Description

Based on the bestseller by Stephen E. Ambrose, the epic 10-part miniseries Band of Brothers tells the story of Easy Company, 506th Regiment of the 101st Airborne Division, U.S. Army. Drawn from interviews with survivors of Easy Company, as well as soldiers' journals and letters, Band of Brothers chronicles the experiences of these men who knew extraordinary bravery and extraordinary fear. They were an elete rifle company parachuting into France early on D-Day morning, fighting in the Battle of the Bulge and capturing Hitler's Eagle's Nest at Berchtesgaden. They were also a unit that suffered 150 percent casualties, and whose lives became legend. ... Read more

Reviews (703)

Band of Brothers - The Complete 10 Chapter Miniseries
This 10 chapter miniseries set is an exquisite mix of Saving Private Ryan with the documentary feel of an A&E type production and the drama, look and the inevitable touch of Spielberg/Hanks brilliance and genius.

Incredibly real and gut wrenching, the miniseries begins at 101st Airborne Division training camp at Camp Toccoa, USA. Whereupon we learn about the tough reality of being in the Airborne Division and the severity of living under a military chain of command. Under the command of Lt. Sobel, Easy Company is trained and drilled every single day until they become on of the best companies in the Division, a fact that will prove to be woeful in battle.

At long last (2 years in training) the Allies have concocted a plan to start the invasion/liberation of Nazi occupied France and Europe. D-day is gruesome but Easy Company is more terrible events are yet to come.

As we follow along the story, we slowly get into knowing people like Lipton, Luz, Perconte, Winters, Buck, Bull, Skip Muck, Popeye, Guarnere and many memorable characters who we see triumph, survive and perish in the cruelty of war.
We are taken into the very jaws of the enemy at battles like Foy, Carentan, Bastogne, the Eagle's nest, all these in the dreariest and bitter conditions of bad weather and lack of supplies. We are also shown the harsh confrontation and evil they were up against when Easy and other companies face the concentration camp in Landsberg.

A miniseries all WWII fans and followers are sure to enjoy, hands down a top 5 stars and Thumbs Up.

You will enjoy it.

Powerful testament to the human spirit
BAND OF BROTHERS (USA/UK TV 2001): The trials and tribulations of Easy Company, 506th Regiment of the 101st Airborne Division, from the D-Day landings in Normandy to their capture of Hitler's Eagle's Nest in Austria at the end of World War II.

Co-produced by Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg, HBO's epic 10-part miniseries (based on a terrific bestselling book by the late Stephen E. Ambrose) was the most expensive TV undertaking of its day, costing a massive $120 million to produce. And, as the old saying goes, every penny is up there on the screen. Borne from the success of Spielberg's SAVING PRIVATE RYAN (1998) - with which it shares a similar dramatic and visual style - BAND OF BROTHERS' recreation of a glorious (and hard-won) chapter in American history assumed an even greater patriotic significance during its initial US broadcast, when it coincided with the horrific attacks that destroyed the World Trade Center in September 2001. Written with economy and grace, and directed with emotional intensity by a series of directors (including Phil Alden Robinson, Richard Loncraine and Hanks himself) whose combined efforts achieve a genuine aesthetic uniformity, the movie is a masterpiece of storytelling and historical documentation. Punctuated by horrific battle sequences, in which the camera is placed within mere inches of the death and destruction, the film manages to transcend its educational remit by its relentless focus on the human cost of war. Almost every episode opens with testimony from surviving members of Easy Company (none of whom are identified until the end of the series), which further strengthens the emphasis which BAND OF BROTHERS - book and film - places on the bonds which drew them together in times of conflict. And, because it's a true story, there's no telling from one episode to the next which of the 'characters' will live or die, which makes it all the more potent and visceral.

The entire production represents quality writ large: Beautifully filmed on various European locations (including the UK and Austria), the movie is noble without being the least bit pompous or austere, and it manages to humanize a large cast of essential characters with small touches of humanity and humor, all of which serves to heighten the sense of terror as they descend into the maelstrom of conflict. The first - and longest - episode is deceptively staid, featuring David Schwimmer (a long way from TV's 'Friends') as the bullying, cowardly commanding officer Herbert Sobel, whose tyrannical methods nevertheless shaped Easy Company into a fighting force which eventually cut a swathe through the heart of occupied Europe. Brit actor Damian Lewis takes the spotlight thereafter as Easy Company's most respected platoon leader, Richard Winters, with Ron Livingston as his right hand man, Lewis Nixon. Other standout performances in a flawless cast include Matthew Settle as battle-hardened platoon leader Ronald Speirs whose wartime career was distinguished by numerous acts of bravery (fuelled by a unique - if morbid - personal philosophy), Shane Taylor as company medic Eugene Roe, Neal McDonough as 2nd lieutenant 'Buck' Compton (laid low by his horrific combat experiences), and Donnie Wahlberg as 1st sergeant C. Carwood Lipton, who maintained the morale of his fellow soldiers, even when the odds seemed stacked against them. Every episode has its merits, but stand-outs include David Leland's 'Bastogne' (ep. 6), which recounts the horrendous circumstances surrounding Easy Company's involvement in the Battle of the Bulge, and David Frankel's 'Why We Fight' (ep. 9), in which the full horror of the Nazi regime is uncovered in a German forest. Additionally, the closing moments of chapter 10 ('Points', directed by Mikael Salomon) are truly heartbreaking.

Like the movie itself, HBO's region 1 DVD is magnificent. Housed in a beautifully embossed metal case, all ten episodes are spread across five discs (running a total of 624m 23s). The image is letterboxed at 1.78:1, anamorphically enhanced, and picture quality is stunning throughout, with faded colors (a deliberate artistic choice) and strong contrasts. The Dolby 5.1 soundtrack is spectacular and horrific, designed specifically to immerse the viewer in some of the most terrifying battle scenes ever captured on film. Closed captions are included, though there are no open subtitles. Crucially, each disc contains biographical information on the soldiers represented in every episode, which allows the viewer to keep track of an extensive array of characters, and there's a useful glossary, map and timeline of Easy Company's advance across Europe. Perhaps the number of chapters per episode could have been doubled (as it stands, there are six for each instalment), but that's a minor glitch in an otherwise exemplary presentation. The sixth disc in HBO's package contains a fascinating, feature length documentary on the real members of Easy Company (essential viewing), and a series of video diaries by actor Ron Livingston of the boot camp to which many of the cast were subjected in preparation for filming, during which the actors seem to have cultivated the same bonds of friendship experienced by real soldiers in combat situations.

It's doubtful that a more fitting tribute to the men of Easy Company could have been devised than BAND OF BROTHERS, a truly remarkable experience, given the Rolls Royce treatment on DVD. By turns engrossing, provocative and deeply, profoundly moving, it stands as a testament to those who fought and died for our freedoms, almost a lifetime ago.

Who did save Europe?
I have seen this mini-series and like every movie that will ever be made by any film maker (US, Ireland, China, Germany, etc…) it is not an accurate account of what really happen. If the US did not save Europe who did? Was it the Russians, the French, the German’s? I forgot the German’s where conquering Europe. Ireland, who did HELP save Europe? Any way, I am thankful and grateful for all who fought to free Europe and the rest of the countries in this world. I am a naturalized citizen and retired member of the Arm Forces of the USA, who with out their sacrifices I would have not been able to come to this great, wounderful, and giving nation I call my home. It also shows the stupidity of the leadership of all nations, but most of all it shows the prize that Americans paid for the freedom we have today. God bless all those who fight for freedom. This is what this movie is all about, FREEDOM!

Idiot's guide to WWII
This tripe just reinforces the idiotic opinion held by so many Americans that "America saved Europe" from the Nazi's. Rubbish. Read a good book instead.

"It appears the Germans are bad, very bad."
I was lucky enough to catch this excellent mini-series on a replaying on the history Channel because 1.) I don't have HBO and 2.) I don't have over $100 to spend on this box set. But I wish I did. This is probably the best war movie I have ever seen. It follows Easy Company, probably the most famous platoon of world war 2 from their training in boot camp, to the very end at hitler's "Eagle Nest." They were a platoon that suffered 150% casulties.

With the exception of its length (over ten hours) this is right up their with a big bedget movie. It has great actors, awesome cinemetogrophy, and great war special effect. Don't let the fact that this tv miniseries is a wimpy piece of junk. It's not! Because it was on HBO, the makers made sure to keep it realistic with the violence (lots of blood, injures, lossed limbs, etc...), theirs bad language and even a little nudity. So don't let a little kid watch this. The late Michael Kamen provides the excellent score and really provides a ambient backdrop to the sorrow and loss and horrible side of war.

If you are at all interesting in Worl War II or like war movies in general. You must do yourself a favour and check this masterpiece out. You will not be dissapointed. ... Read more

Reviews (14)

Bearing Witness To History
Watching the 9.5 hour documentary Shoah one goes through a plethora or emotions: sadness, anger and finally triumph. Shoah is living history one that we will no likely to be able to repeat as time goes on.

Claude Lanzmann gives us a history of the Holocaust from the point of view of the participants. The survivors, the guards, the townspeople who witnessed the Final Solution firsthand. The thing that makes the film amazing is that we do not see the grisly images that were so prevalent in films like Renais Night and Fog. We simply hear voices and see faces.

The interview technique is what makes this film so important. We are forced to look into these people's faces as they tell their stories. And they do have important stories to tell. Also we literally visit the places of destruction as they are now. We see green meadows that were once killing grounds like Sobibor or Chelmno. We see the village of Grabow now reduced of its Jewish population; we bear witness to the railside horrors of Treblinka, and the haunting desolation that was and is Auschwitz.

The startling thing is that the people of the film have been able to rebuild their lives and go on. This is the triumph of the film. We hear horrible things to be sure but these people are true survivors.

The DVD does not offer many extras, but then not many are needed. The end result is a sort of numb silence and this prevades the viewing. The transfer could have been a little clearer but I feel that this was more of a flaw in the source footage than a problem in the DVD creation. The only real problem with my set was on the fourth disc where there were numerous sound fall outs.

All in all Shoah is not an easy film to watch. It takes patience and careful listening if one is to truly understand but it should be regarded as essential viewing for any would be student of history.

Powerful, devastating testimony
I saw Shoah on PBS around the mid-80's and have never forgotten the experience. The documentary was shown in weekly installments. At first, I was just curious, but then I was drawn by the powerful testimony I was witnessing. I remember that while watching the last installments, I was weeping over the depravity and evil that was discussed by the aged survivors. At that time I was a Staff Sergeant with 15 years military service. We are tempted to turn away from the horrendous images and ignore the Holocaust as an anomaly or as something best left in the past. We want to move on. But listening to the stories and watching the faces of the survivors I knew that I must listen very carefully. I must not miss one moment of their testimony. Neither can you. Listen, watch, and learn what evil men can do to fellow man. It's a long, long film but it must be seen in its entirety.

The Best Documentary about the Holocaust
This first aired on PBS sometime in the early to mid eighties. I was in my first couple of years of college at the time. As many of you can relate, I had lots of fun in school (especially after classes)and didn't watch much TV. For whatever reason I was at home when the first installment aired and I was hooked. Being in college, I wasn't too much of a history buff and knew little about the Holocaust. I would come home early from parties just to get to see the next installment. Since that time I have always wanted to see the documentary again and now can say I have bought it and will watch it (this time with my wife) soon.
I had the opportunity to visit Munich some time back and didn't miss the chance to visit Dachau. Wow! What an experience... one that I shall never forget. I think watching the show this time will mean so much more than before. Make sure you get lots of Kleenex before you sit down to watch a segment.

Amazing document !
A very important, powerful, strong and
not an easy watch Holocust documentary.

The best made movie about the Holocaust
It's been 17 years since I watched this movie in a hotel room in Munich on German television. Since that time Hollywood has made their own Holocaust movies, the latest being "The Pianist." By far , "Shoah" is the most meaningful movie that was made about the Holocaust. The shear hypocrisy of the Nazi's false promise to every death camp inmate of "Arbeit Macht Frei" is revealed through the words of the apathetic hypocrits who watched from the sidelines.

It answers the question: Why could this global tragedy happen? It also answers the question: Who were these people who committed the atrocities and where were all the people who bore witness?

The movie asks these questions of the real people who we want to know the answers from. Mr. Lanzman interviews the wife of a concentration camp commandant. Her attitude and her carefully chosen words speak volumes for what she doesn't say. She embodies evil to the nth degree. Her lack of empathy and gross disdain for the 10,000s of Jews that her husband murdered makes you sick to your stomach. And yet she is not guilty of anything more than being an accessory to mass murder and she has never spent a day of her life paying for the sins of her husband. She complains that her life after the war has been hard on her. She wants our pity.

Mr. Lanzman interviews a peasant who lived along the rail line to Birkenau and Auschwitz. The jolly old peasant was proud of how he gesticulated to the hapless souls in the packed railcars how they would have their throats slit soon enough. The peasant made fun of how he convinced many a desparate Jew to throw him their jewelry in exchange for a cup of water - only to not give the Jew the promised water.

There is no ray of hope. There is no triumph of good over evil. There is only the sheer will power and determination of the few survivors that now live in comfortable flats in Israel, the United States and other parts of the world. After the war, they picked themselves by their bootstraps and mentally blocked the horrors that befell upon them by the Nazis and they succeeded to live their lives.

The conclusion I draw from this movie is to remain forever vigilant. Evil is banal. Evil can be overwhelming. Only a clear conscience, an open mind and a consistent collective voice against the darkness of evil will we keep men like Adolf Hitler from propagandizing his fellow countrymen and women into similar acts of atrocity. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Sam Fuller's The Big Red One was already one of the best films of 1980, despite the fact that the version released to theaters ran barely half as long as the director's cut. Fuller had been America's ballsiest B-movie auteur, an ex-newspaper reporter of the hardnosed breed who made fiercely personal, radically stylized, and politically outspoken films between the early '50s (The Steel Helmet, Pickup on South Street) and the early '60s (Shock Corridor). The Big Red One was his long-dreamt-of account of World War II as experienced by his own squad of the 1st Infantry Division, USA, from the first shot fired (by a dead man, on the coast of North Africa) to the last (in a concentration camp in Czechoslovakia).

Even in the studio-truncated version, there was no shortage of astonishing moments and sequences: the squad choking on dust in a bat-filled cave in North Africa as German tanks clatter past the entrance; Fuller's cold-blooded distillation of the D-Day slaughter on Omaha Beach, with a wrist watch on a dead arm in the surf marking time as the water slopping over it grows redder; the rifle squad delivering a Frenchwoman's baby in a German tank on a battlefield full of corpses; a commando-like raid on Nazi troops bivouacked in a Belgian insane asylum. A quarter-century later, film critic Richard Schickel and Warner Bros. executive Brian Jamieson succeeded in restoring 15 never-seen sequences and fleshing out 23 others to create The Big Red One: The Reconstruction, a "new" film nearly an hour longer.

Above all, BR1: The Reconstruction has a rhythm the 1980 cut lacked. The arc of years, battles, and battlegrounds is so much more satisfying. Greater play is given to Fuller's feeling for children caught up in the sidewash of history and atrocity. And the 2004 cut puts sex back into the movie, not orgiastically but as a fact of life and a rarely forgotten driving force. We can see now that Fuller touched, bluntly and shockingly, on the phenomenon of infiltrators--English-speaking German warriors who donned GI khaki and moved among their enemies waiting for a chance to strike.

It's also apparent, as it was not in 1980, that Lee Marvin as the eternal Sergeant leading the young squad is magnificent. This was Marvin's greatest role, rivaled only by his walking dead man in John Boorman's Point Blank. Just beneath the masterly implacability, we glimpse the tenderness, rage, dark humor, experience, and wisdom beyond guilt that have enabled him to survive, to preserve others and to soldier on. His performance, like Fuller's film, is a masterpiece. --Richard T. Jameson ... Read more

Reviews (54)

THE BIG RED ONE - THE RECONSTRUCTION.
Like other reviewers, I saw the film when it first appeared and liked it. But I also felt that it also lacked some missing features which the novel supplied. Fortunately, a reconstruction has now occurred with the "missing footage" making an accomplished film more like the masterpiece Sam Fuller intended. Thanks to DVD, one does not have to live in a major city to see films like this. The 2 disk reconstruction is amazing and the restored footage is really where it belongs. This is a major work of cinema which needs to be widely disseminated.

On the whole Richard Schickel and the restorers have done a good job. On the audio-commentary, Schickel mentions that the reason Fuller's work is now relevant to today (rather than his more illustrious Academy Award winning contemporaries) is because it reflects the insecurity of life and rejects any false sense of complacency. The film contains one of Lee Marvin's best performances supported with sterling performances by those young actors who play the Four Horsemen to say nothing of those other great performances by Stephane Audran, Serge Marquand, Siegfried Rauch, and Christa Lang Fuller herself in a restored scene. I have one hesitation to record. Both Shickel and the restorers often refer to cinematic cohesion. However, Samuel Fuller would always bend or break the rules at times. That is what made his films so iconoclastic and revolutionary in the same way that his absurd dialogue such as "If you die, I'll kill you" had great emotional reverberation. It is a shame the voice-over was not removed entirely because it is really redundant. The excellent acting and relevant silences speak for themselves in the best manner of silent cinema. Somne "deleted" sequences such as the Vichy officer debate could have been restored.

But, in the last analysis, these are really minor points and we should be really grateful for this restoration which really should stimulate a Samuel Fuller Collection on DVD containing not only his most well-known works but others such as CHINA GATE (in restored letterbox form), VERBOTEN, THE CRIMSON KIMONO, and WHITE DOG to show the real diversity of this man's talent and the valuable cinematic heritage he has lef for future generations to appreciate.

Truthful, brutal and magnificent
This film commences with a hard hitting statement that is unmistakably Sam Fuller. "THIS IS FICTIONAL LIFE, ABOUT FACTUAL DEATH". From that moment, he grabs the audience by the scruff of the neck and takes them on a fascinating, ballsy, unsentimental ride through WWII as he saw it. The film is refreshing for it's determined 'survivor's' point of view. He does not judge with emotions in the simplistic way that so many war films do. Instead he puts you in the state of mind you need to actually survive a war, and given Fuller himself survived WWII, he might just be on to something. The art in this film is all in the contradictions of real life and the perverse pleasures that can arise in even the most horrific of settings. A scene in Italy where the rifle squadren liberate an asylum is magnificently chaotic and amoral in it's presentation. In the midst of this madness Griff (Mark Hamill) somehow enjoys a transformative sexual experience with a psychologically damaged woman. We are reminded time and again that these men are only human, with needs that make little sense in the context of war. Fuller shows the straightforward machine you need to become to survive a war. If you know someone in your platoon is going to die, don't bother getting to know them too well. Harsh, but that, according to Fuller, is how you make it through. Lee Marvin's performance, commented upon here by many reviewers is an engine house of repressed humanity. And it's not overdone - you wouldn't even know the humanity was there. Watch this performance then watch Liam Neeson in Schindler's List. With respect to Neeson, he is playing a character. Marvin is playing a man.

Surviving is part of the fight in reconstructed classic
Surviving war is the most challenging part of it. Whether it be surviving the physical and psychological rigors of war or it's sometimes nasty aftermath "The Big Red One: The Reconstruction" is one of the finest movies made about World War II. Fuller ("Shock Corridor" among many other films)made a lot of exploitation films during his long varied career but it's clear that here Fuller had found his best story to tell.

Lee Marvin gives a terrific performance (and one of the best of his career)as the leader of a group of young soldiers. Most of the cast does an exceptional job as well (particularly Robert Carradine essentially playing Fuller). The film has its minor flaws certainly (some of the performances are a bit stilted)but film critic Richard Schickel a long time admirer of Fuller and this film has done a marvelous job of restoring Fuller's masterpiece to its original projected length. Schickel used the original script, production notes and the memories of some of the production participants to help recreate the film Fuller intended to release in the first place.

The new version runs two hours and forty two minutes with the first disc devoted to the film. The second disc has alternate scenes; "Anatomy of a Scene" looks at the film both before and after the restoration. I haven't had time to watch "The Real Glory:Reconstructing The Big Red One" or the War department reel "The Fighting First" yet but the qualtiy of the documentary on Sam Fuller and the rest of the material is quite good.

War Classic -HORRIBLE PACKAGING MATERIALS!
Great film, DVD done right, package LOOKS good, but when I went to open it up it took ALMOST A HALF AN HOUR AND EVEN THEN THE LOW-GRADE SUPER-STICKY TAPE ON ALL EDGES OF THE CASE RUINED THE COVER! Whoever made choices contributing to this fiasco needs to be shot! Or at least fired and drummed out of the industry. Didn't help matters that on the fancy black slip cover Best Buy had slapped a big ugly price sticker that wouldn't come off all the way, even after I heated the glue up with a hair dryer. Hey, I hope you slobs responsible for these stupid choices are reading this because you are a bunch of incompetent unprofressionals. Still, buy this DVD, anyway.

Pretty good aswar movies go
As a kid I enjoyed this movie very much.It has some pretty good action sequences and in some parts, you can have true actual feelings for what soldiers go through when in battle.It has a very good ending and I feel it is definitely worth watching when you have the time.One of my favorite war movies. ... Read more

Amazon.com

When 12-year-old Renato, riding through his small Italian town on his new bicycle, sees the voluptuous Malèna, little does he know he's launching on an infatuation that will carry him through the tumultuous days of World War II. Malèna begins as an enraptured depiction of Renato's adolescent mind--the way he stares, hypnotized, at Malèna's garters pressing through the material of her tight skirt, or his frustrated rebellion against the indignity of wearing short pants--but soon transforms into a portrait of small-town prejudice. Malèna's looks spark lust and envy in the townspeople; when her husband dies in combat, the gossip only intensifies, to the point that Malèna is dragged into court to defend herself against accusations of adultery. When the women of the town refuse to sell her edible food at the market, Malèna has little choice but to become what she's been unjustly accused of being. At the end, a twist of fate turns this tale of longing and jealousy into a heartbreaking love story. Monica Bellucci exudes the can't-help-it eroticism that makes Malèna such a lightning rod for everyone's desires; she's like a more zaftig Isabelle Adjani. The movie seems to wander at times, but the ending has a powerful emotional impact. From the director of Cinema Paradiso. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (79)

One of the best!
Malena is truly a great film. It works on so many levels. I have a relative who doesn't usually like foreign films but had to admit this is a great one. Its funny, its sad and it has a message. The story of the beautiful Malena is one that is heart-breaking. Malena is a beautiful woman whose husband is fighting in World War II and is left alone in this town. She is subjected to constant rumours and harassment by the men and women in their village.

Renato is the young boy obsessed with her. He is also the only person who knows the truth about her and knows she doesn't do the things people say she does. Malena wasn't dating everyone, she was sewing for people into the night, carrying her husband's picture and dancing to their favorite music. The sad thing is that Malena has to become what everyone had labeled her once word got back that her husband was killed. Women refused to sell her food and she had to sleep with men to survive. There is a scene towards the end that really upset me. This movie shows how rotten both the men and the women were to her. Malena shows how dangerous lies and assumptions are to a person's standing in their community and their own self-respect.

Malena is a very funny movie at times. There are scenes with Renato that made me laugh out loud. However, its a film that goes deeper than many out there. I would have to say this has become one of my all-time favorites. A beautiful, thought-provoking film.

A Beautiful Film
This lovely and heart-wrenching movie was made even more special by the fact that the two main characters barely speak (well, one of them IS the narrator). I had never heard of the beautiful actress Monica Belluci (Malena) but now look forward to seeing her perform again. She was exquisite and spoke volumes with just her facial expressions.

Giuseppe Sulfaro played Renato, a young boy feeling the first stirring of his sexual awakening who falls in love/lust with the beautiful Malena. His acting was very touching, especially when he goes to the church and lights a candle every day to try to ensure that Malena will come to no harm.

This coming of age film about love, jealousy, ostracism, and hate during four tumultuous years of World War II was filmed on the coast of Sicily - and what beautiful cinematography it was. The score was also magnificent, befitting the gorgeous setting.

ETMR - Malena
1. Humanity: The boy Renato, we learn, is a free spirit. He expresses, out of all the characters in the film, the willingness to step outside his natural, cultural boundaries and grow past his traditional philosophy. This film is not only about the life of Malena, but also about Renato's growth into an adult. What events force Renato to grow into this new kind of thinking?

2. Implications: The film shows the evolution of Europe, and the break from traditional values, not only through Renato but through the insanity of the war. In what ways does the movie show a critical eye to the old world?

3. Evolution: In what ways is the movie distinctly European, and yet more in detail, distinctly Italian? Do you think the film is trying to make a general statement on the madness of war, or is it trying to make a visceral attack on the rigidity of Italian traditionalism?

4. Realism: The story premise is interesting: imagine if you had a guardian angel in the form of a young boy, but you never knew he existed... do you think the set-up of the story was meant to describe an actual sequence of events with the boy, or is the movie playing a more important role with symbolism?

5. Stageplay: The script provides for a seedier look at the foundations of Fascist Italy. Do you think what was included was sufficient, do you think it was lacking in raw material, or do you think it contained too much teenage sensuality?

Lopsided film that doesn't have much life
This is a story of an Italian boy who grows a adolescent infatuation with a married woman who is so beautiful that she is horribly gossiped about. Here are the reasons this is a bad film. 1)The film often drifts into the fantasies of the main character(all of them are about Malena). At one point, this is so prevalent you wonder sometimes what's real and not. You also start to wonder why the filmaker did this and I have no real answer except that he couldn't come up with anything else. These dream sequences pull the film away from a grounding reality that the film fails to establish. 2)The title character is almost non-existant as a real character. We see her in real life and in fantasy, but she hardly says anything, or reveals anything about her inner character. This makes her a hollow basis for the film because she is in fact hollow and the character who is infatuated is vacuous as well. 3) The combination of these characteristics makes this film get to its conclusion heavyhandedly and it never feels real even if the results at the time were close to what we see. Dramatically, it's just dumb and vacuous. You wish it were more because you feel that Malena would have something interesting to say, but the filmaker chose not to. These things only approach my biggest gripes with the film. The gossip sequences, which are many, seem flippant and careless, and not the razor-sharped judgement that they would have to be in order to be a real factor in her life, which they are in the film. Sloppy, just sloppy storytelling. How the film ends is also very telling of just how bad this film truly is. He speaks about how he's loved many women, but the one he remembers best is Malena, the ideal that never came to grips with. An ending like this would be good if the film developed a relationship beyond what is in this film. This would be compelling if the protagonist was someone with more of a vocal perspective rather than a visual one. As is, it would have been far more effective to use yet another fantasy to illustrate her historic importance to him, but by then I'm sure that the film would seem incredibly redundant because of the rest of it. If this film had established the strong importance of the difference between fantasy and reality and how the protagonist felt about that it would be better. The film doesn't take this road, however, by putting in the scenes of harsh realism which aren't earned from the deadpan, flippant tone of the rest of the film.

La Bella Bellucci
Titillating, tantalizing, and tragic are just a few adjectives that come to mind...It takes no genius to realize Monica Bellucci is one of the most drop dead gorgeous international beauties of the current cinema. She is the Italian version bonafide beauty of Catherine Zeta Jones ! If that isn't saying much...

Belucci seems to play recurring roles of women in great distress and abuse.She does this so convincingly and makes it look so effortless that she is a rare actress who can say much with her facial expressions and actions without really saying much; It's all in the eyes, baby. Malena is the telling of a 27 year old widow left to fend for herself in a small Italian village after the downfall of her husband during WW2.No one will employ her and the women sell her rotten food;it's cruelty in severe doses for Malena. Her father has disowned her due to false allegations of being the town temptress. Men and boys alike fantasize and want her. The women hate her. In comes a young 12 year old boy named Renato Amoroso who develops an obsessive crush over Malena but guards her and holds vigil from afar. This "crush" is what propels Renato into becoming and maturing into a young man who begins to understand that there is much more to romance and life than just lustful sex. He watches and follows Malena secretly and witnesses the many transformations she goes through to survive in a town that has turned hostile against her simply because of her striking beauty ! All of this will culminate towards an unexpected ending which will leave a strong impression to stay with Renato for the rest of his life!

Cinematography is...well, it's filmed in Italy, what more can I say except stunning panoramic views of the Italian coastline.Plenty of comedic and colorful characters in the beginning. The film starts off with much humor when the viewer is permitted to see into Renato's mind concerning fantasies of farce and romance. But things turn sinister as a town bent on hate begins to enclose on Malena... The film score by Ennio Morricone is extrememly effective, captures the time period and also is very likeable and memorable ! The best surround effects take place during a German air raid over the town. You can also hear great detail in the surrounds of the ocean waves crashing and wind rustling through trees;this transports the viewer to an Italian vacation. The only gripe is that this Miramax dvd version of Malena is missing about 12 to 17 minutes of scenes that were included in the Italian or European release.This was due to more nudity involving Belluci's character and some scenes that raised eyebrows between more explicit sexual fantasies of Renato's. ... Read more

Reviews (155)

Great Entertainment, but . . .
George C. Scott's portrayal of General George S. Patton is outstanding in capturing the essense of the man; so much so that one thinks of Scott when considering the historic Patton! Scott's deep voice better fits the profane and volcanic nature of the General, who was "blessed" with a high and squeaky voice! A classic war film that provides great entertainment with each viewing. That said, I must take exception with a reviewer who lauded the film's accuracy. It is anything but historically accurate. The overall timeline is correct, but anyone who has read a book on Patton (especially the "Patton Papers") will spot the dramatic license taken by the Hollywood producers. Just to name a few: Patton knew that he would command Third Army before he left the Mediteranean for England. In the film, he wasn't told until after D-Day! Another: the entire exchange between Patton and Montgomery in Messina was fabricated; as was the competition between the two for Messina. This said, "Patton" remains one of my favorite movies, and I recommend it to anyone. Just have that book ready on the coffee table (also available from Amazon!)

Not the best war movie, but great character study
It may be treasonous to suggest that Patton is a flawed WW2 movie, although it is leaps and bounds the best character study ever developed inside a war movie. Not for nothing was this Nixon's favorite flick. George C. Scott justly deserved an Oscar for his portrayal of the hugely idiosyncratic Patton. I was 14 when I first saw it, and it was a real eye-opener for someone who (growing up in the military) thought all Army generals were bland smiley Eisenhower clones.

Scott's Patton is sensational, and manipulates the audience into a genuine love-hate relationship with the man. He was a tyrant, but soft-skinned. He was a brilliant tactician who was respected above all others by the Germans. He was also a mean, petty, competitive SOB who could waste soldier's lives to feed his ego, and with primitive political sensibilities - kind of an American Arik Sharon.

Flaws? Well... the movie certainly blitzes through WW2 history. Near the end of the film, the flim shows Patton's troopers rescuing the surrounded 101st Airborne at Bastogne (December 1944), and suddenly, it's May 1945. This skips over perhaps Patton's worst moment, when in 1945 he ordered a small task force to penetrate far behind German lines to attempt a rescue of his son-in law languishing in a POW camp (he was captured during the Kassarine Pass battles). The mission was a dramatic and costly failure.

I did have problems with the other significant generals portrayed in the movie. Montgomery was pompous, but he did pull the British through in North Africa. In Patton, he has few redeeming features. Karl Maulden's Omar Bradley is just too nice for a four-star general - probably because the real Bradley served as a technical consultant for the movie, which must have stirred interesting emotions in the man. The real Bradley experienced a real love-hate relationship with the flashy, tempermental Patton.

The biggest flaw in Patton is technical. Like the earlier film, "Battle of the Bulge", American tankers drive 1950's tanks (Chafees?), and the Germans get bigger American tanks. (In unlikely movies like Kelly's Heroes, they used real Shermans). This is way before "Private Ryan", so the battle scenes are dramatic enough but do not have the punch of recent movies.

The real reason for "Patton" is the man, not the battles. In this, the movie surpasses "MacArthur" and similar biopics. And this definitely has the best music score of any war movie. So maybe it gets a "five" after all.

Decent Film/No Frills DVD
It's to the much-deserved credit of the underrated George C. Scott--simply brilliant here--and director Franklin Schaffner that the celebrated general of "Patton's" title comes across more the tragic hero and less the right-wing nutjob, especially considering that the film debuted in 1970. "Patton" is worth a look for that bit of storytelling finesse alone, but the film offers much more, effectively examining both the highs and lows of the headstrong general's World War II days. Though it lacks the poetic grandeur of epics like "Lawrence of Arabia" or "How the West Was Won," "Patton" nonetheless operates on a big scale, and Scott's larger-than-life portrayal is never obscured by the production's legions of soldiers or frequent changes of scenery. The script, co-written by Francis Ford Coppola, stays focused on the professional aspects of Patton's life--his devotion to duty, command, and career--and wisely avoids bogging down with diversions into romance or family life. Some might find such an approach imbalanced, but most viewers will likely enjoy the "purity" of what is, for lack of a better term, a satisfying "guy's story." Look for Karl Malden in a great supporting role as Omar Bradley, and enjoy Jerry Goldsmith's bombastic score, rivaled only by John Williams' Indiana Jones overtures. Still, "Patton" is not without faults. Military buffs may bemoan some technical inaccuracies, such as using tanks that don't fit the historical period; at times, the characterizations devolve into caricature, especially that of British General Montgomery; and some of Patton's borderline psychotic behavior--his various rages and obsessions with dreams and reincarnation--seem too easily dismissed as colorful idiosyncracies. The DVD itself is rather bare for a film that received many Oscars, perhaps the biggest flaw of all.

GREATEST WAR FILM EVER MADE
In 1970, two films juxtaposed each other. "Patton" was an unlikely winner of eight Oscars. The pacifist Scott for all practical purposes took his Buck Turgidson character and refined him into the real-life Patton. In interviews, Scott said he found his research of Patton revealed an unbalanced man, but on screen Scott nailed him as the vainglorious, brilliant, driven warmonger he was. Steiger was offered the role first but turned it down because it glorified war. Vietnam was absolutely at its apex. It was very surprising that Hollywood would make such a film at that time. But director Frankin Schaffner had served under Patton, and after making "The Planet of the Apes" had the clout to call his shots. The film did not get America behind the war, but it did cause Nixon to start bombing Cambodia because the Patton story convinced him to get tough. The screenwriter, oddly enough, was Francis Ford Coppola, who may have done himself a turn. Coppola was no war lover, and wrote "Patton" as a man obsessed with war ("God help me, I love it so"), deluded by visions of Napoleonic grandeur mixed with Episcopalian Christianity and karmic reincarnation. The intent may have been to show a psychotic military man, to de-mask his heroism, and this may have been what prompted Scott to play it. From page to screen there are virtually no changes, but if Coppola was trying to put down the military by showing Patton's human warts, the result was a brilliant work that now is one of, if not the most, conservative pictures ever made. Watching "Patton" stirs wonderful pride in two countries (Great Britain is prominent in the film) that were tough enough to stand up to the Nazis when the rest of the world cowered in victimhood. Karl Malden's Omar Bradley is Patton's perfect foil, as is the Bernard Law Montgomery character. The film saved Coppola, who was about to be fired as "The Godfather" director. When he won the Oscar for "Patton", it gave him too much clout to get the axe.

(...)

WORTH SEEING JUST FOR THE OPENING SPEECH
In this post-9/11 world everyone should see this film if only to see and hear the famous speech Patton gave to his troops, opening the film. He starts out by saying that no one ever won a war by dying for his country. One wins a war by getting the guy on the other side to die for HIS (other) country. The Islamic terrorist plaguing the world today all say they want to die. Patton would say that he is glad to oblige them.

Just a warning, don't expect to learn anything about the conduct of the Second World War from this film. It is first and formost a character study of Patton, the man, and I can't praise George C. Scott enough for his stupendous performance. It is rare in history that an actor adapts so well to the role he is playing. ... Read more

Description

Nazi Panzer forces stage a last-ditch Belgian front offensive that could turn the tide of WWII. Henry Fonda, Robert Shaw and Robert Ryan in the spectacular recreation of a crucial campaign. ... Read more

Reviews (81)

A seemingly controversial film!
Judging from all the previous opinions written on this movie, it is obvious few see it in the same light.This movie, while highly Hollywoodized (is there such a word?) is entertaining and only remotely connected to any historical reality. There is a star-studded cast with heavyweights (all gone now, I believe) like Henry Fonda, Robert Shaw, Robert Ryan, and Dana Andrews, among many others, and it is an interesting, and I found it to be, a very entertaining movie. I have owned this movie for many years on VHS and was disappointed for many of those years that it was unavailable on DVD.Why was it not available?Who cares now--it is finally out on DVD.If you don't like the movie, DVD won't change that, however.

This movie, with whatever faults (and it has many) you wish to attribute to it, is a must in any collection of war genre movies simply because of the stars and the insight it gives to movies made in 1965 while another, but realtively unpopular, war was going on. Even if you're not into war movies per se, I think it is enjoyable to watch.

If you are looking for a documentary on the history of The Battle Of the Bulge, this isn't it. As others more knowledgable than I have pointed out already, there are many inaccuracies, historically, with equipment, etc,etc.Most Hollywood movies are that way--Saving Private Ryan, Pearl Harbor, MacArthur, Patton--that's just a movie fact of life.I am sure only period films of actual combat would please some purests, so put that aside, it is worth a look soley as entertainment.In my opinion, a movie that generates this much controversy also generates curiosity as to why the controversy.See it, if you can, before buying and make up your own minds.

As comic book man would say..."Worst War Movie Ever!"
Mildly entertaining, this movie lacks in so many areas I don't know where to begin. I like to watch war movies to relive my days in the Army (I was in a tanker unit for awhile), and this movie just loses all realism and historical accuracy to the point that it resembles a circus. I saw it as a kid and liked it of course, and viewers who aren't so discerning might actually like it also, but watching it as an adult who has already watched the greatest war movies ever, I now have to give a thumbs down to this flick.
There are no unit patches on any of the soldiers whatsover. Obviously the studio must have had to cut costs somewhere. The German Tiger and Panther tanks suspiciously resemble American made tanks, the acting is so horrendous and hollywoodish, that I actually found myself rooting for the Nazis to kill them so I would no longer have to listen to their phony imitation of real soldiers over and over. Yes it was a big budget film and yes they did assemble a very all star cast, but did any of those actors ever spend 15 minutes trying to learn how actual soldiers act and talk? Actors are supposed to be believable in their roles, and this group just couldn't do it. They obviously didn't even know the right military expressions or jargon at all. Example: One of the generals making a call to HQ asks for "One hundred and fifty fives" (Howitzers), which to my knowledge has always been called one five fives (especially over a radio). Small error though it is, to me it's enough to remove any belivabilitythat the actor has ever spent a day in uniform.
The special effects are laughable, but you do have to remember the era in which this movie was filmed.High explosive tank rounds only cause a puff of smoke on enemy tanks followed by gasoline being lit on the turret.Dont expect to see turrets flying off as would be the case, oh and, soldiers don't bleed when shot either.
The end of the movie was so preposterous that I couldn't help but chuckling as Henry Fonda and Savalas rolled barrels of gasoline towards an entire column of German tanks and then tossed grenades at them and singlehandedly won the Battle of the Bulge.
This movie just seems like a sorry excuse to put Charles Bronson and Telly Savalas in other movie together to attempt to entertain the public.I'll stick to "Band Of Brothers", "When Trumpets Fade", "The Thin Red Line" or even "The Big Red One", when I need my WWII fix.

WW II Action Drama of the 1944 Ardennes Counter-Offensive
Warner Brother's 1965 epic war movie that portrays the German Ardennes Counter-Offensive in December of 1944 during WWII."Battle of the Bulge" depicts Adolf Hitler's gamble that committed three German armies to attack west to Antwerp, Belgium, and halt the Allies to force a negotiation for peace.Producer Milton Sperling and Director Ken Annakin created a movie of grand scale, but apparently chose big-screen action over historical precision to maximize box office revenue.Long relegated to infrequent television play and a chopped video tape edition, it returns on DVD restored for movie fans who like tanks and a screenplay that borders on camp by contemporary standards.

The movie depicts this historic battle through several fictional characters that eventually meet in a climatic battle that seals the Germans' fate.Henry Fonda is Lieutenant Colonel Dan Kiley, an American intelligence officer whose warnings of the coming attack fall on deaf ears.Robert Shaw is Colonel Hessler, the charismatic German Panzer (tank) commander who leads the armor spearhead towards Belgium.Charles Bronson is Major Wolinski, a tough American commander fighting the German onslaught to the last man.Telly Savalas is Sergeant Guffy, a jaded American tanker who is in the thick of the battle facing superior German tanks that relegate his to a tin can.James MacArther is Lieutenant Weaver, a slack infantry leader who survives a massacre of Allied prisoners by German soldiers.Sperling and Annakin appear to have chosen this simpler screenplay to create a few heroes who fight to overcome a seemingly invincible villain-forgoing a complex storyline as used in 20th Century Fox's 1962 "Longest Day."It works OK, certainly not on the level of "Band of Brothers," and lends a somewhat campy appeal for this 1960's action flick.

The movie does portray actual events with German paratroopers disguised as American soldiers who disrupt Allied operations, the Malmedy Massacre, and the siege of Bastogne.Their depictions contain a lot of artistic manipulation, and the relatively simple storyline faults the German defeat to depleted gasoline reserves-setting the stage for a climatic battle when Kiley, Guffy, and Weaver find themselves face-to-face with Hessler at a gasoline dump.Another gross oversight is a massive tank battle in the latter part of the movie that was apparently filmed during the spring-summer season in Spain-deplete of snow.

As long as viewers don't mind these faults-this is an entertaining movie.The M24 Chafee and M47 Patton tanks rented from the Spanish Army serve well as facsimiles for American Sherman and German Tiger tanks, and the live sets look great on the wide screen.Robert Shaw is the most charismatic in this feature and the Panzerlied chorus near the beginning of the movie is rousing.

I've always enjoyed this movie and I'm pleased with the DVD edition's restored imagery and Dolby Digital 5.1 sound, particularly the restoration of footage that I've not seen in years.

A good transfer
I will not review the movie but the DVD. It's in Widescreen. No scenes have been cut. Every minute of the movie is on this DVD. It has the overture, intermission & exit music.I saw no pops or lines in the picture. The sound & pitcure quality of this 60s movie is as good as any DVD I have. I like the movie & wish all old movies on DVD were as well done as this DVD.

dump your VHS version
I'm not going to waste your time telling you about the movie, and how great it is.
The only thing I have to say is someone did something right for a change. Whoever put this one together gave you the full version as it was first shown.
My advice if you know and love this movie, this is the one to buy, and dump your VHS. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The Longest Day is Hollywood's definitive D-day movie.More modern accounts such as Saving Private Ryan are morevividly realistic, but producer Darryl F. Zanuck's epic 1962 account isthe only one to attempt the daunting task of covering that fateful dayfrom all perspectives. From the German high command and front-lineofficers to the French Resistance and all the key Allied participants,the screenplay by Cornelius Ryan, based on his own authoritative book, is as factuallyaccurate as possible. The endless parade of stars (John Wayne, HenryFonda, Robert Mitchum, Sean Connery, and Richard Burton, to name a few)makes for an uneasy mix of verisimilitude and Hollywood star-power,however, and the film falls a little flat for too much of its three-hour running time. But the set-piece battles are still spectacular, andif the landings on Omaha Beach lack the graphic gore of PrivateRyan they nonetheless show the sheer scale and audacity of theinvasion. --Mark Walker ... Read more

Reviews (131)

Comparisons are inevitable; they're also unhelpful
The comparisons are of course between THE LONGEST DAY and SAVING PRIVATE RYAN. The only similarities are: both movies depict the allied landings at Normandy on D-Day, they are tributes to the servicemen of WWII, and most importantly, both are good movies. That said, general comparisons are unhelpful because the realism that made Spielberg's movie so memorable is totally absent from THE LONGEST DAY; for two very good reasons: (1) technically, the capability was unavailable in 1962 and (2) morally, that level of graphic violence would have been unacceptable. Also, Mr Zanuck, as director, did not want to make bloody messes of his numerous stars.

Realism aside, on its own merits THE LONGEST DAY is a tribute that has stood the test of time. The huge collection of stars (over 40) and the near 3 hour length qualifies it as epic. On an emotional level, it is a patriotic salute to the soldiers who went ashore. With a scope larger than Omaha beach, the focus is not exclusively American; the movie depicts the role of the British, and other allied troops, as well as the work of the French resistance. German dialogue is subtitled to add some realism. Perhaps the best aspect of the movie is that as an adaptation of Cornelius Ryan's book of the same name, it is based on a historically accurate account of the battle.

For realism, patriotism, and a sentimental heroic story, only partially based on real events of D-Day, watch SAVING PRIVATE RYAN. For an old fashioned, "clean" war movie based on history with good acting (Henry Fonda, Robert Mitchum, John Wayne, Curt Jurgens) watch THE LONGEST DAY. Better yet, view both, just don't spoil the experience with a lot of comparisons.

The Longest View
Unlike Saving Private Ryan, The Longest Day was filmed to dramatize the true, unfolding story of the invasion of France beginning several days before the invasion, which was documented for all time by journalist Cornelius Ryan. Ryan did something few historians have successfully accomplished since the end of the war. He compiled thousands of interviews and wrote a realistic account of the invasion which reads like a suspense and action novel. The movie seeks to combine many characters taken from Ryan's book, and is therefore fiction as well as history, but it is masterfully done and is otherwise true to history. Stereotypes of incompetent German officers and troops, so common in film and television of the early 1960's was not a problem in this movie, nor is the graphic violence of Private Ryan observable. The true story is the focus of the movie, and it was made primarily for veterans who had seen the real violence and had fought tough, intellegent and brave Germans, and had no need to be reminded of those horrors. They did have a desire to see their sacrifices and trials acknowledged alongside the background of historical context. It is a gripping movie. A side note for those who might want to compare The Longest Day with Saving Private Ryan. These should compliment each other, not be compared with each other. The audience for The Longest Day was primarily the veterans, their peers and children. The audience or Saving Private Ryan is primarily the grandchildren of the veterans, young people who are in the main, quite ignorant of history. There is no doubt that Saving Private Ryan is more accurate a portayal of historical American and German weapons and villages, but this was not even attempted in the Longest Day. If you will read The Longest Day before watching Saving Private Ryan, you will see that the sites and sounds remembered by many of the interviewed veterans who were at Omaha and Utah beaches somehow happened at the same time and place in Saving Private Ryan. That makes Saving Private Ryan as inaccurate for what it shows, as is The Longest Day, for what it doesn't show. Both movies are excellent, and both are moving.

IT HAS NOT STOOD THE TEST OF TIME
Director Darryl F. Zanuck tried his best with the technical resources at his dispostition at the time and using the narrative standar for epic movies of that time. But watching this movie today is a really act of courage. It drags and drags, the three hours seem to never end. Also, even if they tried to give a view of the global situation, they failed miserably.

The movie is an endless sequence of shell and fire sounds, a really pain. I simply don't like the movie, although I understand what they tried to do.

Only a Partial View of D-Day and Operation Overlord
Although this film is certainly worth watching, the viewer who has little idea of what Operation Overlord was about won't learn very much about it. Of course, we see many examples of heroism, but so much was left out that one can easily get a distorted view of things.
(1) Contrary to the impression that the Hollywood movie industry gives, the Americans and British did not defeat Germany alone. Three-quarters of the strength of the German Wehrmacht was destroyed by the Soviet Union. I realize that this film was made a the height of the cold war, but still some mention should have been made of their contribution to victory.
(2) The most impressive part of Overlord were the meticulous preparations made. Some mention of it was made, but more of it should have been shown, such as the various special weapons and ships that were made to ease the assault on the fortified beaches. Archive film could have been easily procured to show the various devices used to clear mine fields and barbed wire.
Most crucial was the development of the "Mulberry" artificial ports.
(3) This film used several Germans as advisors such as Blumentritt who were in the Wehrmacht High Command. They use this film as a vehicle for pushing the now largely discredited line that "if only Hitler had let the Generals run the war, they would have won it for him", and the also the myth that they opposed Hitler and held nothing but contempt for him (von Rundstedt calls Hitler "that Bohemian Corporal" in the film). In reality they were all very loyal to him and they really strongly supported him and his criminal policies when they were winning the war.
(4) The importance of the deception campaign making the Germans think the assault will be at the Pas de Calais and not a Normandy was very important and continued even after the landing on D-Day to make the Germans think Normandy was just a diversion.
This was not mentioned. A whole "virtual army" was created with fake radio traffic opposite Calais. This could have been shown as well.
(5) Although I have nothing personal against the man, John Wayne is a very poor actor and I have no idea where he got his reputation as one of Hollywood's leading men!

The Longest Movie
I watched on June 6th 2004 "The Longest Day" to learn about D-Day June 6th in 1944. In general it was a painfully boring movie. I accomplished my goal of learning about D-Day, but it was at a cost of wasting about three hours of my life. It is my belief that this story could have been told in one and a half hours instead of three. ... Read more

Reviews (66)

Bless them all...bless them all....
I am unable to recall another film whose opening and closing scenes are more effective than those in this brilliant portrayal of the 918th Bombardment group based in England which flew almost daily missions to Germany during World War II. The character of General Frank Savage (Gregory Peck) is reputedly based on Brigadier General Frank A. Armstrong, Jr. Sy Bartlett wrote the book and then the screenplay. Brilliantly directed by Henry King, we are introduced to a combination of combat fatigue and self-pity which results in the replacement of Colonel Keith Davenport by his friend Savage who is told by his commanding officer, General Pritchard (Millard Mitchell), to shape up the 918th while avoiding Davenport's problem: Becoming overly involved emotionally in decisions to send B-17 crews on exceptionally dangerous missions, day after day after day. Savage immediately establishes his authority and almost immediately loses whatever goodwill he may have had. He applies and then maintains constant pressure on the crews to improve their performance in all areas of flight operations. Underachievers are reassigned to one B-17 renamed "The Leper Colony." Morale deteriorates to such a point that those at headquarters become concerned. A formal investigation of the situation is conducted. This is a critical moment for Savage. If he has "lost" his men, he cannot continue. In fact, he expects to be relieved and begins to pack his personal items. However, for reasons revealed in the film, Savage remains in command. And then....

It would be a disservice to those who have not as yet seen this film to say any more about the plot. Suffice to say that brilliant direction, great acting by everyone involved (notably by Dean Jagger who received an Academy Award for best actor in a supporting role), superb cinematography (Leon Shamroy), and haunting music (Alfred Newman) are seamlessly integrated in this analysis of effective leadership (especially decision-making) under wartime conditions. The film begins when Harry Stovall (Jagger) makes an especially significant purchase in an antique store and then proceeds to what has by then become an abandoned air base. As we begin to hear the bombers' propellers whine as the engines roar to life, we are transported back in time. Later, as the film ends, civilian Stovall climbs back on his rented bike and departs what is again an abandoned air base. Stunning images throughout both sequences.

Peck included this among his favorite films, while adding that he was especially proud of his performance as Frank Savage. When first released more than 50 years ago, it did not receive the recognition (much less the appreciation) it so obviously deserves. Whenever CEOs and other senior-level executives ask me to suggest war films which offer important lessons about leadership and management, Twelve O'Clock High is first on the list, joined by (in alphabetical order) Command Decision, The Dirty Dozen, The Enemy Below, Fort Apache, The Hunt for Red October, Paths of Glory, Pork Chop Hill, The Red Badge of Courage, They Were Expendable, and Zulu.

The best war movie I've ever seen. Magnificent!
Twelve "O'Clock High is a powerful and true-to-life film dealing with the early days of the 8th US Air Force in Great Britain. Its mission: to bomb Germany not by night in saturation bombings as the British were doing, but instead to boldly engage in "precision daylight bombing." No one knew if the concept was viable because no one had ever dared try it before on a large scale. Gregory Peck plays the role of a leader suddenly thrust into command of a deeply troubled, demoralized, and shot-up bomber squadron. How he motivates the men and overcomes the fact that the men well know that their chances of survival were poor (the worst survival odds of any American combat assignment in the war) is a deeply moving, powerful, indeed unforgettable story. This is a great movie.

The cinematography of this movie is wonderful, featuring actual combat footage of B-17s engaging German Focke-Wulf fighters in deadly combat. The sense of authenticity that this movie brings to the screen is total. One feels transposed back into England in 1942, engaged in a life-and-death struggle in the air against the Germans. The uniforms, dialogue, everything, about this movie reeks of authenticity. The storyline moves along at a breakneck pace--no dull interludes. And yet this is not just a "shoot-em-up" war flick. It is a stirring story of leadership, personality clashes, honest fear and human imperfections that reminds us what an incredible debt we all owe to the men who fought and won the air war over Nazi Germany.

This is a DVD movie to keep and watch repeatedly over the years. It is not only a great movie, it is wonderfully entertaining. This is truly one of the all-time great war movies.

The best review from someone who lived it.
My father, a b-17 bomber pilot, flew 52 missions out of England (Bassingbourn) during WWII. He spoke very little about his war-time experiences, but he said that this was the closest that Hollywood ever came to capturing what it was like for the B-17 bomber squadrons during WWII. It is a great film about human beings under extraordinary stress, making extremely difficult choices and living with their consequences - but most especially it is a moving portrayal of the complexities of leadership and friendship, and the trust needed to get others to do difficult, if not impossible things.

the meaning of "Maximum Effort"
This is a magnificent World War II film about U.S. airmen stationed in Britain in the fall of 1942, and so much more; it's about the psychology that goes into situations of extreme stress, and what makes a man a winner or loser when put to the test. As General Savage (Peck) says in his pep talk, "fear is normal, but stop worrying about it". Savage has no time for self pity, for himself or anyone else, and his toughness and high principles bring out the best in his men, and it also points up the dangers of emotional attachment in the wrong situations.
The script by Sy Bartlett and Beirne Lay Jr., from their book which is loosely based on a true story, is intelligent and insightful, and the direction by Henry King meticulous. The cinematography by Leon Shamroy is crisp and marvelous, and also includes riveting portions of actual WWII battle footage interspersed in the aerial shots.
The Alfred Newman score also adds much to the film.

Gregory Peck is perfect as General Savage, fabulously handsome, with one of the greatest voices of the 20th century, one cannot imagine a better actor for the part. Dean Jagger is also splendid as Major Harvey Stovall; wise and often witty, it is through his eyes that we see the story, told in flashback as he wanders the deserted airfield in 1949.
Other excellent performances come from Gary Merrill and Hugh Marlowe, but every cast member is good, with strong turns from all.

Nominated for a Best Actor and Best Picture Oscar (losing out to "All the King's Men" on both counts), "Twelve O'Clock High" spawned a much better than average TV series (1964-67) that I enjoyed watching, especially in its first season when it starred Robert Lansing.
This is a film that is actually used in "leadership seminars" for business executives, and by the U.S. Airforce as a teaching tool. It has lessons for the average person too, but most of all, it's a superb film, with memorable performances. Total running time is 132 minutes.

Excellent Movie for Leadership
This movie is a classic tool used by the USAF Squadron Officer School. It is a great way to see the different styles of leadership. When we viewed it in an educational fashion the movie carried a much greater sense of meaning for us. For all military buffs this movie has to be in your collection. Tobey Jugs, leather caps, B-17s...Bless them all, bless them all... ... Read more

Reviews (44)

The Definitive Cat and Mouse Submarine Movie
This is one of the best duel-of-wits on the high seas between submarine and destroyer ever filmed. Robert Mitchum as the captain of an American destroyer and Curt Jurgens as the captain of a German submarine try to out maneuver each other in a battle of nerves, instincts, intelligence, seamanship and raw courage. The multi-talented Dick Powell directed this taught drama, which remains one of the most memorable and benchmark films of this genre. The interior of the German submarine does not have the realistic or claustrophobic look as seen in DAS BOOT but that's not the point. Powell's focus is on the two captains and how they act and react. This film does not lose sight of the mentality of that era and the psychological makeup of the men at sea above and below. This is classic filmmaking and should not be overshadowed by the recent resurgence of certain World War II films that seem to have lost sight of the reason men fought and died. This film also has an impressive cast featuring David Hedison, Theodore Bikel, Kurt Kreuger and Doug McClure. Robert Mitchum and Curt Jurgens portrayed true men of honor each dedicated to their duty that they were called upon.

Dive into this good submarine drama
There is a fairly extensive sub-category of war movies - submarine battles - within which movies made in the 1950's are highly regarded. THE ENEMY BELOW is not up to the standards of RUN SILENT, RUN DEEP but is better than TORPEDO RUN. It is also different that both those movies. Where they use a dramatic human interest story as the main plot line, this movie has a narrow focus on what you would expect from a film about a sub battle. The emphasis is on the chase, the strategy, the cunning and wiles of both commanders - US destroyer Captain Murrell (Robert Mitchum) and veteran German U-Boat commander Von Stolberg (Curt Jurgens). The drama is in changing fortunes - now who is the hunter and the hunted? Both of the main characters are well developed, and while there are differences in behavior, motivation, and naturally, stategy, the movie also shows clearly that as professional sailors they recognize and appreciate the good qualities in their opposites. As such this movie is memorable for the fact that Germans are not demonized or simply stereotyped as Nazis.

It's a well directed movie, with excellent moments of suspense, good acting in some key supporting roles - Lt Ware (David Hedison). The only let down is with some very obvious models in some of the battle scenes.

The Definitive Cat and Mouse Submarine Movie
This is one of the best duel-of-wits on the high seas between submarine and destroyer ever filmed. Robert Mitchum as the captain of an American destroyer and Curt Jurgens as the captain of a German submarine try to out maneuver each other in a battle of nerves, instincts, intelligence, seamanship and raw courage. The multi-talented Dick Powell directed this taught drama, which remains one of the most memorable and benchmark films of this genre. The interior of the German submarine does not have the realistic or claustrophobic look as seen in DAS BOOT but that's not the point. Powell's focus is on the two captains and how they act and react. This film does not lose sight of the mentality of that era and the psychological makeup of the men at sea above and below. This is classic filmmaking and should not be overshadowed by the recent resurgence of certain World War II films that seem to have lost sight of the reason men fought and died. This film also has an impressive cast featuring David Hedison, Theodore Bikel, Kurt Kreuger and Doug McClure. Robert Mitchum and Curt Jurgens portrayed true men of honor each dedicated to their duty that they were called upon.

Enemy Below
Dick Powell had to have had one of the most interesting careers in Hollywood history. He started out as a golden-throated pretty boy actor, made a successful mid-career shift to hard boiled roles like Philip Marlowe and then, for good measure, directed a handful of movies, including the submarine action picture THE ENEMY BELOW.
THE ENEMY BELOW is a 100% action movie, without any distracting romantic sub-plot or comic relief crew members. Robert Mitchum and Curt Jurgens are excellent as the American destroyer commander and U-boat commander who cross paths in the Atlantic Ocean and engage in a deadly hunt. With a few exceptions the models are realistically rendered and convincing. This is one of the best war movies out there, and maybe the best navy movie available. I strongly recommend it to action fans.

great cat and mouse game by two great actors!
This is not the average sub-film that centers on the crews of the sub and the sub-chaser. This is a two-man cat and mouse film, marvelously done with style and incisive insight.

Robert Mitchum is the man who rises to do what is needed. Not a superhero, but a very human man who goes into war and does what is required. He is the Captain of a U.S. destroyer sent out to track U-boats. Curt Jurgens is his mirror reflection - below - a Captain of the U-Boat that becomes the target of Mitchum's search. He is not a product of the Nazi war-machine, but again, a very likable man just defending his country. This is demonstrated with deft humor when Jurgens very deliberately hangs his jacket over the plaque of Hitler's propaganda.

The script eschews the stereotypical "Nazi monsters", and portrays a German crew with very real - and universal - emotions. They, too, were just men doing their job and what is required. Instead of having us root for the Americans to blow up the evil Germans, you are put in the position of caring equally for both sides. You comprehend that they are men, offering their lives for their command, not in a political way, but in a time-honoured fashion of a man going to war. You understand both sides REALLY do not want to be here, to kill or be killed; they would rather home. No rousing stereotypical propaganda. In the end, they will kill each other if they must, but given the choice, they would rather not. Very different for that period of war films.

A little dated appearance on the boat scenes by today's standards. It's obvious toy models when the boats crash, but easily overlooked and dismissed when balanced with the very impressive lack of finger-pointing and flag-waving for either nationality. Both Mitchum and Jurgens are dead-bang on target in their lead roles, with David Hedison, Theodore Bickel and Doug McClure round out a super cast ... Read more

Reviews (264)

Absolutely Brilliant, Yet Creepy Satire
Splendidly acted and brilliantly directed, Dr. Strangelove is Kubrick's satiric masterpiece about the insanity of the Cold War Era and the silliness of the infamous military-industrial complex--i.e., militaristic war machine-- that seems hell-bent on destroying the world with its overblown paranoia and jingoism. After rumors of a supposed Doomsday Machine that the "Commie Rats" are developing, a general, Jack D. Ripper (Sterling Hayden), tricks 34 U.S. Air Force bombers into nuking the U.S.S.R. without asking the President's permission (played by Peter Sellers in one of three roles). Not surprisingly, he's a little touched in the head, as he decides to bomb Russia not only because of this device, but because he's obsessed with the idea of preserving America's "precious bodily fluids." (It's a long story, folks.) Adding to the mess is Joint Chief of Staff, Turgidson (George C.Scott, in a brilliant performance), who's as paranoid as they come and wouldn't mind helping Ripper take out half of civilization to save America from the evil Russians. (One hilarious scene has Turgidson confronted with the possiblity of killing millions of people because of Ripper's stunt. "So what if we get our hair a little mussed?" he says.) Also mired in the madness is another military man, the veddy British Mandrake (Sellers) who works under Ripper and tries desperately to get the insane man to give him the code needed to turn the planes back, but alas to no avail. The star of the movie, however, is the weapons scientist, Dr. Strangelove (Sellers again), a very bizarre wheelchair-bound ex-Nazi with a "trick arm" that can't stop doing the Seig Heil salute. (For trivia buffs out there, this character may have been an allusion to the very real Wernher von Braun, the rocket scientist for Nazi Germany who was recruited by the U.S. after the war.) Also doing a wonderful turn is Slim Pickens, the tough-talking cowboy and man in charge of the only bomber that fails to get the recall from Washington; the scene in which he rides a falling nuke to its destination is a cinematic classic.

What makes Dr. Strangelove so brilliant is that is able to straddle that line between reality and absurdity without having each side cancel the other out. On one hand, the performances are so over the top that you not only laugh, you sigh with the relief that this is, after all, *just* a movie. (A weird cat like Dr. Strangelove could never exist in real life.) On the other hand, there's something about the way the film is directed where there's an eery and creepy feeling that something like this *could* happen-- not with these zany characters, of course, but with saner people in similar circumstances. In the end, no matter how crazy people like Turgidson and Ripper may act, the bottom line is that their underlying beliefs are shockingly similar to what a lot of U.S. military personnel in a position of power to push the button feel like. But then again, that was the point of the film-- on one hand to make people laugh, but on the other hand, to wake them up to the dangers of the Cold War and an entity like the military-industrial complex, that-- if not kept in check-- could one day feel itself powerful enough to perform certain reckless acts without consulting Congress or even the President himself. All in all, a terrific film, and a complete thumbs up from me.

A Kubrick Classic.
U.S. Air Force General Jack D. Ripper (Sterling Heyden) goes entire and Utterly Crazy and Sends his Bomber Wing to Destory the U.S.S.R. He distrust that the Communists are Noted to Contaminate the Expensive Carnal Liquids of the American People. The U.S. President (Peter Sellers) meets with his Advisors, where the Soviet Ambassador tells him if the U.S.S.R. is hit by Nuclear Weapons, it will trigger a Doomsday Decive. Which will Annihilate all Plant and Animal Life on Earth. British Captain Lionel Mandrake (Also Sellers), the only person with access to the Demented General Ripper. U.S. President Merkin Muffley, whose Best Effort to Avert Disaster depend on Placating a High Soviet Permier and the former Nazi genious Dr. Strangelove (Also Sellers), who concludes that such a decive would not be a Cognizant Deterrent for Reasons which at this moment must be all too obvious. Will the Bombers be Stopped in Time or will General Jack D. Ripper succeed in destroying the world?

Directed by Stanley Kubrick (Lolita, 2001:A Space Odyssey, A Clockwork Orange) filmed a well made Black Comedy, feature an Impressive Cast including-George C. Scott, Slim Pickens and James Earl Jones. This film is Unique and It's gets better, every year. Oscar Nominated for Best Actor:Peter Sellers, Best Picture and Best Director:Stanley Kubrick and Best Adapted Screenplay by Peter George, Stanley Kubrick and Terry Southern. DVD has an clear Pan & Scan format and an Dolby Digital 1.0 Mono Sound. A well made that become a Classic. The Newest Edition from Columbia Home Video DVD has Many Extras. Grade:B+.

Oh for the days of the Cold War!
Every ideology that seems terribly important to one generation usually ends up seeming idiotic and even disturbingly naive to the following generation.

Think about it. The ideologies of the 18th century - dying for one's prince, duke or loot - seemed insane during the Napoleonic Wars, when nationalism became THE primary motivating factor.

"Pure" nationalism - like the extreme gung-ho attitudes at the beginning of World War I - seemed rather distasteful to the Allied forces in World War II, who fought to liberate peoples from Fascism.

The idea that Fascism would always endure, and was seriously in danger of taking over the world, seemed laughable during the Cold War.

How does the Cold War look to us today? The McCarthy era; Americans truly believing the USSR and the Communists were veritable Antichrists; truly believing that DESTROYING ALL LIFE ON THE PLANET was a feasible prediction about life in the near future; that the world was, always had been, and always would be, characterised by a fight between Communists and Capitalists.

*Sigh*

Dr Strangelove (or: how I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb) is actually MORE fun