M*A*S*H

This is truly the best military comedy ever made. It is funny, yet it realistically depicts the savagery of war and the non-chalance it gradually inspires in its victims. For example, some of the funniest, yet also most disturbing, moments in the film come when the doctors are operating on wounded soldiers, complete with gruesome sound effects, yet are discussing extremely trivial matters.

The film also benefits from some great performances. Donald Sutherland and Elliot Gould were excellent as Hawkeye and Trapper John. They both had a streak of good movies during the 70s. Robert Duvall is amusing as a pious major whose fanaticism drives our heroes to extreme measures. Sally Kellerman and Tom Skerrit also put in good performances in their roles; it is a pity that these two actors are not better utilized nowadays.

M*A*S*H is a groundbreaking film. Along with Catch 22, M*A*S*H had the audacity to ridicule two of the pillars of American society: war and religion. Whether you find this appalling, subversive, treasonous, outrageous or funny depends on your political and religious orientation. Surely the religious right will find the film blasphemous and the political right will find it treasonous. No matter what your point of view, M*A*S*H is certainly an in-your-face film.

The irony of the film is that for the time it was considered gruesomely bloody. Yet there are no battlefield scenes; all the blood is in the surgical unit. The CSI TV series shows more carnage than M*A*S*H, but M*A*S*H was filmed over 30 years ago.

M*A*S*H is loaded with bizarro characters. Donald Sutherland, Elliot Gould, Robert Duvall, Tom Skerrit, Loretta Swit, Radar are all insane in their own way. In "M*A*S*H," everyone is cruel, playing mean practical jokes and the anti-heroes Donald Sutherland and Elliott Gould are just plain heartless. They absolutely torment Major "Hot Lips" Hoolihan and Robert Duvall. None of the characters in the film tries to be funny. There are no jokes. The humor just grows from the situation which is the grim reality of a mobile surgical unit whose doctors and nurses try their best to repair the horribly mutilated bodies from an insane war. Having worked in a hospital setting, outrageous and black humor is commonplace, especially in the ER, but in M*A*S*H it's taken to a new level.

The only issue I can see with what's an amazing movie, is that we watching it now are aware of the TV series. That wasn't the case when the movie was released in 1970...two years before MASH the TV show.

The two have a few things in common; Korea, some of the characters names, the theme song, and Gary Burghoff as Radar.

The movie, it isn't anti-war, a reaction to the Vietnam War. Based on the novel written by Richard Hooker, it's a dark look on life inside a Mobile Army Surgical Hospital during that war, and how those drafted into that war dealt with the horrors of trying to piece together broken and torn bodies under those conditions.

I had watched it years ago, and I read the book before then, and yes a fan of the program. And I'm still a fan of the movie. Donald Sutherland as Hawkeye, Elliot Gould as Trapper John.were a perfect paring, and the rest of the casting was inspired, and the story moves along with out any lags, and ends much like it ends (no spoilers.) I judge movies by whether I'd see myself watching it yet again. That's the case with MASH and a visit to the 4077.

And then there was Korea. In an understaffed and overstretched medical camp Lt Col Blake puts an order in for more surgeons. Dispatched to him in a stolen army jeep are Captain's Hawkeye Pierce and Duke Forrest who immediately start chasing the nursing staff and annoying their tent mate Major Burns. When chest cutter Trapper John McIntyre joins them in the camp it starts a working practice that ignores authority and tries to find as much fun as possible in the middle of their bloody war.

I had watched the TV show for a long time before I finally got to watch the movie - I prefer the cynical comedy of the film although I have always loved the more sitcom style approach of the series. Many critics have hailed this as an anti-war film that exposes the brutal effects of war; to some extent I suppose that is true but it is far from being a part of the main narrative - even to call it a theme would be generous! It does have some scenes of blood and gore but it is far from having anything substantial to say about the cruelty of war.

Instead I always find this film to be a very episodic, freewheeling comedy, some bits of which work and some others don't. On the whole it is pretty funny and uses the sort of sporadic dialogue and action to move it forward. At times it is based on imaginative banter between Trapper and Hawkeye and at others it is out and out slapstick such as the chaotic game of American football at the end of the film. The downside of this is that sections of it just don't work - Painless Paul's dilemma is pretty uninspiring at least - however, on the whole it is energetic and very funny. Altman's use of overlapping dialogue and his usual use of overlapping scenes as opposed to a traditional narrative flow is good here but it would have been better if it had been toned down somewhat.

The cast is what really carries the film - the plot is weak and they have no characters other than what they create themselves and, although the dialogue is good, I couldn't help the feeling that the cast did as much as the writers. As such the lead two of Sutherland and Gould stand out as great comedians with great witty touches, their characters are the largest and their lines are the funniest. Skerritt starts out as equal to them but quickly becomes a third wheel despite still giving a good performance. The support cast are all a good mix of characters whether they be played by actors such as Duvall and Kellerman or less well known faces such as Burghoff or Bowen.

Overall, I am still unable to see what those who call this a `brutal anti-war film' see but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy it as a comedy. As such though, it is very episodic and really lacks a solid narrative flow meaning that any 10 minute period could be good or bad. Aside from this lack of substance it is a funny, enjoyable comedy but it doesn't deserve the classic reputation that it has obtained.

I too, like another reviewer, had seen this pic only after being accustomed to the TV series. The TV show's characters had a warmth and comradeship, especially in the later seasons. Hawkeye, Trapper or BJ might have teased Frank, Hot Lips or Winchester, but always with a twinkle in their eye. In the movie however, despite Trapper avenging Frank's blaming an intern for a soldiers death and Hawkeye's helping Painless's "problem", I found the movie's characters extremely self-centered, hard-nosed, mean-spirited and hubristic. Hawkeye and Trapper just walk over anyone and everybody to have their way. I guess they feel they are such good surgeons that they don't have to obey any Army regulations. In the REAL army of that period, their shenanigans would have them in court-martial in less time than you could say "I like Ike." Everyone excepting Radar, Father Mulchay and Spearchucker comes across as stuck-up morons. The movie and TV show seem to be completely about something different. I sympathize with the Tokyo jeep driver's sentiment "Goddam Army!"