Skip to main content

Maybe back in the days of the pioneers a man could go his own way, but today you got to play ball.

From Here to Eternity
(1953)

(SPOILERS) Which is more famous, Burt Lancaster and Deborah Kerr making out in the surf in From Here to Eternity or Airplane! spoofing the same? It’s an iconic scene – both of them – in a Best Picture Oscar winner – only one of them – stuffed to the rafters with iconic actors. But Academy acclaim is no guarantee of quality. Just ask A Beautiful Mind. From Here to Eternity is both frustrating and fascinating for what it can and cannot do per the restrictive codes of the 1950s, creaky at times but never less than compelling. There are many movies of its era that have aged better, but it still carries a charge for being as forthright as it can be. And then there’s the subtext leaking from its every pore.

Daniel Taradash adapted James Jones 1951 novel of the same name (Jones wasn’t pleased with the picture). It’s a magnificent title, derived from a Kipling poem (Gentleman-Rankers). Jones’ The Thin Red Line has been subsequently made twice, of course, and both works share an individualist protagonist in a system that irons out all traces of individual thinking. Rather than dealing with combat itself, the plot revolves around life at a Hawaiian barracks in the run up to Pearl Harbour. The attack is, by dramatic necessity, staged for the climax, although I couldn’t help feel it undercut the melodrama (in a similar respect, it’s the cadet training in Full Metal Jacket that carries the punch, rather than the Vietnam sequences). Michael Bay didn’t have much more luck when he re-enacted it. Naturally, there’s as much analysis of the machinations behind the Japanese attack as Oliver Stone would provide in The Secret History of the United States (none at all). And because it includes no armed combat, it’s also absent any discussion of the paraphernalia of heroism (something Terrence Malick’s The Thin Red Line is able to grasp).

Which isn’t to say From Here to Eternity doesn’t try its best to undercut classical Hollywood narratives of righteous warfare. Pauline Kael noted of this and the following year’s Best Picture winner, that “these films brought new attitudes to the screen that touched a social nerve…” Private Prewitt (Montgomery Clift), a bugler new to the regiment, finds himself under pressure – mostly in the form of vindictive punishments and coercive duties – to buckle down and join the regimental boxing team. Having previously blinded a man during a match, he is understandably reluctant. His foolish, philandering superior Captain Holmes (Philip Ober) scoffs at his attitude (“You might as well say stop war because one man got killed”), while the First Sergeant Warden (Burt Lancaster), who disdains Holmes, is convinced Prewitt will buckle.

Warden: I hate officers. I’ve always hated officers!
Karen: That’s a fine, intelligent point of view.

But as presented, there is good army and there is bad army. Warden, “The best soldier I ever saw”, is obviously good. That’s why he doesn’t want to be an officer. He puts his men first. While the system here is presented as corrupt, it is by dint of ensuring cooperation within its rifle company, not endemically so. Holmes is an ass, the NCOs obeying his instructions to test Prewitt are (mostly) brutes, and even those who aren’t (Jack Warden’s Corporal Buckley), aren’t going out on a limb for him.

Director Fred Zinnemann and Taradash had to amend their adaptation to dampen down military objections. So in a climactic scene Zinnemann hated shooting, Holmes is forced to resign (in the novel he is promoted and transfers out) or face court martial, his superiors less than enchanted by his behaviour. Stockade Sergeant “Fatso” Judson (Ernest Borgnine) subjects Private Maggio (Frank Sinatra) to routine beatings when he finally has him locked up, but he is not characterised as representative (and the beatings occur off screen, while Maggio’s death is also caused by falling from a truck, rather than entirely due to the injuries inflicted by the sergeant). It seems the army was still not happy at the finished film, such that they took their name off it. I can’t say I’m that surprised, particularly as the Holmes resignation scene only ever feels like the sop it is. More than that, though, the picture’s entire underpinnings are downbeat; no character comes through improved by their experiences of or in the services.

There were other elements removed for production code reasons; rather than having suffered a veneral disease, Karen (Deborah Kerr) is unable to have children due to a miscarriage. Prewitt’s girl Lorene (Donna Reed) is a hostess at a “social club” (“She pays us to be nice to all the boys” Lorene says of the madam). Meaning she’s a hooker at a brothel. Gay themes from the novel are absent, although more of that shortly.

None of this – Time Out’s Geoff Andrew called it a “bowdlerised” adaptation – can distract from the picture’s mettle, however. The dialogue is polished, and the performances, even where they don’t fit, are compelling. Lancaster is a good choice for the tough sergeant. Kerr was cast over studio head Harry Cohn’s objections (he wanted Joan Crawford, until he nixed her over outrageous wardrobe demands). Sister Clodagh from Black Narcissus is reinvented as a swimsuit-sporting sex bomb. Kerr’s entirely superb as an embittered woman whose spark of life is rekindled.

Sinatra had scarcely been able to get a gig in Hollywood prior to this (per Anthony Holden’s The Secret History of the Academy Awards), with legends forming around his lobbying for the movie (namely, the horse’s head in a bed in The Godfather). He’d win an Oscar and a newly-invigorated screen career. I’m a little less enthused, though. He’s engaging and eager, and because he mines the laughs, it’s a showy role, but his performance is much less interesting than those of most of his co-stars (perhaps his mob chums threatened the Academy of voters with depraved visitations on their pets too). Who also include Reed (winning an Oscar), Borgnine, Warden and George Reeves (Superman on TV). And Clift.

Clift’s act is easily the most interesting part of From Here to Eternity, but it’s interesting in the way that Brando’s turns are always the most interesting thing about any movie he’s in. It doesn’t necessarily mean they’re appropriate to the material. I disagree with Kael’s take that Clift is able “to control the charm… without ever stepping outside his inflexible, none-too-smart character”. For me, there’s an essential disconnect between Clift and Prewitt, in that the former is unable to disguise that he’s deeper and more self-aware than the man he is playing. That intelligence is perfect for the same year’s I Confess, but here I simply find myself not believing, even as the trials forced on the non-compliant private are dramatically engrossing. Prewitt avers “I’m a thirty-year man”, but I am never once convinced of this.

Kael also suggested “Clift’s innovative performance was buried in the public praise for Sinatra and Lancaster”. Although, it’s worth noting that for such a heavily-rewarded movie, it missed out on statuettes for its main roles (Lancaster, Clift and Kerr were all Oscar nominated but none won). Clift was reportedly highly upset by the lack of recognition (“What do I have to do to prove I can act?”) He also thought Lancaster was rubbish and “a big bag of wind”. Lancaster is said to have found Clift’s acting chops intimidating (it’s said Clift’s exactitude raised everyone’s game on set). Cohn hadn’t wanted the exacting method man, stating he was “no soldier, no boxer and probably a homosexual”.

The latter is an interesting observation, given From Here to Eternity’s barely concealed subtext. It’s there from the very first scene, in which Warden’s attentions are divided between Karen and newly-arrived Prewitt. Homoerotic subtext in military movies, where conflict between characters typically gives way to camaraderie, could be more recently seen in Top Gun (and doubtless its forthcoming sequel). Here, we follow each enlisted man’s blossoming romance in parallel. Both choose women who want to escape their situations (unhappy marriage, turning tricks) and may not look to closely at their prospective spouse’s proclivities. Both men attest to their girls their love of and devotion to the company of men (the service). Ultimately, both men choose the company of men over their other half.

Warden opts out of taking a captain’s exam, key to his future with Karen. Prewitt takes revenge on Fatso for killing his beloved Maggio, stabbing (penetrating) him and being stabbed (penetrated) in return (notably, Maggio in the novel’s originally censored material is established to have prostituted himself to male clients in the past). In another movie, say An Officer and a Gentleman, individuality would be the kernel of a great soldier; here, it is indicative of a sensitive soul. We see this most clearly when the two drunken men commiserate their troubles and Warden asks “How’s your girl?” as he strokes Prewitt’s head. And then, as the capper, Warden breaks off his intense heart-to-heart with Karen, the one where it’s clear their relationship is over, because he believes he has spotted the AWOL Prewitt (“I’m sorry. I thought you were somebody”). It’s quite clear where his deepest affections lie.

I mentioned that I didn’t find the climax too good a fit with the material. Apart from anything else, it seems to double down on the themes of just and noble war following justice served to Holmes (and this is despite resisting the usual catharsis of the decent man consistently resisting violence triumphing when he eventually succumbs; Prewitt beating Galovitch (John Dennis) is actually a prelude to his downfall and death, both acts of violence). Kael was of the view “Prewitt’s fate gets buried in the commotion of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour”, and it’s true. It doesn’t help that this is preceded by the clumsy manner in which escapee Maggio suddenly appears to interrupt Warden and Prewitt’s drunken tête-à-tête (only to swiftly die).

Zinnemann won Best Director Oscar, something he would later repeat for A Man For All Seasons. His approach has received differing responses over the years; Kael referenced his “lean, intelligent direction” while Andrews termed it “flat”. I’d come somewhere in between. You aren’t aware of his work, which at its best enables the storytelling to unfold expertly (in both those Oscar winners, it’s the performances you remember). You don’t, however, tend to think of him as very seized or dynamic (although, The Day of the Jackal, with its immediate documentarian bent, is no slouch). This was the first time I’d seen From Here to Eternity – that I recall, anyway – and my response is very much guarded recommendation. It’s far from the unqualified classic its reputation suggests, but it’s easy to see why it has been embraced as such.




Popular posts from this blog

I’m smarter than a beaver.

Prey (2022) (SPOILERS) If nothing else, I have to respect Dan Trachtenberg’s cynical pragmatism. How do I not only get a project off the ground, but fast-tracked as well? I know, a woke Predator movie! Woke Disney won’t be able to resist! And so, it comes to pass. Luckily for Prey , it gets to bypass cinemas and so the same sorry fate of Lightyear . Less fortunately, it’s a patience-testing snook cocking at historicity (or at least, assumed historicity), in which a young, pint-sized Comanche girl who wishes to hunt and fish – and doubtless shoot to boot – with the big boys gets to take on a Predator and make mincemeat of him. Well, of course , she does. She’s a girl, innit?

Everyone creates the thing they dread.

Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) (SPOILERS) Avengers: Age of Ultron ’s problem isn’t one of lack. It benefits from a solid central plot. It features a host of standout scenes and set pieces. It hands (most of) its characters strong defining moments. It doesn’t even suffer now the “wow” factor of seeing the team together for the first time has subsided. Its problem is that it’s too encumbered. Maybe its asking to much of a director to effectively martial the many different elements required by an ensemble superhero movie such as this, yet Joss Whedon’s predecessor feels positively lean in comparison. Part of this is simply down to the demands of the vaster Marvel franchise machine. Seeds are laid for Captain America: Civil War , Infinity Wars I & II , Black Panther and Thor: Ragnarok . It feels like several spinning plates too many. Such activity occasionally became over-intrusive on previous occasions ( Iron Man II ), but there are points in Age of Ultron whe

If you ride like lightning, you're going to crash like thunder.

The Place Beyond the Pines (2012) (SPOILERS) There’s something daringly perverse about the attempt to weave a serious-minded, generation-spanning saga from the hare-brained premise of The Place Beyond the Pines . When he learns he is a daddy, a fairground stunt biker turns bank robber in order to provide for his family. It’s the kind of “only-in-Hollywood” fantasy premise you might expect from a system that unleashed Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man and Point Break on the world. But this is an indie-minded movie from the director of the acclaimed Blue Valentine ; it demands respect and earnest appraisal. Unfortunately it never recovers from the abject silliness of the set-up. The picture is littered with piecemeal characters and scenarios. There’s a hope that maybe the big themes will even out the rocky terrain but in the end it’s because of this overreaching ambition that the film ends up so undernourished. The inspiration for the movie

I think it’s pretty clear whose side the Lord’s on, Barrington.

Monte Carlo or Bust aka  Those Daring Young Men in Their Jaunty Jalopies (1969) (SPOILERS) Ken Annakin’s semi-sequel to Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines tends to be rather maligned, usually compared negatively to its more famous predecessor. Which makes me rather wonder if those expressing said opinion have ever taken the time to scrutinise them side by side. Or watch them back to back (which would be more sensible). Because Monte Carlo or Bust is by far the superior movie. Indeed, for all its imperfections and foibles (not least a performance from Tony Curtis requiring a taste for comic ham), I adore it. It’s probably the best wacky race movie there is, simply because each set of competitors, shamelessly exemplifying a different national stereotype (albeit there are two pairs of Brits, and a damsel in distress), are vibrant and cartoonish in the best sense. Albeit, it has to be admitted that, as far as said stereotypes go, Annakin’s home side win

Death to Bill and Ted!

Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey (1991) (SPOILERS) The game of how few sequels are actually better than the original is so well worn, it was old when Scream 2 made a major meta thing out of it (and it wasn’t). Bill & Ted Go to Hell , as Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey was originally called, is one such, not that Excellent Adventure is anything to be sneezed at, but this one’s more confident, even more playful, more assured and more smartly stupid. And in Peter Hewitt it has a director with a much more overt and fittingly cartoonish style than the amiably pedestrian Stephen Herrick. Evil Bill : First, we totally kill Bill and Ted. Evil Ted : Then we take over their lives. My recollection of the picture’s general consensus was that it surpassed the sleeper hit original, but Rotten Tomatoes’ review aggregator suggests a less universal response. And, while it didn’t rock any oceans at the box office, Bogus Journey and Point Break did quite nicely for Keanu Reev

This entire edifice you see around you, built on jute.

Jeeves and Wooster 3.3: Cyril and the Broadway Musical  (aka Introduction on Broadway) Well, that’s a relief. After a couple of middling episodes, the third season bounces right back, and that's despite Bertie continuing his transatlantic trip. Clive Exton once again plunders  Carry On, Jeeves  but this time blends it with a tale from  The Inimitable Jeeves  for the brightest spots, as Cyril Basington-Basington (a sublimely drippy Nicholas Hewetson) pursues his stage career against Aunt Agatha's wishes.

I’m the famous comedian, Arnold Braunschweiger.

Last Action Hero (1993) (SPOILERS) Make no mistake, Last Action Hero is a mess. But even as a mess, it might be more interesting than any other movie Arnie made during that decade, perhaps even in his entire career. Hellzapoppin’ (after the 1941 picture, itself based on a Broadway revue) has virtually become an adjective to describe films that comment upon their own artifice, break the fourth wall, and generally disrespect the convention of suspending disbelief in the fictions we see parading across the screen. It was fairly audacious, some would say foolish, of Arnie to attempt something of that nature at this point in his career, which was at its peak, rather than playing it safe. That he stumbled profoundly, emphatically so since he went up against the behemoth that is Jurassic Park (slotted in after the fact to open first), should not blind one to the considerable merits of his ultimate, and final, really, attempt to experiment with the limits of his screen persona.

Another case of the screaming oopizootics.

Doctor Who Season 14 – Worst to Best The best Doctor Who season? In terms of general recognition and unadulterated celebration, there’s certainly a strong case to be made for Fourteen. The zenith of Robert Holmes and Philip Hinchcliffe’s plans for the series finds it relinquishing the cosy rapport of the Doctor and Sarah in favour of the less-trodden terrain of a solo adventure and underlying conflict with new companion Leela. More especially, it finds the production team finally stretching themselves conceptually after thoroughly exploring their “gothic horror” template over the course of the previous two seasons (well, mostly the previous one).

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) (SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek , but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan . That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the