Cry 'Havoc'

The service of more than 100 nurses in the Philippines in World War II is one of the great stories of heroism in war. And the capture of 79 of those mostly Army and Navy nurses is the largest single military imprisonment of women in history. The other 23 were evacuated just a few days before the fall of Corregidor when the Americans surrendered to the Japanese on May 8, 1942.

Two movies were made, and two books have been written about this group, referred to as the "Angels of Bataan." There are significant differences between the films, and the books. An Army nurse, Lt. Juanita Redmond, who was among the evacuees from Corregidor, wrote the first book, "I Served on Bataan." It covered the five months from the Japanese attack of the Philippines on Dec.8, 1941, to the fall of Corregidor. It was published in 1943 and was the basis for the Paramount movie, "So Proudly We Hail," that came out on Sept. 9, 1943. The book and movie were about the ordeal of the nurses over those five months, first on Bataan and then on Corregidor. Although no nurses were killed, some were wounded as the Japanese continually shelled and bombed the Allied defenses.

The second book is more recent. "We Band of Angels," came out in 1999. It was written by Elizabeth Norman, an associate professor of nursing at New York University. Norman did extensive research and travel, and interviewed the remaining survivors in the 1990s. Her book includes the months the nurses tended the wounded on Bataan and Corregidor. It covers the evacuation of nearly a quarter of the nurses by a flying boat and submarine before Corregidor fell. Then it goes into the details of the nearly three years of imprisonment. It ends with the liberation of the women in February, 1945, their return home, and the later years of the remaining survivors.

Another Army nurse, Lt. Eunice Hatchitt, had been tabbed by the military to be an adviser for the Paramount movie. She wanted to dissociate from the film because she didn't like some of the Hollywood touches to the story, especially two romances. So, her name doesn't appear in the film credits. Even with the Hollywood touches, "So Proudly We Hail" is an outstanding movie, in all respects. The recreation of the Malinta Tunnel on Corregidor was most impressive and gave a very real feel to the film. The story is told and seen in a nearly continuous flashback from several of the nurse evacuees on board a ship as they are returning to the States.

"Cry Havoc," is another film altogether. MGM came out with it in February 1944 – five months after "So Proudly We Hail." It was based on a play that ran for just 11 performances over Christmas of 1942. Since Redmond's book was not yet written or published, the play author, Allen Kenwood, probably based his script on news reports and interviews of the evacuees that appeared in the press earlier that year. And MGM apparently didn't want to copy the first movie, so it kept to the fictional script of the play.

In this film, most of the women are not nurses but are civilians who answered a call for volunteers to help the nurses on Bataan. Only a couple of the women are military nurses. They are in charge. Some scenes are outside, and among hospital wards in tents. But much of the action takes place inside a large earthen bunker that served as quarters for the women. The cast, acting and script for this film were quite good. It does have a couple of incidents that are too much of a stretch. And, this film ends with the women being captured in the fall of Bataan.

I agree with other viewers who have compared the two films. "So Proudly We Hail" is the far superior film. But "Cry Havoc" also is a good telling and showing of the peril, ordeal and heroism of women serving in time of war.

"We Band of Angels" is still available from book stores. Noted historian Stephen E. Ambrose, author of "Band of Brothers" and other books, had high praise for it. "This is a gripping book. Elizabeth Norman presents a war story in which the main characters never kill one of the enemy, or even shoot at him, but are nevertheless heroes…They were the bravest of the brave, who endured unspeakable pain and torture. Americans today should thank God we had such women."

The title for this film may have come from William Shakespeare. In his 1599 play, "Julius Caesar," the term appears in a line in Act III, Scene 1. Bereaving the murder of Caesar, Antony says, "Cry 'Havoc!' and let slip the dogs of war."

WWII curiosity with -an all female cast, while those men who do briefly appear are wounded servicemen dependent on the women. The girls are nurses in a field hospital in the Phillipines just as the islands are falling to the Japanese. They're volunteers recruited at the last minute as the bombs are falling. So we wonder how well these comely civilians in their mascara and lipstick will perform under extreme battlefield conditions.

Good cast. But somehow the movie doesn't live up to the material's potential. As I see it, the problem lies with director Thorpe who films the dramatics from an impersonal distance as if it were still the stage play from which the movie was adapted. With the basically single set where the girls live, there's not much room to move about. So when the bombs fall or one of the girls freaks out, close-ups of personal reactions are needed, not a continuing group scene that disperses the emotion. There's a ton of dramatic material to engage with here, but too much is allowed to impersonally slip by.

Nonetheless, it is an entertaining cast, especially the two dames, Blondell and Sothern. They're natural rivals with their sassy wisecracking that keep the audience amused amid the grimness. Sullavan with her husky voice and domineering demeanor makes an unusual screen presence, as does the rail-thin, sharply intelligent Marsha Hunt. I just wish the Japanese planes had let Blondell finish her mock striptease.

The play was put together in 1942, the war's darkest period. This 1943 movie reflects many of these somber prospects, and is thus of some historical interest. Clearly, the purpose is to show that the girls can rise to wartime challenge as well as the boys, and by focusing on the women, we know the spirit comes from them and not from some male overseer. This is one of the few WWII films that really had me guessing about the ending. As it turns out, I failed. Nonetheless, there's enough suspense and good acting to make up for the parts that now (perhaps thankfully) seem dated and distant.

Assorted characters trapped in a perilous situation, each with his or her own motivations, backstory, hopes and fears, the sort of story ("The Flight of the Phoenix," for instance) that I find irresistible. Thirteen characters, all women - men are entirely peripheral, practically stage props - find themselves trapped in a perilous situation. For that, any danger could do. Here the peril is war. Will they survive? Will they escape? We know (dramatic irony) that even if they survive they will not escape. Very little action occurs. It is not required. We understand the situation. No need to show it dramatically. The story, originally a stage play, is character driven. The situation encompasses everything. How will the women react, each according to her own character, its weaknesses and strengths? That is the strength of "Cry Havoc." That is what makes it compelling. If you prefer a war movie with non-stop action, or a wartime love story, switch to another channel.

It is a women's picture in the true sense, akin to "The Women," "Stage Door," "Tender Comrade," "Caged." Men make fleeting appearances. There is no love story. True, the unseen Lt. Holt is a presence. But he is not a focus. He serves merely to create dramatic tension, to illuminate the characters of two women, Smitty (Margaret Sullavan) and Pat (Ann Southern), whose mismatched personalities clash. The women reveal themselves as they confront the enveloping menace. Andra (Heather Angel) displays courage, Connie (Ella Raines) fear, Sue (Dorothy Morris) intensity, Flo (Marsha Hunt) serenity, Nydia (Diana Lewis) insouciance. The desperate Smitty alone and the commander Capt. Marsh (Fay Bainter), resigned to her fate, realize what is to come. Luisita, the only Philipina in the group (dancer and actress Fely Franquelli) also seems to know. Surrender approaches. Only she hides her face in despair.

We know more now than the screenwriters knew then. We know what awaits: the death march, mistreatment, possibly rape, evidence that only became apparent at the war's end. The Japanese, perhaps for that reason, but surprisingly for a war movie in wartime, are not completely demonized. They are hardly virtuous. They bomb hospitals. They strafe unoffending people bathing in a stream. Still, I have seen far worse denigration in other films. At the end a voice calls out in accented English for the women to surrender. It is not a caricatural voice, not lewd or sinister. The enemy, like the wounded soldiers and Lt. Holt, are a backdrop. The psychological focus remains on the protagonists, their characters, their response to a perilous situation.

"Cry Havoc" was not alone in 1943. Hollywood's other nurses-on-Bataan movie, "So Proudly We Hailed," came out in the same year. It cannot match "Cry Havoc." "So Proudly's" long, rambling tale, told through a flashback with a clinical, newsreel-like voiceover narration, is principally propaganda (the title gives it away) sweetened with a love story. The enemy are emphatically demonized. Men, and how to attract them, are the nurses' constant preoccupation. The story sends its heroine (Claudette Colbert) on an unblushingly sappy, soap-operatic journey. Husband is reported killed. Claudette succumbs to a morbid catatonic depression. She stares unblinking, for weeks. (It's not even clear when or how she enables herself to eat.) She wills herself to die. Of course, husband pops up alive and well, well enough to write her an interminable cloying letter, which we endure until the music mercifully swells to conclude proceedings. Nurse Olivia (Veronica Lake) hates the enemy with such implacable vehemence (her husband had the misfortune to be at Pearl Harbor) that she blows herself up to kill them, hand grenade tucked into her pocket. One film develops character, the other caricature. One, like Hitchcock's "Lifeboat" (Heather Angel was also briefly a passenger on that raft), transcends a war movie. The other remains a wartime curiosity.

Today this film is viewed as lackluster and stagey, but at the time it was released it told a powerful story that needed to be told. MGM always made good use of it's stable of fine supporting players, and this film did a remarkable job. Marsha Hunt, Frances Gifford, Diana Lewis, etc. all got a chance to emote along with the biggies ... Margaret Sullavan, Fay Bainter, Ann Sothern, etc. Other films that should be viewed in the same era include Bataan, So Proudly They Hail, Purple Heart, Wake Island, etc.

The context of this film is certainly interesting, even for a WWII film. In April, 1942, a very large American force surrendered to the Japanese at the end of the Battle of Bataan in the Philippines, thus precipitating the Bataan Death March, a Japanese war crime. The play that formed the basis for this film was written in September, 1942, and it tells the story from another angle, that of a group of American nurses in the area. However, the Death March had not been disclosed to the American public until January, 1944, after this movie was made and released, and as such, it focuses just on the doomed, lost cause that resulted in a massive surrender. Had the film been made after January 1944, it's a safe bet that the Japanese would have been depicted very differently at the end, given the rage in America over hearing about the atrocities.

The film is dominated by a practically all-female cast, but if you're looking for something that is authentically from a woman's perspective and by today's standards, this ain't it. There's a lot of pithy comments about interactions with soldiers, a silly love triangle with an unseen male officer at the center of the film, and subplots like the finding of a piece of soap leading to bathing and frolicking in a lake. I chalk all this up to trying to lighten a pretty dark story, which was a big American loss, and presumably in there to boost the morale of those watching it.

On the other hand, it's more than a little sobering for me to see a generation looking at itself and saying this is what we're going through, a life and death struggle with nations that are truly acting as evil agents in the world, and we must keep up our spirits. Joan Blondell is great in scenes with wounded or dying soldiers, and it's touching when the nurses categorize a bunch of belongings from the dead, tossing bag after bag of them into a pile. There is a sense of being trapped and doomed, with a lack of medicine and supply shipments bombed. One of them articulates the magnitude of the war, and another provides a good description of the island's strategic importance, making the case that the stand the Allied forces made was important to slow down the Japanese spread across the Pacific. I liked the topical little touches, such as the whistling and humming of the song 'Blues in the Night,' and the snappy dialogue from Ann Sothern, who turns in a strong performance. It's not a great film or even a very good film, but for another window into the period, the setting, and Blondell and Sothern, I found it enjoyable.

Favorite quote: What did you do in burlesque? Um. You know what you do to a banana before you eat it? Well, uh, I do it to music.