I normally review films with a positive bent, but make exceptions from time to time. This is one of them. Only a few people have commented on "Cry of Battle," and I wonder if any of them saw the same movie I did. I don't see how it can be considered a war movie at all. There are two short scenes with any shooting between the "good" guys and the Japanese. There isn't much intensity about evading capture. And the one supposed mission to knock out a Japanese warehouse never comes to pass on film. So, most of this film is about crime. Van Heflin, one of the stars, is a rapist, a racist and a murderer. Most of the "good" guys that he and James MacArthur tag along with are bandits taking advantage of the war. They rob, pillage and kill their own people.
Some may argue that this shows a part of reality that is seldom shown about war, especially in the Philippines. Was there really such a situation with all bad eggs doing no good? There have been a number of good films made about resistance fighting in the Philippines during WWII. They show the struggles, the persecution of the Filipinos by the Japanese, and the heroic efforts of the people. This film shows none of that, and only alludes to one true resistance group fighting the enemy.
The plot is weak to start with, and the characters and acting for the most part are all quite bad. MacArthur is fighting mad about Van Heflin's rape of a young Filipina. In the next scene he's almost forgotten about it. Van Heflin spends much of his time getting drunk on the local coconut liquor. In the movies based on true stories about the Philippines, the few Americans and the Filipinos themselves were rightly scared, wary of the Japanese and too alert to go on frequent drunks. And, just think of all those other war movies we have seen that show Americans getting drunk while trying to elude the enemy and save their lives. Is it any wonder why there aren't any? The only way I can see that this film relates to a war movie is that it bombs out. Or, maybe the filmmakers just wanted to make a movie about ugly and dumb Americans.
Some may argue that this shows a part of reality that is seldom shown about war, especially in the Philippines. Was there really such a situation with all bad eggs doing no good? There have been a number of good films made about resistance fighting in the Philippines during WWII. They show the struggles, the persecution of the Filipinos by the Japanese, and the heroic efforts of the people. This film shows none of that, and only alludes to one true resistance group fighting the enemy.
The plot is weak to start with, and the characters and acting for the most part are all quite bad. MacArthur is fighting mad about Van Heflin's rape of a young Filipina. In the next scene he's almost forgotten about it. Van Heflin spends much of his time getting drunk on the local coconut liquor. In the movies based on true stories about the Philippines, the few Americans and the Filipinos themselves were rightly scared, wary of the Japanese and too alert to go on frequent drunks. And, just think of all those other war movies we have seen that show Americans getting drunk while trying to elude the enemy and save their lives. Is it any wonder why there aren't any? The only way I can see that this film relates to a war movie is that it bombs out. Or, maybe the filmmakers just wanted to make a movie about ugly and dumb Americans.