It's a big job, gentlemen... and it's gonna need a fine regiment. Our job is to make this the finest regiment that the United States ever saw. I needn't tell most of you that a regiment is something more than just six hundred disciplined fighting men. Men die. But a regiment lives on; because a regiment has an immortal soul of its own. Well, the way to begin is to find it. To find something that belongs to us alone. Something to give us that pride in ourselves that'll make men endure - and, if necessary, die... with their boots on. As for the rest it's easy: since it's no more than hard work, hard riding and hard fighting. Thank you, gentlemen, I know I can count on you.

3.  What movie is this?

It is Buster Keaton’s masterpiece, although it took a while for the critics and public to realize that.  The movie was a commercial and critical bomb when it was released in 1926.  Thankfully Keaton lived to see the revival of its reputation in the 1960s.  Recently the American Film Institute ranked it the 18^th greatest film and the 18^th greatest comedy (don’t ask).  This must have been heartening since he co-wrote, co-directed, and co-produced it.    He based it on The Great Locomotive Chase by William Pittenger.  Keaton used 500 Ohio National Guardsmen for the battle scene and even had them switch uniforms to give the armies more size.

ROUND 1

VS.

#8 The Last Starfighter vs. #9 War of the Worlds

PLOT - In "The Last Starfighter", a league of planets is in need of ace starfighter pilots to face an evil empire. Arcade games have been set up on Earth to find potential starfighter candidates. A teenager at a trailer park gets the high score and is whisked off as a recruit. Meanwhile an android clone is left for comic relief and to interact with his girlfriend. There are some bumps in the road, but Alex proves to be an ace pilot without the aid of  "the Force". The plot is inventive in its setup, but pretty clicheish afterwards. It's basically a low rent Star Wars exploitation flick, but still fun. GRADE = C (7)

Spielberg's version strays far from the novel and the original film. It is the story of a father and his son and daughter and their adventures during the alien invasion. Hell of a way to bond with your kids and shed your reputation of being a ne'er do well. It is not so much a war movie as a trek-during-a-war movie. The plot has several big disaster scenes and enhances the horror element of the story. In Spielberg's typical quest for the family friendly ending (literally), the movie is rife with implausibilities and ridiculous human actions. GRADE = C (7)

STRATEGY AND TACTICS - In "The Last Starfighter", the Rylan Star League’s strategy is relying on its "Frontier defensive wall".  A wall in outer space? The enemy manage to sabotage the starfighter base (like the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor) and then plan to penetrate the wall. Alex is the lone Gunstar that can stop their command ship. The tactic is classic commando raid. GRADE = B (8)

Spielberg's movie does not dwell much on strategy and tactics since it concentrates on the trio of humans. There are no scenes of the President and the military dealing with the crisis. It appears the strategy is suicidal attacks on the tripods based on an atrocious scene where the Army goes straight at the incomparably superior aliens. The soldiers are joined by unarmed civilians! The tactics are simply frontal attacks. As far as the aliens, they are simply destroying and conquering. They don’t need finesse. GRADE = C (7)

WEAPONS - Alex's Gunstar is similar to Luke's X-Wing fighter (surprise!). It has a pilot and a weapons specialist. The armament is lasers, photon bolts, and particle beams. Alex's is equipped with a secret weapon called the Death Blossom which enables it to defeat a host of enemy fighters that are similarly armed. This is necessary because the good guy has to take on the enemy by himself.  GRADE = C (7)

"WOW" is set in present time so the humans have tanks and rockets. Nukes are not used. Christ, if we can't use them against an alien invasion, why have them? They would probably be useless anyway because of the alien force fields. This is a not a fair fight. The aliens have heat rays that disintegrate people. Thank God we are a germy people.  GRADE = C  (7)

SPECIAL EFFECTS - TLS was one of the first movies to make extensive use of CGI which means at the time it was amazing, but today looks dated and cheesy. It looks like a video game looks now. There are 27 minutes of effects in the film which is nice quantity. GRADE = C (7)

Since it is a big budget Spielberg extravaganza, the special effects are amazing. The initial destruction of the city sets the tone for mankind's doom. The alien craft are cutting edge effects. CGI and miniatures were used. The tripods were modeled after jellyfish. The aliens are creepy and not obscure in darkness. GRADE = A (9)

ANALYSIS: The opening match of the tournament is between a Star Wars knockoff and a Spielberg blockbuster. Neither is much of a war movie. TLS does conclude with a battle, but it is really more of a one ship raid. The movie concentrates more on Alex's recruitment and incorporation into the starfighter role and his clone's comic relief dealings with the trailer park denizens. It's a bit of fluff, but it earns good will from its target audience of people wanting a Star Wars type movie to tide them over until the next installment. WOW is on the other end of the spectrum. Being a Spielberg huge budget extravaganza, it has a much higher bar to jump. The movie may have the word "war" in the title, but it is even less of a war movie than TLS. Spielberg made an intimate invasion movie. If Cruise is going to play the rogue daddy role, you can't have him in a spaceship and you can't waster screen time in some other character. Although very popular, the movie requires the audience to disregard numerous stupid elements in the plot. I personally think much of the movie is ridiculous. Although I much prefer TLS, WOW wins the match mainly because of its effects.

WOW = 30
TLS = 29

BEST SCI-FI WAR MOVIE TOURNAMENT

It's time for my annual war movie tournament.  This year I have decided to determine the best sci-fi war movie.  This means first I had to find 16 sci-fi movies that could even loosely be labeled war movies.  This turned out to be difficult.  In order to compare the movies they needed to have at least one battle in them.  I ended up having to use some movies that didn't have much of a battle.  Second, I determined what criteria they would be judged on.  Last, I had to watch all sixteen movies.  I had already seen most of them, but I had not focused on the war aspects.     The tournament is obviously my opinions, but is not just based on which movie I think is the best. I am usually surprised how my tournaments turn out. The categories can create a situation where the better movie does not always win. However, I think it will result in the best sci-fi WAR movie. If you don't like the result, just remember that it is just for fun. No wagering. Here are the matchups (the seeding is based on Rotten Tomatoes scores):

1 - Aliens
16 - Battle: Los Angeles

8 - Last Starfighter
9 - War of the Worlds

4 - Edge of Tomorrow
13 - Ender's Game

5 - Rogue One
12 - Attack of the Clones

2- Star Wars
15 - John Carter

7 - Return of the Jedi
10 - Pacific Rim

3 - War for the Planet of the Apes
14 - Independence Day

6 - Avatar
11 - Starship Troopers

Here are the categories:

Round 1

Plot
Strategy and Tactics
Weaponry
Special Effects

Round 2

Acting
Entertainment
Combat
Enemy

Round 3

Cliches
Sets
Dialogue
Creativity

Predictions?

MY WORST REVIEWED MOVIES OF 2017

                I reviewed over 80 movies in 2017 and naturally at this stage most of them were not good.  Basically, I have seen a vast majority of the good war movies, which leaves a lot of the bottom dwellers to be endured.  It’s amazing that after seven years, there are still so many war movies I want to see.  Fortunately, some on my “to be watched” are supposed to be good.  Here are the worst war movies I reviewed this past year:

5.  Ironclad:  Battle for the Blood  (2014)  -  This is the sequel to the guilty pleasure “Ironclad” which had James Purlfoy.  This movie does not.  Is that a clue as to whether it would be worse than the original?  If you like frenetic blood splattering, you might enjoy it. In one of the fights, a guy kills another with a severed arm! For the rest of us non-psychopaths, it is terrible and headache-inducing.  

4.  Beyond Valkyrie  -  You know what they say about sequels.  It’s especially true when the sequel has one percent of the budget of the original.  Needless to say the plot is ridiculous and the acting is atrocious.  It’s a Tom Sizemore movie, ‘nuff said.  There is a copious expenditure of ammo if you like that sort of thing.  Not enough to drown out the dialogue, however.

3.  Dad’s Army  (2016)  -  I am not British, so I am not required to love “Dad’s Army”.  The movie was based on the much beloved series.  I think even fans of the series had to admit the movie was a bomb.  The acting is terrible and the production is shoddy.  The movie plot is silly, but not silly funny like you would expect from the British.  I am a big fan of British comedy, but this movie did not make me laugh even once.  But then again, I watched the supposed best episode of the series and did not find it special.  I’ll stick with “Allo! Allo!”

2.  USS Indianapolis:  Men of Courage  -  Another Sizemore movie.  And it stars Nick Cage.  If that is not enough to a bad vibe, then enjoy this movie.  Even the sharks are bad actors.  Robert Shaw’s character in “Jaws” would have been more traumatized by being in this movie than actually being on the Indianapolis. Prepare to laugh guiltily.

1.  “The Red and the White” is a joint Russian-Hungarian project to commemorate the Russian Revolution.  Director Miklos Jansco decided to jump two years to the Russian Civil War and not make a celebratory film. The fact that he survived that decision tells you that the Soviet government was not as evil as thought.  The resulting film met critical acclaim in the West, but its negative portrayal of its topic did not sit well in the Soviet Union.  It was reedited to make it more heroic for Soviet audiences.  I must have seen the original version.

                The movie is set in 1919 on one of the twenty-one fronts of the Russian Civil War.  A unit of Hungarian volunteers are fighting on the side of the Bolsheviks (the Reds) versus the anti-communist Whites.  It opens with a slo-mo cavalry charge at the camera.  The cavalry are chasing two foot soldiers and catch and kill one.  In an ominous development from the perspective of this viewer, they don’t bother to get the other guy even though they can clearly see him.  This will not be the last head-scratching moment.  Here are some others.  The cavalry strip some prisoners and tell them to run home.  The White leader chooses three and shoots them in the back.  Then the remainder are chased and lined up and shot.   Next, some nurses are taken into the woods and suddenly they have dress gowns on and there is a military band.  They are forced to dance with each other and… then they are told to go.  I assume there is some symbolism here.  A prisoner is forced to sing and then told to jump in a river and is speared.  Lots of aimless walking.  Some stuff happens at a hospital.  Finally, the big battle scene.  The Hungarians charges a larger unit, then runs back, then makes a suicide attack.  Well, it was either them or me because at this point if the movie had not ended I might have slashed my wrists.

                “The Red and the White” is an “emperor’s new clothes” movie.  In other words, it’s a movie that critics insist is a masterpiece and if you don’t get that than you are a moron.  Well, I may be a moron, but I have seen enough good war movies to know a piece of shit when I see one.  It is not a single piece, but a steaming pile.  And I don’t say this because I was hoping for a heroic take on the Bolsheviks.  I think Jansco was trying to depict the insanity of war.  Or rather, that must have been his excuse when he faced all the WTF looks from the opening night audience.  Why did I shoot some of the deaths of main characters from a far distance?  Because war is confusing!  Why did the nurses dance in the woods?  If you have to ask, you don’t deserve to know!  Was the movie meant to be a comedy?  I don’t know, what do you think?  Seriously, do you have any idea what I was trying to do?  Help me understand my own movie, please.

                The movie does have some strengths.  The cinematography is showy, really artsy-fartsy.  Jansco loves long shots.  And he films from an airplane!  Awards please.  Another strength is it is one of the funniest war films I have seen.  I actually laughed out loud at some parts.  Sorry, highbrows. I couldn’t help myself.  But most importantly, it lasts only 90 minutes.  Trust me, it seems like many more.

                If you want to learn more about the Russian Civil War, read a book.  Don’t watch this movie.  There are some good movies that can inform you that war is fucked up.  Try “The Burmese Harp”, which came out the same year.  Hell, if you want to watch a entertainingly confusing war film from that year, try “Beach Red”.   At least you can decipher what Cornel Wilde was trying to do.

GRADE  =  F-

PICTURE, QUOTE, MOVIE #25

WHAT MOVIE IS THIS LINE FROM?

"Well, the tank's broke, and they're trying to fix it..."


WHAT MOVIE IS THIS?

It is a war movie dedicated to American bomber crews and command in England in 1942. It is based on the novel by Sy Bartlett and Beirne Lay, Jr. It was made with the full cooperation of the Air Force which provided several B-17s and combat footage including from the Luftwaffe. The movie was a hit with the critics and won two Academy Awards (Jagger for Best Supporting Actor and Best Sound Recording) and was nominated for two others (Best Picture and Peck for Actor). It takes its name from the slang for enemy fighters being spotted above and straight ahead.

#1 Das Boot vs. #9 Above Us the Waves

VS.

DIALOGUE:  “Das Boot” has a good mixture of dialogue and action.  The dialogue is divided between the officers and the crew.  The officers are a heterogeneous lot and their conversations offer a variety of takes.  The captain in particular offers a cynical, war-weary view of the war.  When he observes the men carousing before they go on patrol, he says:  “Scared f***ers.  They need sex as much as the infantry needs alcohol.”  He is not a man of many words, however.  His facial expressions do his talking for him.  The sailor banter is crude as you would expect.  GRADE  =  B

There is nothing special about the dialogue in “Above Us the Waves”.  It’s a very British movie so the dialogue is sparse.  There are no speeches and little exposition.  There is some humor of the British ilk.  Very dry.  GRADE  =  C

FIRST QUARTER SCORE:  Das Boot  =  8

                                             Above Us the Waves  =  6

SPECIAL EFFECTS:  “Das Boot” is not famous because of it special effects.  There is little undersea footage.  The depth charge scenes eschew the descending cans imagery.  The explosions themselves are well-done and the effects on the sub interior are the best of any sub movie.  The sound effects are also the acme.  The effects for the burning tanker are awesome and there is a bomb laden final scene that saved the best pyrotechnics for last.  GRADE  =  B

“Above Us the Waves” has some fine underwater camerawork.  It was obviously done in a pool in daylight, but I am fine with that considering when it was made and for how much.  These shots include a sequence that includes the cutting of a submarine net, going under a torpedo net, and then placing some limpet mines on the hull of a ship.  However, the scene where one of the subs gets trapped under the Tirpitz is underwhelming.   GRADE  =  C+

HALFTIME SCORE:  Das Boot  =  16

                                   Above Us the Waves  =  13

ACTION:   One of the things that makes “Das Boot” so realistic is that it is not nonstop action.  There are long stretches where the sub sees no action.  It is frustrating for them, but not for us.  The reaction of the officers and crew are fascinating.  The action we get is pretty much confined to depth chargings and the efforts of the crew dealing with the damages from them.  GRADE  =  C

 “Above Us the Waves” is light on action.  It’s more of a claustrophobic thriller. It’s as slow moving as the mini-subs.  But no one advertised it as an adrenalin rush.  It does build well to the attack on the Tirpitz.  GRADE  =  C

THIRD QUARTER SCORE:  Das Boot  =  22

                                              Above Us the Waves  =  19

ACCURACY:  It is hard to judge the accuracy of “Das Boot” because it is based on a novel that is based on an actual u-boat patrol.  The movie is more realistic than accurate.  It gets the details and vibe right.  The attitudes and behavior of the submariners are authentic.  It lays the frustration and cynicism on a bit thick considering this was not the low moment in the war for the u-boats.  There was an actual u-boat and the book author is represented by the naval correspondent Werner.  However, the actual U-96 did not experience the incidents covered in the movie.  Since it does not claim to be a true story, I am going to grade it mainly on its accuracy in depicting life on a u-boat.  GRADE  =  B

“Above Us the Waves” is based on Operation Source which was the attempt by Royal Navy mini-subs to sink the German battleship Tirpitz at its anchorage in Norway.  It also covers the original plan which was to try to use Chariot manned torpedoes to attach mines.  That mission failed as depicted in the film.  The action by the X-craft is pretty close to what happened.  One of the subs was lost mysteriously, probably to fire from the Tirpitz.  The other two placed their side cargoes under the warship and two of them exploded causing significant damage that put it out of action for six months.  The two successful craft tried to escape, but were taken under fire and had to surrender.  Six men were captured and two were lost.  GRADE  =  A

FINAL SCORE:  Das Boot  =  30

                           Above Us the Waves =  28 

ANALYSIS:   “Above Us the Waves” is not a traditional sub movie.  It might not have made the tournament if I could have found another movie where a torpedo was fired.  I’m glad I did this tournament because I might not have run across this little gem.  And it is admirably accurate in dramatizing an operation that I had not been familiar with.  Still, it’s hard to pit it against possibly the most acclaimed sub movie.  The categories this round did not really play into the strengths of “Das Boot”.  It is no doubt the better of the two movies so it deserves to move on.

#4 Crimson Tide vs. #12 Hell and High Water

VS.

DIALOGUE:  The dialogue in “Crimson Tide” is not flowery.  It does lack in sailor jargon since the movie concentrates on the officers.  There are some philosophical discussions between Ramsey (Gene Hackman) and Hunter (Denzel Washington) on topics like Hiroshima and von Clausewitz.  The confrontations between the two mutineers (that’s right, each leads a mutiny) are pretty intense.  Quentin Tarantino was brought in to add pop cultural references to the script.  GRADE  =  A 

“Hell and High Water” puts a scientist and his comely assistant on board a boat with a motley crew and a hard-boiled skipper.  Much of the dialogue pits science against the military mind.  There are no memorable lines, but the actors are not forced to embarrass themselves by what comes out of their mouths.  GRADE  =  C

FIRST QUARTER SCORE:  Crimson Tide  =  9

                                             Hell and High Water  =  7

SPECIAL EFFECTS:  “Crimson Tide” had the benefit of cutting edge technology and a big budget.  It did not have the cooperation of the US Navy.  It tends to frown on plots involving mutinies.  The director did manage to film the actual USS Alabama at sea and submerging.  Everything else was CGI.  There is a duel between subs that is better than in “The Hunt for Red October”.  The movie manages to get a fire into a sub movie.  This is truly a Hollywood production.  The sound effects were worthy of an Academy Award nomination.  GRADE  =  A

“Hell and High Water” had a budget of less than $2 million. Denzel Washington was paid $7 million to make “Crimson Tide”.  Not exactly a level playing field.  The littler movie did well with what it had.  The underwater scenes are better than average and the film was nominated for Best Effects.  GRADE  =  B

HALFTIME SCORE:  Crimson Tide  =  18

                                   Hell and High Water  =  15

ACTION:  “Crimson Tide” has a galley fire and a sub duel, but it’s mostly the threat of violence that dominates the latter part of the film.  The level of action would have gone off the meter if all those guns had been used in the final confrontation between the opposing sides.  As it is, we had to be content with verbal fisticuffs.  The movie is more of a thriller than an action movie.  GRADE  =  C

“Hell and High Water” has a tangle with a Chinese sub and two shore landings.  In the sub encounter, they ram the enemy under the water.  Well, that’s different.  The first commando raid is your typical blow things up type.  The second gives the sexy female scientist the chance to shoot a guard.  That is also something you don’t see in every sub movie.  Oh, and they shoot down a B-29.  GRADE  =  B

THIRD QUARTER SCORE:  Crimson Tide  =  24

                                              Hell and High Water  =  23

ACCURACY:  “Crimson Tide” posits a doomsday scenario that cannot be judged for accuracy.  However, the way the sub handles the crisis can be judged based on American nuclear doctrine and procedures.  The scenario involves Russian rebels getting control of some ICBMs and possibly firing them at the U.S.  The clock-ticking nature of Hollywood thrillers requires the missiles to be fueled up before launched when in reality they would be ready to go immediately.  The biggest artistic license is with the central issue of the exec refusing to concur with the launch because he feels a second incomplete message is likely a cancel order.  In reality, the exec has only the power to confirm the authenticity of the message, not stop its implementation.  There were sub veterans, including the technical adviser who had skippered the real Alabama, who insisted the movie was essentially accurate.  A political adviser might have been nice since American nuclear doctrine is against a preemptive strike.  Not that a President might not violate that rule.  (Who are you picturing right now?)  All of the inaccuracies were classic artistic license to enhance the drama.  GRADE  =  C

“Hell and High Water” is totally fictitious.  It is very much a product of the early Cold War.  Although entertaining, it is totally preposterous.  The Red Chinese have a plan to use a purloined B-29 to drop an atomic bomb and blame it on the U.S.  International scientists hire a rogue sub to stop the bad guys.  Surely you read of this in your history textbook.  And a woman scientist in 1954 – come on!   As Capt. Jones says:  “So tell me Professor, what makes a girl who looks like that get mixed up in science?”  GRADE  =  D

FINAL SCORE:  Crimson Tide  =  30

                           Hell and High Water  =  28

ANALYSIS:  I consider myself pretty knowledgeable about war movies, but I have to admit I had never heard of “Hell and High Water” before starting work on this tournament.  When I began to hunt for 16 sub movies that fit my criteria I ran into it.  It almost did not make the cut because I was unsure that I would be able to get a copy.  It is not a well-known movie.  I am glad it worked out because it was an enjoyable movie to watch.  This matchup was one between an obscure B-movie and a blockbuster.  “Crimson Tide” could not be more different.  It is the better movie, but mainly because of all the resources available to it.  Still, “Hell and High Water” put up a good fight and hopefully its performance will encourage others to seek it out.

#6 We Dive at Dawn vs. #11 Up Periscope

VS.

PLOT:  “We Dive at Dawn” is a British submarine movie released in 1943.  The Sea Tiger, commanded by Lt. Taylor (John Mills), returns from an unstellar cruise so we can get some soap operaish plot developments involving the crew.  Once these human interest stories have been initiated, the boat gets a secret mission to sink a German battleship.  Once this is possibly accomplished the sub has to land a shore party to blow some stuff up.  The plot does a good job balancing character development, the home front, and the action.  It builds to a rousing conclusion.  GRADE  =  B+

“Up Periscope” was released in 1959 which makes it the last of the post-WWII sub movies.  It concentrates on a secret mission which involves landing a frogman (James Garner) on a Japanese island to steal a code book.  Unfortunately, Commander Stevenson (Edmund O”Brien) is a by the book type who does not want to endanger his boat even if it means winning the war.  There is a romance to bookend the movie and a duel with a destroyer.  The mission is fairly suspenseful, if predictable.  There is little character development and it lacks crew perspective.   Basically, it’s nothing special.  GRADE  =  B-

FIRST QUARTER SCORE:  We Dive at Dawn  =  8

                                             Up Periscope  =  7

ACTING:   “We Dive at Dawn” has a good cast of Brits who you probably don’t know except John Mills.  In a bit of a a twist, he plays the ladies’ man instead of a member of the crew.  This is a bit of a stretch but he of course is perfect as the imperturbable captain when at sea.  The acting honors go to Eric Portman as the sad sack Hobson who is dealing with a wayward wife, but still finds it in himself to become an action hero.  It actually is believable. 

GRADE  =  A

Much of the entertainment value for “Up Periscope” comes from the acting.  Garner and O’Brien are appropriately feisty towards each other.  It was Garner’s second significant role after “Darby’s Rangers” and he was still appearing in “Maverick”.  He was coming into his own as a leading man.  O’Brien was at the top of his career.  The supporting cast is fine and dominated by Alan Hale, Jr.  as the boat’s resident wolf!  Believe it or not.  He also provides the little comic relief in an otherwise serious movie.  GRADE =  B

HALFTIME SCORE:  We Dive at Dawn  =  17

                                   Up Periscope  =  15

TACTICS:  “We Dive at Dawn” has the Sea Tiger traveling on the surface during the daytime because they are in a rush to intercept the battleship.  However, it does crash dive when a plane is spotted.  “Looked like one of ours, so we dived immediately.”  That line alone tells you the screenwriter knows the dangers of sub warfare.  The sub easily goes through a mine field and rams its way through a net.  They fire six torpedoes at the battleship and have to dive before knowing what the effects were.  It was a lucky fire situation, however.  They get out of a depth charging by broaching which was nuts.  GRADE  =  D

“Up Periscope” is a strange bird when it comes to tactics.  Commander Stevenson loses the faith of his crew by staying on the bottom while a fleet passes over even though he has a crewman who is grievously injured in an accident.  This makes little sense because the Japanese are not even pinging for him.  Later, he risks the boat by traveling on the surface to get to the target island sooner, but when he gets there he refuses to risk the sub by going into the lagoon.  He changes his mind because there is a ship outside, which makes little sense.  GRADE  =  C

THIRD QUARTER SCORE:  We Dive at Dawn  =  22

                                               Up Periscope  =  21

CLICHES:  In “We Dive at Dawn” leave is cut short because of a special mission.  A depth charging results in leaks.  They fool the Germans by jettisoning oil, debris, and a conveniently dead German.  They send a shore party ashore to wreck s*** and steal some fuel.  They don’t follow a ship through a net, they bash their way through!  GRADE  =  B-

In “Up Periscope”, the skipper and the frogman butt heads.  The sub is sent on a special mission.  Garner conducts a one-man commando raid to get a code book.  A man is left on deck during a dive.  Diesel oil is released to fool a Japanese destroyer that is depth charging them.  The sub has a black mess mate.  GRADE  =  C

FINAL SCORE:  We Dive at Dawn  =  29

                           Up Periscope  =  27

ANALYSIS:  Because of the categories, this matchup ended up closer than it should have been.  “We Dive at Dawn” is the much better movie.   It has better acting and develops the characters well, including some of the crew.  The dialogue is more realistic (provided you can wade through the accents) and the behavior on board more genuine.  It has a superior set piece that is one of the better shore party scenes in a sub movie.  On the other hand, “Up Periscope” has too many holes in the plot.  It also has a lame romance thrown in.

#7 Crash Dive vs. #10 Operation Pacific

VS.

PLOT:  “Crash Dive” is a love triangle set around a submarine movie.  Hot shot PT-boat ace Lt. Stewart (Tyrone Powers) is transferred to the silent service.  He is exec to Lt. Commander Dewey (Dana Andrews).  In an awkward development, the wolfish Stewart stalks a comely school teacher named Jean (Anne Baxter) who coincidentally is engaged to Dewey.  The USS Corsair patrols the North Atlantic and encounters a Q-ship.  Later, they are sent on a special mission to destroy the Q-ship base.  The plot is heavily tilted to the 1940s style triangle which is very predictable.  The sea scenes are trite and not instructive of life on a submarine.  The big action scene at the base is blustery and unbelievable.  GRADE  =  D

“Operation Pacific” is a John Wayne movie.  Wayne is exec on the USS Thunderfish.  The love triangle in this movie involves his ex-wife being wooed by his captain’s brother.  Wayne wants her back and so does everyone else (including the captain!).  The Thunderfish also has an encounter with a Q-ship which results in Wayne taking command.  In between patrols, the movie takes on the problems that plagued American torpedoes in the first half of the war.  On a later mission, his sub runs into an entire Japanese fleet, including an aircraft carrier.   The plot is weak with its lame romance and everything else is equally predictable.  There are several action sequences that are laughably unrealistic.  GRADE  =  C

FIRST QUARTER SCORE:  Crash Dive  =  5

                                             Operation Pacific  =  6

ACTING:   “Crash Dive” is a three person affair.   The cast is a good one with Powers playing the wolf but laying it on a bit thick.  Baxter is lovely and manages to gloss over the fact that she is a sl**.  Andrews has to play morose cuckold and is a bit wooden.  The crew contains the usual crusty chief, but gives the obligatory black steward a bit more to do than serve food.  He is not a caricature.  The acting is formulaic to match the movie.  GRADE  =  C

Wayne is Wayne and I don’t have to tell you that romance was not his forte.  He and Patricia Neal had no chemistry (maybe because they did not get along on the set).  Ward Bond is good while he lasts.  Philip Carey acts like a man who is competing against John Wayne for the same woman.  In other words, hopeless.  The supporting cast is nondescript.  GRADE  =  C

HALFTIME SCORE:  Crash Dive  =  11

                                   Operation Pacific  =  12

TACTICS:  The encounter with the Q-ship is problematical as the Corsair comes up on the surface to inspect it and is totally taken by surprise.  One torpedo would have easily taken care of the problem.  The egress from the Q-ship base is done partially submerged with the captain guiding the sub past shore batteries that should have easily sunk it.  It’s an exciting image if you can see it through your tears of laughter.  GRADE  =  D

“Operation Pacific” is just as hazy on tactics.  They spot an aircraft carrier and fire only two torpedoes instead of the usual six.  In their encounter with their Q-ship, they fall for a white flag and surface.  They end up ramming the Japanese ship which is pretty ridiculous.  Once they solve the torpedo problem, they have no trouble sinking ships with little firing solution efforts.  GRADE  =  D

THIRD QUARTER SCORE:  Crash Dive  =  16

                                               Operation Pacific  =  17

CLICHES:  In “Crash Dive”, the sub is sent on a special mission to destroy an enemy base.  This involves landing a commando group.  They blow lots of things up.  There is dysfunction between the CO and the exec over a girl.  There is a black mess mate on board.  He goes on the raid.  When the periscope gets hit, the captain stays on deck to guide the boat.  During a depth charging they release debris to fool the pursuers.  The sub follows a ship through both an anti-submarine net and a mine field.  GRADE  =  D

In “Operation Pacific”, the captain gets left on deck when he is wounded by the Q-ship.  Wayne gets redemption for his decision to dive with his captain left on deck.  They fix the problem with the torpedoes, although this is done ashore.  They survive a depth charging that is incredibly accurate, but does not do much damage.  GRADE  =  B

FINAL SCORE:  Crash Dive  =  21

                           Operation Pacific  =  25

ANALYSIS:  I did not plan this matchup.  It’s just a coincidence both involve love triangles which is not shocking considering how common this trope is in war movies (although not that common in sub movies).  The scenes involving Q-ships are bizarre, however.  Truthfully, neither movie is in the upper level of submarine movies.  “Operation Pacific” is the winner mainly based on its surprising lack of clichés.  It is also a slightly more realistic look at submarine operations.  Both have lame romances, but at least “Operation Pacific” does not make it the main raison d’etre.  Plus, it has John Wayne, even it is not one of his stellar performances.

WAR MOVIE TOURNAMENT: Submarine Combat

                It’s time for my annual subgenre tournament.  This year I have decided to do submarine movies.  I found it difficult to pick sixteen movies that fit my criteria and were available for viewing.  The main qualification was  the movie had to have some combat in it.  This eliminated movies like “Gray Lady Down”, for instance.  I came up with an interesting mix of mostly WWII movies with a wide range of quality.  For the seeding I went with the general critical consensus on the films, not the views of war movie experts or my own opinions.  As with all the other tournaments, the format is that of a basketball tournament with four quarters in each matchup and a total of twelve categories in reaching the finals.  Here are the matchups:

1 -  Das Boot

16 -  The Enemy Below

8 -  Destination Tokyo

9 -  Hell and High Water

4 -  Crimson Tide

13 -  Torpedo Run

5 -  U-571

12 -  Above Us the Waves

2 -  Run Silent, Run Deep

15 -  Hellcats of the Navy

7 -  Crash Dive

10 -  Operation Pacific

3 -  The Hunt for Red October

14 -  Submarine Command

6 -  We Dive at Dawn

11 -  Up Periscope

                Although I had seen and reviewed most of the sixteen before, I did watch them all for this tournament.  That was quite a chore in some cases.  However, the few that I had not seen were entertaining and worth the effort.  I hope this tournament may cause others to view some of the forgotten gems in this competition and avoid some pretty bad movies.  So here goes.  Good luck and good hunting!

#8  Destination Tokyo vs.  #9 Above Us the Waves

VS.

PLOT:  “Destination Tokyo” was released in 1943 so it has a heavy dose of patriotism and propaganda.  The USS Copperfin (commanded by Cary Grant) is sent on a special mission to penetrate Tokyo Bay and land a commando team that will facilitate the Doolittle Raid.  After that, their reward will be a shot at a Japanese aircraft carrier.  The plot was actually nominated for Best Original Screenplay, but that must have been a fit of patriotism because this is an average sub movie which lacks realism and suspense.  It was right for its time, but does not hold up well.  GRADE  =  C

“Above Us the Waves” is a British film that was released in 1955.  It is the story of the operation to sink the German battleship Tirpitz at its anchorage.  The original attempt is by way of human torpedoes and then by way of midget subs.  The movie covers the training and the two missions but concentrates on the final one.  We follow the three midgets as they sneak up to their target.  It does an admirable job chronicling the event and is suspenseful and realistic.  GRADE  =  B

FIRST QUARTER SCORE:  Destination Tokyo  =  6

                                             Above Us the Waves  =  8

ACTING:  “Destination Tokyo” has the inestimable Gary Grant as the Captain Cassidy.  He underplays a bit, but his character is iconic.  The rest of the cast is fine.  Alan Hale, Sr. is on board for comic relief.  John Garfield plays the stereotypical wolf with some 1940s verve.  He is one of the better ladies’ men that appear often in this subgenre.  Overall, the acting is appropriate for a movie of this era.  GRADE  =  B

“Above Us the Waves” has John Mills as its lead, of course.  (It is, after all, a British war movie.)  The rest of the cast is equally British.  It’s a good group and they are up to the very claustrophobic setting.  GRADE  =  A

HALFTIME SCORE:  Destination Tokyo  =  14

                                   Above Us the Waves  =  17

TACTICS:  For a movie that was supposedly used as a training film by the US Navy, there is surprisingly little that deals with submarine tactics in “Destination Tokyo”.  In the attack on the aircraft carrier, Capt. Cassidy fires four torpedoes from the bow tubes.  He then passes under the warship and fires the four stern tubes.  That would have been highly unlikely.  The sub survives a typically accurate cinematic depth charging and then sinks the offending Japanese destroyer with a bow shot.  GRADE  =  C

“Above Us the Waves” is not a typical submarine movie.  The midget subs do not fire torpedoes.  Their tactic was to sneak up on the target and drop explosive devices under the keel.  The movie accurately depicts the tactics.  GRADE  =  A

THIRD QUARTER:  Destination Tokyo  =  20

                                  Above Us the Waves  =  26

CLICHES:  “Destination Tokyo” is considered the “granddaddy of American submarine movies" and it established several of the clichés associated with the subgenre.  The Copperfin is sent on a special mission.  Cassidy has to disarm an unexploded bomb and assist in an appendectomy.  They follow a Japanese warship through a net.  The sub lands a commando group to report on the weather.  The crew listens to Tokyo Rose.  The sub undergoes a depth charging that results in leaks and rivets blowing.  They sink a Japanese destroyer using a head-on shot.   GRADE  =  A   (because it created the clichés)

“Above Us the Waves” is as atypical as “Destination Tokyo” is standard.  It does cover a special mission.  They do go through a submarine net and also under a torpedo net.  It is one of the least clicheish submarine movies.  GRADE  =  B  (it would be unfair to give it an A because it the plot is not set up like a normal sub movie)

FINAL SCORE:  Destination Tokyo  =  29

                           Above Us the Waves  =  34

ANALYSIS:  “Destination Tokyo” is one of the iconic submarine movies.  It was a big hit and is still remembered fondly.  This is in large part due to Cary Grant.  Its flaws are partly due to the time it was made.  Being produced in the middle of the war meant that it was required to wave the flag and demonize the foe.  Some of the dialogue is hard to sit through.  It is not only full of speeches, but also sermons.  It can be forgiven for being loaded with clichés because it was early in the game so they were fresh back then.  That does not excuse the ridiculous script developments that would have pleased a 1943 audience and still please modern viewers, but cause war movie lovers to cringe and pull their hair.

               

                “Above Us the Waves” is a gem that is not well known in America.  While “Destination Tokyo” is almost total bull crap wrapped around the Doolittle Raid, “Waves” is an almost documentary on Operation Source.  The event is recreated in a no frills way, but this does not negate suspense.  It is certainly the best movie about midget submarines.   

2016 Movies from Worst to Best

It always seems like there are not very many war movies coming out these days, but when I looked back at 2016, it turns out there were more than twenty that were released. In fact, most of them I had not even heard of until I started this project. I saw #10, 9, 8, 3, 2, and 1 in theaters when they came out. Granted, most of them did not make it to theaters, but that is still an acceptable amount of war movies. It’s just a shame that more of them were not good and only one of them was very good.

18. Dad's Army - “Dad’s Army” is a sequel to the beloved Britcom. In this extended episode, a comely German spy masquerading as a journalist (Catherine Zeta-Jones for God knows what reason) is determined to ferret out the location of a D-Day preparation site. This could change the outcome of the war. All she has to do to ensure that Germany wins the war is to dupe the Home Guard of Walmington-on-Sea. She does this by flirting with the two leaders of our bumbling crew of geezers and geezer-brains. Comedy hijinks ensue and guffaws result if you are a septuagenarian who refuses to admit the original series was not all that funny and thinks a remake was an excellent idea. Sorry, elderly Brits, this movie is a steaming pile of crumpets. F-

17. U,S.S. Indianapolis: Men of Courage- If you watch a movie starring both Nick Cage and Tom Sizemore, you are an “Audience of Courage”. This “based on a true story” flick attempts to do justice to the men of the ill-fated USS Indianapolis. As anyone who has seen “Jaws” knows, the Indy was sunk by a Japanese sub after delivering the atomic bomb to the “Enola Gay”. Sharks feasted on the survivors. The movie feasts on our eyes. While fairly accurate, the acting and pitiful effects dilute the historical significance. F  Netflix Instant

16. Beyond Valkyrie: Dawn of the Fourth Reich - “Beyond Valkyrie” has one thing in common with the Tom Cruise movie. I’ll give you a hint – it’s not Tom Cruise. If you want to see Cruise’s excellent take on the attempted assassination of Hitler, make sure you do not put the word “beyond” on the front of your Netflix request. This “sequel” has something to do with a mission behind enemy lines to rescue a plotter. Straight-to-DVD action and acting take your mind off the mindless plot. The reason why this movie is slightly better than USS Indianapolis is it has only Tom Sizemore in it. F

15. Sniper: Special Operations - Continuing the trend of bad actors making bad movies, this movie stars Steven Seagal. Part of the venerable “Sniper” franchise (try saying that out loud at a film festival), this episode has our heroes trying to rescue a Congressman being held hostage by the Taliban. Meanwhile, a laconic sniper (Seagal) is holed up behind enemy lines in need of extreme rescuing. Bang! Bang! Boom! Boom! USA! USA! You get what you expected. D

14. Guernica - A cynical, hard-drinking journalist (how original) hooks up with a government censor (opposites attract) for a romance set in the terror bombing of a Spanish city during the Spanish Civil War. Tragedy and romance – a war movie staple. Supersize to love triangle. Evil Soviet (not Nazi, at least) and the Red Baron’s son. Plus plenty of bombs! The actual bombing inspired Picasso to paint a famous mural that is on the opposite end of the artistic spectrum from this movie. But it does set the tropes in an obscure historical event and Nick Cage, Tom Sizemore, and Steven Seagal are nowhere to be found, so it is not the worst war movie of the year.  D

13. Operation Chromite - If you weren’t so focused on America’s role in the Korean War, you would be aware of a mission by South Korean commandoes to steal the plans to the mine fields off Inchon. By watching this movie, you will still be totally in the dark about Operation Chromite, unless it was slap-ass crazy. This is a below average Korean combat-porn movie. What makes it stand out is the usual gonzo Korean leading man has been replaced by a Liam Neeson as Douglas MacArthur. He actually does an acceptable overrated military genius. Unfortunately, the movie does not do an acceptable rendition of Korean combat-porn. You don’t have to be drinking to be drunk by the end of the movie.  D

12. Sniper: Ghost Shooter - How does the Sniper franchise manage to put out two movies in one year? That is like two Star Wars in one year. In this entry, our snipers (plural because more is better and essential at this stage) are tasked with defending a pipeline in the Middle East. There is a jihadi sniper who is better than all of them and he has their coordinates somehow. Don’t worry, their plus/minus will be reversed big-time in the climactic snipe-off. And our designated focus sniper has gone through his redemption arc from refusing to shoot a kid to killing for our cause. And he gets the hot spy babe. Stick around to the end to get your fill of jihadi slaughter. C- 

11. Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk - How genius is it to contrast the home front to what went on with our troops in Afghanistan? How about if we throw in a what-really-happened-in-the-incident scenario? Okay, but what if we film it in some radically different cinematography that distracts from the plot? To tell the truth I was not distracted from the plot because I saw this movie in the boring regular format that forced me to concentrate on how lame the plot is. If you don’t want your movie to be a disappointment, why would you set it in a Dallas Cowboys game? C-

10. Allied - “Allied” is a high wattage WWII espionage/romance that greatly improves on “Shining Through” but still requires a lot of suspension of belief. It is a movie for the masses who want to watch two beautiful people (Brad Pitt and Marion Cotillard) ooze sexual chemistry. The plot developments deftly connect the dots in ways unknown to the real world. Not bad, just forgettable. C

9. The Free State of Jones - “Free State” is another sincere effort to bring a forgotten historical event to the nonreading public. During the Civil War, a county in Mississippi refused to go along with secession. They were led by a charismatic anti-planter named Newton Knight (Matthew McConaughey). The movie is more of a biopic than a war movie. It is competently done and relies a lot on McConaughey’s star power to overcome its piousness and civil rights activism. And it is admirably accurate. The big problem is it is too long and insists on covering the anticlimactic Reconstruction period. C

8. Hyena Road - This is a movie that highlights the involvement of the Canadian army in Afghanistan. Did you know the Canadians killed a lot of evil jihadists there? Paul Gross (of “Northern Exposure” fame) brought this “based on several incidents that could have happened” story to a couple of screens in Canada. The action is decent and the romance is female-appealing, but the movie is average. C Netflix Instant

7. Jarhead 3 - The third in the series and the second to not grace a theater. “Jarhead 3” is not a cult classic. It is a competent actioner and better than could be expected. It is not in a league with the similarly plotted “13 Hours”, but if you have seen that movie and want more ass-kicking and a happier ending, see this one too. C+ Netflix Instant

6. Siege of Jadotville - It was a good year for obscure incidents. This movie highlights the heroic efforts of a green unit of Irish peacekeepers in the Congo when it was going through the usual African turmoil. The men are led by a commander who is unflappable and a quick learner. Unfortunately, they are besieged by a horde of warriors tempered by French mercenaries. Throw in slimy politicians and you have a movie that is micro (the siege) and macro (the United Nations efforts). The action is cyclical and similar to “Zulu” although clearly inferior. The historical accuracy is high. B- Netflix Instant

5. Anthropoid - If people still don’t know the story of the assassination of Reinhard Heydrich, perhaps this seventh rendition of the story will do the trick. The movie tells the tale of the two Czech special operatives who took out the Nazi bigwig in the streets of Prague. Naturally , the two have to find romance. Although the strained attempt to appeal to the female audience is a weakness, the movie is noteworthy for its recreation of the assassination in real time. Then it adds the siege of the assassins in a church that sates your need to see many Heydrich peons blunder into bullets. B

4. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot - This is a Tina Fey vehicle set in Afghanistan. It is based on the experiences of Kim Barker. It is our most recent addition to the war journalist subgenre. In that respect, it maintains the usual clichés of hard-partying, cynical reporters trying to scoop each other. The film is surprisingly not political and actually is pro-military. If anything, its message is that the war is just a mess. The cast is top notch and has Margot Robbie as a slutty news bunny. Fey is very good. There is some good action and interaction between the journalists and the military. It is a dramedy with the snarky humor you would expect from Fey. B

3. 13 Hours- This is a Michael Bay film that is not a load of hooey. It tells the story of the military contractors that defended the State Department and C.I.A. personnel in Benghazi after the killing of Ambassador Stevens. It falls into the “last stand” subgenre. The action is intense and although the body count is enhanced, the movie sticks to the facts for the most part. Amazingly, it does not weigh in on the controversy and did not become a Republican propaganda film. It is red meat, not for Hillary-haters, but for war movie lovers. B

2. Hacksaw Ridge - Why did it take so long for Hollywood to tell the story of Desmond Doss? Doss was a conscientious objector who won the Medal of Honor for his efforts in saving the wounded during the conquest of Okinawa in WWII. It is better as a biopic than as a war movie. Andrew Garfield is fine as Doss (although not worthy of an Oscar nod) and his religiousness is not overplayed. The movie is an accurate take on Doss’ life, but that is diluted by the ludicrously over the top combat. The juxtapositioning of standard biopic with combat porn is whiplashing. The action is Korean style and has some LOL moments for anyone familiar with what combat is actually like. But that is what the public wants and at least they learn about a legit war hero. B

1. Rogue One - The latest Star Wars movie is the best in years and ends a string of disappointments. I consider it to be the third best installment after the first two. It is also the most war movieish of them all. In fact, the final battle is one of the greatest ever filmed. The plot has a variety of well-worn themes like the vengeance-minded lead (refreshingly a female this time), the quest by the motley crew of rogues, the multi-faceted battle. And the return of one cinema’s great villains. What’s not to like? A 

There were several movies that I was not able to track down. I am confident none of them would have made the top five. If anyone wants to make a case for any of them, feel free.

The Yellow Birds
Railroad Tigers
The King’s Choice
Alone in Berlin
Sand Castle
Land of Mine
Chosen
Kamp Holland
Harlem Hellfighters