The American Spectator : Old Hollywood versus New Hollywood

Text Size

What's Still Great

Old Hollywood versus New Hollywood

By Mark Tooley on 2.17.12 @ 6:08AM

Lucky the child of 40 years ago who was introduced to the last great wave of the old.

The Academy Awards are next weekend, and undoubtedly a dwindling audience will watch, if declining movie profits are any indication. Old Hollywood, though liberal, once celebrated America's virtues. Now new Hollywood obsesses over and celebrates its vices. Old Hollywood was patriotic. New Hollywood sees America as villainous. Old Hollywood celebrated family life. New Hollywood primarily honors autonomous individuals. Old Hollywood, though not itself religious, respected faith. Its iconic representative was perhaps director Cecil B. DeMille, renowned for its biblical epics, who did not attend worship services but liked to sit quietly in church buildings. Old Hollywood portrayed struggles between good and evil, often with nuance, in which Providence gave victory to the former. New Hollywood often likens life to a casino. Old Hollywood privately misbehaved but publicly was glamorous and classy. New Hollywood is proudly trashy.

Hollywood became cynical and trashy partly thanks to the Vietnam War and the sexual revolution of the 1960s. Fortunately, my father took me to several movies over 40 years ago, when I was only age 5 or 6 or so, that reflected the nobility of old Hollywood and that were deeply impressionable to me. The most celebrated of those movies we saw was Patton, starring George C. Scott as the flamboyant World War II commander. Scott himself won an academy award, though eccentrically declined to accept it. It was Scott's greatest role, though he was actually much younger than the general he portrayed, and his voice was much deeper. Patton's grandson recalled in his family memoir that his father, himself a general who served in Vietnam, quietly taking the family to a theater to see the portrayal of his father. The son quietly whispered to the grandson that his own father's voice was much higher pitched than Scott's. But the son also wept during the movie's portrayal of the Battle of the Bulge, one of Patton's supreme moments. Appropriately, Scott dominates the film. His chief military aide is a slightly prissy actor who later appeared in television soap operas. Patton's superior, Eisenhower, is felt but never shown on screen. His favorite enemy, German Field Marshall Erwin Rommel, is barely shown. Karl Malden's General Omar Bradley is accurately stolid and bland. The not well-known British actor portraying British Field Marshall Bernard Montgomery comes close to challenging Scott's dramatic dominance, which is true to life. Montgomery was Patton's chief nemesis. He is portrayed as prickly and arrogant, partly thanks to the real life Omar Bradley, who shared Patton's disdain for their ally, and who served as a film advisor.

Many years later, Scott would again portray the general in a television movie The Last Days of Patton, showing Patton's agonies as he lay dying after a car accident. Mercifully, Patton omits that final chapter, instead stirringly ending with Patton, at the height of his fame, walking his bull terrier towards an Austrian mountain, as he recalled the ancient Roman warning that all glory is fleeting. President Richard Nixon famously relished the movie, supposedly watching it repeatedly, especially during the Cambodian incursion. Rod Steiger reputedly always regretted declining to portray Patton. But it's nearly impossible to picture anyone other than George C. Scott, in full battle regalia, gruffly addressing his troops before a giant American flag in Patton's iconic opening scene.

Rod Steiger did gloweringly portray Napoleon is another film to which my father took me, Waterloo, also superbly featuring Christopher Plummer as the Duke of Wellington. More magnificently, but too briefly, a sardonically corpulent Orson Welles is King Louis XVIII, who ambles to his escape after a terrified courtier warns the "monster" has returned from his exile on Elba. Marshal Ney has promised the king he would bring Napoleon back to Paris in an "iron cage." But when a defiant Napoleon asks Ney's troops who will be first among them to fire on their emperor, they rally to him, with Ney once again in the service to his old commander. The battle scenes are wonderfully staged, with aerial scenes of British and French troops arrayed into "battle squares" to receive attacks. Plummer, as Wellington, remains composed when a subordinate at his side loses a limb to a cannon ball. The climax is when aging Marshal Gebhard Leberecht von Blücher arrives with his Prussian army, ensuring Napoleon's doom. "Kill, my children, kill!" he shouts as they galloped into the field. It's a very rare moment in any film for British or American audiences when German troops are rescuers. The actor playing Blücher was a Soviet Georgian. Over 15,000 Soviet army troops were extras, a rare opportunity for the Red Army during the Cold War to be constructively useful. And the film was partially filmed in the Soviet Union. The film itself was an Italian-Soviet collaboration.

In Waterloo's final scene, a victorious Christopher Plummer as Wellington surveys the thousands of corpses, exclaiming "next to a battle lost, the saddest thing is a battle won." I recall leaving the movie theater, at age 5 or 6, with the mistaken impression that only Wellington survived the battle. In fact, Rod Steiger, as Napoleon, is shown being hustled off the battlefield by his marshals, his Old Guard having chosen death before surrender. The film does not glorify war, but neither does it darkly claim it is useless. Wellington is sad but not regretful. Napoleon's final defeat ushered in nearly 100 years of relative European peace.

Napoleon's war-ravaged reign over France was the last, terrible blast of the murderous French Revolution, which had beheaded the French monarch and thousands more. More than a century before, the English Puritans had beheaded their own King Charles I, whom Alec Guinness perfectly portrayed in Cromwell. Richard Harris has the title role as the Puritan general who becomes England's Lord Protector. As a little boy in the movie theater, I thrilled to Cromwell's military exploits and impatience with the dignified but feckless king. The battle scenes from the English civil war are effective, though lacking thousands of Soviet military extras. Timothy Dalton is Prince Rupert, and Robert Morley is the smugly fat Earl of Manchester. Largely accurate to history in the big story if not the details, Cromwell outmaneuvers them all. Alec Guinness, as the king, nobly accepts his execution, announcing from the scaffold: "I go now from a corruptible to an incorruptible crown."

In true old Hollywood form, King Charles is shown at prayer and genuinely devout, though appalled by the more populist demands of the Puritan parliament. Cromwell is equally ardent in his faith, often citing Jehovah to justify his war against royalism. And the film's music score features an English cathedral choir singing "Rejoice in the Lord." Richard Harris, as the Puritan commander, advocates "democracy" to sneering royalists, obviously an historical exaggeration. But the Puritan defeat of royal power prefigured the more peaceful Glorious Revolution of 1688 and eventually the British and American democracies. The film concludes with a shot of Cromwell's sarcophagus (the real one was actually destroyed during the royal restoration), which proclaims: "Christ, not Man, is King." Thirty years later, another film To Kill a King, with Rupert Everett playing a much snottier King Charles than Alec Guinness, links the Puritan revolt with the French Revolution. The comparison is unfair, as the Puritans at least tried to create a Christian commonwealth that protected property and some liberty of conscience. The French Revolution quickly degenerated into a mindless bloodbath, led by atheists, and ultimately inspiring the vicious, utopian ideologies of the 20th century.

The final film that remains in my memory from that era is Zulu, Michael Caine's first major movie role, and which portrays the Battle of Rorke's Drift in 1879. About 150 British and colonial troops defend a South African mission station from 3,000 to 4,000 Zulu warriors after a much larger Zulu army had already wiped out about 1,300 British soldiers at the Battle of Isandlwana. Richard Burton is perfect as narrator of the film, which was first released in 1964 but reappeared in U.S. theaters in the early 1970s. It was filmed amid stunning scenery in South Africa. And a young, real life Chief Buthelezi, who is still alive, vividly plays the part of his ancestor Zulu king.

Nearly all of the characters in Zulu are flawed but ultimately admirable. Caine is a young inexperienced lieutenant who organizes the defense with a fellow officer also lacking any combat history. The mission's Swedish pacifist missionary and his daughter, pleading for the British command to flee rather than fight, are themselves chased off. The watching Zulus respectfully permit the Swedes to depart in peace while preparing their own brilliantly choreographed attack on the small British command. Cynical and once besotted British soldiers, malingering in the infirmary, rise to the occasion as they are surrounded by thousands of assaulting spears men. After the carnage, which the few British barely survive, the Zulu warriors pay homage to their valor with a tribal dance and song. Expecting another, final assault, the British robustly sing a soaring Welsh martial melody, "Men of Harlech." These tributes are fictional additions to the history, of course, but marvelous for the film. Nearly a dozen men received Victoria Crosses for their heroism at the battle, as Richard Burton recalls at the film's close.

Zulu neither glorifies nor denigrates war or the British Empire. It celebrates duty and valor. A 1979 film with Peter O'Toole and Burt Lancaster portrays the Zulu decimation of the British at Isandlwana, shown as tragic and almost deserved, in true new Hollywood style. The Victorian British in South Africa were just like the feckless Americans in Vietnam, of course.

None of these historical biopics from old Hollywood were perfect history, of course. No film ever is. But they un-cynically and magisterially interpreted heroic events that new Hollywood would never understand and likely would despoil. The historical biopics before this year's Academy Awards like J. Edgar and Iron Lady feature outstanding performances but speculatively obsess over personal psychodrama. Ironically, their title characters in real life were uninterested in their own inner emotional lives, preferring to think of themselves as historically momentous actors on a national stage.

These films of 40 years ago from that I saw when very young were some of the last from old Hollywood. They spared us postmodern psychobabble and spotlighted great men as agents of great events. They were tremendously entertaining, and inspiring, to a child and still are to an adult.

About the Author

Mark Tooley is president of the Institute on Religion and Democracy in Washington, D.C. and author of Methodism and Politics in the Twentieth Century.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (193) | Leave a comment

albert constantine jr.| 2.17.12 @ 7:32AM

Once upon a time, many of the performers (as well as the directors, producers and crews) in Hollywood had lived through the deprivation of the Depression, volunteered or were drafted into the military if physically able to serve, went to school on the GI Bill, and then drifted into show business, which entertained a culture that lauded achievement and respected their elders. Somewhere, during that process, they matured into adults in a society where adults were welcome, and expected to take charge.

Today, too often, popular entertainers in our current youth obsessed culture achieve success without having to grow up, despite what “dues” they might have had to pay to get where are. Immaturity and irresponsibility are glorified, and as long as their characters use condoms, embrace the correct left wing causes and don’t smoke, their industry credentials are established, and the rest of the country is expected to shell out their cash to watch them trash what we value, and applaud them for it.

Colin| 2.17.12 @ 11:09AM

For those just now getting their mail, Tinseltown died decades ago. It just wasn't written up in Rolling Stone, or the freebie papers in the lobby of the Hollywood Free Clinic.

With exceptions, "good ol' Hollywood" used to be about stories, emotions and (mostly) positive messages. Or, happy endings. Since the radical left gained control over production, scripts, and screen values, the focus in primarily, today, on smut, left wing agendas, and trashing anyone or anyTHING that even whiffs of conservatism. Or those deadly Hollywood garlic bulbs called - Family Values. Of course there are exceptions, but those few are ... the exception.

Much of today's film product is video game garbage, the scripts are mostly filtered through the eyes of Marxist messaging, and many of today's (alleged) actors are indoctrinated, programed ... idiots!

It and THEY ... are what they are.

*Opinions offered by ME. Your opinions may vary. At least (if or until) Obama wins another four years. If that happens? Your opinions will not be allowed. Unless they agree with ... Obama, the agenda ... or both.

See usher for details.

Seek| 2.17.12 @ 11:23AM

Check your local newspaper listings to see that the things Hollywood supposedly "abandoned" decades ago are well in abundance today.

Die Fledermaus| 2.17.12 @ 4:02PM

Colin,

I noticed this change kind of started in the 1970's. Movies became more about "causes" than stories.

My favorite example was the lackluster, if not completely boring, "Kramer vs. Kramer". If not for one brief front nude scene of Jo Beth Williams, I hated the film.

And they gave an academy award to Meryl Streep for about 20 minutes film time where she frowns and cries?

George Appley| 2.18.12 @ 12:40AM

Oliver Cromwell was a mass-murderer who tried to exterminate the Irish people....

Occam's Tool| 2.21.12 @ 6:22PM

Yup. My Irish Girlfriend of many years ago used to spit whenever his name came up.

However, once upon a time Hollywood Superstars were also capable of being real life Generals in the Air Force with combat experience. We will not see Jimmy Stewart's like again, either as the quality actor he was, or the quality hero he also was.

RJ| 2.18.12 @ 3:11AM

Colin,

My opinion about Hollywood movies and TV is much the same as yours. Perhaps it is a reflection of cultural rot. I hope we will see it turn around.

PolishKnight| 2.17.12 @ 5:04PM

On the contrary, I've noticed tons of smoking in leftist holiday movies and the actors puffing away behind the scenes as well in tabloids. Watch a Quentin Tarintino film: There's tons of stylistic smoking going on.

Clint| 2.17.12 @ 5:21PM

Dad, Told Us About Patton Having A High Pitched Voice.

3rd Army Patton Was There To Inspect Dad And His 38th Cavalry, 1st Army Troopers ,When They Were Awarded The Presidential Unit Citation For Being The First Unit To Hold And Turn Back The Germans On The North Shoulder Of The Battle Of The Bulge.

Alan Brooks| 2.17.12 @ 8:46PM

Patton is a great film, perhaps the best war film ever made. But the reason is it is tough, sad, funny, all around; it doesn't take itself with deadly seriousness as so many war films do.
Patton is a war film, a a tragedy, and a comedy-- something Rightists filmmakers generally lack the ability to create. If Ayn Rand had written or directed 'Patton' we would have puked up our popcorn and soda pop while watching it. Rand and the majority of other Rightists would use a heavy-handed machete rather than the scalpel used in 'Patton'.

Alan Brooks| 2.17.12 @ 8:50PM

... in fact if Reagan had played the title role , it wouldn't have succeeded as it did with Scott.
If Goldwater and or WFB had done the screenplay, it would have turned out too preachy and turgid. I've always thought Rightists usually do agriculture and gunsmithing far Far better than they do art and entertainment.

Moe Blotz| 2.18.12 @ 8:09AM

If if if......... hypothetical speculation fantasy to show your contempt for the riff-raff,eh? If your mother had two balls she would have been your father. We "Rightists" do pretty well behind the wheel of a big truck, too. Mine is a Peterbilt.

Nemo| 2.19.12 @ 12:27PM

Oh, we're a prophet, are we? Gifted wiuth second sight as to how things might have been?

Martin Owens| 2.18.12 @ 8:10PM

Aaa-and thaat was once upon a time...
Aaand that once upon a time never comes
aaah-gain...

donserge| 2.17.12 @ 7:58AM

Can anyone imagine the intelligence challenged metrosexuals like DiCaprio, Penn, Pitt, Damon, et. al. playing people like Patton? They justify the fact that I haven't put one dime into their liberal coffers for over 45 years.

Dan Mathewson| 2.17.12 @ 9:13AM

I saw a story that DiCaprio will be starring in a Travis McGee movie directed by the loathsome Ollie Stone. The horror.

Grzmlyk| 2.17.12 @ 9:55AM

I think DiCaprio is ok but overrrated. I think Penn overacts and indulges way too much in angst. I think Damon has very, very limited talent. I do think Pitt, though, has some chops.

However, he is uneven, and in the Tarantino film "Inglourious Basterds" - a typical Tarantino mix of fantastic filmmaking and juvenile sensibilities - Pitt really misses the mark as Lt. Aldo Raine. A shallower performance I cannot imagine.

And yet he's done reasonably good comedy (Burn After Reading & The Mexican) and some fairly three-dimensional drama (Moneyball).

He'll never be confused with the greats who seemed so plentiful from Hollywood's pre-rot days.

Of course Hollywood is merely a microcosm of America's cultural sensibiliy at large. As such, it seems to me that actors today who are lionized for their talent - Sean Penn being a perfect example - unfailingly give narcissistic, inward-looking performances that are simulataneously over-the-top and weirdly small.

Compare that with the utter scope, the grandeur and, above all, the humanity some of the actors mentioned here brought to their roles - Scott, Malden, Burton, Plummer, O'Toole, Harris, Steiger (when he could rein himself in), Caine, etc. - all of these guys saw acting as a craft. Today's actors all too often see it as an apotheosis.

Anthony| 2.17.12 @ 10:53AM

Hey Grzmlyk, nice to see that you're back. I was wondering if we had lost you completely. You've been quiet, not suprising when you accurately end your posts with "we are so screwed".
Keep the faith, brother.

Al Adab| 2.17.12 @ 10:58AM

Grz:
Let me echo Anthony, welcome back.

Enjoy Waterloo even with its production techical problems. Steiger almost makes one think it really is Napoleon.

VDH would tell us that the study of war shows us better how to manage this great curse of mankind which is both our greatest evil and yet demonstrates our greatest virtues.

Grzmlyk| 2.17.12 @ 12:40PM

Hi Anthony - thank you very much, and to you, Al Adab, for your welcome back. Unfortunately, I've just been incredibly busy lately.

I was toying with giving up my crack habit to free up some time, but after Whitney Houston's death, I figured I had to keep the faith and show solidarity!

And is there any better indication that we are screwed than when Chris Christie orders the flags in NJ to be flown at half-mast for a washed-up, burned-out, wrun-out crack head with a modicum of talent who squandered it and then spent 20 years trying to kill herself before she succeeded?

Gee, when Charles Manson dies, does anyone have any doubt that Governor Moonbeam will have all the flags in California lowered to half-mast? After all, Manson has been an indelible part of the cultural landscape ever since he directed that innocent people - capitalist pig, one-percenters each and every one of them - be butchered. And Manson has been living the sociopathic narcissist's dream, having become an icon of the counter-culture a la the cult of Che Guevara, unemployed and living on the governement teat for over 40 years!

Seems to me that Manson represents all that is good about America in the eyes of Democrats.

Besides, Manson's achievements merely foreshadow what Obamacare is going to bring to us: The involuntary liquidation of innocent people.

In any case, I do hope to post more in the future, but there are days I don't even have the opportunity to log onto Amspec!

But, sadly, nothing I've seen from the ongoing GOP circus has made me think we're NOT screwed. I'm a little excited about Santorum's rise (imperfect as he is), but then I look at Congress - that "august body" that many conservatives are putting all their hopes into. With friends like Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, who needs enemies? :-)

albert constantine jr| 2.17.12 @ 11:08AM

GRZ;
Regarding Pitt and Tarantino, I believe the latter was the screenwriter on "True Romance", and Pitt was a scene-stealer in the small but funny role of Floyd the burnout roommate.

Many "big" names in Hollywood today played small roles in that movie, and when Dennis Hopper died in real life, I imagine he wished he could have gone out like his character in that film.

Grzmlyk| 2.17.12 @ 12:44PM

Good points, Albert - I do think that Pitt has some genuine talent. Too bad his life is such a circus - he might really hone his craft.

However, I confess I have not seen True Romance! I will check it out. I remember that 5-year period when Patricia Arquette was in every A-list movie that came out. Then she disappeared.

Show-biz.

Al Adab| 2.17.12 @ 1:46PM

Simply because one can act or sing we are not bound to follow their example of how to live a life with purpose and meaning. That is the mistake so many make when they confuse celebrity with wisdom.

Grzmlyk| 2.17.12 @ 2:39PM

That's one of humankind's biggest foibles, I think - we look at sports stars, celebrities and beautiful people as icons, and we imbue them with magical powers - they are blank slates onto which we project our own ideals.

It is sad. And it's impossible for such an icon to live up to the ideal. My sympathy for Whitney Houston is VERY limited, but I do think that fame warps a person - as well as the people that surr0und that person - such that it is very, very difficult to keep one's less salubrious impulses in check.

If you've ever seen the great 1957 Elia Kazan movie "A Face in the Crowd" (with Andy Griffith), it's a poignant depiction of the old adage that power corrupts (although in Lonesome Roads's case, he was a sociopath from the beginning; but that doesn't excuse his various hangers on, who benefited from his corruption).

Al Adab| 2.17.12 @ 3:14PM

I concur and agree that the half-staff flag is an abomination. Christie should know better.

Mike Hawk| 2.18.12 @ 9:39PM

Flying the flag at half-staff in any of these cases is a breach of US Code for flag etiquette. Christie should read it. GOv Moonbeam doesn't care. he'd rather burn it.

Bob Grant| 2.17.12 @ 11:18AM

I simply can't think of DiCaprio, Pitt, Penn, Damon, Cruise, Affleck, ...and other current performers as boys acting in men's roles.

You could make an argument that Clooney, Norton, and Walhberg are the exceptions.

Bob Grant| 2.17.12 @ 11:19AM

that would be 'simply can't help but think'...

Grzmlyk| 2.17.12 @ 12:49PM

I agree, Bob - I think Penn is a petulant child who may be the most overrated actor of all time - and I've seen two movies he's directed; talk about a gratuitously nihilistic, bleak world view! Ugh!

I think Clooney was TERRIBLE on ER. But he grew into movie stardom quite nicely; I think he has real talent. Affleck ought to be arrested for impersonating a movie star, as far as I'm concerned. Cruise is inexplicable to me. I don't hate him, but I always think there must be 100,000 other guys who would be more compelling on screen.

Norton's always been the real deal, and Wahlberg takes his craft seriously - I think he has somewhat limited range, but he acts within himself and always does a nice job.

skip| 2.17.12 @ 4:45PM

I can't help but notice Cruise hasn't yet cracked these lists of emotionally prattling liberals.

If the criteria for an actor is to convey thoughts and actions with excellence in three dimensions, while striving for a fourth - mythical - dimension, Cruise has yet to display any chops in a second dimension.

I've read the imposing 5'6" Cruise is set to play the 6'5" Jack Reacher, the epitome of modern day domestic vigilante justice. What's next, Pee Wee Herman to star as Mitch Rapp, the epitome of modern day foreign vigilante justice?

skip| 2.17.12 @ 5:25PM

I can't help but notice a brief scan would catch errors like typing an 's' rather than the 'd' next to it - 'hadn't' - Bob Grant above mentioned the diminuitive one that led to my post. Sheesh.

Occam's Tool| 2.21.12 @ 6:23PM

Gary Sinise does well.

PolishKnight| 2.17.12 @ 10:22AM

My wife and I were rewatching Doctor Zhivago last night. Such a film would never be made today: 4 hours long, with slow plot developments, and subtle characters that don't need their villainy spelled out on the screen. It's a perfect symbol of old Hollywood (despite being a foreign film). It was epic.

Brad Pitt recently tried to remake Spartacus and I saw it but was unimpressed. It was hollow, fake, and simplistic. His life and politics are tabloid fodder and suitable for reality TV which now gets great ratings because leftist writers are so worthless. A bunch of drunks in a home sleeping with each other come up with better lines.

Al Adab| 2.17.12 @ 10:51AM

Didn't Pitt play Achilles in that mes of Troy?

Seek| 2.17.12 @ 11:26AM

Watcvh Pitt in "Troy" (2004). He was pretty convincing. And I didn' notice any sort of Leftist "agenda" either. "Troy's" German-born
filmmaker, Wolfgang Petersen, has made "Das Boot," ""In the Line of Fire," "Outbreak" and "Air Force One." Is that part of some agenda, too?

PolishKnight| 2.17.12 @ 1:20PM

I'm sorry, early morning mistake, it was Russel Crow who remade Spartacus.

Actually, Brad Pitt has done some pretty good work. I liked him in 12 monkeys but perhaps much of that was that him playing a crazed animal rights activist probably wasn't that far off of his real life persona. Troy was a mess.

Ground Control| 2.17.12 @ 3:54PM

I have yet to see a picture with Brad Pitt in it where Mr. Pitt is even remotely convincing. Brad Pitt is first and foremost a pretty face, and secondarily a reasonably competent actor. But Olivier he ain't. I would liken Pitt to Robert Redford, in that he is always the actor playing the part, but he is never absorbed in the role, and his movies suffer for it. "Troy" was a miserable mess.

Nick| 2.17.12 @ 5:10PM

Ground Control,

He was pretty convincing as the stoner in True Romance.
Although, he probably wasn't doing much acting, now that I think about it!

PolishKnight| 2.20.12 @ 9:31AM

He reminds me of Courtney Love's performance in "The People Versus Larry Flynt" where she plays, convincingly, a wasted, amoral heroin addict. How did she possibly do it?

Renard| 2.17.12 @ 8:36PM

Exactly, donserge! Although I cannot say I haven't paid to see a movie in the last 45 years (Wow!), it's been a least 15!

It's really kind of sad, too, because I used to love movies and TV - westerns, war movies, detective shows, family-oriented sitcoms, etc., etc. But, I don't watch anything new on TV, and I definitely won't PAY to see a movie! I WILL NOT support the liberal leftists in modern-day Hollywood!

I'm satisfied watching movies and old TV series on YouTube and other websites. Currently, I'm enjoying The Virginian, Gunsmoke, The Wild, Wild West, as well as snippets from variety shows like Dean Martin, Hollywood Palace, etc. And, to anyone older than 40, don't you really MISS those - I sure do??! (Today's so-called "Reality TV" is atrocious!)

And, even though many of those shows were very liberal - esp. Laugh In and the Smothers Brothers show (even by today's standards), somehow they were innocent and light enough to still seem fun. Do I see this wrong, or do others agree with me? Maybe because I was young back then I'm seeing things with rose-colored glasses.

Nemo| 2.17.12 @ 8:07AM

Only one quibble with an otherwise excellent article. The film Cromwell was historical rubbish, a whitewash of Cromwell.

Bulgaricus| 2.17.12 @ 8:07AM

Yep, great column. Most of today's films are junk compared to films like Zulu, Patton & Lawrence of Arabia. I remember I was watching some new DVD release recently, & after it was over, I realized that something was different. I couldn't put my finger on it, & then I realized 1) no sex scene & 2) very few 4 letter words! A refreshing change, but VERY unusual for today's Hollywood. I'm hoping some conservative guys will make a film about Reagan that does justice to him. But I'm not holding my breath!

Seek| 2.17.12 @ 11:27AM

Bad column. Recycled Michael Medved and little else. The fix is in on this one. Anyone can cherry-pick a few examples to get the desired "conclusion."

Frekki| 2.17.12 @ 2:59PM

Bad column. Recycled POST American and little else. The fix is in out this one. Anyone can cherry-pick a few examples to get the desired "idiocy."

WRTolkas| 2.17.12 @ 8:30AM

My I add to your list The Great Raid as an excellent film. Not perfect but close enough. The longer director's cut is the best for viewing.

And 300 Spartans. "Spartans, what is your profession?" I know the difference from fantasy and reality. But still darn entertaining.

Finally, Fireproofed. Good message of positive change. "Is it too late to let me grow old with you?"

Everyone have a safe weekend.

albert constantine jr| 2.17.12 @ 11:14AM

The Great Raid, like Gettysburg, Gods and Generals, A Bridge Too Far and The Longest Day, are good movies about real history that rely on some real life characters and the actual drama of the event itself to provide the story. I wish they were more films like this.

albert constantine jr| 2.17.12 @ 11:15AM

" I wish they were more films like this"

I wish there were more films like this, and fewer typos like mine.

Al Adab| 2.17.12 @ 1:48PM

albert:
Typos are my forte. Your list is a good one.

How strange is it not that war, the greatest curse of mankind, brings out the greatest virtues we possess?

albert constantine jr| 2.17.12 @ 2:49PM

I think that it is crisis that actually brings out the best (though often also the worst) in people, and war is one of those "man-made crises" (to borrow a phrase from Big Sis Napolitano) that we get to more frequently experience on a wider scale than earthquakes, tsunamis, volcano eruptions, etc. (though in the 1970s, disaster movies replaced war movies as the genre of choice for drama).

Bob Grant| 2.17.12 @ 11:27AM

My best guess is it would be cost prohibitive to make a true, non-computer enhanced, epic movie today.

In addition, there's no interest in the genre. Why make an epic movie about a war or a landmark moment in history when you can bring back an awful movie franchise from the 80's, like Police Academy, which can net a movie company a hundred mil'?

One of many cesspools in our culture that needs to be drained and cleaned.

albert constantine jr| 2.17.12 @ 12:13PM

Apparently, plots are developed primarily at the comic book store, instead of the history section of the library.

Occam's Tool| 2.21.12 @ 6:25PM

Yes, but 300 got the Eastern evil correct; not surprisingly, as Frank Miller's work has been brilliant regarding the war on terror and Islamofascism.

Dale| 2.17.12 @ 8:31AM

Zulu got it wrong also, the local missionary did not get drunk and flee, but stayed and was decorated by the queen. Ohterwise a great film

Monty's Python| 2.17.12 @ 10:05AM

Yes, Zulu is one of my favorite films. But the portrayal of the missionaries (the father is portrayed as a secret drunk and the daughter is a gutless harpy) is one of the early examples of anti-Christian bias creeping into movies in the 1960's and is thus the very thing that Mr. Tooley now decries.

Al Adab| 2.17.12 @ 10:38AM

Interesting sidelight to Zulu is that Mangosuthu Buthelezi portrayed his ancestor Ceteswayo in the film. It was Buthelezi and DeClerk who negotiated the end of apartheid in South Africa, a large portion of which took place on the editorial page of the WSJ. Great men indeed.

richard blaine| 2.17.12 @ 11:29AM

Also at the premier of the film in London the grand daughter of Henry Hook walked out because of the very inaccurate portrayal of her grandfather. The real Commisary Dalton was like Nigel Greene as Color Sgt Bourne. The real Bourne was only 24 year old.

Al Adab| 2.17.12 @ 12:07PM

"Dramatic license" as they say. We should not watch movies expecting accurate history lessons. Nonetheless I enjoy the portrayals of people and events. Too much "social conscience" in films these days.

richard blaine| 2.17.12 @ 12:35PM

Agree!

AhiaGuy| 2.17.12 @ 12:55PM

Yes. The real Henry Hook was considered a model soldier in the regiment. And Colour-Sgt. Bourne, rather than a man sporting a gray-flecked beard, was so young he was referred to as "the kid" by his compatriots.

irish19| 2.17.12 @ 8:56PM

It was still a wonderful movie! Just the memory of the 24th singing Men of Harlech in the movie gets my blood running a bit quicker.

PaulyD| 2.17.12 @ 9:18PM

Again, here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related

Derek Tyler| 2.19.12 @ 10:44PM

Thank you for posting the awesome link.

Occam's Tool| 2.21.12 @ 6:25PM

It's the gutless pacifism.

Derek Leaberry| 2.17.12 @ 8:45AM

Hollywood turned a page into the darkness in 1969 when it awarded the vile "Midnight Cowboy" the Academy Award for best picture. The long march into social anomie began in earnest then.

Grzmlyk| 2.17.12 @ 10:34AM

Derek, I have to disagree with you in part.

I think Midnight Cowboy is, in some ways, a beautiful film. It does suffer from the trappings of filmmaking fashion of the era, no doubt. And it does follow low-life losers around (but then so do countless other Hollywood classics, such as John Huston films like The Maltese Falcon, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, The Asphalt Jungle and The Misfits, along with many others - Double Indemnity, They Live by Night and even Streetcar Named Desire, innumerable Westerns, etc.).

Even greats like "The Best Years of Our Lives" explore the underbelly of the American Myth.

At its heart, though, Midnight Cowboy is an unlikely (and non-sexual) love story between a common street thief from the Bronx and a delusional, none-too-bright hick from Texas.

It is bleak and dystopian, no doubt (but then so is Metropolis, made in 1927 - granted, Metropolis is not a "Hollywood" film, but its influence cannot be understated).

Midnight Cowboy's twin protagonicsts find deep meaning in their pathetic, inconsequential lives because each loser finds someone in the harsh world who cares about him.

There is beauty in the film.

I do agree, though, that the film - and the era - changed movies. Then again, this was a product of a lot of social changes as well as the collapse of the studio system and the changing role of film in the fabric of American life - probably an inevitable consequence of the encroaching cynicism that has destroyed this country (even as Weimar Germany's different brand of cynicism informed Metropolis).

I certainly agree the post 1960s movies lack the innocence and the mythic qualities that imbued the art form with a magical wonder prior to that era. But, again, that's exactly what happened to our culture, our politics, our news media, the nuclear family, respect for the Juedo-Christian ethos, morality in general, sexual relationships and on and on and on.

Movies have never stood still - each era produced its own memes, whether it's the Astaire-Rogers confections of the depression-era, the can-do patriotism of the mid 1940s, the noirish disillusion that settled in after the war, the emerging demographic shift that ushered in the 50s, the aforementioned cynicism that gained momentumin the 60s, the paranoia and political reactionism of the 70s, the ennui of the 80s, etc.

AhiaGuy| 2.17.12 @ 1:11PM

Grzmlyk---However, the vast difference between old & new Hollywood is that old Hollywood didn't resort to the sleazy topic of homosexual prostitution to make the points you refer to.

Grzmlyk| 2.17.12 @ 2:21PM

I would agree, it's tough to take and it is unpleasant.

But sleazy topics aplenty abound right from the silent era, and certainly heterosexual prostitution is the at the center of many classics - Sada Thompson (1928) and Rain (1932), Camille (1936), Dead End (1937), From Here to Eternity (Donna Reed, no less!) (1953), Irma La Douce (1963).

Likewise, homosexual allusions date back from the beginning of film. Morocco (1930), Call Her Savage (1932), Gilda (1946), Rope (1948), In a Lonely Place (1950), Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, (1955), Some Like it Hot (1963), Spartacus (1963), etc.

In my opinion, the fact that Midnight Cowboy was among the first to put the two together doesn't necessarily sink it deeper into sleaze than myriad other aspects of humanity that Hollywood has depicted - out in the open or, more often during the "golden age," obliquely.

And the way the film deals with homosexual prostitution, it is not holding it up as an acceptable lifestyle choice. On the contraray, it is the last exit on the road to utter humiliation and degradation. It is incredibly distasteful and dehumanizing (so is the instance of heterosexual prostitution with Vera Miles). I do not think Midnight Cowboy is guilty of delving into prurience for the sake of cheap shock value, crass titillation or moral equivalence.

Art is always a tough call for a conservative, and has been almost from the beginning. While nobody likes life-affirming stuff like Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers films, or Vincent Minnelli's wonderful "Meet Me in St. Louis," or George Stevens's "I Remember Mama" more than I, I do not believe we should relegate art only to feel-good stories that ignore much of what comprises the human condition. I am not a fan of cheap shock value, crass titillation or moral equivalence, and I think movies like Brokeback Mountain - which I did not see - capitalize on a socio-political fad and nothing more - the attempt to mainstream homosexuality and assuage an increasingly cynical middle-class morality.

THAT is offensive to me.

Grzmlyk| 2.17.12 @ 2:27PM

Oops - Some Like it Hot (perhaps line for line the funniest movie ever made) is 1959, not 1963.

THKrupp| 2.17.12 @ 2:41PM

I was born in the early 70s so perhaps it colors your perception of movies a bit depending when you were born and what your expectations are.

I honestly believe that good movies now are better than good movies pre 1960. Thats being said there are classics that will never go out of style. I enjoy almost any movie with Audry Hepburn. I dont enjoy movies with John Wayne. He does the exact same thing in almost every movie Ive ever seen of him. The recent remake of True Grit was much better than his version...in my opinion. I used to love John Wayne movies when I was a kid. Now that I look back on that era of movies I realize why. The plots were fairly easy. The good guys were good guys and the bad were bad. For the most part. Modern movies show heros as being more human with their own set of foibles and even taking it so far as to create anti heros. I think that movies try very hard to show a realistic view of the world where as they used to show us the world we wanted it to be. This is in general and I know there are examples in which this is not the case. We do have to remember there are very few themes to work with. Every story has basically been done to death and essentially ever story is a remake of some other story. In order to keep things fresh movie makers have to find new ways to bring people into the theatres and if old style movies did that then they would still be making them.

Btw I did see Brokeback Mountain and its a very good movie. You may disagree with homosexual love but in the end it was a well made movie.

Grzmlyk| 2.17.12 @ 3:55PM

I heard that about Brokeback; I actually went to school with Ang Lee, the director. We all thought he was crazy - a Chinese guy who couldn't speak English being in a theater department.

There is something to be said for unequivocal heroes, but they are rarer in the history of cinema than a first glance might indicate. Look at Nicholas Ray, or Jimmy Stewart's Westerns in the 50s and 60s, or at John Huston's films from the 40s on. Certainly Billy Wilder captured the moral paradoxes of existence beautifully, as did Elia Kazan.

Then too, ironically, in movies today, many of the heroes are sufficiently modern so as to be dutifully flawed (although, increasingly, we have comic book portrayals of both good and evil) while it is the villains - greedy US corporations, primarily - that are monchromatcially drawn as unequivocally, inhumanly evil.

You might want to revisit John Wayne - I went through a similar series of opinions - I loved him when I was very young, and then I dismissed him as I became immersed in "modern" acting.

But look at movies like Stagecoach, Red River, The Searchers, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance and The Shootist. You'll find his portrayal of the protagonists in each of those movies are rife with inner conflicts and moral contradictions.

I think because he was larger in life in many ways, and didn't have a lot of fluidity to his line delivery, he doesn't get his due as an actor. And he's not "modern" in the navel-gazing way Motgomery Clift is in Red River (1948) - but, again, Wayne hearkens back to an epoch in which America may have been conflicted, and may have made wrong decisions - but was nevertheless unapologetic for its existence and its right to take on the world on its own terms; we didn't always hold ourselves to a moral rectitude that is utterly unattainable, and then seek vainglorious validation of our own individual moral superiority by castigating our country because every action it undertook did not accrue to the wondrous benefit of all parties involved such that nobody was ever hurt or came out on the bottom or even was offended.

That unapologetic right to exist as we are, warts and all, is gone from our cultural landscape, and, while we may be more introspective, like the insufferable James Dean, we are none the wiser - and are in fact far weaker than we used to be when we believed in absolutes - and when people like John Wayne embodied that ethos.

Grzmlyk| 2.17.12 @ 4:10PM

Three other things:

1) There is no new story under the sun and hasn't been for a long, long time. The art comes in telling the story in new ways. I just saw Moneyball, The Grey and Young Adult - all were variations on stories that have been told countless times - wile winning over money, survival against nature and unhealthy obsession. But all were very good movies.

2) There is no such thing as any filmmaker depicting a "realistic" world view. Movies are utter artifice and even documentaries are always tendentious because they ar made by humans who are inherently subjective. What's "realistic" to you might seem utterly ridiculous to me. Witness the new comic-book style versions of Sherlock Holmes. That may be realistic to some people, but those films are rife with cliches, shortcuts and ludicrous circumstances. The 1940s Sherlock Holmes flicks with Basil Rathbone, by comparison, were realistic depictions of the sensibilities of the time - the 1940s - and, as such, had no more to do with the original Holmes of Arthur Conan Doyle than the Robert Downey Jr./Jude law versions do. I prefer the superior, grown-up acting of Basil Rathbone to the shameless, puerile mugging of Robert Downey Jr.

3) If you like Audrey Hepburn, there is hope for you. She is magnificent in every way.

Butch| 2.17.12 @ 4:58PM

Holly Golightly, my original love.

Skippy| 2.17.12 @ 5:56PM

I think Heinlein said that all great stories are always only three stories.
-David & Goliath-the triumph of weak and good over strong and evil,
-Romeo & Juliet-the triumph of love over all,
-A Christmas Carol-the redemption of the human soul.
As far as John Wayne, I still see Tom Donaphan as the ultimate Wayne/Western/American man.
Strong, brave, humble, generous, self-sacrificing, fearless.
My favorite John Ford/John Wayne western of all.

albert constantine jr.| 2.17.12 @ 10:39PM

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance is also my favorite John Wayne film, in large part because of how he demonstrates the characteristics you list.

Occam's Tool| 2.21.12 @ 6:29PM

Or the antithesis, Skippy---1984, for example, which was deliberately the reverse of all three, and the perfect example of the future Obama desires for us.

THKrupp| 2.17.12 @ 6:24PM

Hahaha well perhaps I will take another look at John Wayne. To be honest I prefer Clint Eastwood, but perhaps he is more new Hollywood rather than old.

Yes I understand that movies are not realistic. I guess I was thinking more about showing warts and all in a character. Take your typical war movie from both eras and you are right there is no belly button gazing about war from old Hollywood. They dont even make movies like that anymore at least without showing a lot of inner turmoil. The closest you get to the old standard fantasy movies or scifi. I didnt come across exactly the way I wanted...I guess characters and plots seem more complex now. That of course is speaking very generally.

macwell| 2.18.12 @ 6:30AM

Growing up in the 50's, was a great time to be a kid. Oh yeah you might think people were too goody-two-shoes and innocent. There was a reason for it though, it was because people were responsible and dedicated to raising their families, they didn't want the added distraction of their teenaged boys seeing T&A in their high school hallways. Families tried to be good. They taught us kids right from wrong. They taught us not to take from others, but to try and give to others.
Kids weren't bombarded with sex all day, every day. We also didn't worry, or even think about perverts in our neighborhood. Oh, there's always been perverts, but at that time in history the perverts knew that if they were caught, there would be hell to pay, (like trip up and down a few flights of stairs on the way to the police station). So for the most part, our neighborhoods were safe for us to play in, well after dark.
In the movies the bad guys always lost and the good guys always won, cowboys were mostly good guys, and no one had sex outside of marriage. Hollywood has been pushing the envelope since the 60's and will continue trying to convince us that we're all perverts, like them.

BackToBasics| 2.19.12 @ 8:13PM

THKrupp, - from your post - " I think that movies try very hard to show a realistic view of the world where as they used to show us the world we wanted it to be. "

I understand your point and agree with it to an extent as long as films have some objectivity with good balance. These days, however with the often excessive, unbalanced protrayals of the negative in any genre I think a case could be made the opposite is true. That is many on the left have an agenda to turn society in the direction they would rather see it. The results are often films that are more propaganda than actually reflecting reality.

Die Fledermaus| 2.17.12 @ 4:09PM

I was a young lad when I say "Some Like It Hot" so maybe I missed some messages (yeah, Wilder) but two guys dressing like women to avoid the mob doesn't hit me as a homosexual message.

Grzmlyk| 2.17.12 @ 4:10PM

Watch the last five minutes.

Skippy| 2.17.12 @ 6:01PM

"Oh well, nobody's perfect!"

Occam's Tool| 2.21.12 @ 6:27PM

And don't forget Bogart's description of Greenstreet's lackey as a "gunsel" in The Maltese Falcon.

davelnaf| 2.17.12 @ 8:52AM

The old Hollywood is still the best Hollywood. The actors of today are cardboard cutouts and movie themes and plots of today’s films are usually hackneyed, cliché ridden, and special effects larded imitations and even the best of the current films entertain modestly by comparison to the old ones.

I have to correct the author on the release date of the film “Zulu.” I can quite vividly recall being on a street in downtown Shreveport, Louisiana in 1964 and spending a long moment regarding the poster for this film and being very intrigued by it—it was playing at a theater called the Strand. With a younger brother and his friend in tow I had gone around the block from another theatre, the Don, which was not yet open, and checked to see what was playing at this theater. Finally, with the starting time of the other movie approaching I decided to take us back to the Don and see “The Great Escape.” Both are great films.

Evelyn| 2.17.12 @ 9:14AM

One other tiny quibble: In the last scene, Patton is shown walking his dog with windmills in the background. I'm pretty sure he was in The Netherlands.

Robert| 2.17.12 @ 9:18AM

Zulu was and is my favorite movie next to Rio Grande. I watched these movies with my grandson when he was young. When he went off to college he was much surprize to be shown Zulu at his college frat house and to realize that duty, honor and the willingness to die for a cause was the same message his frat brothers understood. There is still hope.

Butch| 2.17.12 @ 5:02PM

When the cable goes out and the power stays on, Zulu goes in the DVD. I can't say which movie is my favorite, but Zulu is right up there in contention.

2Anglico| 2.17.12 @ 9:32AM

Zulu-Colour Sergeant Bourne barks "Button your Tunic". One of the great lines in Hollywood history.

Derek Leaberry| 2.17.12 @ 10:01AM

As a bit of trivia, Color- Sergeant Bourne was the longest lived of the veterans of the Battle of Rorke's Drift. Sgt. Bourne outlived Adolf Hitler by a week, dying in May of 1945.

And even more trivial, I have very briefly met Chief Buthelezi who plays the Zulu Chief Cetewayo at a television studio way back in the mid-80s.

Al Adab| 2.17.12 @ 12:09PM

Google up Men of Harlech. There is a great you-tube clip of a young Charlotte Church with the Welsh Regimental singers. Very moving.

PaulyD| 2.17.12 @ 4:25PM

Not Charlotte, but the movie itself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related

Anthony| 2.17.12 @ 10:05AM

I loved the scene when he calls the roll after a horrific attack, with his British stiff upper lip, and his pregnant pauses for fallen comrades.
And of course, the comic relief of "Hughes, you're alive, I saw you"

Bill| 2.17.12 @ 10:12AM

Don't forget the Tommy who drops his bayonet when the "Fix....Bayonets!" command is given, and the color sergeant glares at him, calling him, "You slovenly soldier!"

Notary Sojac| 2.17.12 @ 11:09AM

"And a bayonet, sir.
Wi' some guts be'ind it."

AhiaGuy| 2.17.12 @ 1:00PM

If we're talking great movie lines, Fort Apache is full of them.

"And how did your son get to West Point, Sergeant?"
"Presidential appointment, sir."
"It's my understanding that can only be given to the son of a recipient of the Medal of Honor."
"That's my understanding too, sir."

Al Adab| 2.17.12 @ 1:51PM

Isn't that the one where the "trooper" turns out to have been a Confederate General and is given honors by "both sides"?

irish19| 2.17.12 @ 9:05PM

That was "She Wore a Yellow Ribbon." Another great one. Part of John(?) Huston's Cavalry Trilogy IIRC.

chris123| 2.20.12 @ 8:48AM

Irish, I think you meant John Ford.

Bill| 2.20.12 @ 10:09AM

Ben Johnson, "Corporal Tyree" was a Confederate colonel who (because reformed Confederates - "galvanized Yankees" who joined the U.S. Army could not be commissioned) continued as a military man. He helped comfort a private in John Wayne's ("Captain Nathan Brittles")'s command. Turns out the private was Corporal Tyree's commanding general.

Bill| 2.20.12 @ 10:56AM

The movie "She Wore A Yellow Ribbon" was filmed (the fort parts) at the Goulding Trading Post on the Navajo Reservation, where the Monument Valley is located. Captain Brittles's quarters remains nearly exactly as filmed 70 or so years ago, and can still be seen if you go there. I recently read a book about the artist-poet Everett Ruess, who is known for his mysterious disappearance in the desert in 1934; the book contains a picture of Ruess with that very building in the background. It was cool, noting Ruess and Ford's choice for the movie together, two unrelated moments brought together.

Occam's Tool| 2.21.12 @ 6:30PM

If I recall, it was Bourne who backed up the two relatively non-descript officers and was largely responsible for the successful defense.

KyMouse| 2.17.12 @ 9:36AM

There used to be so many movies in which people did what duty demanded, and didn't put themselves first. "Shane" and "High Noon" come to mind. "Shane" has the added virtue of the hero's refusal to act on the attraction he feels for the rancher's wife. If the movie were made today, I imagine he wouldn't have been so honorable.

irish19| 2.17.12 @ 9:06PM

I always wanted to slap Brandon DeWilde (sp?) around when I saw Shane.

Fred| 2.17.12 @ 9:38AM

Patton is one of my favorite movies.

Unfortunately, almost none of it is true.
He played a insignificant role in North Africa, did no real fighting in Sicily, and caused more US casualties to his 3rd Army, most unnecessary, than all the D-day and subsequent casualties by other armies: about 89,000. He was insubordinate as well. But we had a shortage of leadership at the higher levels and we do need myths to keep our spirits up.

2Anglico| 2.17.12 @ 9:47AM

Fred, where did you get the information you cite, Obama's first or second book?
EVERYTHING you said in your post is wrong. Now, your comrades are calling.

Moe Blotz| 2.17.12 @ 10:04AM

Moosburg: 1945 . Thousands of Allied airmen crammed into one Stalag Luft VII from other camps due to the advance of the good guys. Tanks roll in after Moosburg is liberated and Old Blood and Guts steps up into view. "I'll bet you sons-a-bitches are happy to see me". My father was one of the guests transferred in from Stalag Luft III who cheered General Patton after he delivered that line.

Mike Hawk| 2.17.12 @ 11:07AM

It was Stalag VIIA (minor correction). Over 100,000 Allied POWs in the place by April 29 when Patton's Division Liberated it. Largest POW liberation in history 67 years ago. When the American Flag went up on the town clock tower it was dead silent and copious tears of joy. Then pandemonium. Patton was greeted with resounding gusto, as said, when he came through the gaping hole punched in the barbed wire by one of his Shermans a bit later. God Bless the USA.

Bill| 2.17.12 @ 1:19PM

Mooseburg was first exposed to a Patton attack when Gen. Patton sent Task Force Baum to liberate it in order to release his son-in-law, John Waters, who was a POW there.

Mooseburg started out as a Wehrmacht tank school, but was changed into a POW camp when the Germans started moving their Allied POWs west away from the Red Army's advance.

Task Force Baum was undermanned, and the attack on Mooseburg was premature, so the POWs were told by the American tankers that they were pretty much on their own. Many POWs remained in Mooseburg because they didn't think they would be well-treated if they were on their own in Germany. Some Americans, like Medal of Honor awardee Lt. Lyle Bouck, captured by the Waffen SS during the Battle of the Bulge, found their way to the American lines.

Mike Hawk| 2.17.12 @ 2:51PM

You are so full of sh!t. I have had personal contacts over the past few years with dozens of Ex-POWS and their experiences would be directly in conflict with your falsehoods. Numerous personal accounts have been written as well that show your statements to be oure BS.

Bill| 2.20.12 @ 10:10AM

Examples of your lies? You don't have them, despite all those interviews with the vets, do you?

Bill| 2.20.12 @ 11:02AM

Correction: I was thinking of the raid on Hammelburg, Oflag XIII-B. My error. I AM indeed full of sh!t and BS. Thank you for pointing that out. It was highly civil of you.

Dai Alanye| 2.17.12 @ 11:12AM

Don't fall for leftist propaganda. Patton was the only high-level Allied general the Germans feared, and the casualties his troops took were relatively light considering their accomplishments. If you wish to discuss poor generals, choose Clark in Italy.

Occam's Tool| 2.21.12 @ 6:33PM

He took over from Fredendall in North Africa and reinvigorated an army, beat Monty to Messina in Sicily, and, if he had been given his head, would have possibly have ended the German war by Christmas. His 3rd Army did a miraculous change in direction to rescue Bostogne. I doubt even Clint will argue with what I have written here just now. Sorry, Fred. I concur with D'Este---A Genius for war.

Conservative Bob| 2.17.12 @ 9:47AM

I would respectfully add "Bridge on the River" Kwai, although Zulu remains one of my all time favorite movies along with Patton.

Al Adab| 2.17.12 @ 10:53AM

Kwai was one of the early cynical anti war films. Meaninglessness and all that.

albert constantine jr| 2.17.12 @ 11:23AM

"Be happy in your work".

I have a colleague (who is half a communist) who actually believes it was Mao, not Colonel Saito who said this. The problem is, the Chairman and the Commandant share more in common in their cruel lack of humanity than Anita Dunn would ever feel comfortable admitting.

Bill| 2.17.12 @ 10:10AM

Just for the record, "Zulu" was not a Hollywood film; it was British through and through.

pam| 2.17.12 @ 10:21AM

HERE HERE

pespada| 2.17.12 @ 10:38AM

One recent movie that I found interesting in this context was "The Aviator," the Howard Hughes bio movie with Leonardo Di Caprio. I remember that scene in which he is invited to dinner with Katherine Hepburn's family, in which there is a searing portrayal of quintessential "limousine liberalism." I was surprised to see such a statement in a movie these days.
BTW--Fred is all wrong about Patton's history. He must be hitting the left-wing "revisionists" pretty heavily these days.

Seek| 2.17.12 @ 11:29AM

Remember, "The Aviator" (2004) was Martin Scorsese's film. And very few old filmmakers could hold a candle to Scorsese.

Nick| 2.17.12 @ 1:00PM

Seek,

Actually, you have it backwards.
It is Scorsese who doesn't come close to many of the old masters.

Although, The Color of Money is one of my favorite movies. Even though the only resemblance to Walter Tevis' excellent book is the character 'Fast' Eddie Felson.

Petronius| 2.17.12 @ 11:20AM

There is a P C school that most of the young stars attend to get their P C Bonofieds, red ribbons, green advocacies, and other leftist hauteur which is now pro forma in our Californicated culture. And nary a one of them can act his or her way out of a paper bag, but that no longer matters. The cinesewage will continue to stain the big screens and the small and corrupt the hearts and minds of the Eloi who absorb this tripe as the soap opera fans of old who believe it's all real.
As to a list of "the good stuff" not to be missed, add these titles to the mix. The last film worth crossing the street to pay admission for was Shakespeare in Love. It was written by Tom Stoppard, a Real Playwright, and displayed the best actors and actresses to be seen. Gwyneth Paltrow should have retired as she will never get such a wonderful role again. And her antagonist in that film, Colin Firth finally hit his stride in The King's Speech. But such work no longer eminates from Hollywood. Mark dwells on war films here, and as 'Nam was such a catalyst for the new wave, I nominate Hamburger Hill; obscure and unnoticed, it was more realistic than film goers would like to believe, but ask the veterans and they'll tell you. And how about a couple of comedies to squash P C humbug which Hollywood champions? A fun number from the age before Woodstock is How To Murder Your Wife with Jack Lemmon, Virna Lisi, Clair Trevor, and Eddie Mayhoff, who is better remembered as the Old Pro cheering "go go go for Falstaff." Such social satire cannot be made today because the Stepford libtards can't relate to it. And then we can see that crime does pay when John Astin shows how it's done in Evil Roy Slade. He should have hung it up and run for Congress after. There's more credibility in these two than the entire trash canon of Oliver Stone. But that's the reason Hollywood suffers. Film makers believe their own propaganda but for a few exceptions, like Shindler's List. And that could be as close as Spielberg could get to A Man For All Seasons. Think on that. How many of us would rather die than face living under the socialist dictatorship being imposed upon us as you read this post?

David W| 2.17.12 @ 12:03PM

I see fewer and fewer movies. That is becoming true with my TV viewing. Forget Fox's Animation Domination night. I don't touch ABC. Before 60 minutes comes on I say to myself, "I wonder what liberal stories will be on tonight?" I even stopped watching NCIS (after that episode with Lily Tomlin. It seems that they are doing more and more shows about evil US government. Who knows, maybe they'll do an episode where they purposefully screw an innocent person because that is the politically correct thing to do (which apparently the real organization did to a soldier in Afghanistan or Iraq)).

By the way, after hearing of Samuel L. Jackson's rant about voting for Obama only because he is black I won't be seeing the "New Avengers" movie - I wouldn't want Sam to be forced to receive "racist" money from me. Maybe if more conservatives refused to ... oh come on, why ruin their viewing pleasure just because of politics.

Red Raven| 2.17.12 @ 12:11PM

Mark;

RE: "Hollywood became cynical and trashy partly thanks to the Vietnam War and the sexual revolution of the 1960s."

1. The war in Viet Nam did not "make" Hollywood become cynical or trashy. Entertainment-control illiberals (plus their "60s Generation" followers) became cynical and trashy because of their refusal to rise to the occasion ... aided and abetted by many "Greatest Generation" parents. Over the immediate post-WWII years, they (we) had been taught through high school that "It's a Free World;" that everyone everywhere has a RIGHT to freedom from tyranny; that "Americans" would make sure. Although a so-so student in civic and American history courses, two phrases stuck with me: "Making the world safe for Democracy," and "Arsenal of Democracy." As it turned out, the Democrat party (including "Hollywood"), from which those phases originated, went against "America" and "Freedom" during the Viet Nam War, and have been "progressively" anti-American ever since. Thousands of my contemporaries found that they would "rather f--- than fight" ... feeding the agressive, invasive, and PROGRESSIVE "virus" that is now pandemic.

2. As far as movie stars of the "patriotic" Golden Years wartime movies are concerned, many took sides with the Communists during Viet Nam. Henry Fonda and Gregory Peck are two of the most egregious examples.

3. George C. Scott's dramatization of Patton should be taken as no more than what it is ... acting. Scott was also a goofball "anti-war" Leftist.

4. Saving Private Ryan, Band of Brothers, and The Pacific are far better war movies than any of "classics," yet are works of another two egregious leftists, Spielberg and Hanks.

Otherwise, thanks for the article.

Al Adab| 2.17.12 @ 12:55PM

In re: your 3 Correct. Nonetheless recent biographers of Patton, such as Carlo D'Este, cite the film as a fairly accurate portrayal of the tenor of the man.

Movies come down all over the spectrum on the issue. I recall In Lord of the Rings, before the final battle in Return the speech to whit: "There may come a day when sword will shatter and courage will fail, but this is not that day..." Etc. We could do worse than take that for our watchword this election year. There may come a day when America sells itrs birthright for a bowl of government pottage, but not this day.

Bill| 2.17.12 @ 1:28PM

After the first half-hour, "Saving Private Ryan" is mostly mediocre; "Band of Brothers" is what, ten hours long? It isn't really a movie as much as it is a mini-series, though it IS a very good one. But it wasn't made with movie production values. The Pacific I haven't seen; I've heard its story is a bit diffused. I would compare "Battleground" favorably with the Bastogne episode of Band of Brothers and Paths of Glory with "Saving Private Ryan." I can't think of a movie about the Central Pacific campaign that is like The Pacific. But now that I think on it a bit more, I guess "Halls of Montezuma" is at least as good.

Bill| 2.17.12 @ 1:33PM

Oh, and by the way, if one wants to bring up the contrived nature of the classic war films, the rightly acclaimed first half hour of "Saving Private Ryan" compresses about 6-8 hours into 30 minutes, and ignores Brig. Gen. Cota and Col. Taylor ("only two kinds of people are staying on this beach...").

Bill| 2.17.12 @ 1:33PM

Al Adab| 2.17.12 @ 1:55PM

Cota earned, but was not awarded, the Medal of Honor for his performance on D-Day. I believe he got the DSC and there was a movement to get the MoH for him a couple years back on the anniversary. While not often given to General officers it was awarded (posthumesly) to Gen. T. Roosevelt for his actions at Utah beach. Cota deserves it.

Brian Mc| 2.17.12 @ 4:49PM

"We'll start the war, right here."

Bill| 2.20.12 @ 10:15AM

"We'll start the war right here" was a quote from Gen. Theodore Roosevelt, Jr. and was made on Utah Beach, when Gen. Roosevelt his force had been landed about a mile from their intended landing point.

Bill| 2.20.12 @ 10:14AM

In an interview, General Cota said the most important lesson he learned on Omaha Beach was that he found out he was a "pretty good squad leader."

He led a small force that was one of the groups that made its way up the bluff past the beach.

Occam's Tool| 2.21.12 @ 6:36PM

Cota was brilliant at Normandy Beach. Lost his grip a bit later in the war, though, if I recall.

macwell| 2.18.12 @ 6:43AM

I think "Band of Brothers" is the best war movie ever made. From what my dad told me in his war stories and what was portrayed in BoB it's very realistic. Saving Private Ryan was good from the standpoint of the realism of the opening 30 minutes, the rest was trivial poop.

BackToBasics| 2.17.12 @ 12:22PM

Zulu and Patton are great films. There's no portrayal of guilt or apologies for soldiers being soldiers, and valiant ones at that. There's no angst or "overdone emotional" stresses portrayed about having to fight either during the battle or after. I never cared for later films about the Viet Nam war and never watched them in entirety. A couple films come to mind such as Apocalypse Now or The Deer Hunter.

Some actors not mentioned in the well written article who seemed a little more like modern actors are Olivier, Welles, De Niro. They could be good actors but some of the more modern sensibilites showed through often enough.

Lancaster and Mitchum were okay as the men they portrayed. Lancaster seemed to smile about only about one time per film and Mitchum not much more.

I haven't been to a movie theater in over 10 years and don't care to waste the money watching films that denigrate America, Christians, and all that is good while trumpeting all that is bad or that delve in excessive navel-gazing into the lives of the most desperate among us.

Brian Mc| 2.17.12 @ 5:08PM

Speaking of "overdone emotional stresses" this is what, in part, endeared me to "We Were Soldiers"...worth the coin which I will seldom spend at the overpriced cinemaplex. The intensity of emotion after the napalm strike is a reaction to the tragedy I think we could all have succumbed. I await the arrival of "The Hobbit" as the next target for pulling out my wallet out.

BackToBasics| 2.17.12 @ 7:13PM

I've not seen "We Were Soldiers" so I cannot speak about it for myself. No doubt there's still an occasional good movie these days but in general I still see too much of what I referred to in my post. So, I either do not watch the newer ones too much anymore or don't watch them in entirety depending on how bad they are and never since LOTR I, II, III at the big screen. "The Hobbit" might be an exception for me as well.

Bill| 2.20.12 @ 10:16AM

"Gentlemen, prepare to defend yourselves!"

BackToBasics| 2.17.12 @ 8:22PM

Correction, Welles was mentioned briefly in the article.

I liked "Amistad" (1997) directed by Spielberg. I've read that the critics were quite negative about this film because of the first scenes that show how blacks in Africa captured and sold other blacks to the whites who bought the slaves and shipped them to the New World.

Take out those first scenes and the movie would have been great in their eyes, otherwise it's trash. This attitude encapsulates what's wrong with so many of the modern films and why so few good ones are made.

Bill| 2.20.12 @ 10:45AM

People who have been in combat, and who are not traumatized by it, are just as entitled to be honored as those who have been traumatized by it.

BackToBasics| 2.20.12 @ 5:45PM

Agree. So much of the so-called reality films whether war-based or not show only the negative, most unhappy aspects of life.

RJ| 2.17.12 @ 12:44PM

Mark, in the closing scene, Patton wasn't just walking toward a mountain, he was walking towards a windmill, an illustration to complete the earlier reference to Don Quixote.

Since General Omar Bradley was an adviser to the movie, I paid special attention to one of the line's that Karl Malden, acting as General Bradley, said, "George, you are one of the best commanders that I have got..." It inspired me to read Bradley's "A Soldier's Story." I got the impression that other generals, such as Courtney Hodges, were valued by Bradley as much (or more) as he valued Patton, but didn't get the public notice.

Hollywood since the 1960s has done a disservice to America. Its often tears us down, celebrating destructive behavior, rather than inspiring us. It promotes a very negative image of America which affects how foreigners view us. As an illustration, one immigrant friend of mine said that his view of America before he came here was limited to "Miami Vice" and "Baywatch." Scary.

Al Adab| 2.17.12 @ 1:57PM

Didn't Malden win as Oscar for his performance as Bradley? It was very accurate as to the nature of the man.

RJ| 2.18.12 @ 3:26AM

He deserved it, but I haven't found any evidence that he won for that role, although he was an Academy Award winner for "A Streetcar Named Desire." I never "get" my history from Hollywood, but I really enjoy Patton. There are many memorable lines in that movie. I particularly remember Bradley's discussion with Patton during the Sicily campaign, primarily because since Bradley was technical adviser, I hope that his character's words in that scene reflect his thoughts.

I found the following statement about Karl Malden in Wikipedia: "Malden often found ways to say "Sekulovich" in films and television shows in which he appears. For example, as General Omar Bradley in Patton, as his troops slog their way through enemy fire in Sicily, Malden says "Hand me that helmet, Sekulovich" to another soldier."

Bradley was a great general. He deserves more credit than he is given, but time has a way of forgetting almost everyone.

C. S. P. Schofield| 2.17.12 @ 1:38PM

I am no friend to the Hollywood Liberal Establishment, and think they shoot themselves in the foot a good deal, I am also sick to the teeth of "They don't make them like they used to". Liberal idiocy and all, the major difference between 1972 and today is that, mercifully, we don't remember every hack film that came out in 1972. The same goes for 1962, 1952, and 1942 with the added effect that the older the movie, the less likely it is to have survived if nobody liked it.

Yes, I'd like to see Hollywood get over it's "Artistic" and political pretensions. But there are good films coming out every year, if you look for them.

Bill| 2.17.12 @ 1:45PM

For me, the biggest puzzlement is the willingness of Hollywood producers to make message movies. In the old days, profitability was the bottom line. Samuel Goldwyn was famous for saying, "If you want to send a message, call Western Union."

C. S. P. Schofield| 2.17.12 @ 2:14PM

They have decided that they are "artists", which is too bad. When they were just doing a job we didn't have to deal with quite so much ego.

On the other hand, some of my favorite films were made by somebody with some artistic pretensions. YOJIMBO, SECONDHAND LIONS. THE WIND AND THE LION, THE LORD OF THE RINGS.

I do wish somebody in accounting would notice that anti-American message films may please the rest of Hollywood, but they lose a packet. It would keep the number down to something bearable.

Al Adab| 2.17.12 @ 3:42PM

I very much enjoy The Wind and the Lion despite its "artistic license" with the actual facts. Brian Keith makes a good TR. "The world will never love us, but it must always respect us."

C. S. P. Schofield| 2.17.12 @ 4:53PM

Best part Brian Keith ever had. Pity so much of the rest of his career was second-string Disney tripe. He deserved better.

Butch| 2.17.12 @ 5:43PM

Jonas Cord in Nevada Smith was a pretty good part, and well played, too. Also a good part in The Rare Breed.

albert constantine jr.| 2.18.12 @ 5:41PM

When I was a young Marine officer at Quantico, hey would play the Marine landing scene from "The Wind & the Lion" over and over again for us for motivation. In addition, I love it at the end when Raisuli is laughing over having lost everything. John Milius did well again with this film.

RJ| 2.17.12 @ 1:53PM

Sure there are some good movies these days, but don't you think there is much more destructive counter-culture movies than there were in the 40s and 50s?

C. S. P. Schofield| 2.17.12 @ 2:21PM

On the other hand we aren't treated to painfully Rah-Rah booster movies. I've seen a couple and what I can remember of them (which is mercifully blurry) is just as bad as most counter-cultural cr*p. I think that there are too many anti-american The-CIA-is-Behind-Everything films, even granting the number of horrible 1955 films we've forgotten, but otherwise I really think it balances out.

The biggest problem we have today is that, with the invention of home video, we now have a much better chance of running across movies so awful that, absent video, we'd have forgotten them.

But it has also taken the wind out of the windbag Film student. If everybody who cares can rent a copy of pretty much anything, you aren't a student of film. You're a vidiot, like the rest of us.

RJ| 2.17.12 @ 3:39PM

Thanks. I get your point and there is always the view that art reflects culture. So much of what is in theaters and on tv is alien to me. Sky King was one of my favorites as a child and I think it offered a much better example for children than what is on today. I wish we had more shows like that today, but sadly, I doubt today's kids would watch it.

C. S. P. Schofield| 2.17.12 @ 5:04PM

I haven't watched broadcast TV or cable for about 25 years, less because I despise what's on (I always despised MOST of what was on) than because long, multi-episode story arcs demand more of my time than I'm willing to commit. Having made the mistake with several of my childhood favorite shows, I recommend that you DON'T pick up DVDs of Sky King (should they exist). Your memories are almost certainly better than the reality. By the time I got into my teens I had become sufficiently critical (or warped) that favorites are still favorites (Emma Peel was my first crush), but the stuff I watched when really young just doesn't stand up.

There are shows out there that provide a good example. Many of them, oddly, are Japanese. If you don't mind a very real chance that the hero will die being a hero, anime (what we used to call japanimation) often tells highly moral stories, in which good guys and persistence are rewarded. You do have to check on them, though. There's a little more nudity than Americans are comfortable with (the Japanese have different taboos. Not none. Different).

RJ| 2.17.12 @ 6:10PM

Well, I had my memories of Sky King refreshed about two years ago when I saw most of the series again. I was surprised at how much I still liked it. Surprisingly, I also bought copies of a few episodes of The Avengers, including the last episode in which Emma Peel appeared. It was one of my favorites, too. Dianna Rigg will always be pretty cool.

macwell| 2.18.12 @ 6:50AM

I remember Sky King, good wholesome stuff. Could you imagine Hoody Dooty's Buffalo Bob ending a kids show with this line?
"Now kids, don't forget church or sunday school"

BackToBasics| 2.19.12 @ 2:02AM

So much of early television was that way. In hindsight I wonder if the good shows reflected society at the time or were they more the bait on the hook that a more Christian nation swallowed only to be quickly turned on its head in the later 60's and early 70's.

RJ| 2.19.12 @ 2:52PM

A good question, BackToBasics. I have been thinking about that one for a few years now.

I wouldn't say that Sky King and Father Knows Best, et.al. were an accurate reflection of society of those days, but I do think that those shows, are evidence of a very different society from today because they were popular then and probably wouldn't be today.

Here is another illustration: The evolution of how Hollywood portrays a hero in the Star Trek character "James Kirk." In the early episodes there were references to him being a very serious student, always with a pile of books in his hands. In one of the episodes where he is being court-martialed, he says all of my life I have trained for this job. In contrast, in the most recent Star Trek movie, today's version of a hero, the young James Kirk is a juvenile delinquent who drives his uncle's car over a cliff as part of a joy ride and generally throughout the movie is bold, but irresponsible. He is referred to as a wild stallion. Quite a difference in what the producers from the different generations thought about how to illustrate a heroic character.

Occam's Tool| 2.21.12 @ 6:49PM

CSP: I must disagree---running across horrible movies is part of the fun; for example, I have a poster of "Creature from the Black Lagoon" signed by the actor who played the creature, and I have ALL of the episodes of MST3K that ran on Comedy Central and SyFy. I also regularly download shorts from Riff-Trax.com.

It's wonderful watching a truly great actor like Ernest Borgnine (and he was---watch "Marty") act in delightful crap like "Laser Mission" (no Lasers, and an incoherent mission, and Brandon Lee) with a constantly shifting vaguely Eastern European accent. Who can forget one of the lesser actors who played Tarzan, Gordon Scott, in "Danger: Deathray," a movie that makes Barcelona look like Gary, Indiana? And, need I mention the OTHER great Texas Fertilizer Salesman---no joke! (not the current one from Galveston), the worst director of all time, Harold P. Warren, who made: "Manos, Hands of Fate," for MST3K fans to enjoy for posterity.

Not to mention the great "Agent 00," starring the immortal "Weng Weng," smallest chopsocky secret agent of all time....

Really, CSP, you must get in more....

Bill| 2.17.12 @ 1:43PM

Bradley had other generals as good as Patton. I'm thinking particularly of Lucian Truscott and Terry Allen, but they were foot soldiers and didn't get away with THEIR flamboyance. I think Col. William O. Darby and Col. Robert Frederick, both also quite flamboyant and both of whom became generals, also didn't get quite the attention of Patton the tank man.

Melvin| 2.17.12 @ 2:09PM

You mean.....Vivitar doesn't really exist? Dude I'm so bummed.

Old Soldier| 2.17.12 @ 2:26PM

Somehow HBO can crank out better cinema with their series than Hollywood.
The Wire
Band of Brothers
The Pacific
Game of Thrones

I wanted to hate "Generation Kill" - then I watched it and thought somebody had stuck a camera on my Humvee in 1991. Scary accurate.

canuckistani| 2.17.12 @ 2:44PM

It's amazing when an outlet like HBO actually gives artistic license to producers of these shows - and actually trusts its audience to come along.

The Wire by far has had the best script writing and character development of any show in the last 40 years since All in the Family. Black, white, political and corporate were all spotlighted in the shows brief run.

Shameless on Showtime is pretty graphic, but the writing is superb.

Generation Kill was a gem as well.

albert constantine jr| 2.17.12 @ 2:58PM

While there is much that you write that I disagree with, I add my concurrence to your characterization of "The Wire", though it is not really movies, and its not TV (as they would advertise a few years back), its HBO.

THKrupp| 2.17.12 @ 2:53PM

I agree, there are some very good miniseries or series out there. Many about history and not just HBO. I actually prefer these to regular movies. My favorite being the remake of battle star galactica also the short lived series Firefly. Great Scifi series. Historical series include Pillars of the Earth, Henry the VIII, The Bourgas and Downton Abby. The ones you list are great as well.

Frekki| 2.17.12 @ 3:04PM

I like to watch dark films. I like to watch them as they make my heart hurt. I like to make love with my wife too. I don't let my children watch either one.

cicero| 2.17.12 @ 5:18PM

great stuff, all. On Patton, when I was a boy, my dad's friend, and our barber, was in Patton's Third Army in europe. He always told us that the men, himself included, would have followed Patton anywhere, and done anything he asked. Patton was a leader. He may have been slightly nuts, but a leader.
After they made "ZULU", produced and directed, I believe by the actor who playedd the engineering officer who took command of the mission, they made "Zulu Dawn", which was the story of the battle of Cetswayo's krall, where the Brittish crushedd the Zulu army, w hile taking no casualties thermselves. Finally, the South Africans themselves made a film titled "Shaka Zulu" which was played on television, but I didn't see it in the movies. It gave very evenhanded play to both sides. Good stuff. For the definitive history of the Zulu people, I recommend "Washing of the Spears", by I think Preston.

Pat| 2.17.12 @ 7:12PM

A nice stroll down memory lane and well worth the time to read. But today’s movies are literally “No Country for Old Men” – we’ve changed, the movie industry has changed and what character portrayals inspired many of us in our childhoods are truly “Gone With the Wind”. Yes, they don’t make em like they used to but the same can be said for our presidents – just look at Obama – yet the younger generation loves him. Giving in to change isn’t giving up although that may seem one and the same at times. But Hollywood tries to move with the times and someday Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt will be as revered as George C. Scott and John Wayne are today, among us older Americans.

Today, the 9 screen Cineplex stands where the old single screen Rialto Theatre once stood. For the price of a small, buttered popcorn today you could have taken your entire family to the Rialto with enough change leftover to spend on boxes of Ju-ju bees, Tootsie Rolls and those jaw breaking toffee bars.

Young folks still go to movies frequently, it gets them out of their parent’s basement and provides some privacy away from the prying eyes of the old folks. What’s a degenerate movie mogul to do but give them what they want and hope they come? Plus, with the lavish use of special effects, you can kill more people faster and more gruesomely than the entire cast of “Zulu” – it’s called progress, or so we're told.

Richard Baker| 2.17.12 @ 11:08PM

The performers today can't act, the producers and directors don't know how to tell a story, and the writers have pyrotechnics, special effects, and unremitting violence and vulgarity on the brain. Stopped going to the movies looong ago.

POST American| 2.17.12 @ 11:17PM

---------------------FINAL WORD-----------------------

---Holllywood of the PAST 5, 6 decades
cannot even begin to be understood without
reference to the EUGENICS age-enda
implemented by the foundations and
the Macy Group et al.

From 'The Godfather' on it's also
essential to reference the CFR-RED China
handover, sellout and TREASON OP.

The writer probably KNOWS this
himself and is actively censoring
not just opinions, but TRUTH itself
from this very blog.

Remember kiddies, D--NILE ain't
just a river in 'E---jipped'
-------IT'S THE RIVER THEY WORSHIP.

-------------HUAC/ NUREMBERG 2012--------------

Nick099| 2.19.12 @ 9:32AM

Brilliant commentary!!!!

Purple Lips| 2.19.12 @ 12:24PM

Firebase Gloria (Lee Ermey) and Cross of Iron are two of my favorites. Cross of Iron featured some really outstanding German actors (Klaus Loewtsch and Senta Berger), as well as great performances from James Colburn, James Mason, and David Warner.

But Michael Caine in Zulu is still my all time favorite. The Welsh peasants who manned that God foresaken outpost performed one miracle after another.

BTW, a young and unknown director, Francis Ford Coppola, directed and wrote the screenplay for Patton.

Derek Tyler| 2.20.12 @ 12:29AM

Cross of Iron is one of my favorites. James Coburn as Sgt. Steiner, James Mason, Maximillian Schell and the entire cast were epic. Sam Peckinpah was the director.

Orson Welles said that after All's Quiet on the Western Front, Cross of Iron was the greatest anti-war film ever made.

Nemo| 2.19.12 @ 1:02PM

What about "The Greatest Show on Earth", "The Sea Chase""The Enemy Below" and "Casablanca?"

The moans from conversatives over the fact there are no conservarive or patriotic films today make me want to vomit. The only reason we don't get such films now is that conservatives are too mentally lazy or cowardly to make them.

And when they are made, they can be very good - "The Lord of the Rings", the Narnia adaptations, the "Hornblower" and "Sharpe" series on TV, are examples. I, without trying, could think of a dozen plots from history as exciting and celebratory of courage as "Zulu" (what about the defence of Lucknow for example?) if I received the slightest encouragement ... Turning to Science-fiction, what about Larry Niven's wonderful series, "The Man-Kzin wars"?

Al Adab| 2.19.12 @ 9:00PM

Enemy Below is very good, one of my favorites. Peck in Hornblower, Hrrumph, is marvelous and the recent Master and Commander reprises its swagger.

Would love to see Man - Kzin wars made or perhaps Ringworld. What about The Mote in Gods' Eye? Grandson (17) and I plan to see John Carter of Mars soon. I introduced him to the books and he loved them

Occam's Tool| 2.21.12 @ 6:52PM

Al, when I read "Mote," I kept on thinking screenplay. But Niven is fabulously wealthy and can do what he wants...

Al Adab| 2.19.12 @ 9:00PM

Enemy Below is very good, one of my favorites. Peck in Hornblower, Hrrumph, is marvelous and the recent Master and Commander reprises its swagger.

John II| 2.19.12 @ 4:08PM

Whoa. Some terrific comments on this thread. Proof that conservatives are at their best when the topic is moral and cultural rather than merely political (if it's possible to be "merely" political--where was I?)

Oh yes. Consider the following three classic scifi flicks:

1. Howard Hawke's "The Thing from Another World" (1951)

2. Robert Wise's "Day the Earth Stood Still" (1951)

3. George Pal's "War of the Worlds" (1953)

I've selected the scifi genre because it tends to be preoccupied with ideas, and our topic is "Old Hollywood" vs. "New Hollywood."

All three of these great flicks were great enough to inspire remakes. And all three of the remakes suck. John Carpenter's remake of "The Thing" (1982) is less than coherent and mostly despairing and grisly to the point of being revolting. The much later relatively anonymous (no distinctive names; just herds of executive producers and CGI geeks) "Day the Earth Stood Still" (2008) is at heart a screed of creepy, human-hating environmentalism. And Spielberg's remake of "War of the Worlds" (2005) is dramatically bogged down by the soap-opera antics of a dysfunctional family, headed by the perennially dysfunctional Tom Cruise.

What all three of the remakes have in common are casts of characters impossible to feel any sympathy for. What underlies all of them is an implicit conviction (rather more explicit in the remake of "Day the Earth Stood Still") that, except for a very few enlightened ones who deserve to rule, the human race in the aggregate is a congeries of vermin, the extinction of which would somehow improve the cosmos.

By contrast, the classic forebears of these remakes--though also preoccupied with ideas--nonetheless have pretty tightly coherent plots and interesting characters whom viewers are likely to get to know well enough to care about.

Yet there's still that theme business (the preoccupation with ideas on display in the scifi genre), and the classics seem to me to exhibit early stirrings of the "New Hollywood." Carpenter's remake of "The Thing" runs with the icy arrogance of scientism which is relatively subdued in the original; the remake of "Day the Earth Stood Still" with its full-blown wacko environmentalism can plausibly be taken as the end-point of the smug Drew-Pearson liberalism in the original ("earthlings-must-become-peaceful-or-we-superior-liberal-aliens-will-annihilate-the- earth"); and the remake of "War of the Worlds" seems to me to ripple with the kind of progeny one might expect to issue from the intermittently egotistical Dr. Clayton Forrester of the original (the late Gene Barry, who eerily gives a cameo appearance in the remake, surveying the ruins of his extended family).

Although second to no one in my general preference of the "Old Hollywood" over the "New," I'm afraid that the "Old Hollywood" of my youth was feeding on the residual moral capital of a culture already in decline. The germ of the remakes' inferiority was present in the originals. And that goes for "True Grit" too.

And now back to "The Incredible Shrinking Man" (1957), a truly unique scifi classic of tight plotting, emotional depth, and philosophical subtlety. There will be no remake of that one.

Bill| 2.20.12 @ 10:20AM

The Thing: Dewey Martin says, when the subject of The Thing's possible ability to read minds comes up: "He's gonna get real mad when he gets to me!"

Also, right at the beginning, some Air Force "lawyer" says he has some right as an airman, Capt. Kenneth Tobey says, "Where does it say that?," the guy looks up the statute in Air Force and cites some lengthy numbers for the reg, and Tobey says, "Oh...that one."

Bill| 2.20.12 @ 10:23AM

To me, the saddest thing about the remake of The Thing is that John Carpenter's inferior version is more faithful to the John Campbell story "Who Goes There?" than the Howard Hawks version, which is worlds better. Just another example of the fact that you can make a work of art without necessarily being slavishly faithful to the original subject-matter, and in some cases, abandoning the original subject-matter might be an improvement.

John II| 2.20.12 @ 10:38AM

Actually the regulation-number line is delivered by the co-pilot, not by Tobey. Among the real charms of that flick is the quickly forged camaraderie and constant banter of the principals amid horrific (and genuinely suspenseful) circumstances.

The signature line for me is delivered when they suddenly realize that the Thing has shut off their heating system and Nikki (the girl) tells Scotty (the wisecracking newspaperman) that his mouth is starting to emit puffs of condensation while he's talking (to get that effect, by the way, the set was constructed in a huge meat-transport deep-freeze facility).

Nikki: "Wait a minute."
Scotty: "What . . .?"
Nikki: "Your breath . . ."
Scotty: "Well, I'm SORRY! I've been very upset lately . . ."

Bill| 2.20.12 @ 10:27AM

Respectfully, they DID do a remake of the GREAT "Incredible Shrinking Man." It was the execrable vehicle for Lily Tomlin, "The Incredible Shrinking Woman." I suppose you could argue that the latter wasn't even close to being a remake of the former.

Bill| 2.20.12 @ 10:37AM

They haven't done a remake of "Them!" yet, though. Maybe that's because the giant insect theme was pretty much played out in the 1950s, ending or nearing the end with "Mothra."

John II| 2.20.12 @ 10:47AM

Or scraping the bottom with "Mothra." "Them" was the first and only truly good one in the whole declining series. The fabulous casting helped a lot. The great Edmund Gwenn is perfect as the distracted myrmecologist from Washington.

Occam's Tool| 2.21.12 @ 6:54PM

My son loved "The Incredible Shrinking Man," John II. You are so right.

I also liked "Destination: Moon," because Heinlein kept the science centered.

POST American| 2.20.12 @ 12:35AM

----------------------BOTTOM LINE------------------------

1972 --the year of the well-engineered,
long in the works Rockefeller/Acheson/Harriman/
Kissenger 'Nick's ON'-MAO summit and handover.

Tavistock Hollywood was there with the
programming.

'Cabaret' bringing up a subject no one
was hitherto much interested in
---Weimar Berlin. But a nifty vehicle
for bringing into mainstream consciousness
'A--bore--shun' culture and deviance.
All this under the moral cover of 'dealing
with the Halocaust'. The programmers
know full well people imitate what they see.
BOTH deviant lifestyle and, in an extra nifty
capstone touch, the engineered HIV plague
soon followed.

Then there was 'Patton'. More moral cover
for what was REALLY going on. Flag fetish
Americana even as Vietnam demoralization
was still alive. Again, keep the clueless
fixated on the symbols and 'EYE-cons'.
"-----Everything's just dandy! --Patton is
here!"

Then there was 'Deliverance'. A new level
of demonization of the 'REAL source' of
all evil --backwoods hillbillies. Scared the
average American to death of his synthetic
'mythic' white shadow self.

Then there was 'The Godfather'. Again,
WHY? --In '72 the mafia was pretty much
washed up. It seemd retro. But the book
was very heavily promoted into bestseller
status. The movie itself was lavishly done
(--rediculously so) and --some-- of the acting
was great.

'The Godfather' has been relentlessly
pushed, referenced and praised ever since
---being psychically driven into the mass
culture. ----WHY?

What NO ONE seems to catch is that it
sends an unprecedented message. Unlike
even 60s nihilisn a la 'Bonnie and Clyde'
there was NO justice --or retribution.

The trappings of the movie were reassuringly
'family'. The end note was '---that's
REALLY the way it is. Get used to it.'
The last scene a veritable inclusion fantasy.

Hence, 4 decades of broad daylight capstone
sellout, handover and corruption
were programmed away from ALL moral consciousness.

The got away ---with murder.

The Rockefellers walk free. Bill Gates brings
in awesome EUGENICS. Our economy is
removed ---at OUR expense. '--But what are
ya' gonna' do? ---that's the way it is'.

FINALLY, 1975 saw further programming
for cultural and moral suicide with 'Cuckoo's
Nest'.

---AGAIN ---WHY are we being asked to
identify with a porn addicted jerk --'the
TRUE spirit' Jack Nicholson?

The answer emerges after the battle with
the token figure of the EUGENICS age-enda
--nurse Ratchit.

Nicholson is lobotomized ---and in the arms
of a very giant ---very Chinese looking
Indian. In an act of 'compassion' the Indian
soft kills Nicholson --crashes through the window
and saunters off into a 'Greenie' enviornmental
landscape.

---------------------GET THE PICTURE?

YOU WILL-----------------------------------

---------------HUAC/ NUREMBERG 2012------------

Nemo| 2.20.12 @ 1:36AM

"the residual moral capital of a culture already in decline.' - Cultures don't decline unless people allow them to. "Zulu" and "The Lord of the Rings" (both book and film) came out of a Britain filled with kitchen-sink dramas of whining social protest to be perennial smash hits. There is no inevitable determinism in a culture, only what people make of it.

Bill| 2.20.12 @ 10:30AM

"Zulu" came out of a Britain filled with...whining social protest?

Maybe so, but "Zulu" doesn't have a murmur of social sensitivity in it. No one would make "Zulu" today; that scene at the redoubt at the end, where the camera pans slowly and almost lovingly over the piled-up bodies of the dead Zulu warriors would today be seen as racist; it was almost racist in America by early 1960s standards.

Bill| 2.20.12 @ 10:33AM

Now that I read your post again, I guess that's what you were saying. Sorry, never mind.

Occam's Tool| 2.21.12 @ 6:55PM

Well, that was the point of the Rorke's Drift battle: soldiers are better than warriors. And the Henry could rip you in half.

Soljerblue| 4.4.12 @ 2:21PM

excellent point, often made elsewhere. Decline is a choice.

POST American| 2.20.12 @ 5:48AM

----------------BOTTOMLESS LINE--------------------

The above poster is apparently unaware
of the 'wonder--full' discoveries of Stanford
Research, Ivan Pavlov, Tavistock et al
in effective programming through culture
---adulterated food and water ----and alterations
in the enviornment (TV/ radio/ CCTVs).

Granted, it took some organizing --and some
years of experimenting on inmates, orphans
and the 'insane' ---but, with limitless funding
from PRIVATE, 'chair--'IT'--Abel' groups
----it was done.

"--Understand, this is a PERFECT science
of CONTROL."
-Aldous Huxley

----SO ---keep 'overlooking' those ultra-rich,
TAX FREE, 'benny violent' EUGENICS mongering
foundations and NGOs.

--------------------Everything's just -----DANDY!

-------------HUAC/ NUREMBERG 2012--------------

Soljerblue| 4.4.12 @ 2:19PM

all of the films you mention were great cinema, and had a moral core. But in all cases, the books were much better. There's plenty out there to choose from.