Gung Ho! (1943)

Sadly Over-hyped

Good concept, poorly executed.

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

GUNG HO is an American propaganda film about a battalion of marine raiders whose job is to capture a significant island from the Japanese during WWW2. The film follows a standard template; the first half is all about the training and characterisation of the men involved, while the second is all action as the troops put said training into action. The propaganda is most noticeable at the climax, in which a rousing speech promises that America will continue to stand proud and firm against its enemies.For a low budget black and white production that looks cheap and dated, I thought this was pretty good; certainly up there with the '60s-era men-on-a-mission movie that had bigger budgets and better production techniques to recommend them. The training scenes are notably brutal although the story is dragged down early on by boring romance stuff, most notably a love triangle that goes nowhere and adds nothing. J. Carrol Naish and Robert Mitchum are two of the young recruits, while western star Randolph Scott does his square-jawed thing as their colonel.The action is where this film hots up and it has a noticeably violent and ruthless edge. These guys spare no mercy for the Japanese, an enemy mainly made up of Filipino actors, and when they do try to be nice, it backfires. The usual gamut of heroism and heroic death ensues, along with genre tropes like the blowing up of the enemy base. The most imaginative bit is when a steam engine, of all things, is called into play. It's certainly exciting enough, and worth the build up.

Sets the standard for war moves to come.Many complain about "clichés", how can you call the move that created the clichés as cliché? Are Edward Weston's photographs "cliche"? He set the standards, copied by many, as does this movie.As kids growing up in the 50's, watching movies like this on weekend TV set the stage for many battles between our block and those kids across the street.Great action scenes, heroic Americans mowing down "Japs" by the hundreds, explosions, airplanes bombing & strafing, ships, submarines, this movie has it all!

This fact-based war film (detailing the first ground assault on Japan following the attack on Pearl Harbor) is neatly divided into two parts – showing, first, the specialized training session of the carefully-chosen platoon (which is quite interesting) and the mission itself (displaying fairly standard heroics but well enough done nonetheless).The film has been criticized for glamorizing what was essentially a band of cutthroats (Leonard Maltin even describes it as "a jaw-dropping experience"). Still, there was no doubt that any war picture made during this time wouldn't ram propagandist slogans down the audience's throat (witness Randolph Scott's final straight-into-camera speech); ironically, even if the latter was the film's nominal star, he's rarely involved in the action proper – being there mainly to co-ordinate things, and repeatedly instigate his men to kill every Jap on the island!).The supporting cast is good, made up of veteran character actors – J. Carroll Naish, Sam Levene – and newcomers – notably Robert Mitchum; however, a fair share of the running-time is unwisely devoted to the romantic triangle involving a girl and two soldiers who happen to be half-brothers (one of them played by Noah Beery Jr.) – all of which has a quite deadening effect on the main narrative! Despite being a relatively early WWII film, the action sequences are surprisingly gutsy – though accentuated on occasion by obvious stock footage.

Very good "period" film. Good depiction of military, from what I have heard , from those who were "there", and own experience. Have heard this type of film described as "racist". Considering the time and context, I don't think so. Of course it had a "RAH, RAH", patriotic message, but that was the time and the attitude. Also natural that our guys were the "Good Guys" & the other guys were the "Bad Guys". That is the feeling, when you are in an all-out war. Things that are considered "free speech", now, would get your teeth handed to you, then, and rightly so. More people should see this movie and others like it, to recapture the feeling of a truly "United States" and what our people are capable of doing, when properly motivated.