The Hook (1963)

Absolutely Brilliant!

Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Copyright 31 December 1962 by Perlberg-Seaton Productions. Released through Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. U.S. release: 16 January 1963. New York opening simultaneously at the Embassy 46th Street and the Kips Bay theaters: 15 February 1963. U.K. release: 9 June 1963. 5 reels. 8,794 feet. 98 minutes.SYNOPSIS: To transport a dangerously high-octane plane fuel from an abandoned airstrip on a Korean island, is the mission of a four-man navy team, whose base is low on fuel. COMMENT: An unusually talkative and pretentious film from M-G-M, usually the home of slap-happy escapist entertainment. There's hardly enough action for a half-hour TV serial. For the rest of the time, the three principals, led by Kirk Douglas, who is the chief culprit, just stand about yakking on the moral dilemmas of war. True, the few action spots are excitingly handled, but the rest of the film is both stupefying and routine. It is also cluttered with lots of unnecessary close-ups — especially of Mr. Douglas. A bit of location filming helps, but otherwise production values and credits are well below M-G-M's usual slick standard.

I didn't make it through to the end, beckoned instead to the comforting embrace of Morpheus. From the one hour that I saw, there was little evidence that I'd missed much. If you take away the name stars, what you wind up with is an inexpensive and very talky B feature.Kirk Douglas is Master Sergeant Briscoe, in command of two enlisted men, the erratic but compliant PFC Nick Adams, and the humanitarian youngster, Robert Walker Jr. They are the last men to leave a post in Korea, aboard a UN-chartered freighter, captained by Nehemia Persoff. As they leave, they pick up a downed North Korean aviator, half drowned. The Republic of Korea is in charge of the operation and over the radio the commander orders Douglas to kill the prisoner.There are some nice touches. Persoff runs a practical ship, full of highly explosive gasoline, under a neutral Finnish flag. Ordinarily a situation like this calls for a ship crawling with rats and manned by greasy, scarred, and rebellious lascars. Not in this case. Persoff's ship is tidy and he has a French cook who serves up beef Bourguignon, petite pois, and a robust and determined French wine with a fine nose.There are very few action scenes, not particularly well done but a welcome interruption to the drama taking place aboard the vessel.That's about it. The characters argue mostly, but not exclusively, over who is going to shoot and kill the friendly prisoner, Kim, with that .45. Each role is as subtle as a truck. Not even the banter sounds quite right. I suspect the novel might have been better than this adaptation.Most of the time it resembles a staged play. The three soldiers and their prisoner sit in their cabin and argue. Occasionally there is a visit from the captain or the steward. The men are groomed not like grunts who have been in a combat zone but rather like Hollywood stars. Douglas' moussed hair hasn't a strand out of place. All three were shaved that morning by the studio barber.Douglas does all right by the role of the sarcastic and ruthless sergeant, tormented by memories of child abuse. You see, that's why he's so tough on his men, especially the boyish non-actor Robert Walker Jr. Douglas is reenacting the role of his brutal father. (Ho hum.) I hope the Korean kid made it to the end of the movie. That's more than I could do.

I enjoy watching movies and will most often make a selection because of the actors, then maybe because of the theme, or occasionally because of a recommendation. "The Hook" is a movie that I had never heard of, so seeing Kirk Douglas on the cover is what hooked me for this war movie. Also Robert Walker Jr is someone that I first saw in TV's _"Star Trek" (1966) {Charlie X (#1.2)}_ (qv) playing a 17yr boy, so what would he be like in a movie produced 3 years earlier.The opening of this movie includes "This is a story of men in war, not men at war. And the two are not the same." To understand my view, I am a baby-boomer who has never served in the military, but I have known many who have served. Most of these men don't really talk about their experiences, so I often wonder if my views on war movies would be very different of those people who have served. My preference would be that countries would not be at war, but regardless of this I believe we need to support those who chose to serve in the roles in which they are assigned."The Hook" is a title that showed no relevance before I watched the movie, and I never did catch. Is this an anti-war movie, or a personal interaction story, or war conflict drama, and this question repeats itself for 90 minutes. Regardless the movie itself is compelling. We are engaged with three surviving servicemen vacating a military post upon a 'neutral' merchant vessel, plus an enemy retrieved after he has bailed from his failing aircraft. Your journey is to imagine your response to their scenarios. Would you have rescued the enemy at all? How would you treat him on this merchant ship? Just imagine how you would respond to engaging an enemy on the battlefield; how is it different or the same, across an eating table? Kirk Douglas, Robert Walked, and Nick Adams are the enlisted men facing these scenarios.I enjoyed this movie, in spite of moments of "I wouldn't do that!". The movie is a must for Kirk Douglas fans, and highly recommended for anyone interested in war movies. I don't know if actual enlisted people would behave this way, but "The Hook" is wonderfully acted and does not need the tonnage of special effects that are today's production norms.

For fans of the taut and psychologically grueling and philosophically provocative filmed one-act play, The Hook is right in the class of Lifeboat, The Petrified Forest, Obsession, The Desperate Hours, 12 Angry Men, and Time Limit -- all among my personal favorite movies. The movie hinges on one dilemma: What does a military man do when given a direct order from a Commanding Officer to kill an unarmed POW in cold blood? The questions of right and wrong are further blurred by the fact they are informed that all the other soldiers in the unit have all been wiped out by a brutal North Korean attack. Aboard a friendly vessel en route to reconnoiter with another fighting division, a Sergeant (Kirk Douglas), Corporal (Nick Adams), and Private (Robert Walker Jr.) have two days to dispose of the prisoner or disobey a direct order. For his part, the prisoner shows every sign of singlemindedly waiting for an opening to escape. He speaks no English and only one of the three speaks even a few words of Korean. The Sergeant orders each subordinate, in turn, to execute the prisoner, but they are both quite conflicted also. Kirk Douglas is perfectly cast as the tough-as-nails-on-the-outside-Sergeant Briscoe. But, Nick Adams truly steals the movie as the Corporal who nearly relinquishes his humanity trying desperately to support his Sergeant. Walker gives a solid if unremarkable performance as the Private that Briscoe relentlessly tries to bully into executing his dirty work. That's all of it. So, if you are looking for a war movie with lots of action and visual effects, look elsewhere. But, if you wish to look into the souls of three enlisted men faced with Hobson's choices within an unrelenting pressure cooker, this fast-moving and well-acted psychological study will haunt you for the rest of your film-going life. I give it 10/10 for its genre.