Movie review - "Strange Intruder" (1956) **

 Based on an Australian novel (by Helen Fowler) which was about a returning POW - this one updates it to the Korean War. It confirms Edmund Purdom was too bland to be a star.  He's given a meaty role as a traumatised POW to seeks out the wife and kid of his dead mate. The role is completely beyond Purdom's abilities.

The tension comes from Purdom promising to kill his mate's kids because the mate's wife has been unfaithful. That's terrifyying , but it works if Purdom is a psycho - and he is a psycho and we need to think he's going to kill the kids.

The movie should have been told from Ida Lupino's point of view, so we play the mystery of this guy and have her fall in love with him and investigate what happened. But it's told from Purdom's point of view and we never really feel he's going to kill the kids.

Purdom is embarassingly bad. Jacques Bergerac isn't much better as Lupino's new squeeze. Lupino watches on, no doubt aware she should have played Purdom's role. They could've made the POWs some nurses in Korea. 

Movie review - "Men in War" (1957) ***1/2

 Excellent, tight little lost patrol movie set in the Korean War - Robert Ryan leads what's left of his men, crossing with Aldo Ray and a shell shocked colonel (Robert Keith). Anthony Mann is on tip top form. Stripped back story which nonetheless has some decent character stuff.

The left wing leanings of producer Sidney Harmon and Ryan are on show, I believe, in things such as the dehumanisation of war (soldiers freak out, run away and step on mines) and the presence of a black soldier (James Edwards). 

Tight, solid, stripped back, etc etc. 

Book review - "Conflict: The Evolution of Warfare from 1945 to Ukraine " by Andrew Roberts and David Petraeus

 A look at various Western conflicts after WW2 - Vietnam, Oman, Korea, Malaya. Amazing how much failure. The bits on Iraq and Aghanistan are especially upsetting because they were so pointless, and expensive. Smart book. All the conficts needed political solutions. Just depressing.

Movie review - "Period of Adjustment" (1962) **1/2

 Little remembered though it was a hit at the time - well, profitable for MGM at a time when everything from that studio was constantly flopping. Also it was from Tennessee Williams, an early role from Jane Fonda and the first feature from George Roy Hill.

It's a more comic take from Williams - no one's life is destroyed or goes mad, although as in many plays it has men reluctant to have sex with women. Jim Hutton and Jane Fonda get married  but squabble and she winds up at the house of Anthony Franciosa, Hutton's old army buddy who's just had a fight with his wife, Lois Nettleton.

Williams' film adaptations had a good chance it it was about a hot, beautiful female star who was horny - here they were lucky enough to get Jane Fonda. Hutton was a dab hand at comedy, which helps. She and Jim Hutton are sweet. Their plot is Huddon is scared to have sex - he didn't even do it with the gals during the Korean War.

I don't really like Franciosa, he gives off too much of a wife beating vibe (I'm not saying he did it, just that's the sense he gives) even if he's a good actor. I didn't care that much for Lois Nettleton or that plot - she's "homey", he married her for dad's money. It feels 50s TV. Maybe if Nettleton had been more heartbreaking or Franciosa more empathetic. Or more Southern. (John McGiver as her dad isn't very southern). I'm being mean, maybe I just didn't really care about either compared to the others. It's also long.

But it's fine.

Movie review - "An Annapolis Story" (1955) **

Another services film where John Derek is in love with the same woman as his buddy. According to Don Siegel, who directed, Derek insisted on swapping roles with Kevin McCarthy. This means Derek pinches Diana Lynn off McCarthy but then is heroic saving McCarthy's life only to see Lynn get back with McCarthy. It didn't really make much difference.

There's documentary footage of training and stuff at sea. Derek and McCarthy go up in jets. It's a surprise to see Siegel directed this.

This is dull. Sam Peckinpah worked on it as dialogue supervisor - he did a bit of work for Allied Artists around this time.

Movie review - "Mission Over Korea" (1953) **1/2 (warning: spoilers)

 A film that kept surprising me. On one hand there's a lot of rah-rah ness - unfunny military comedy, talk about sacrifice, Maureen O'Sullivan winsome and tired looking as John Hodiak's wife, John Derek being lecherous with women, Korean orphans, much of it feels rewritten/recut/made up as it goes along.

And yet... the fact it focuses on spotter planes is different, there's plenty of documentary style footage, the consistent action in the middle is fairly gripping, scenes like the arrival of a base that has been wiped out are tense.

There's camp (Derek talking about wanting to napalm the commies), surprisingly interesting characterisation (Audrey Trotter's tired, traumatised nurse), emotional ending (Hodiak dies), some 50s novelty (Harvey Lembeck and Richard Erdman reteaming from Stalag 17, a black soldier sings a song), Rex Reason has this random deep voice.

The film was so much better than I thought it would be.

Hodiak and the director, Fred Sears, would both be dead within a few years.

Movie review - "Cry for Happy" (1961) **

 Films set in Japan were all the rage in the late 1950s but this was one at the tale end of the cycle - I think it flopped. Glenn Ford is once again an American serviceman abroad, this time working for the navy. He and some other sailors including Glenn Ford get billetted at a geisha house.

The girls, Miko Taka and Miyoshi Umeki, were both in Sayonara. James Shigeta and Chet Douglas are other sailors.

There's a really unfunny extended bit in the middle where everyone watches a film with Japanese actors in a Western. Actually a lot of this is unfunny. It reaches for charm and doesn't get there. O'Connor's role is relatively small... I felt this would be better as a straight out buddy comedy.

Apparently Bobby Darin was up for a role in this but couldn't make it work schedule wise. O'Connor's part? Douglas's?

This is one of those films where the elements are there - the concept, stars, director all seem appropriate - but it just doesn't work. Maybe it's the lack of a core romance for Ford. Maybe it was too early to have really racy fun with the subject matter. Or they were too worried about offending people. Or something. It doesn't work.

Location filming is pleasant. And it was good to see actual Japanese actors given decent parts.

Movie review - "Submarine Command" (1951) **

 Made with the official co operation of the navy and it feels like it, with lots of talk of duty and any fun sucked out of the film.

William Holden is a sub officer who towards the end of WW2 has to undertake an action that results in the death of some fellow officers. No one blames him, it's all above board, but he's tormented by Guilt. Fortunately the Korean War comes along to give him the chance to be a hero.

Directed by John Farrow who was presumably attracted to the sea aspects of the story but it lacks his usual energy. Holden isn't well cast in this sort of thing. The cast is a bit "yawn-y": Nancy Olson as his gal, Don Taylor as an officer, William Bendix as a comical below decks character.

 

Book review - "The Garner Files" by James Garner

I'm still not sure how I feel about James Garner. A TV giant absolutely - I was never a fan of Maverick or The Rockford Files but I recognise his skill in them and his status as a TV star... also in a series of high quality TV movies in the late 80s. His track record is a movie star is patchier - I agree with the critic who once said he seemed to make movies he was in seem like TV shows, but he appeared in a decent number of classics: The Great Escape, The Americanisation of Emily, Support Your Local Sherriff.

There's lots about him to admire - a marriage of over forty years (albeit with some separations - I did hear he had a fling with Lauren Bacall hence his appearance in The Fan) to a woman who had a daughter with polio to another man when they met, a strong work ethic, a respect for the script (he doesn't like going off book), a willingness to sue Warners over their harsh contracts and also Universal after ripping him off, a strong civil rights record (including taking part in the March on Washington).

He has a prickly side, a temper - he admits to punching out Tony Franciosca (on the set of A Man Could Get Killed), Glenn A Larson and someone who heckled him at golf. He can be pompous and up his own arse, and takes these swipes at Rog Huggins (was it Garner and not Huggins who added the humour in Maverick - really?)

In this books he also skims over stuff which would have been worth talking about in greater detail (or at least I would've liked to hear about it more) - doing cocaine with John Belushi, a fifty year marijuana habit (his life long smoking led to heart surgery). Instead we get long-winded chapters on his interest in golf, football and racing cars. I did like his chapter on how he approached acting. I would've liked to have heard more about his films and TV shows but appreciate the chapter at the back of the book where he goes through all of them.

Garner had a rough upbringing - his mother died when he was young (a botched abortion), he was passed around to various relatives, dad drank and one of his new wives was physically abusive, it was the depression. After school he bummed around from job to job and saw active service in Korea (proper service to - he took part in battles, shot at people, was injured - this is a good section of the book).

He was lucky, too - blessed with beauty (he earned some money modelling), and a childhood friend was Paul Gregory who he bumped in to and suggested Garner try acting. Gregory promptly put him in a stage production of The Caine Mutiny Court Martial which went to Broadway - Garner's role was only small but he was in a hit and got to watch Hank Fonda and Lloyd Nolan act. He learned lessons well and was signed to Warner Bros who eventually put him in Maverick.

The book has a few digs and claps for Steve McQueen (a neighbour in the Hollywood Hills for a time), a strong dislike of Charles Bronson and Charlton Heston. There's a dull chapter where Garner's family and friends talk about how great he is. I have a lot of respect for Garner but after this, I get the feeling that I don't like him. I'm sure he wouldn't care a toss!

Movie review - "The Steel Helmet" (1951) ***1/2

The film that really put Sam Fuller on the map - a tough look at the Korean War, focusing on a sergeant who is the sole survivor (Gene Evans) of an ambush. He joins up with some other soldiers and they get stuck in a Bhuddist temple. The same old structure really - a siege movie - but Fuller always keeps it fresh and new: the opening shot of a steel helmet, a soldier being stabbed going "oh no... oh no..."

The low budget is artfully used - scenes in the temple, at night, with mist. Tight, very good.

Movie review - "A Stranger in My Arms" (1959) **

Jeff Chandler was one of Universal's biggest film stars of the 1950s - it's odd he didn't make more movies with Ross Hunter, whose plush cinematic melodramas and comedies would've suited the granite-jawed Chandler. While Hunter mostly used Chandler types like Rock Hudson and John Gavin, he did work with Chandler on The Spoilers and this.

Chandler plays a test pilot who has PTSD. He's pressured to visit the widow and mother of a fellow pilot who died in Chandler's arms during the Korean War. Mum is Mary Astor in a classic 50s castrating mother performance. Also entirely suitable to the genre is June Allyson's noble, brave widow.

The nub of the plot is that dead man Peter Graves was a useless piece of work - a coward (Graves is good in flashback). Mum Astor wants him to have the Medal of Honour and Jeff is unsure whether to tell the truth That's not a bad idea for a film.

It does lack something extra - some drama playing out in the present day. Written in the Wind, from the same writer as this (the original novel, not the script) had more stuff going on - Robert Stack and Rock Hudson were childhood friends, so there was an element of betrayal when Hudson fell for Stack's wife; Stack kills himself and there's a murder trial; Stack's sister Dorothy Malone loves Hudson.

This doesn't have that. The most interesting character dramatically is Peter Graves who is dead when the film starts. He didn't love Allyson and was a coward. Sandra Dee is on hand as Graves' sister - a bit of a minx, I think meant to be along the lines of Dorothy Malone... but she's too young to be a threat for Allyson/Chandler.

I think Graves had to be alive - or Dee needed to become obsessed with Chandler - or Astor tried to kill him. Or something, anything, that played out more in the present day. There's nothing at stake except Graves' reputation and Astor's feelings and a slight feeling of awkwardness for Chandler. Compare so say Rock Hudson in Written on the Wind who was best friends with Robert Stack and wound up on trial for murder.

It doesn't help that the film is in black and white and lacks production values. Douglas Sirk lite.

Movie review - "The Glory Brigade" (1953) ***

There was a late 40s/ early 50s vogue in Hollywood to make movies about prejudice in the army - Jews (Crossfire), blacks (Home of the Brave), Japanese-Americans (Go for Broke!). This one was the Greek's turn. Not Greek-Americans but Greek soldiers themselves.

I didn't realise there was much prejudice against Greek soldiers - and the film kind of acknowledges that by having Greek-American officer Victor Mature keen to work with European Greeks, until a battle incident happens where Mature thinks they're cowards. Mature feels bad about sticking up for the Greeks and gives them a hard time. Of course, since the president of 20th Century Fox was a Greek, Spyros Skouros, the Greeks are actually innocent - they just wipe their bayonets clean.

That's not a bad idea for a film - the Greek angle gives it some freshness. Mature is solid in the lead role and has decent conflict with Alexander Scourby, who is the Greek officer. (The moustache is a bit distracting.) Lee Marvin and Richard Egan pop up in support roles. And New Zealanders will enjoy the fact that there's a small part involving a New Zealand soldier who gives them information - played by someone called Ray Harden who was also in The Desert Rats.

I dont know much about director Richard Webb but enjoyed his work here - gritty, accomplished use of visuals. It's not a classic but is a professional tough war film with the novelty of Greek characters and a focus on America's relationship with it's allies in the Korean War.

Movie review - "House of Bamboo" (1955) ***1/2 (warning: spoilers)

Hollywood went on a Japanese kick after World War Two with sympathetic depictions of that country booming in the wake of their support in the Korean War: this, Sayonara, Joe Butterfly, Teahouse of the August Moon, etc. This was at the forefront - Sam Fuller's taken the story of another movie and added his own unique touches.

The marriage works well - the structure is a very sound one (as most undercover stories are), with Robert Stack infiltrating a group of ex servicemen committing violent robberies in Japan under the control of Robert Ryan. We find out Stack's undercover around 15 minutes in - the same point when we did re: Paul Walker in The Fast and the Furious.

I feel this movie has influenced a lot of other movies, right down to its homoeroticism... Ryan basically falls in love with Stack making old flame Cameron Mitchell jealous; Ryan winds up shooting Mitchell when the latter is nude in the bath because he believes he's a traitor, the discovers it's Stack. The film throws in the guys having "kimiko girls" to make sure we all know they're straight, but not Ryan... I think Fuller was being up front about him.

There is stunning CinemaScope photography and location work in Japan - it's a treat for the eyes. Robert Stack can be dull but Fuller's loosened him up and he's not a bad hero. Robert Ryan is a superb villain, though the film lacks a character scene or two to flesh out his relationship with Stack and Mitchell. (It didn't feel real Ryan would be so invested in Stack so quickly). Stack's romance with Shirley Yamaguchi is very sweet. I was surprised Sessue Hayakawa's role wasn't bigger.

The Fuller touches are plentiful - Biff Elliot's death on the operating table, Ryan shooting Mitchell in the bathtub, the final shoot out on the spinning wheel.

Movie review - "The Interview" (2015) **1/2 (warning: spoilers)

One of the most politically significant films in recent times - how many movies spark an attack from an overseas country, in this case a cyber attack from North Korea? It's actually got a lot of funny moments in it as well as actually giving two decent roles to Asian-American comedians - Randall Park is hilarious as Kim Jong-Un and Diana Bang even funner as a North Korean officer.

The beginning is a bit iffy - too much time was given over to James Franco riffing and crapping on - there wasn't that much fresh about his character: a hyper actively slightly idiotic TV host. Seth Rogen is fair more likeable but even then scenes where we set up his character's dissatisfaction seemed odd - everyone does celebrity journalism now and 60 Minutes would leap at the sort of stories he and Franco are doing on their show.

Also it felt mean that they went over there to assassinate Kim Jong. This might sound dim but that's not a very nice thing to do - not when there's no personal reason for doing it for either character. If one of them had a relative or lover who had been kidnapped/killed by North Koreans it would have made more sense or at least meant more. We know North Korea is a threat to world security but it's not that much of a threat.

Lizzy Kaplan was wasted - ditto that snobby reporter friend of Rogen's. I kept expecting both to turn up in the third act. And it cheats by recreating history.

Having said that there's lots of funny jokes and the movie got better as it went along. I loved how Frano and Park bonded over Katy Perry. It's also a really good looking, stylishly shot movie.

Movie review - "The Korean War" by Max Hastings (1988)

I've become a big fan of Hastings work - he has an eye for the big picture of war, the strategy and key players, but also an old journo's eye for a personal story, and dramatic incident: the peasants, pilots, mechanics. He's a conservative but not silly - justifiably angry at a lot of what went down: idiocies from the North Koreans who started it, then the Americans who fought back so well but then pushed it too far, the lunatics who wanted the bomb (especially MacArthur who covered himself with glory via Inchon then almost caused World War 3). He argues the war was ultimately justifiable, just far too long - if only the US had the courage to stop at the 38th parallel, then the Chinese the same. (This presumably informed American activities during the First Gulf War - the sensible one.)

Even though this was written towards the end of the Cold War it's fascinatingly apt about lessons for the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars - the danger of fighting a technologically poor but tough enemy on their home turf in unforgiving climate. Look at this quote (it relates to Vietnam but it's still apt:

The political difficulty of sustaining an unpopular and autocratic regime; the problems of creating a credible local army in a corrupt society; the fateful cost of underestimating the power of an Asian Communist army. For all the undoubted benefits of air superiority and close support, Korea vividly displayed the difficulties of using air power effectively against a primitive economy, a peasant army. The war also demonstrated the problem of deploying a highly mechanized Western army in broken country against a lightly equipped foe... Yet because it proved possible finally to stabilize the battle in Korea on terms which allowed the United Nations--or more realistically, the United States--to deploy its vast firepower from fixed positions, to defeat the advance of the massed Communist armies, many of the lessons of Korea were misunderstood, or not learned at all.

It's an excellent comprehensive history: causes, big personalities (of which MacArthur was the best known but also Truman, Ridgway - who comes out of this very well, the dodgy and brave Koreans), a Chinese point of view, POWs, air force, navy, Allies (including us - Kapyong gets a brief mention) the battle of Imjin River and Choisin Reservoir, the shockingly poor performance of US troops at the beginning of the war and the beginning of the Chinese offensive, how close the Chinese came to winning, all the nationalities (Turks were fantastic fighters apparently), how the war revived Japan, the climate, the pointlessness of the two year stalemate (due to fights over POWs).

It was a fascinating war - not as epic or easy to understand as World War Two - but a fight worth doing and remembering and it's an excellent book.

Radio review – Suspense – “Flight of the Bumblebee” (1950) **

About a bombing raid during the Korean war but it feels like a WW2 story – Fred MacMurray has a good voice but gives a flat performance as the bombardier where they have trouble getting home. A plane is an ideal setting for a radio drama – cramped, small cast, atmospheric – but the story isn’t much. The plane needed to crash or something.

Movie review – M&L #3 - “At War with the Army” (1950) **

Martin and Lewis apparently made this right after My Friend Irma but it’s release was held off after the release of My Friend Irma Goes West (something similar happened with Abbott and Costello’s early film career – Hold That Ghost’s release was delayed so the stars could go do follow ups to Buck Privates). Unlike Irma this puts Martin and Lewis front and centre. It’s the most commercial of comedy genres, the service comedy – our heroes are in the army; Martin is a sergeant desperate or active service, Lewis is an idiot private, and they were a partnership team way back when.

 

 It’s not a very good movie, to be honest. The stars are in alright form but they spend too much time apart; also Martin’s character is meant to dislike Lewis’, (they’re former songwriting partners only Martin doesn’t want to have anything to do with him) – which gives the action an emotionally yukky core. 

 

The story is very weak: it’s about Martin wanting to be transferred to Korea (even if they never seem to mention the word “Korea”), and Lewis wanting to go home to see his wife and their new baby (yes that’s right he plays a married man – and we never see the wife or child), and some officer getting jealous of Martin pursuing his girlfriend (Polly Bergen) (which is fair enough but the officer is meant to be the baddie), and there being confusion about a dumb girl who Martin thinks he’s knocked up (he passes the blame on to Lewis, which is horrible).

 

There are some decent comedy bits, like Lewis in drag at an officer’s mess, and shenanigans on the army training field. There’s also a bit where Martin and Lewis impersonate Bing Crosby and Barry Fitzgerald in Going My Way. But it's definitely one of the weaker films made by this duo.

Book review - “Elephant to Hollywood” by Michael Caine

I like Michael Caine, everyone likes Michael Caine, he’s one of those actors impossible not to like – at least now he’s become an institution. I think it was easier to get sick of him in the 70s and 80s when he kept starring in so many bad films. Indeed, Caine remained a star for much longer than you think his flop ratio would allow – The Swarm, Ashanti, The Marseilles Contract, The Magus, etc, etc. But as he once said all you need is one hit for every five and he seemed to make that. Also I think he was so good natured and likeable, people wanted to make movies with him – you know you’d get a good performance from a true professional, and some laughs behind the scenes.

This book does feel like a bit of a rip off, though. Caine had already written an excellent memoir, which came out in 1992. He’s certainly done enough since then to warrant a second book – he survived a dip in his career which happened in the early 90s as he transferred from leading actor to character star, then went on and featured in a number of fine works, even winning an Oscar. He could gone into some of his old adventures in friends in greater detail, like David Niven did with ‘Bring on the Empty Horses’. But instead what we get is a book whose first two-thirds is a repeat of ‘What’s It All About’ – the same stories, only briefer. By the time I hit page 200 and still hadn’t heard a new anecdote I was getting seriously annoyed. I mean, I enjoyed the anecdotes and Caine writes in a bright, lively style, but he’d told them before and in more detail. Why couldn’t he have done things like talk more about his Korean War service? Early theatre personalities? His work as producer (Get Carter, Blue Ice)? More in-depth profiles of famous people he knew?

There is some new stuff here: Caine loved Miami and lived there for long sections in the early 90s, he has a man crush on Jude Law and calls Law’s Hamlet the best he’s seen in recent years. There’s a moving section on his gang of mates who he’s been friends with since the 60s and who are recently dying off. And I liked the section on Harry Brown. More of this and it would have been a better book. Unfortunately, there’s a bit too much of how great his life is and his house, and too much polite treatment of the people he’s worked with recently.

Movie review – “All the Young Men” (1960) **1/2 (warning: spoilers)

Alan Ladd's films became increasingly depressing towards the end of his life, due in no small part to his own physical degradation; this one, although flawed, was at least made by someone who cared.

For starters, it has an unusual setting (snow-drenched hills of Korea during the initial American offensive of the Korean War) and a decent story (a black sergeant is promoted to be in charge of a platoon to the chagrin of his troops).

It's also got Sidney Poitier in the lead as (surprise) the black sergeant; he plays the role with his customary authority and dignity - although he threatens to shoot his men a lot! Ladd's role is undeveloped - apparently it was boosted into a co-star role and you can tell. He plays a sort-of racist, not convinced that Poitier should take over but not as evil as Paul Richards. Ladd looks puffy but he doesn't drag the film down. And he gets his leg amputated after having it run over by a tank - full on!

There's some authentic looking combat footage and an awful lot of talk. The structure is talk-talk-bang-bang-talk-talk. There's a real odd ball cast, most of whom who get a chance to chat and do schtick: there's James Darren, who sings a song; Ingemar Johansson, the boxer, who talks about a farm; comic Mort Sahl (very believable as a GI) who does comic routines. It's easy to make fun of some of the liberalism here eg Poitier giving a blood transfusion to Ladd - but it was pretty gutsy at the time.

Movie review – “A Hill in Korea” (1956) **1/2

Years before Zulu, Stanley Baker and Michael Caine fought on screen for the British army in another siege film, this one set during the Korean War. Neither one is the star, though (Caine is actually billed last – it was his movie role – and Baker is a support). That honour goes to a chap called George Baker, who had a so-so career, and plays the lieutenant of a platoon that’s cut off by the enemy while on patrol and find themselves holed up at a temple. 

Most of the story consists of squabbling in the ranks (the radio operator’s a coward and the men hate him), or a series of attacks by basically faceless Chinese troops (referred to as “chinks” or “Kim”) – it’s just like Zulu, but without that film’s skill.

It’s not bad, though – some of the action is quite exciting, and it gets points for the sheer novelty of being a British film about Korea (even if you get the feeling at times they could have called the enemy Japanese and set it in World War Two). Also it has an incredible cast of stars-to-be: Caine (very small and unememorable role), Stanley Baker, and Robert Shaw, plus quasi names like George Baker, Ronald Lewis and Steve Boyd.