The saga of a battalion of U.S. Marines during the Korean War, starting with their training, landing at Inchon in 1950, advance into North Korea and their subsequent retreat back to the 38th... Read allThe saga of a battalion of U.S. Marines during the Korean War, starting with their training, landing at Inchon in 1950, advance into North Korea and their subsequent retreat back to the 38th parallel.The saga of a battalion of U.S. Marines during the Korean War, starting with their training, landing at Inchon in 1950, advance into North Korea and their subsequent retreat back to the 38th parallel.
Russ Tamblyn
- Jimmy W. McDermid
- (as Rusty Tamblyn)
Nedrick Young
- Sgt. Novak
- (as Ned Young)
Morton C. Thompson
- Capt. Kyser
- (as Mort Thompson)
John Bradford
- Radio Operator
- (uncredited)
William Cabanne
- Boxum
- (uncredited)
Sue Fawn Chung
- Child
- (uncredited)
Jack Daley
- Doctor
- (uncredited)
Fred Datig Jr.
- Marine
- (uncredited)
Featured reviews
The movie traces Marine combat battalion from training base in California to South Korea's Inchon landing to North Korea's Chosin Reservoir and retreat from there to the coast for naval rescue.
Several notable features are in this otherwise fairly routine war film. First, it's surprisingly de-politicized for its sensitive time period. The movie was produced in 1952, at a time when the war in Korea had stalemated and anti-communist fervor (Senator McCarthy) was at a fever pitch stateside. One would expect a lot of talk about red aggression and Chinese hordes. However, there's hardly any explanation in the narrative about where the war is or why it's occurring! Instead, the screenplay focuses almost exclusively on Marine Corps professionalism from officers to NCO's to recruits.
Looks to me like the movie's purpose is to restore the Marines' popular image following the Chosin debacle, without getting involved in messy politics. After all, Marine combat in WWII had been one of steady advance across the Pacific; at the same time, footage of retreat in Korea shook American confidence in that murky war.
Another notable feature is the low-budget film's effort at recreating the horrendous winter weather that plagued the retreat. I recall newsreels of the time of the steep mountains and freezing snow being almost as scary as the combat itself. I doubt the retreat over those mountain passes would have succeeded without the continuous air support.
Notable too is the general absence of sometimes silly small talk that characterizes so many WWII combat films. That's understandable since the war in Korea was never popular and little understood at home, especially after the massive Chinese intervention. On the other hand, there's the kind camaraderie and bonding among the troops that could be expected, but none of the light-hearted victory-is-certain banter of 10-years earlier.
As other reviewers note, the combat itself is mostly a series of clichés. However, the acting is good and Tamblyn is perfect for his idealized all-American-boy role. But the movie itself is now largely a curiosity dramatizing as it does one of America's few military retreats.
(In passing—in my little book, the war was characterized by two massive blunders—first, North Korea's reckless belief that the US would tolerate a unified communist Korea only a few hundred miles from post-war Japan; and second, Gen. MacArthur's over-confident belief that China would somehow allow an American army on China's border {the Yalu river}. The result of these blunders was 3-years of war, thousands of dead, and most ironically, a return afterward to the same divided country {38th Parallel} as before the devastation!)
Several notable features are in this otherwise fairly routine war film. First, it's surprisingly de-politicized for its sensitive time period. The movie was produced in 1952, at a time when the war in Korea had stalemated and anti-communist fervor (Senator McCarthy) was at a fever pitch stateside. One would expect a lot of talk about red aggression and Chinese hordes. However, there's hardly any explanation in the narrative about where the war is or why it's occurring! Instead, the screenplay focuses almost exclusively on Marine Corps professionalism from officers to NCO's to recruits.
Looks to me like the movie's purpose is to restore the Marines' popular image following the Chosin debacle, without getting involved in messy politics. After all, Marine combat in WWII had been one of steady advance across the Pacific; at the same time, footage of retreat in Korea shook American confidence in that murky war.
Another notable feature is the low-budget film's effort at recreating the horrendous winter weather that plagued the retreat. I recall newsreels of the time of the steep mountains and freezing snow being almost as scary as the combat itself. I doubt the retreat over those mountain passes would have succeeded without the continuous air support.
Notable too is the general absence of sometimes silly small talk that characterizes so many WWII combat films. That's understandable since the war in Korea was never popular and little understood at home, especially after the massive Chinese intervention. On the other hand, there's the kind camaraderie and bonding among the troops that could be expected, but none of the light-hearted victory-is-certain banter of 10-years earlier.
As other reviewers note, the combat itself is mostly a series of clichés. However, the acting is good and Tamblyn is perfect for his idealized all-American-boy role. But the movie itself is now largely a curiosity dramatizing as it does one of America's few military retreats.
(In passing—in my little book, the war was characterized by two massive blunders—first, North Korea's reckless belief that the US would tolerate a unified communist Korea only a few hundred miles from post-war Japan; and second, Gen. MacArthur's over-confident belief that China would somehow allow an American army on China's border {the Yalu river}. The result of these blunders was 3-years of war, thousands of dead, and most ironically, a return afterward to the same divided country {38th Parallel} as before the devastation!)
Now, don't get me wrong, `Retreat Hell' is an action-packed film, full of tension and combat, with the expected heroism and violence.
It's just that it has a...sensitive side. It somehow seems out of place for its time, more suited for the 70's than the '50s.
Richard Carlson is an unlikely hero for a war picture, particularly one from the hard-edged, patriotic 1950's. He's such a sensitive, nice fellow, and, to those of us accustomed to seeing him portray science-nerds (as in `Creature from the Black Lagoon' and `It Came from Outer Space') he may seem a tad intellectual for a leader of a Marine company. Even more unlikely is baby-faced Russ Tamblyn (who was still billing himself as `Rusty' at the time) as a rough-necked Marine Corps grunt. But that's the kind of picture this was: a war movie that dealt with the human face of war, even to the point of making `our boys' seem downright sentimental, but without being even remotely a vehicle for pacifist sentiments. It's an unusual, even eccentric approach, and at times it doesn't work, while at others it surprises with effectiveness.
There aren't very many war movies about Korea, today called `the forgotten war' in America. The most well-known one, `MASH,' was an unabashed allegory for Vietnam, and one quickly loses sight of the distinctions. `Retreat Hell' is much more specific, and accurate, in its portrayal of a war most Americans don't really know what to make of. It was the war we didn't quite lose, but certainly didn't win, and for the post-WWII generation, that was a perplexing legacy. Many of the more extreme patriots of the day chose to rationalize it by asserting we had been railroaded into the war by the UN, possibly as part of a Communist conspiracy. `Retreat Hell' avoids political uncertainties by focusing on the lives of brave but sympathetic soldiers, who did their duty as the American leadership saw fit to define it.
The title, which sounds like a statement of defiance (`like Hell we'll retreat') is actually a somber quotation from General MacArthur. At the time the forces in Korea had overextended themselves, and become surrounded on all sides. The order was given to break through the enemy lines to the sea. When asked about the retreat in Korea, the general replied `Retreat Hell, we're advancing in the other direction.' A retreat normally means falling back through your own lines to reach a stronger position, but this was an advance, through enemy lines, to a position that would allow a retreat.
Unlike many WWII pictures that were being made at the time, actual Asian actors were used to portray Asians, and not all of them were evil. The filmmakers evidently thought enough of their audience to remind them that the war was being fought for our Asian allies, not as a racist war against a generic enemy. In light of recent political developments, it is interesting to note that the British also make an appearance on our side. The Communist soldiers are portrayed as devious and callous, but not beyond the realities of the war (obviously Bad Things committed by our side are not shown) - they are not inhuman, merely the enemy.
This movie gives us both action and drama, and probably was a precursor to `Saving Private Ryan' in more ways than one.
It's just that it has a...sensitive side. It somehow seems out of place for its time, more suited for the 70's than the '50s.
Richard Carlson is an unlikely hero for a war picture, particularly one from the hard-edged, patriotic 1950's. He's such a sensitive, nice fellow, and, to those of us accustomed to seeing him portray science-nerds (as in `Creature from the Black Lagoon' and `It Came from Outer Space') he may seem a tad intellectual for a leader of a Marine company. Even more unlikely is baby-faced Russ Tamblyn (who was still billing himself as `Rusty' at the time) as a rough-necked Marine Corps grunt. But that's the kind of picture this was: a war movie that dealt with the human face of war, even to the point of making `our boys' seem downright sentimental, but without being even remotely a vehicle for pacifist sentiments. It's an unusual, even eccentric approach, and at times it doesn't work, while at others it surprises with effectiveness.
There aren't very many war movies about Korea, today called `the forgotten war' in America. The most well-known one, `MASH,' was an unabashed allegory for Vietnam, and one quickly loses sight of the distinctions. `Retreat Hell' is much more specific, and accurate, in its portrayal of a war most Americans don't really know what to make of. It was the war we didn't quite lose, but certainly didn't win, and for the post-WWII generation, that was a perplexing legacy. Many of the more extreme patriots of the day chose to rationalize it by asserting we had been railroaded into the war by the UN, possibly as part of a Communist conspiracy. `Retreat Hell' avoids political uncertainties by focusing on the lives of brave but sympathetic soldiers, who did their duty as the American leadership saw fit to define it.
The title, which sounds like a statement of defiance (`like Hell we'll retreat') is actually a somber quotation from General MacArthur. At the time the forces in Korea had overextended themselves, and become surrounded on all sides. The order was given to break through the enemy lines to the sea. When asked about the retreat in Korea, the general replied `Retreat Hell, we're advancing in the other direction.' A retreat normally means falling back through your own lines to reach a stronger position, but this was an advance, through enemy lines, to a position that would allow a retreat.
Unlike many WWII pictures that were being made at the time, actual Asian actors were used to portray Asians, and not all of them were evil. The filmmakers evidently thought enough of their audience to remind them that the war was being fought for our Asian allies, not as a racist war against a generic enemy. In light of recent political developments, it is interesting to note that the British also make an appearance on our side. The Communist soldiers are portrayed as devious and callous, but not beyond the realities of the war (obviously Bad Things committed by our side are not shown) - they are not inhuman, merely the enemy.
This movie gives us both action and drama, and probably was a precursor to `Saving Private Ryan' in more ways than one.
Much of the footage of the fighting in and around Seoul and near the Chosin Reservoir came from actual Marine Corps combat photographers (this was l-o-n-g before embedded reporters!). The "sensitive, caring" company commander (Richard Carlson) was a Marine reservist and veteran of WW II who was called back for Korea -- and carried some resentment of the recall with him. The comment "Retreat, hell, we're just attacking in another direction" has been variously attributed to 1st Marine Division Commander Major General Oliver P. Smith or to regimental commander Colonel (later LtGen) Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller. Douglas MacArthur spent most of his involvement in the Korean War in his Far East headquarters in Japan. The battalion executive officer in the movie, "Major Knox," was played by Peter Ortiz (a Ford favorite who appeared in What Price Glory and Rio Grande, both times wearing an eye patch), who was a real-life WW II Marine hero with the O.S.S. in France.
The local Fox channel in Los Angeles must have harbored a cell of fans of Retreat, Hell!, because it seemed as if they showed this film at least once a month in the hours between 2 and 5 a.m. I was hooked after one viewing, although I know I came in somewhere in the middle; it was some time before my erratic sleep patterns fell into synch with the program schedule. I can't recommend it too highly--it is a tribute to all cliches of all war movies to that date, without the distraction created by interesting characters, plot or technical skill. Watch it again and again and you'll understand.
This is a war movie which focuses more on the feelings, emotions and insecurities of the platoon as well as providing a shed load of action & explosions. For this to work, you have to care about the characters. The hard edged Colonel is well portrayed and you can see the humanity leaking out of him as the pressure intensifies. The Captain who is centre of attention early n, fades into the background somewhat. The real star is young, fresh faced McDermid. You feel as if you are with him every step of his journey, you feel his nerves, pain & bravery. Although in black and white, you can almost see the red mist descend in one poignant scene. There are loads of explosions and plenty of action for the late night viewer but this is a war film with a deeper than average plot line.
Did you know
- TriviaWhen asked if they were retreating, Frank Lovejoy's character, Lt. Col Steve Corbett, says, "Retreat, hell! We're not retreating, we're just advancing in a different direction." This was actually said by Maj. Gen. O.P. Smith, who was Commanding General of the 1st Marine Division at the Battle of Chosin Reservoir.
- GoofsAfter Captain Hansen interviews Private McDermid at Camp Pendleton, he tells him to put his cap on. Marines do not use the term 'cap'. The correct term is 'cover'.
- Quotes
Lt. Col. Steve L. Corbett: Retreat hell! We're not retreating, we're just advancing in a different direction.
Details
- Runtime
- 1h 35m(95 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.37 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content