Amazon.com

When people think of James Dean, they probably think first of the troubled teen from Rebel Without a Cause: nervous, volatile, soulful, a kid lost in a world that does not understand him. Made between his only other starring roles, in East of Eden and Giant, Rebel sums up the jangly, alienated image of Dean, but also happens to be one of the key films of the 1950s. Director Nicholas Ray takes a strikingly sympathetic look at the teenagers standing outside the white-picket-fence '50s dream of America: juvenile delinquent (that's what they called them then) Jim Stark (Dean), fast girl Judy (Natalie Wood), lost boy Plato (Sal Mineo), slick hot-rodder Buzz (Corey Allen). At the time, it was unusual for a movie to endorse the point of view of teenagers, but Ray and screenwriter Stewart Stern captured the youthful angst that was erupting at the same time in rock & roll. Dean is heartbreaking, following the method acting style of Marlon Brando but staking out a nakedly emotional honesty of his own. Going too fast, in every way, he was killed in a car crash on September 30, 1955, a month before Rebel opened. He was no longer an actor, but an icon, and Rebel is a lasting monument. --Robert Horton ... Read more

Reviews (88)

Rebel Without a Cause
"Rebel Without A Cause" is one of the finest films ever created. The story is about a troubled youth that seeks redemption and a sense security through his family, but when they fail to do that he seeks comfort through friendship. James Dean, Natalie Woods, and the rest of the cast are great in this film, so it's no wonder why this movie is a classic. With great scenes like the chicken run car race or the arguements James has with his parents, you'll never want to turn off the T.V. The direction for this film seemed very powerful and had you in suspense throughout the film. One moment you'll be sad at some of James Dean's struggles in the movie, but then you'll be happy at some of his more happy scenes in the film. I think many of today's youth can identify with Dean's character, so making it that much more of a powerful film. Although the film does seem a bit paced at time, it doesn't ruin the experience. Overall, if you like movies, then you'll love this one.

To the reviewer who asked if there is a Two-Disc Edition DVD coming: Yes, a Two-Disc SE is coming out on May 31st 2005!

The milestone film about the juvenile delinquency!
James Dean became a mythical legend after this cult movie which has stood up the status level through the years and doesn't age a bit .

The astonishing presence of a selected group of promising young actors made of this movie a must see for every movie conosseur : Sal Mineo , Natalie Wood and Dennis Hopper signed their names without knowing in this immortal artwork .

Nicholas Ray , Samuel Fuller , Elia Kazan and Otto Preminger were the most minucious and outlaw film makers of that decade.

It seems so useless to recommend this item because it's more than obvious.

A Brilliant Movie Of Coming Of Age In The 50s
This classic James Dean movie is exceptional. James Dean is charismatic as Jim Stark playing a high school youth trying to fit in with a 50s peer group not willing to except an "outsider." Jim trys to defend his honor by playing chicken in a game where his opponent loses his life, but not by Jim's hand. There are only a handful of films that fit the standard of classic "old hollywood" with outstanding acting. This movie is one of the very best.

Straight Talking
This exceptional movie probably deserves even more of a cult status than it already has. Most people, when they think of RWC, remember it only as one of the few examples we have of James Dean's eerie charisma; but it's also an entertaining and powerful film, well written and acted, and the credit for the lasting impression of Dean's character should go as much to the filmmakers as to Dean himself (not that Dean himself doesn't deserve bales and bales of credit).

Today, a lot of elements of RWC might seem obvious; the generational gap in more apparent now than ever, and the attemps of children to compensate for a lack of parental attention has been a common theme for decades. Not only, though, should you consider that the film was groundbreaking when it was released, but what it has to _say_ about the issues between children and their parents is more relevant today than ever. The script deserves credit mainly for a couple of reasons:

1) The film doesn't have that 'made by kids' feel that's afflicted a lot of more recent movies about kids, such as Better Luck Tomorrow. It has a definite sense of perspective, as in the scene where Jim's father tells him: 'I'm trying to show you how foolish you are!--Ten years from now, this won't mean anything; you'll look back on it and laugh!' In a way, he's right, but that doesn't make Jim's feelings or the problems facing him any less urgent at the moment.

2) The kids in RWC are smart, and they have personalities beyond basic love-starved psychosis. Buzz, especially, is a surprisingly fully-drawn character, and some of Dean's best moments as Jim come when he's doing innocent things, like jumping up behind the fence to get Judy's attention. Finally, the scene in which Jim, Judy and Plato parody adult behavior is especially incisive and especially relevant today - kids are, in many ways, shrewder than they're given credit for, and their eyes are open.

3) There are moments of overacting (Jim shouting: "You're tearing me apart!"), but there's understatement too. At the beginning, for example, after Jim's father complains that he's bought everything for his son, and the audience is ready to write him off as ignorant and materialistic, he immediatley adds that he's shown Jim love and affection too - which may not be entirely true, but he's shown as being more than just a stock Bad Parent.

4) Things like 'no stab' knife fights and racing with stolen cars might seem almost tame by modern standards, but the display of self-destructive behavior in RWC still has some emotional power. The kids may doing things which kids today would consider silly, but their attitudes are sometimes genuinely frightening. Again Buzz is a great character. The gang mentality, too, with its shifting attitudes and its effect on personality, is very striking and very accurate.


In an era when parents seem to be trying harder than ever to understand their children, the problems have really remained the same. The consequences today might be more severe, but psychology and the human thrist for love are timeless, and RWC may well be timeless. In fact, beyond still being relevant, the film is an effective antidote to modern films which glorify and enshrine adolescent problems, when many of these things are just as pathetic, in the end, as a boy whose socks don't match.

Love James Dean always
This film is a true classic, fine film making at its best. James Dean is perfectly cast as Jim Stark the misunderstood rebel, Dean gives a charasmatic performance and is extremely convincing. Natalie Wood and Sal Mineo star as his girlfriend and tag a long pal, both give great perfromance as well. This film perfectly captures the feelings of every lonley soul out there who ache to belong. James Dean is absolutley amazing in his most memorable role, a truly terrific actor. CLASSIC film and star! 5 stars! ... Read more

Description

In one of moviedom's most influential roles, James Dean is Jim, the new kid in town whose loneliness, frustration and anger mirrored those of postwar teens -- and reverberates 40 years later.Before the feature are three Behind-the-Cameras segments from the Warner Bros. Presents TV series (including a "safe-driving" interview withdrawn from airing following Dean's September 30, 1955 death) about Rebel Without a Cause.A documentary segment exclusive to this Warner Bros. Classics edition contains recently recovered screen tests and outtakes that show intriguing variations on what ended up in the final film. ... Read more

Reviews (80)

Quintessential punk rebel
This is a great movie. James Dean plays the quintessential teenage punk rebel. He is the sensitive soul misunderstood by parents and the society that surrounds him. His efforts to fit in with other students fail and this leads to problems. Natalie Wood and Sal Mineo turn in realistic portrayals of teenagers without a cause. This film shows a darker side of the '50s than the vision espoused by the Happy Days sitcom. These kids are feeling a lot of alienation and angst. This is Seattle grunge 40 years before Eddie Vedder and Kurt Cobain. The pain they feel is very real. The screenplay by Stewart Stern reveals great sympathy towards these kids. They are good kids who have gone bad because they don't fit in. People always tell you that the high school years are the best years of your life. That isn't true for all kids, however, as this film poignantly illustrates. It is heartbreaking but powerful. It is vintage James Dean and becomes more wrenching due to Dean's early death. One can only guess how good his career would have been if he hadn't died so soon.

1950s Utopia?
This will always remain one of my favorite films of all time. After seeing it I can finally understand the reasons why James Dean has such a following. He is what everyone either envisions himself as or wishes to be. In my mind, you can't quite label him an anti-hero in this movie. You have to show his character respect. In my mind, what makes this film great is what you might find fault with in other films. At times it seems overly melodramatic and so emotional it seems painful to watch. But this ain't no "Titanic." Somehow, all this intense emotion is what gives the film its power. When you are in high school everything seems as though it is a life or death situation. Who can honestly say that they weren't utterly self-absorbed at that age and even in the present? All the typical themes are included such as unrequited love, fitting in, complex family relations, and violence(today kids might have guns but name another scene as riveting and dangerous as the switchblade fight). The additions to the widescreen version are very worthwhile and offer some extra insight. Is it just me or does Natalie Wood seem on edge during her interview? The Dean "safe driving" interview is also rather interesting if not kind of sick.

True Classic.
This movie is one of the best however one reviewer had a lot of negativity about this movie do not listen to him this movie is not crap. For one James dean is not wearing a Leather Jacket on the Cover is happens to be his Red... Jacket in black and white.Anyhow the story line was very authentic Natalie Wood is just great in this Movie Sal Mineo Is Great and James Dean As always Is Exceptional.I recommend this movie trust me you will not be Disapointed.

These Rebels DID have a cause
For all that the title is such a classic one, it is rather inaccurate. And possibly, it was meant to be. Maybe a catchy title to draw in the crowds or a deliberate lie to show later that their cause, seeming meaningless, was a valid one. And in the end, this film is so poignant! Not a "dated" film at all, but a lesson to the generations of teenagers before and afterwards. Teenage angst has not changed in the last 50 years, and the reasons have not become any less meaningful. "Rebel Without a Cause" offers a very truthful look into the lives of teenagers, the reasons they rebel and gives a reason to why rebeliousness should not be taken so lightly.

The movie begins with all three of the main characters Jim (James Dean) Judy (Natalie Wood) and Plato (Sal Mineo) in a police station in the wee hours of the morning. All are dressed in obviously middle and upper-class clothes but have been picked up on the street for wandering, drunkeness and violence. The title of the movie immediately gives itself away, Judy is upset because her father was rough with her, Plato's father left him and his mother is never at home...
Then we meet Jim's parents. A submissive father, sharp-tongued mother and uptight grandmother. True, they may give him "many things" but the tension, strain and ignorance of Jim's needs are, as he says, "tearing me apart!"

We find out in the course of the movie, as Jim, Judy and Plato come together, that they are really good kids who are only looking for love and acceptance. We see how little their parents understand of them and how they are rebelling against the ignorance that has been starving them for years!

And truly, this is my FAVORITE James Dean movie, I think his portrayal of Jim is really a mirror of his own life with his biological Dad and some of the kids he grew up with. His acting is just so true, real, passionate and believable. This movie is my reasoning for why he is still such a legend. Truly, one of the greatest actors of all time. And a fantastic movie to boot!

Great 50's fun.
This film was first released in 1955 and stars James Dean, Natalie Wood and Sal Mineo. It was directed by Nicholas Ray and is probably one of the best, and most remembered movies from the 1950's.

"Rebel Without a Cause" begins in the local police station, where Jim (James Dean) has been arrested for drunkeness, Judy (Natalie Wood) has been picked up for walking around before dawn after a fight with her father, and the disturbed Plato (Sal Mineo) has been brought in for killing a puppy. Jim is new to the place (his parents are always moving) and finds it hard to fit in at school. He gets in a fight, which later leads him to have a chicken race with one of the gang bullies. Jim, Judy and Plato are brought back together again at the chicken race, but it ends in trouble. While Jim gets away unharmed, his opponent is killed when he gets caught in the car and goes flying straight off of the cliff. While being chased by the dead boy's friends, Jim, Judy, and Plato end up at a deserted mansion, to hide out, away from their parents and the trouble looking for them out on the streets. But still, it does not end nicely.

The film may seem dated to some people, but it still remains a brilliant movie to a lot of others.

Now for the DVD:
The film is presented in widescreen format and the print is brilliant. The sound is in 5.1 Dolby Digital. The extras include Trailers, behind-the-scenes documentary, and a few segments from TV Documentaries with Gig Young, including the 'Drive Safely' interview. Along with a few other little things aswell.

Overall, I think this is an excellent presentation for a great movie and I highly recommend this DVD.

PLEASE NOTE: Refers to Region 2 release, which appears to be the same as this Region 1 release, by the same company. ... Read more

Description

The life of Jesus Christ is powerfully chronicled in this intelligent, gripping epic starring JEFFREY HUNTER, ROBERT RYAN, RIP TORN and a cast of thousands. From the producer of the epic spectaculars El Cid and The Fall of the Roman Empire and the director of Rebel Without a Cause and 55 Days at Peking comes a vivid retelling of the world's greatest story. ... Read more

Reviews (66)

An intelligent, inspiring life of Christ.
"King of Kings" was my favorite religious motion picture when growing up, and I believe it still is. When MGM first released it in 1961, movie critics irreverently dubbed it "I Was a Teenage Jesus", since the role of Christ was given to teen idol Jeffrey Hunter. In hindsight, it was an unfair appraisal. Unlike other actors who have played Jesus in the more sublime, "stained-glass" manner that appears to be the norm, Hunter's portrayal showed a very human, energetic Messiah whose divinity still could not be denied. Interestingly enough, "King of Kings" was directed by Nicholas Ray, who six years earlier had directed James Dean in "Rebel Without a Cause". This time around, our "Rebel" has a well-defined Cause which places Him at odds with the religious and civil authorities of His day. The film's international supporting cast consists mainly of lesser-known character actors whose performances are mostly able. The great actor/filmmaker Orson Welles gives an uncredited performance as the film's narrator; curiously, the narration was written by science fiction author Ray Bradbury, who is also uncredited. The film's stirring music was composed by Miklos Rozsa, who was no stranger to religious epics (the soundtracks to "Quo Vadis?" and "Ben-Hur" stand out among his other works). Beautifully filmed in Spain, "King of Kings" is an intelligent and reverent profile of He who has been the Way, the Truth, and the Life to hundreds of millions for almost 2000 years. END

Hunter as Jesus Shines!
'King of Kings' features Jeffrey Hunter's finest performance, as a young, dynamic Jesus of Nazareth, and his intrerpretation, open and earnest, is the best part of a movie both uneven and flawed.

Produced by many of the people responsible for 'Ben Hur', the film utilizes some of the same sets, actors (Frank Thring appears in major roles in both films), and composer (Miklos Rozsa, whose score for 'King of Kings' was one of his finest). The cast was fleshed out by respected actors (Robert Ryan is too old but charismatic as John the Baptist, Siobhan McKenna is a glowing Mary, Brigid Bazlen, a deliciously wicked and oversexed Salome, Harry Guardino, an 'over-the-top' Barabbas, a VERY young Rip Torn scores as Judas). While the cast didn't have the 'star power' of 'Ben Hur', or many other Christian epics, the actors, by and large, perform credibly in their roles, particularly Hurd Hatfield and Viveca Lindfors, as Pilate and his wife, Claudia, and Ron Randell as Tribune Lucius.

The film was a MUCH less expensive project than 'Ben Hur'; the budget restraints show most glaringly in recreating Jesus' ministry (most of Christ's miracles are only referred to, not shown), and extras casting (Spanish townspeople, overdubbed with some truly RIPE dialogue!).

The film works best when focusing on Jesus; unfortunately, it veers off into distracting subplots about Barabbas and the zealots, and the decadence of Herod's court. These stories consume a LOT of screen time, and damage the overall impact of the film.

Yet rising above all this is Jeffrey Hunter's interpretation of the Savior. Easily the most audience-friendly of all the actors who have assailed the role, Hunter took a lot of flack for his 'matinee idol' good looks, and piercing blue eyes, but his kindness, his sincerity, and the complete believability with which he delivers Christ's words overcome any qualms about his appearance! The Sermon on the Mount is a film high point, and magnificent; the Crucifixion and Resurrection have the kind of power that can bring a lump to your throat, even after repeated viewings!

While 'King of Kings' lacks the big names and budget of 'The Greatest Story Ever Told', or the emotional core of 'Jesus of Nazareth' or 'The Last Temptation of Christ', in Jeffrey Hunter, the film presents possibly the most compassionate of all screen Messiahs, and makes this film a MUST for the holidays, and your collection!

Jesus Christ Never Existed.
'King of Kings' made in 1961 is a famous film some people have seen or at least heard about. Most people fail to realize all of that doesn't matter because Jesus Christ never existed!! Jesus Christ is a mythological figure the church has exploited for hundreds of years and now the film industry has for almost a hundred years. There is absolutely no archeological or historical evidence that Jesus Christ existed. Even if he did exist, it would be highly unlikely he would have received that kind of punishment.
It is a shame that con artists like these filmmakers are using this mythological figure to make millions of dollars. People have to start swaying away from the manipulations of the church and the filmmaking industry and start looking at the hard facts. Jesus Christ and his crucifixion never happened.

The best one in its genre.
I'm positive that a lot of people have turned back their gazes to former versions of Jesus's life and death in view of the huge acceptance of Mel Gibson's recent film. Revisiting some of the classic titles is a good exercise in hindsight. How things have changed? To the worse, to be sure.

"King of Kings" is an excellent film, one of the best epics ever -alongside the also painfully underrated "The Fall of the Roman Empire"-. The film tells the story straightforwardly, mixing in it a little of historic and political speculation. It has a good rhythm, high visual artistry, admirable sets, genuine multitudes... Of course, Jesus is the wisest and most benevolent of men, and it is but right that he be also the most handsome of all: Jeffrey Hunter at his physical best and with bizarre -but culturally right- characterization.

Miklos Rosza's score is precisely one of its major assets. I think that he hit the target when it came to produce grandiloquent but available music, apt to bring up a sense of the religious or the military, not forgetting some passages of a sweet beauty, like that one with the Wise men in Bethelem.

The film treats Jesus as an all-out hero, on the terms set by his followers: he is a superman, compassionate, able of working miracles, godlike as God's son should be. He delivers his teachings unashamedly and boldly. We are spared ridiculous moments that could issue from clinging too close to the letter of the Gospels. Nicholas Ray is clever enough to offer tactfully the blind man's recovery of sight, the lame walking again, etc

Most of the cast is ideally suited, although I find Hurd Hartfield too strained and joyless as Pilate.

The battle scenes are amazing, and so are the initial images with Pompey breaking into the Sanctum of the Temple.

Whatever your actual feelings about Christianity and Jesus be, you can go back happily to a world of certainties and security ("suspension of disbelief") with a fine work of arte like "King of Kings", very enjoyable. After all, and in the worst of cases, you'll get back your childhood's hero in style.

And praise Samuel Bronston, the producer and the man behind half a dozen of the last and best epics from the sixties. He got the money and contributed much more than that. Gen. Franco, by the way, contributed the masses, since the film was shot in Spain and the Spanish Army was put at the team's disposal.

YOU FUNDAMENTALISTS MAKE ME SICK
I just got done watching my newly acquired dvd of KING OF KINGS.So I decided to go online to write a review.And like always I read other reviews as not to repeat what others have already said.To my shock and disgust I'm hit with one berating after another.READ THE NEXT SECTION LIKE A WHINEY FIRST GRADER: ("That didn't happen in the bible" "This didn't happen in the bible"I'm gonna tell!) That's what you fundamentally retarded people sound like.I can care less about SO CALLED SCRIPTURAL ACCURACIES.If that's so important to you watch your lame copy of JESUS W/Brian Deacon.Wow! badly portraying word for word what's in the bible. You're absolutely right! That is the way to go. Conveying a message and emotional connection are far more important to me.All 4 gospels total approximately 200 pages (give or take the size of the print).Hardly a dent in the life of a 33 year old man.I sure am glad you stopped the movie as not ruin your childrens' thinking. They'll make great document lawyers.I'm done with likes of you. NOW I WRITE TO THE TRUE CHRISTIANS,The ones that believe with their hearts, not a KING JAMES six gun.I bought this disc about a week ago.While (Jesus of Nazareth) is my favorite and (The Greatest Story Ever Told) is a close second,this movie has an untouchable magic of it's own.Sure they spent a little too much time on Barabbas,and Robert Ryan's portrayal of John the baptist is no better than a cold reading, as if he's seen the script for the first time.Or any thing else you want to nitpik about.But the score is wonderful and so many moments will force tears from your eyes,if you only relax yourself into movie.If you contemplate getting this DVD I strongly suggest that you do.The picture is remastered nicely and the sound is very fulfilling,bonus features;not much, total less than 10 minues.Even if you have a personal recording from TCM like I do. Get the disc.It offers you an even more panoramic view not shown on Turner Classic Movies. ... Read more

Reviews (6)

Widescreen fans please note...
...you can order a very good quality print of this film from Amazon France's marketplace sellers. The only drawback is that the English version has French subtitles which can't be erased using the menu. However, when you see the low price, even accounting for postage, you won't complain.

A movie that needs to be remade
Don't get me wrong. This movie is fun but as historical accuracies go, it falls pretty flat. The movie doesn't even use the real names of the people involved.

I'm a big fan of epic period pieces and I think there is a lot going for this kind of movie to be made today (with an international cast)

First I'd choose John Milius, Michael Mann, or Mel Gibson as director

Sample Cast
George Clooney or Billy Zane.....US Marine Major
Catherine Zeta Jones...Russian countess
Elizabeth Hurley....British ambassador's wife
Tom Sizemore.....US Marine sgt
Chow Yun Fat.....Prince Tuan
Michelle Yeoh....Empress Dowager
Brian Cox....British Ambassador
Ioan Gruffudd (Hornblower) or Heath Ledger....British Captain
Jermey Irons....German Colonel
Sophie marceau....French ambassador's wife
Alan Rickman....Russian ambassador

You get the picture :-)

spectacular yet intimate
Before the era of political correctness, Caucasian actors donned make up to play characters of other races; roles which, for whatever reason, could not be filled by non-white actors at that time. If you are the kind of person who gets mad watching white people play "sinister" Chinese roles then stay away from this movie or be prepared for this kind of thing:

Prince Tuan: "Your majesty, the execution has been stopped!"

The Empress: "Who!"

Prince Tuan: "Jung Lu!"

However if you can keep that momentary suspension of disbelief going just long enough to allow yourself to get into the story, then you can believe Flora Robson is the Empress and 55 Days is one of the most underrated films of all time: the action sequences are extremely well paced and choreographed and the film, for the most part, stays faithful to history. Obviously the producers could not reproduce the entire Forbidden City so the "palace" exterior scenes are somewhat hokey, but the legation compound and the city wall are reproduced in a convincing way and as set pieces they are used to great effect.

Look for Walter Gotell (General Gogol from the 007 films) and Nicholas Ray himself (in wheelchair) as the American ambassador.

55 days at peking
With all the wham, bam, thank you not madam junk that is prevasive now, this has a superb plot and it has class. This is a 5 star in a world of -1 s! Niven is wonderous and Ava is regal with her feet of clay.

Enjoyable epic and star vehicle
"55 Days At Peking" is an unusual and enjoyable epic and star vehicle. Not least among its admirable characteristics is a set re-creating in Spain an authentic impression of the old Legation Quarter of Peking. The set makes sense to anyone who knows the actual site in modern-day Beijing. That is a considerable achievement in the pre-digital cinematic art of illusion. It shows, too, that there was a great deal of China knowledge behind the making of the movie. Well into the 1990s, many Boxer Rebellion-era structures survived in the old Legation Quarter of Beijing. Due to enduring political and cultural sensitivities, the historical significance of these structures was unsignposted and ignored by the official Chinese tourist authorities, and most of the area was occupied by Chinese Government organisations. The gate of the former British Legation which was recreated for the movie could still be seen just off Chang'an Avenue in Zhengyi Street, a short walk southwest from the Beijing Hotel. The layout and other striking architectural features of the area are well-recorded in books such as Michael J. and Yeone Wei-Chih Moser's "Foreigners Within The Gates" (Oxford 1993). The movie takes liberties with history--overplaying, for instance, the US military contribution, and making the British Minister (played by David Niven) appear a more militarily energetic figure than he seemed to contemporary observers of the siege of the legations. Some purists might find jarring the poor Chinese calligraphy in graffiti, and the casting of (generally well made-up) Caucasian actors in major Chinese roles. However, the standard caveat applies that this is an entertainment, not a documentary. Talent like Chow Yun-Fat, John Lone, Gong Li, Zhang Yimou and Wayne Wang wasn't available to western moviemakers in 1963. "55 Days At Peking" entertains with a creditable impression of this historical episode when China warred by proxy on the rest of the world. It is an interesting film to compare with "Khartoum", in which Charlton Heston also plays the lead, as part of the canon of epic moviemaking about imperial and colonial wars. The casting and illusion of China is worth comparing with "The Inn Of The Sixth Happiness" (1958), in which Robert Donat plays a Chinese mandarin and Wales substitutes for China. It would be fascinating to see a remake of this film with a re-worked story and script, a re-arrangement of Dimitri Tiomkin's excellent score, digital technology, and cross-cultural casting and direction. However, as it probably still could not be shot in China without unacceptable interference, it might need "Red Corner" treatment. ... Read more

Amazon.com

John Wayne and Robert Ryan co-star in Flying Leathernecks, Nicholas Ray's intense 1951 war movie that managed to appeal to RKO studio chief Howard Hughes's passion for thrilling aerial footage while supplying Ray's own fascination with the human psyche under near-inhuman duress. Wayne plays Major Dan Kirby, commander of a Marine Flying Corps squadron in the South Pacific of World War II. After witnessing the slaughter of men under his command at Midway, Kirby is battle-hardened and in no mood for the familiar style of his executive officer (Ryan). Emotions are further strained as Kirby's pilots are picked off one by one in grueling missions, leading to a crisis that ultimately forces each man to reevaluate his attitude toward sending men to their likely doom. The drama is built around extensive, startling documentary footage of battle action in the sky, but what makes Flying Leathernecks unique is its literate, psychologically probing script. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Flying Leathernecks!!........cool flying.........go Marines
Flying Leathernecks is one of my favorite war dramas to watch on a boring, rainy, summer day. John Wayne is a Marine avatior who drives his men to the edge during training and in the war, installing hatred in their hearts againist him, especially his second in command, played by Robert Ryan, who clashes with Wayne, but goes easy on the squad. Later in the movie, Wayne teaches Ryan the importance of being hard and rough on the squad. This movies should have got some Oscar nominations for
Best Actor: John Wayne
Best Cinematography
Best Supporting Actor: Robert Ryan and for
Best Special Effects.
If you were in the Marine Corps, and if you want to see some old war planes, like Corsairs, Wildcats, a PBY seaplane, and a real harsh look at what Marine Corps pilots went through in WWII, give this movie a try. I recemend it to anyone who served in the Marines, John Wayne fans, and models buffs. Semper Fi Go Marines.

Sands of Iwo Jima in the air
Flying Leathernecks is an entertaining John Wayne adventure about a squadron of Marine fighters stationed on Guadalcanal during the fierce fighting. The Duke plays Major Daniel Kirby, a new squadron leader who tries to get the men into fighting shape as he tries to prove his theory of ground attacks heavily supported by air support. Kirby and his executive officer, Captain Griffin butt heads as they argue over how to treat the men. The plot might sound familiar to Sands of Iwo Jima which it is, but it is still a quality movie. The aerial shots are taken from actual WWII footage that work pretty well with the shots of the actors in their planes. The story is fairly predictable, but it is still worth a watch if nothing else.

John Wayne is pretty good as tough as nails Major Kirby, a role very similar to his role as Sergeant Stryker that earned him a Best Actor nomination. Robert Ryan gives a decent performance as Captain Griffin, who Kirby believes is not ready to take over command of the squadron. Wayne and Ryan work well together throughout. Don Taylor plays Griffin's brother-in-law and fellow squadron member. Jay C. Flippen has a very funny role as Master Sergeant Clancy, Kirby's line chief who has a talent for taking things that are just lying around. Like all Duke movies, I hope this one gets a DVD release since the VHS is not in the best of shape. For an enjoyable Duke adventure, check out Flying Leathernecks!

The Duke on Command
The Duke himself is in this movie about Marine pilots in the South Pacific during World War II. Since this movie was made in the fifties, there is not a lot of gore and violence. The fight scenes you see are mostly actual footage from aerial combats during WWII.

The movie centers around two things. First, it shows the usage of military planes providing close ground support. Repeatedly, everyone mentions it can't be done, but the Duke and his group continue to show that it is viable. Second, we see the agonies of command.

John Wayne is a major who is not always liked by his subordinates. He is a career military man trying to keep his team, mostly young college men, alive by enforcing discipline. He drives them relentlessly as the executive officer tries to ease up on them. By the end of the movie, the executive officer gets an explanation on why it is necessary for commanders to push their men.

For military film buffs or John Wayne fans, I would highly recommend seeing this movie.

flying leathernecks
This is one of the finest of the DUKES WWII movies which exemplifies the American fighting mans indominatable wills to endure and win above all odds

john wayne gives the marines air support
typical world war two aviation yarn starring the duke as the tough as nails squadron commander. good supporting cast. a plus for the film is the fact that its shot in color, a rarity for this type of film at the time. if you like john wayne and ww2, you'll like flying leathernecks ... Read more

Reviews (31)

Disturbing, Important Film
For all the praise film-noir is lavished with (quite a lot of it valid), the majority of it relies on convention as much as the standard white-picket-fence, happy-ending 'family' film does: just invert the cliches and bathe them in deep-focus shadows. While this movie, on its surface, resembles the classic-style film noir of DOUBLE INDEMNITY, beneath the surface it's a whole different animal. No calculating evil females or tough guys masking hearts of gold populate IN A LONELY PLACE. It's a much more wrenching and powerfully disturbing film because the murder that draws the protagonists together turns out to be of peripheral importance, while the love story between Humphrey Bogart's troubled screenwriter and Gloria Grahame's B-actress spins inexorably towards damnation completely on its own power. The basic story has him a suspect in a killing, and her in love with him yet unsure of his innocence, but director Nicholas Ray stages the proceedings so that WE see it's not the murder that disturbs her but her own conviction that his self-destructive and volatile nature will destroy them both. To his credit, Ray never takes the easy way out of having Bogart turn monster on her. You care inordinately about the characters, hoping hard (as Bogart's agent does in the film) that some transforming moment will come that will spare these people and allow their deeply felt love to flourish and heal them both - even as the evidence before your own eyes tells you there ain't no way. For 1950 -hell, for any year- such an unsentimental and uncompromising treatment of a tragic adult relationship is a rarity. The shadows suffusing this excellent film come not from UFA-influenced lighting but from the Black Dahlia murder, the HUAC hearings, the death throes of old Hollywood & the moral and spiritual detachment of postwar American life. But most of all, they're projected from within the characters themselves. Grahame and Ray's own real-life deteriorating relationship formed the template for the doomed lovers, and for them, this film is an act of great courage. For his part, Bogart (the star and executive producer) takes elements of all his previous romantic loners and blends them with the harsh, sour pigments of Fred C Dobbs, running the risk of audience rejection. His performance is unflinchingly honest, among his best work ever. See this movie.

DARK, BROODING HUMAN EMOTIONS....
Excellent psychological noir drama about a cynical Hollywood screenwriter (Humphrey Bogart) with a disturbing violent streak who becomes a suspect in the brutal murder of a hat check girl from the club he frequents. His only alibi is Gloria Grahame, a starlet who's his neighbor in their apartment complex. She covers for him to the police even admitting that she likes his face. They begin a relationship and Grahame discovers his frightening violent tendencies. Now even she begins to doubt his innocence as well as fear for her own safety. Film crackles with cynicism and tension throughout and offers one of Bogart's best performances as the troubled writer struggling with his inner demons. Grahame is excellent in one of her first big roles before becoming the 50's film noir femme fatale she later did. Ironically, the film was directed by the great Nicholas Ray whose marriage to Grahame was falling apart at the time. This could explain why it has a bleak, gloomy feel to it and the two leads are such tormented characters who are powerless over their destinies. A must see, a must on DVD and a must have for those who know what Bogart could do in a role like this, for fans of Grahame and especially for those who are familiar with Nicholas Ray. A potent, adult film that's an underrated and overlooked classic.

Dark, angry Bogart in a noir classic
"In a Lonely Place" is usually considered a classic example of film noir, although-as other reviewers have pointed out-- it doesn't completely fit the mold. It has much of the darkness and violence typical of the genre, but the main female character(Laurel Gray) is less a classic femme fatale than an ordinary woman who has fallen in love with the wrong man (Dixon Steele, a screen writer whose career is on the skids). Although the background plot of the movie is about a murder investigation with the Steele as the prime suspect (he's innocent), its major focus is really on the man's psychology and the negative impact of his violent streak on those around him.

Bogart is perfect as Dixon Steele, the screen writer with what would now be called "anger management problems." His screen presence oozes with the dangerousness that lies under his character's surface. Gloria Grahame plays Laurel as a basically sweet women who finds herself increasingly uneasy and eventually terrified of her lover's potential for violence. The issue of domestic abuse is never explicitly raised, but it's implicit in Laurel's fear of Steele's dangerous side. The tension builds, the relationship collapses, and in the bittersweet end, both lovers are left in a "lonely place" without each other.

This film was based on a 1947 novel of the same name written by Dorothy Hughes. The novel is a classic example of hard-boiled pulp fiction. Dark as the movie is, the original novel is much darker. In the film version, Steele is a deeply flawed man, but one capable of love as well. In the novel, he's a twisted serial killer with no redeeming features. It's interesting to compare the book and the movie. Even given Bogart's penchant for tough guy roles, it's easy to understand why so many changes were made. Both versions are good, and both are concerned with the violent nature of the main character, but they're really two different works. Watch one, read the other--and enjoy both.

Much More than just a Disturbing Murder Mystery
IN A LONELY PLACE is a brilliant film from director Nicholas Ray. Humphrey Bogart with his usual cragged-faced presence dominates the screen once again. This time he is a man totally introverted and obsessed with some hidden lack of ability to express his own compassion and humanity. Bogart plays an elusive Hollywood screenwriter named Dixon Steele that becomes the focus of a police investigation of a murder in this atmospheric and unsettling film. What makes the film so unsettling is Bogart's performance. He is a very enigmatic, private and tired man who at times seems so detached from reality that it is frightening. Yet Bogart in this role still posses a virile and cynical coolness of style that is so appealing and it is one that only he can pull off with his screen charisma bringing this character to reality and believability.

In the film Bogart lives in a complex of courtyard apartments. The police investigation interferes with a relationship that Bogart has with Gloria Grahame who lives in the same complex. Bogart comes to be intrigued (and visa versa) by her and truly falls in love with her. Yet it is the police investigation that continues to intensify Bogart's inner struggle as a human being with his need to love and be loved and escalates his volatile and violent outbursts which confuse and distance Grahame from him.

IN A LONELY PLACE examines such human qualities and frailties of love, trust and loyalty. It explores and exposes the effects of our interpretations, perceptions and misconceptions and ultimately demonstrates that our own human flaws can lead to perpetual loneliness of the heart if left unchecked. IN A LONELY PLACE is an outstanding and important film.

Bogey's Best
Here's late 1940's early 1950's Film Noir, a love gone wrong drama. Bogart's ugliness, the angles of his forehead, the lines about his mouth are fascinating. Bogart is both violent and tender by body language. A truly remarkable and revealing performance. Not that the dialogue doesn't matter. It's brilliant give and take, literary musings with tough guy and gal repertoire. Gloria Graham is no piker either. She is the beautiful actress, but there is no doubt she loves Dixon Steele the screenwriter and comes to fear him too. I can't imagine another actress of this period pulling off this love story. And we get Bogart in love, a tough, and maybe psychotic guy in love. His manliness is counterpoint to his unprotected psyche. Also homage should be paid to Nicholas Ray's direction. There is a dark LA at night, eyes in the headlights of a post-war Buick feel in his direction. The story is adapted from a potboiler novel, but the adaptation takes it to another level. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Jean-Luc Godard once famously wrote, "The cinema is Nicholas Ray." Much less famous is the movie that occasioned the observation. Bitter Victory marked Ray's ascension to "auteur" demigod status in France. Unfortunately, American prints ran 20 minutes shorter than the Amère victoire seen in Europe, with the unsurprising result that this enigmatic film--so charged with suppressed desperation and rage, you can hear the neurons snapping--became well-nigh incoherent. It gets worse. The picture, a milestone in the deployment of CinemaScope for emotional subtlety and expressiveness, was dumped to television in a pan-&-scan version that made hash of its compositions and editing rhythm. And that's the only way it was seen, for decades.

The setting is North Africa early in World War II. Two British officers, played by Curd Jürgens and Richard Burton, lead a commando team into the desert to attack a German post. Commander Jürgens doesn't know, but comes to suspect, that his wife (Ruth Roman) and Burton were involved sometime before Jürgens married her. The mission recedes into the background as the tension between the two men builds, and issues of ethics, cowardice, and the legitimacy of wartime killing are thrown into relief against the anvil of the desert. Jurgens was an opaque actor, but Burton etches a searingly modern portrait of an alienated soul whose mordant self-awareness avails him nothing; it's right up there with such Ray-directed landmark performances as James Dean's in Rebel Without a Cause and Humphrey Bogart's in In a Lonely Place. --Richard T. Jameson ... Read more

Reviews (1)

A real masterpiece!
Nicholas Ray makes an impressive tragical portrait of the war looking inside the human soul and not about the outer conditions.

A honor debt will be paid by an officer -Richard Burton- in the middle of the War desert when he involves in a love affair precisely with the wife of his superior.

And Curt Jurgens the cheated husband will find the right time in this case when the revenge assumes his own identity color and metaphorically he can observe himself through this sinister animal.

The final speech is admirable. And the medal will be hanging from a silent scarecrow's is one of the most admirable and original proposals ever made .

A colossal artistic triumph and superb mature film!
... Read more

Reviews (1)

A Deeply Moving Documentary
Wow. Watching Nick Ray die of cancer is not an easy thing to watch. Still, he had the desire to make a final film and even had an idea to make a movie about the painter from Wenders' "American Friend" sail to China in search of a cure for cancer. Given Ray's state of health, such a film was unrealistic, but Wim Wenders did rise to the occassion and help Ray complete this movie which ends up being about his own death.

Parts of it started out as being scripted, so the result is a part fiction/part documentary look at Ray's final days. One cannot help but be moved by such an intimate look at Ray and those who love him surrounding him.

The film transfer on this DVD is far supperior to the old Pacific Arts videotape and laserdisc. Those older releases were not even made up of the proper cut of the film, so people now have a chance to see the definitive version of the movie (in it's correct aspect ratio) likely for the first time.

Ronnee Blakley's songs shine on the soundtrack and Wenders' commentary track (done in the Fall of 2002) is very insightful.

This movie can hardly be described as a happy film, but it is rare to see death addressed so honestly and with such care as it is in this movie. This is a great DVD. ... Read more

Description

This 6-DVD set includes Rebel Without a Cause, North by Northwest, Singin' in the Rain, The Bad and the Beautiful, Designing Woman, and Ben-Hur. ... Read more