Released in 1965 at the height of the cold-war, this movie takes us on that one extra step.
Richard Widmark plays the commander of an American surface warship out hunting for commie subs. He's the sort of maniac-in-authority who epitomised the worst nuclear nightmares. He's a hunter with a hunter's instinct. He would love to chalk-up a kill. And he hates the communists. It's a lethal psychology.
Sydney Poitier is a visiting journalist. He's sailing with the ship at the navy's discretion, not at the captain's invitation. It's pretty evident that second only to commies, Widmark's character despises pacifist desk-jockeys.
Theirs is an intimate and uncomfortable relationship.
Eventually, they find a Russian submarine. They're in international waters so technically each is free to go where and as they please. Even if that means inconveniencing the other. A cat and mouse chase ensues. As time passes, the dangerous cocktail of the American commander's psychology tilts towards hunting rather than military discretion. His is the absolute right to command, and he gives the enemy no latitude.
In his wildest imagination, the journalist can see where this must lead, but things can surely never arrive at that point - can they? These are war games, and he's bluffing - right? He's the commander, with absolute power, but naval authorities don't give a maniac that much authority - do they? No they don't. But appointments can never ultimately evaluate psychology. People change over time. And they react to the moment.
A point is reached when the hunting instinct takes precedence over all else. An emotional switch that was never anticipated or it was always supposed would yield to discretion and responsible command is thrown in the single-minded resolve to beat the enemy.
It's a nice tense thriller after the fashion of 'The Enemy Below' but without the Russian perspective. For that, Poitier is obliged to act as devil's advocate, which makes him even less endearing to the commander. Widmark does the 'unhinged' thing so well it is surprising that he didn't feature as a really bad guy more often. Poitier is still at his strongest and makes a very commanding if thoughtful presence. One or two other stalwarts also catch the eye, like Martin Balsam. Some of the location shots are showing their age a bit now, but the drama and antagonism keep the movie running at flank speed.
Despite their colossal budgets, special-effects, and greater attention to detail, modern cold-war dramas never seem to capture that essential paranoia of the time. Perhaps economy of scale suits the genre best. I recently watched 'Crimson Tide', and although it contained a number of similarities - not least of which were black and white antagonists in the leading roles, and a do-or-die commander just itching for a scrap - I couldn't help but feel that whereas Widmark and Poitier were starring actors selected to tell a story; Crimson Tide was as much a vehicle to advertise Denzel Washington's and Gene Hackman's stellar status. It's a small shift in emphasis, but that's how it seemed to me.
Watch 'The Bedford Incident' if you get the chance. It may not be the best cold-war movie, but it'll hold you attention right readily.
Richard Widmark plays the commander of an American surface warship out hunting for commie subs. He's the sort of maniac-in-authority who epitomised the worst nuclear nightmares. He's a hunter with a hunter's instinct. He would love to chalk-up a kill. And he hates the communists. It's a lethal psychology.
Sydney Poitier is a visiting journalist. He's sailing with the ship at the navy's discretion, not at the captain's invitation. It's pretty evident that second only to commies, Widmark's character despises pacifist desk-jockeys.
Theirs is an intimate and uncomfortable relationship.
Eventually, they find a Russian submarine. They're in international waters so technically each is free to go where and as they please. Even if that means inconveniencing the other. A cat and mouse chase ensues. As time passes, the dangerous cocktail of the American commander's psychology tilts towards hunting rather than military discretion. His is the absolute right to command, and he gives the enemy no latitude.
In his wildest imagination, the journalist can see where this must lead, but things can surely never arrive at that point - can they? These are war games, and he's bluffing - right? He's the commander, with absolute power, but naval authorities don't give a maniac that much authority - do they? No they don't. But appointments can never ultimately evaluate psychology. People change over time. And they react to the moment.
A point is reached when the hunting instinct takes precedence over all else. An emotional switch that was never anticipated or it was always supposed would yield to discretion and responsible command is thrown in the single-minded resolve to beat the enemy.
It's a nice tense thriller after the fashion of 'The Enemy Below' but without the Russian perspective. For that, Poitier is obliged to act as devil's advocate, which makes him even less endearing to the commander. Widmark does the 'unhinged' thing so well it is surprising that he didn't feature as a really bad guy more often. Poitier is still at his strongest and makes a very commanding if thoughtful presence. One or two other stalwarts also catch the eye, like Martin Balsam. Some of the location shots are showing their age a bit now, but the drama and antagonism keep the movie running at flank speed.
Despite their colossal budgets, special-effects, and greater attention to detail, modern cold-war dramas never seem to capture that essential paranoia of the time. Perhaps economy of scale suits the genre best. I recently watched 'Crimson Tide', and although it contained a number of similarities - not least of which were black and white antagonists in the leading roles, and a do-or-die commander just itching for a scrap - I couldn't help but feel that whereas Widmark and Poitier were starring actors selected to tell a story; Crimson Tide was as much a vehicle to advertise Denzel Washington's and Gene Hackman's stellar status. It's a small shift in emphasis, but that's how it seemed to me.
Watch 'The Bedford Incident' if you get the chance. It may not be the best cold-war movie, but it'll hold you attention right readily.