I found "attack" online and vaguely remembered seeing it back in the 90s on AMC (yes, they used to show commercial-free older films). I remembered it was a good psychological war movie that I needed to see it again and I'm glad I did. This movie is riveting from the first shot, it has an action sequence before the opening credits even roll that sets up the story. Every scene matters in this crackerjack of a film that has a master at the helm in Robert Aldrich and features knockout performances by Jack Palance as heroic Lt. Joe Costa and Eddie Albert as cowardly captain Cooney. The rest of the cast is great too,Lee Marvin, Buddy Ebsen as the reliable platoon sergeant, Robert Strauss and Richard Jeackel add some comic relief.
The setting is the battle of the bulge (where's the snow?), but unlike other war films that play like a reenaction of events, the setting is not really relevant as this film explores themes of cowardice and treachery in battle. It could just as easy be set in WW1, or Vietnam. Reminiscent in these themes of Kubricks anti-war 'Paths of Glory', though that film explored cowardice at the lower ranks and treachery at the higher ranks, and 'attack' is somewhat the opposite in that the cowardice is clearly at the top of the company with Cooney, and the treachery seems to be all up and down the ranks. So maybe this too is an anti-war film, and maybe that is why the US military refused to give support in the filming...probably the reason that some of the sets and props lack authenticity, which is the only fault in this film.
Captain Cooney is one of those officers that comes from a powerful family, and he is kept in place by a Colonel (Lee Marvin, solid as usual) who wants to use the connection for post-war political gain. So Cooney is entrenched but Costa has seen enough of Cooney's debacles in battle and is threatening to come back and "stick a grenade down your throat and pull the pin" if he is left twisting in the wind after Cooney's latest order of sending Costas platoon to occupy a farmhouse in a town that may or may not be a Nazi hotbed. Cooneys plan backfires and more men are dead, and when the platoon pulls back Costa ends up missing, but he won't be missing for long, for his searing anger toward Cooney and need for retribution are giving him all his reason for living.
When you consider war movies like Aldrich's later 'The dirty dozen' or 'Saving private Ryan', though they contain many cynical lines and 3/4 of the cast end up killed, the thing that probably makes them acceptable to the US military is that you at least get the impression that the men at the top are noble, caring soldiers. Not so with 'attack', it seems the closer to the top you get the more cynical, cowardly or uncaring they get. Could this have been the problem the military had with this film? -probably. People are people, and this story goes beyond war when it shows the monumental effect of weak leadership on morale and sanity. Costa reaches a point where he has become almost as unglued as Cooney, and Palance's performance here is so powerful and intense that YES, it should have received Oscar attention, but again, it just isn't the message or the type of film on which the system likes to shine a light.
That's a shame, but today it doesn't matter, it's a great film to enjoy and to watch this collection of fabulous actors who all became much better known in the 60s and 70s than they were at the time. I would guess they were all unknown (except maybe Palance, 'Shane','The big knife')to most people in 1956, as was Aldrich, though he had made 'Kiss me deadly' the year before. I think this may be his most engrossing film, it's tight, action-packed, extremely well acted...and it stuck with me afterward, made me think...high praise indeed.
The setting is the battle of the bulge (where's the snow?), but unlike other war films that play like a reenaction of events, the setting is not really relevant as this film explores themes of cowardice and treachery in battle. It could just as easy be set in WW1, or Vietnam. Reminiscent in these themes of Kubricks anti-war 'Paths of Glory', though that film explored cowardice at the lower ranks and treachery at the higher ranks, and 'attack' is somewhat the opposite in that the cowardice is clearly at the top of the company with Cooney, and the treachery seems to be all up and down the ranks. So maybe this too is an anti-war film, and maybe that is why the US military refused to give support in the filming...probably the reason that some of the sets and props lack authenticity, which is the only fault in this film.
Captain Cooney is one of those officers that comes from a powerful family, and he is kept in place by a Colonel (Lee Marvin, solid as usual) who wants to use the connection for post-war political gain. So Cooney is entrenched but Costa has seen enough of Cooney's debacles in battle and is threatening to come back and "stick a grenade down your throat and pull the pin" if he is left twisting in the wind after Cooney's latest order of sending Costas platoon to occupy a farmhouse in a town that may or may not be a Nazi hotbed. Cooneys plan backfires and more men are dead, and when the platoon pulls back Costa ends up missing, but he won't be missing for long, for his searing anger toward Cooney and need for retribution are giving him all his reason for living.
When you consider war movies like Aldrich's later 'The dirty dozen' or 'Saving private Ryan', though they contain many cynical lines and 3/4 of the cast end up killed, the thing that probably makes them acceptable to the US military is that you at least get the impression that the men at the top are noble, caring soldiers. Not so with 'attack', it seems the closer to the top you get the more cynical, cowardly or uncaring they get. Could this have been the problem the military had with this film? -probably. People are people, and this story goes beyond war when it shows the monumental effect of weak leadership on morale and sanity. Costa reaches a point where he has become almost as unglued as Cooney, and Palance's performance here is so powerful and intense that YES, it should have received Oscar attention, but again, it just isn't the message or the type of film on which the system likes to shine a light.
That's a shame, but today it doesn't matter, it's a great film to enjoy and to watch this collection of fabulous actors who all became much better known in the 60s and 70s than they were at the time. I would guess they were all unknown (except maybe Palance, 'Shane','The big knife')to most people in 1956, as was Aldrich, though he had made 'Kiss me deadly' the year before. I think this may be his most engrossing film, it's tight, action-packed, extremely well acted...and it stuck with me afterward, made me think...high praise indeed.