ETO_Buff Reviews

Recon (2019)

Just Not Worth Watching, That's All

[4/10 · 19 April 2024]

This is another one that's straight from the dung heap. I'm sure that it was written by a high school student who had no idea of what combat, or even the military, was like during World War II. Honestly, at the 20-minute mark, it was obvious that there was no point in enduring this film any longer, because the story could not possibly become plausible.

First, there's the prevalent use of the F-word, which was literally nonexistent during WW2. It's put into WW2 movies by script writers who don't know much about WW2 and don't know any other words for characters to use to express themselves forcefully.

Second, there's the lone German officer with his girlfriend, who decides that it's a good idea to use his sidearm to launch an attack on a fully equipped American heavy infantry squad.

Third, let's talk about the American soldiers addressing a corporal as "sir." On second thought, let's not. Of course, a sergeant, if there isn't a staff sergeant, would be in command of an infantry squad anyway, so maybe the guys were already confused, like the script writer.

Fourth, the corporal makes two of the squabbling squad members drop and do push-ups on the side of a road to punish them for bickering, as if it's basic training all over again.

Fifth, speaking of that road, the squad had just walked down the middle of it in two columns, with everyone pretty close together, obviously feeling pretty safe in enemy territory amongst the hills and trees.

Just like with me watching the movie, there's really no point in continuing this review. The script is totally unrealistic, and it's just not worth seeing.

36 Hours (1964)

Creative, but Realistically Impossible

[6/10 · 13 April 2024]

Well-written with good acting, and a completely implausible fictional plot.

James Garner is, as always, a level-headed, cool, American everyman, except he's also a major in army intelligence. The Germans also know who he is and what he's up to, thanks to their agents in London. The problem with that is, in real-life history, the Allies had found all of the German agents in Britain long before D-Day and turned them into double-agents to feed Germany mostly incorrect info.

Getting past this fact, the Germans then create an elaborate ruse with resources that they did not possess at the time in reality to convince Major Pike (Garner) that he is in an American hospital in 1950 after the war and is suffering from amnesia. It's a pretty suspenseful film until that point.

T-34 (2018)

Not a Typically Bad Russian Film

[8/10 · 11 April 2024]

This is basically the Russian version of "Fury". In fact, the English-language title of the film is, in fact, "Iron Fury". I was surprised that it's not a bad film. In fact, I enjoyed it. There are some elements that are certainly far-fetched, because it is, after all, a movie, but most of it is fairly convincing, even with the romantic subplot that is required in all Russian/Soviet films about the war. It's not an obvious Russian propaganda film either, where everyone is happy and smiling to be at war fighting for the Motherland. The special effects are good, and the cinematography is very good. The acting is convincing, and the script isn't ridiculous.

Convoy 48 (2019)

Not a Typically Bad Russian Film

[8/10 · 11 April 2024]

This is a very long film. It really dragged in some places, but maybe that's because I'm not Russian, and so maybe I didn't get into the story as much as I would have. In my defense, I missed many of the subtitles because they went by very quickly, so I had to rewind many times and pause several times, but more often, I didn't even bother.

The effects were kind of lame. Whenever the Germans sent an artillery "barrage" it was only two shells at a time, and they weren't very explosive.

Having said that, the acting was good, and the script wasn't stupid. It seems that Russian filmmakers are now tryin to produce good motion pictures. It had the requisite romance subplot that at Soviet/Russian films about the war have, of course. It seems like an important story, too. I didn't know that a railroad bridge to Leningrad was built across the from lake that the city is in. I knew Leningrad was on an island and that the Germans blockaded it, but I only knew that the Russians trucked in supplies across the frozen water to get food and medicine to the starving and sick residents of the city.

All-in-all, I didn't regret watching it like I do most Soviet/Russian films.

Paratrooper (1953)

Cowboy American in the RAF

[4/10 · 26 March 2024]

Alan Ladd stars as Steve "Canada" McKendrick, a cantankerous American who acts like he's better than the other trainees (apparently he already has some experience) and enlists in the Canadian Army to join the British paratroopers before the U. S. gets into the war. He already doesn't fit in because he's not a Brit, and to make things worse, he fights or threatens anyone that looks at him the wrong way. There's no reason given for his bad attitude, so maybe it simply stems from the filmmakers' opinion of Americans. Later in the film there is an American flight crew that is very casual in terms of their military courtesy and none of them salute the British colonel when he briefly speaks to them, so the filmmakers obviously regard Americans as a bunch of cowboys, or whatever.

After his unit's first op, Canada is offered a commission due to his leadership ability, which he must have demonstrated off-screen. Maybe the British filmmakers in 1962 didn't think that Brit corporals, sergeants, and other NCOs during the war had any leadership ability, so privates that showed such ability became officers.

The script is bad, and the effects are stupid. A shell from a Navy gun creates the same size blast as a hand grenade, and neither one causes any casualties. However, in one scene, a grenade explodes at the feet of the British commander, causing him to lose his balance and fall over. War is Hell, I guess.

The throwing knives are pretty lethal, though. At one point a Brit soldier throws a knife at a German sentry, which sinks about an inch deep (we see him pull it out right after) into the sentry's back below his shoulder blade and kills him instantly.

Early in the film he hits on an English lass who works as a parachute packer. She quickly warms up to him (it's anybody's guess as to why), and their relationship serves as a subplot. He keeps being a jerk to her and ticking her off, but after one argument, she storms off, he catches up to her, grabs her and says, "Here's one thing you will understand," and kisses her in a very manly 50s fashion. After that things are smooth between them until they have an argument at dinner one evening, and Canada walks off saying, "So long, Baby." That's the last we see of the gal in this fictitious story, which ends with a (probably wildly inaccurate) portrayal of the real-life Operation Biting.

It's a pretty typical film for its era, though certainly not one of the better ones in my opinion.

Zinvorn u pighe (1978)

Another Nonsensical Soviet Bloc Film

[4/10 · 22 March 2024]

Like pretty much every film about the war that was produced in the Soviet bloc, there is just so much that goes on in this picture that is just nonsensical, goofy, and illogical. It didn't even matter that I couldn't understand the dialog and that there were no subtitles. I could just tell after watching so many of these that the dialog would not have made the action make sense. I guess that's the advantage of making films in a country where the audience isn't accustomed to seeing anything better.

One must also wonder why, as late as 1977, are films still being produced in grayscale (a.k.a. "black and white")? I know that major American studios produce films in grayscale occasionally because some filmmakers think it's more dramatic or more stark. In those cases, the picture quality is still high-quality. This one is not.

Masters of the Air (2024)

I've Been Waiting Nine and a Half Years for This.

[9/10 · 21 March 2024]

The original release date for this series was 2014 and it was to be entitled "The Mighty 8th". I waited nine and a half years for this miniseries to be produced and released. I am very happy that it didn't turn out to be a disappointment!

Having said that, I was slightly disappointed that the producers chose to condense the story of the 100th Bomb Group into nine episodes instead of the ten episodes that each of its two companion miniseries have. However, I know that this miniseries was much more expensive to produce than the other two.

One thing that lost it one star from me was the factually incorrect use of all of the F-bombs, a word that was virtually non-existent in the 1940s. Nevertheless, one cannot have a Spielberg-produced film without its prolific use. Otherwise, it was quite realistic.

This miniseries was superbly done, just as Band of Brothers and The Pacific were. It was annoying to read articles by critics that kept unfairly comparing this miniseries to Band of Brothers because they are two entirely different shows about different people in different circumstances. If all miniseries after Band of Brothers are going to be compared to Band of Brothers, there's no point in producing miniseries anymore.

If you want to see Band of Brothers, then go watch Band of Brothers and grow up.

Another thing that annoys me is all of the people complaining about the British air crews being insulted by the Americans. That's what people in the military do, especially when we get liquored up. The Brits were doing it also. We give our allies a hard time, we give guys and gals in other branches of our own military a hard time. It's life in the military, get over it.

The Good War (2002)

Disappointingly Below Average

[4/10 · 17 January 2024]

It may have been a good war, but this is a below-average picture, and the sing-song narration by the female lead is distracting. Four other minor details were completely illogical and kept this potentially good film under the 5-star level: The first is that the major premise of the story was that the food quantity was being reduced and that the prisoners were being starved to death. They all looked pretty heavy and healthy to me the whole time.

Secondly, during a riot, the guards and prisoners are fighting. A few prisoners are shot, but as soon as one of the guards is accidentally shot, everyone simultaneously stops fighting and the riot is over.

Third is when Manin, the Italian escapee, tries to steal a car to escape, Gartner, standing behind the car, takes two shots at the car with his .45 and the second shot hits the oil pump under the car and the car immediately stops and steam starts spewing steam from the radiator.

The last is when the female lead gets shot accidentally in the back at very close range. According to her narration, she was in bad shape (which is believable), but 3 or 4 days later, she is out of the hospital completely healed and at full strength with no indication of ever having been wounded.

Is Paris Burning? (1966)

Shooting at Panzers with Rifles?

[3/10 · 6 January 2024]

The first thing that put me off about this one was that it was made in 1966 and in my opinion should not have been in black & white. However, later in the film, they blended in quite a bit of footage from the actual battle for Paris and clearly wanted it to look like part of the movie.

One thing that that did not make sense is that the actors playing German characters and French characters spoke English (which is typical of any film, otherwise the whole thing would have been in subtitles), but the character of Adolf Hitler spoke German, as did the actors speaking to him. There was no reason given for the inconsistency.

With the exception of Orson Welles and Gert Fröbe, the acting was pretty bad. Kirk Douglas was in a brief scene as Patton, and although Douglas is a fine actor, he was totally unconvincing in that role. Maybe they should have had George C. Scott do it.

The fighting scenes were incredibly unrealistic, except the aforementioned actual footage. Two examples of this are a Sherman tank being destroyed by a German hand grenade in one scene, and several scenes of Resistance fighters shooting at panzers with rifles.

Paisan (1946)

Difficult to Watch Until the End

[2/10 · 6 January 2024]

The description says there are six stories, and at the beginning, the casts are given for six stories, but I think I only saw four.

Besides being a film of completely separate stories with separate casts and situations, another thing that makes this film unusual is that ordinary, non-professional actors are cast along with professional actors. I have never heard of the professional actors in the cast, some with American names, and their acting was as mediocre as the non-professionals, so the blend worked in that respect. The script was bad, as one would expect from an early post-war Italian film, and each story ended with no resolution or discernable plot. All of these elements, combined with plot devices that didn't make any sense, made it difficult to sit through.

There are some some "harsh realities of war" depicted, as the description says, which comes from the director living through the war in Italy, instead of seeing it on newsreels or reading about it like American directors, whose pre-1990 films almost always ended well for the good guys. In spite of that aspect, I don't recommend this one.

Overlord (1975)

Lame Duck

[2/10 · 6 January 2024]

Beginning with a premonition of his death, the film follows a young soldier through his call up to the East Yorkshire Regiment, his training, his meeting a young girl, his journey to France, and his death on Sword Beach. Calling this picture "thought-provoking" is clearly an attempt to get people to watch a lame-duck film. Bad acting and poor production quality contribute to a film that I wish I had missed. It's difficult to believe it was produced in 1975 because of the poor quality. The filmmakers used archive film from the actual battle, especially from Germany, and combined it with their own new footage. It was a noble attempt, and for the most part, it worked on a strictly technical level. However, the film as a whole seemed more like a 1950s film from behind the Iron Curtain.

Operation Seawolf (2022)

Another Bad Film by Steven Luke

[2/10 · 23 August 2023]

During the first scene, I was 75% sure that this film was going to be crap, then at the end of the opening credits I saw that it was directed by Steven Luke, and that made it 100%. The scene included the sinking of a U-Boat, but in a later scene, we see that one of the officers escaped the sunken submarine, but with no explanation.

The acting is bad, the haircuts and mousse are modern, the terminology is wrong, and the plot is implausible. In addition, a U. S. destroyer is portrayed with an African American captain and bridge crew, even though the racist policies of the U. S. Navy until after WW2 forbade African Americans from being anything other than cooks and stewards.

Of course there are numerous other problems with the film, but I'm not going to spend more time on it than I already have. I have to wonder if Luke's films actually make any money, or if he just has millions of dollars from some other source that he's able to throw away on this hobby.

Jungle Siren (1942)

So Stupid I Kept Falling Asleep

[1/10 · 28 July 2023]

This is such a stupid film that I kept falling asleep during it and had to watch it in three parts. It had to be considered stupid even in the time period in which it was produced.

I had never heard of Ann Corio before watching this film. As it turns out, she was a famous stripper who also made a few films. Corio plays a woman whose parents died in Africa when she was young, leaving her to be raised by a guardian who was an associate of her parents. Although her parents and guardian spoke English, she apparently learned to only speak broken English. She of course also becomes a skilled she-warrior for whom the native Africans have great respect, because none of them can beat her. Didn't I say it's a stupid film?

Buster Crabbe enters the jungle siren's domain and easily convinces her to help him fight the German agents in the area and the natives that have allied with them. That's the plot.

By now you should be grasping the ridiculousness of this story, thus not really requiring me to go any further.

Oppenheimer (I) (2023)

Oppenheimer

[8/10 · 25 July 2023]

I didn't give it 10 stars because it jumps around a lot chronologically, which is a very annoying current trend in film making, and can be confusing even if one's a history buff. Also because in typical Hollywood bleeding-heart-liberal fashion, it talked more about the destruction wrought by the atomic bombs than it did about the hundreds of thousands of civilian Japanese lives that were saved because of the bombs.

Other than that, the acting was excellent, which is to be expected from a cast with four Academy Award winners, a two-time Academy Award nominee, and a few BAFTA winners and nominees. The fX were spectacular as well.

Soldier Boy (2019)

Not Bad, in Spite of Being Russian-made

[7/10 · 6 July 2023]

It feels weird giving it seven stars, but in spite of it being a Russian-made film, it wasn't too bad. The little boy in the lead role did a good job. Of course it had all of the usual Russian movie tropes, like silly dialog, everyone being happy about being in the army, and the male commander falling in love with a female subordinate. The fX and photography were good, and even the acting was okay. It's supposedly a true story, but the filmmakers make that somewhat hard to believe, because some of the things that are portrayed have to be fictional. For one example, in the very beginning, the boy's aunt helps him escape from the Germans by putting him outside of the house through a window and she is immediately shot dead from outside, but the boy gets away without interference.

Overall, I wouldn't watch it again, in spite of my 7-star rating, but I'd recommend others to see it at least once.

The Star (2002)

Better than Other Goofy Russian Propaganda Flicks

[3/10 · 20 June 2023]

It was difficult to know in the beginning if this was a comedy or a drama because of the goofy dialogue, then it looked like it was going to be a romance. Then I remembered that all Soviet and Russian war films have silly dialogue and a female love interest.

The military aspects of the film are pretty ridiculous too. The unit is not only harassing the enemy, but acting as a reconnaissance unit also and reporting on the enemy. At one point they radio in that "there's lots of 21 owl 2" ( using the predetermined code for infantry, which isn't even necessary), but don't estimate the amount of infantry or give its location. In another scene they report in with a radio that has no transmitter antenna.

One reviewer, who cried at the end of this movie, and who clearly cannot make the distinction between movies and reality, said it's better than the completely fictional "Saving Private Ryan" because in the completely fictional "Saving Private Ryan", some of the soldiers question their orders.

The photography was very good, but of course they use the Hollywood tropes like blood erupting from a person's mouth to signal their death.

I didn't care much for it generally, but it's better than many Russian and Soviet war films.

The Rebels of PT-218 (2021)

The Details Have Never Been Seen Before Because They Never Happened!

[1/10 · 7 June 2023]

First of all, it's highly unlikely that this film is based on a true story. I say that because at about the 10-minute mark it shows Omar Bradley, the commander of ground forces and a US Army general officer, giving commands directly to a US Navy PT boat commander. Even a Navy flag officer wouldn't be in direct communication with a single PT boat, so an Army general definitely wouldn't be either.

I could tell within the first minute of the film starting that this is a low-budget cheesefest. At 11 minutes in, after the scene with Bradley, wearing a weird variant of a 1970s-1990s US Army class A uniform and a 1940s-1970s M1 combat helmet with four large goofy plastic-looking stars on it, I shut the movie off, so I don't even know, or want to know, what happened after that.

How I Won the War (1967)

Terrible Part of John Lennon's Legacy

[1/10 · 28 May 2023]

I had this in my Netflix queue for a couple of months, then it was bumped down to my "Saved" section for a few years, then it was removed completely from Netflix. Because I'm a World War II film enthusiast and a John Lennon fan, and because the trailer made it look like it might be mildly entertaining, I decided to just go ahead and purchase it on Amazon, otherwise I'd probably never be able to see it and not be able to review it for my list of over 1200 films about the European Theater in WW2.

It is not funny at all, and despite Lennon's top billing, obviously because he was one of the top ten most famous entertainers in the world at the time, he played a only a minor supporting role (not that he was ever a great actor anyway). It's a poorly written and poorly acted slapstick comedy with over-the-top attempts at juvenile humor that never at any point end up being funny.

I'm sure that the only reason it still exists is because Lennon is in it, but for films in which he is actually funny sometimes, one is much better off sticking to "A Hard Day's Night" and "Help". At least those have great music, if nothing else!

Valley Girl (2020)

Should Have Known Better

[5/10 · 6 May 2023]

I have to start by saying that the original is still one of my all-time favorite films. I was 16 and growing up in Pasadena, California when it was released. I began my 35-year career as a DJ a few months before that. Later, I was an intern at KROQ in 1987 and lived and worked in the San Fernando Valley in my early adulthood. I still have my original VHS copy of it, as well as a DVD, and a vinyl copy of the original soundtrack.

The review of this film by moderniste is spot-on and perfectly correct. This version can't hold a candle to the original in terms of actual Los Angeles early 80s New Wave/Post-Punk culture. The filmmakers tried too hard to reference 80s pop culture and like, totally lost the substance of it, dude, fer sure. Then again, making it into a musical, and a Disney-esque one at that, was clearly poor judgement.

I gave it 5 stars because I like a lot of the music that was used and I'm being forgiving of all of the allowances that the writer(s) thought had to be made for post-Generation X audiences. Making the party that Randy and Julie took off from into a costume party where everyone was dressed as a pop culture icon was an interesting twist, although they obviously felt they had to explain each costume (though to be honest, I would have missed the Dukes of Hazzard reference).

Having KROQ host a prom is something that wouldn't have happened. I was the DJ at many Southland proms in that time period that had Roq Joq come for a couple of hours, but I don't remember Raechel Donahue ever doing an appearance, and Rodney Bingenheimer definitely would not have. It would likely have been Richard Blade, "Swedish" Egil Aalvik, Jim "Poor Man" Trenton, Jed "the Fish" Gould, or possibly Freddy Snakeskin.

Having said all of that, homages rarely stand up to the original, but kudos to the film's producers for paying tribute to a totally trippendicular cult classic, albeit in a 2020 way. As I mentioned, the idea of making it a musical was a misfire, but to fair, if they had tried to re-make the original, it almost certainly would've also fallen flat, especially if they didn't consult with people who were there in those days. It would be pretty much impossible to duplicate the perfection of Deborah Foreman and Nicholas Cage in the original anyway.

Beyond Valkyrie: Dawn of the 4th Reich (2016)

There's Good and Bad

[3/10 · 28 April 2023]

The good thing about this one is that it's only 100 minutes long. The bad thing is, it's 100 minutes that you'll never get back. I suppose there are some redeeming features if you watch as just a mindless action flick, which is why I gave it three stars instead of one. I just get so annoyed with films produced by people who have no clue about how the military operates, much less about how it was in World War II. How hard is it to just find a veteran, not even a military film consultant? In the first 14 minutes and 55 seconds of this film, I had already submitted four factual errors and an anachronistic error. How can you have a US Army captain address a US Army master sergeant as a US Marine Corps master gunnery sergeant? Then, later on, a US Army major general addresses that same master sergeant as a different USMC rank (gunnery sergeant)!

There's also a guy who opens a switchblade with both hands.

Those are just a few examples of the dumb mistakes in this thing.

It just boggles the mind how ridiculously careless filmmakers are these days, and yeah, I get it; they're amateurs, or first time filmmakers, or looking for a tax write-off, or whatever, but do 30 minutes of research or ask a veteran... smh.

Cobra Kai (2018–2025)

Waiting For It to Get Better

[3/10 · 19 April 2023]

This series started silly, but became goofy, then progressed to ridiculous. However, as dumb as it became, I continued watching it once in a while, so I don't know what's dumber, the series or me. I realize it's a kids show, but I was a kid when the first movie came out, which I enjoyed, so I watched the series for nostalgia. Typing this during the last episode of season 5, I can only shake my head. I do have to give the producers credit for finding all of the actors who are still alive and bringing back all of the characters from all of the films. However, having actors/characters in their 70s still doing what they were doing in their 30s is ludicrous. Also, the entire premise of the kids starting Karate and being black belts and competing in tournaments a few weeks later is complete fantasy.

I realize plots have to be dumbed down for 21st century audiences, but bilge like this discredits the films that it's based on and reinforces the reasons that I don't watch regular TV anymore.

I gave it two stars for bringing back the characters from the films, and a third star just for bringing back Elizabeth Shue for an episode.

Ip Man 4: The Finale (2019)

Complete Fantasy

[3/10 · 11 April 2023]

I couldn't finish watching this after about two-thirds of the way in. The whole thing is a complete fantasy. To begin with, it isn't clear if the rebellious teenage son who is portrayed in the film is supposed to be Ip Chun, Ip Ching, or Ip Siu-wah. The time period portrayed is around the time that Bruce Lee was featured at Ed Parker's International Karate Tournament, which was 1964. This would have made Ip Chun about 40 years old, Ip Ching about 28, and Ip Siu-wah maybe 6 or 7. So, who was the rebellious teenager in the film that Ip Man was trying to get into a private high school in the United States?

In addition to that, Ip Man would have been 71 in 1964, and in this film he looks like he's in his late 40s.

I won't even go into all of the things that are wrong with the ridiculous USMC scenes.

INS does not stand for "Immigration and Customs", which doesn't even exist. Additionally, U. S. government agency employees in the 1960s would not be driving cars that were manufactured in the 1940s.

This film is a complete fantasy with a goofy script and bad acting. It has no basis in reality except for the names of Ip Man and Bruce Lee.

Operation Overlord (2021)

I Know It's Going to Be Bad

[1/10 · 6 April 2023]

Even films like these have a bunch of easily entertained individuals who really like them. I knew this one wasn't going to be good when its average was 3.2 when I started watching. One 9-star review, obviously from the production company, and one 7-star review. That's as far down as I went.

Bad set design. Bad costuming. Bad script. There were no SS personnel in Normandy until after the invasion. There were no African American soldiers in Normandy before the invasion. There were no concentration camps (given away by the electrified fence posts and the officer wearing the SS Death's Head Brigade skull and crossbones on his cap) in Normandy. No German officer would have asked a low-ranking enlisted POW how many soldiers were involved in the operation that the Germans didn't know about. Operation Neptune (the invasion of Normandy) and its successor, Operation Overlord were incredibly well-kept secrets, according to EVERY historian. Even if the Germans knew about the invasion, an officer would know that a low-ranking enlisted man wouldn't know how many soldiers are involved in it, and why would that minute detail matter?

Here's the last example of how stupid this film is: About a third of the way in, two American soldiers, wearing weird hybrid uniforms with the armored division patches on their right sleeves instead of their left sleeves (for some reason) capture a German wearing a light blue Luftwaffe dress uniform, but with the SS lightning bolts logo on it. The American with the 1970s mustache and greased-back hairstyle hits the Luftwaffe airman/SS soldier with his rifle butt to knock him out at first, and then hits a couple of times during interrogation, which doesn't knock him out. While questioning him for info, the other American asks him how many Germans are inside the bunker/building. The prisoner says "Three SS soldiers and one lieutenant colonel". The American then asks, "Armed?"

No, you dipstick, they sent these four SS soldiers to Normandy and decided that they didn't need weapons. Really!?

The rest of the film, until I stopped watching it, is just as stupid as that scene.

Pompeii (I) (2014)

Not Pompeii

[5/10 · 4 March 2023]

I saw this film about a month after touring the ruins of Pompeii. Even though it was obvious early on that it was going to be a typical story of an aristocratic woman falling in love with a slave, I hoped that it would show what Pompeii might have been like before and during the eruption of Vesuvius. I was sorely disappointed. I have to wonder if the producers ever even visited Pompeii.

First, it showed the city as being right at the ocean with a defensive semi-circular defensive wall in the water. The shortest distance from the city wall to the ocean is a mile and a quarter, and the Stabian gate, where seafarers entered, is a couple of miles from the harbor. I was still hopeful when it showed the stone traffic control blocks that were put in the streets, but that was the only factual item represented.

The eruption of Vesuvius didn't take anyone by surprise, as was portrayed in the film. In fact, approximately 90% of the city's inhabitants fled before the city was destroyed. There were no huge faults that opened up in the ground. There were no fiery boulders that landed on the city. The arena didn't have any walls collapse. The gladiators didn't live under the arena, because it doesn't have anything under it like the colosseum in Rome, just earth. The gladiators lived two blocks away in the... wait for it... gladiator barracks! Between the arena and the gladiator barracks there's a large training area (larger than the arena floor) where the gladiators and the city militia trained. I won't even comment on the incorrect way that the gladiators were treated.

The last thing that I'll mention is that there was no tidal wave that added damage to the city and caused casualties. In fact, Pliny the Elder sailed to Pompeii from across the bay to help rescue the few people who were left, and was himself buried by the ash and tephra.

The way that Pompeii was destroyed in reality is plenty dramatic without changing it. The film's totally predictable fictional Romeo and Juliet story with the evil senator villain could still have been told within the context of the eruption of Vesuvius. The effects were good, and could have been used factually with just as much effect by a creative director and writers.

Thanks to all of the nonsense, I can't give this one more than five stars. This film could have been so much better.

Breakthrough (1950)

I Hoped It Would Be Good, But...

[5/10 · 26 February 2023]

The star of the film is John Agar, who starred the year before in Sands of Iwo Jima with John Wayne. Agar was also a friend of my grandfather, and in fact, taught me to play poker when I was eight years old. Unfortunately, though Agar was in three films with The Duke, thanks in large part to his 5-year marriage to Shirley Temple ("Who wants to shake the hand of the first man to put it to America's sweetheart?"), he also starred in a lot of B sci-fi movies during the 1950s. He also did another WWII flick called Hell Raiders because he thought it would never be released, and it shouldn't have been, but it was. Although he did guest appearances in many 1960s and 1970s TV series, like Rawhide, Combat!, and Charlie's Angels, I had reservations about this one before I saw it because of Agar's filmography. Turns out that my apprehension was well-founded. It's just not a good film, sadly. John was a genuinely nice guy, did a lot of volunteer work, and loved to entertain people, but never warranted any big film success after he divorced America's sweetheart (who was apparently a serious witch, with a capital "B").

I thought it was cool that one of the characters in the film was from Klamath Falls, a small town in Southern Oregon where my dad was born and raised, and where one of my aunts and some cousins still live. It was that fact, and John Agar, that earned this one an additional star from me. One other thing that I liked about it is that it portrayed the hedgerow fighting in Normandy more extensively than any film that comes to mind. That's important because the hedgerows made breaking out of Normandy into the interior of France extremely difficult for the Allies. Otherwise, it was a pretty typical low-budget war movie with poor acting, lots of dramatics, and technical errors.