BlazeLime Strong and Moving!

Stevecorp Don't listen to the negative reviews

Beystiman It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

Odelecol Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

SimonJack When this movie came out in 1962, I was in training for the U.S. Army. From April 1962 to Oct 1964, I served near Mainz, Germany, with the American airborne portion of the 8th Infantry Division (504, 505 and 509 Airborne units). I first saw this film sometime during 1962. That was during the Cold War – before Vietnam, and right after the Berlin Wall went up. Besides it being a World War II drama film with some action, it made an impression on me at that young age. It was about fighting against an oppressor and aggressor, and a story about a family divided by the war. There I was in Europe, where WWII had concluded just 17 years before. I was serving to defend a divided Germany where it's eastern half and the rest of Eastern Europe were held captive by the Soviet Union. We held maneuvers and trained along the Czech and East German borders. We had exercises with other NATO countries – British, West German and others. We jumped in Germany, Denmark and Turkey. While I was serving my country and a just cause – and was willing to die for both, deep inside I was like most other American patriots of the day. I hoped that I would never have to see battle. I hoped I would never be face- to-face with an enemy soldier when I had to either shoot to kill or be killed. I have since watched "The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse" three or four more times. Each time I saw a little something else in the film. Most obvious, of course, is the tragedy of war and destruction of a family. With this most recent viewing of the film, another aspect emerged. I think it was always there, but now it loomed large. That was that good people cannot run away or isolate themselves from a world war. Or any abomination or injustice of such a nature. By its scope, it involves the whole world. Maybe not in the direct combat, but it affects the whole of humanity.In this film, the family patriarch, Julio Madariaga, had tried to do just that – isolate his family from war. By leaving his native Spain for Argentina three decades or more earlier, he hoped to raise a family that could hide from the evils of war. Indeed, what father would not want his family to be safe and away from war? But, in striving thus, Madariaga secluded his family from the world and what was going on in it. Had he not done so, his daughters, their husbands and children would likely have grown up better informed and more closely aligned as a family. By paying attention to events taking shape in Europe, they would have known more about Adolf Hitler and the Nazi threat to peace. By watching many years ahead of the Third Reich and the war, and discussing and looking closely at the events in Europe, the family would have become more close knit and understanding. By not discussing, arguing and living their South Americanism, the two sons- in-law never overcame the strong attachments to their native countries. And, that unbroken loyalty is what first drives the German Hartrott's to embrace Nazi Germany. Had the old man not died of a heart attack in Argentina early in the film, he surely would have died of a broken heart by film's end at the death of all of his grandchildren. This still is a good anti-war film, but it's more a film about what happens when people try to ignore evil that is taking place all around them. The person of Julio Desnoyers is the link in bringing out the selfishness of avoiding help for one's fellow man. His part is exaggerated as a hedonistic character, which makes the contrast all the more vivid. The fact that he can fall for and aggressively pursue a married woman to lure her away from her husband attests to his lack of unselfish upbringing all along. Each of the characters of this plot have some interesting aspects that stand out. This is a powerful film with strong messages. It has a superb cast of highly acclaimed actors. Charles Boyer as Marcelo Desnoyers, Paul Lukas as Karl von Hartrott, Paul Henreid as Etienne Laurier, Lee J. Cobb as Madariaga, and Glenn Ford as Julio Desnoyers – all were excellent. Another reviewer couldn't see Ford in an Hispanic role. Well his character was part Spanish, part French and whatever else. I think he was spot on. The rest of the cast were equally good. According to some sources, Vincent Minelli had problems directing this film. He wanted it to be set during World War I, as was the original story and the 1921 silent film based on the book. But, I think it fits perfectly with World War II. Most people would strain to get a connection with Boyer's character failing to serve in the French Army in the previous conflict – before WW I. That would have been the Franco-Prussian War of 1870. By changing the setting to WW II, I think Hollywood made the film more familiar. I don't understand why the movie was a box office flop – unless the public couldn't stand the outcome. This film is quite different than the 1921 movie in characters and plot, especially with the love interest of Julio. And that film veered a great deal from the novel of the same title by Vincente Ibanez. This is a thinking person's film. It is an interesting story with strong anti-war sentiments along with powerful subplots and social commentary. It should be in any serious collection of war films.

avgalia Blasco Ibáñez wrote this novel in 1916, and the most amazing thing about the story is the description he makes of the German character which tries to dominate the rest of the world based on their "superiority" over the rest of the races. According to the characters in Blasco Ibáñez story the Germans forced this war because they were sure about their superiority over the rest and they were sure it would be an "easy" win. By changing the setting in the film from World War I to World War II this is missing. The problem with this is that by knowing how the war ended and what happened twenty years later when one reads the book one comes to the conclusion that if the Germans had learnt the lesson the tragedy of World War II could have been avoided. The film misses the irony of that conclusion.

nomoons11 This is a pretty obvious stinker. Not long into this you realize why the stars signed up for this one. They probably got payed well.Where to start. Can you imagine Glenn Ford playing the role of a college age student just flitting about Argentina and Europe during the start of WWII? By this time he was 45 years old. Dying his and darkening his skin a bit couldn't convince me. His acting was so wooden in this I believe I could get more out of staring at a Cigar Store Indian.I won't even get into Ingrid Thulin. Let's just say she musta owed someone to star in this. For me the only actor worth mentioning is Charles Boyer. For the little part he had he did OK. He usually does.For me the whole reason, or most of the reason, for this negative review is the first 15 minutes and the acting by the grandfather character. For around 15 minutes or so we get a speech from this patriarch of the family and when he spewed this drivel out, all I could imagine was if he were wearing a Shakespeare costume and the sets were different, it would just be like a Shakespearean play. This long and winding oratory sounded like it came straight outta Macbeth or Othello or whatever. It had no place in this film. He overacted his small part and I knew then I was in for a dud...and it was.This screenplay was just plain bad. I mean some of the dialog just didn't work. I think what made it worse was the acting. To say it was bad would be an understatement (listen for some really bad audio dubs to...it's a laugh).Simply put, this film was obviously in trouble in pre-production...screenplay wise...so they got a few big stars and tried to make it work...It didn't.

tonstant viewer Apparently the positive comments here are largely by people who've never seen the silent version. Well, the Valentino/Ingram edition shows up on TCM from time to time and there is no comparison.The silent version is poetry, a dream fantasy. This is soap, earthbound, every line of dialog falling to earth with a thud. How come Lana Turner missed this one? The problem is not just that Glenn Ford is too corn-fed. Ingrid Thulin looks trapped and unhappy in every scene, as if she is being hammered from all sides between takes. She and Glenn Ford have zero chemistry, playing whole scenes together without even looking at each other. It's impossible to imagine this as a grand passion on any level.Then we have to believe Yvette Mimieux is a serious political thinker. She scowls, purses her lips and looks like she needs an Alka Seltzer. The older folks do a bit better, but only Charles Boyer and Paul Henried come off well. Paul Lukas looks tired and disoriented, and if you liked Lee J. Cobb as a boozy patriarch in "The Brothers Karamazov," you'll like him here, because it's the same performance.But it's almost sacrilege to use World War II as the background to this decorative exercise. Vicente Minnelli never could direct people, the actors were always on their own, but he'd get great performances out of sets, props, costumes and the color wheel.That's what happens here, with lots of eye candy and some stunningly inept staging. A student riot looks like a dance number minus the jazz, and there's a crucial scene with Paul Lukas trapped behind his desk and Charles Boyer at loose ends in the rest of the room that is as clumsy a piece of film-making as any major director has ever taken responsibility for.The film is too long, too slow, too ham-fisted, too under-energized. And then it runs down. In the last reel, Paul Frees dubs around five different characters and almost gets into an argument with himself. When Armageddon finally arrives, it's a relief.The project was probably doomed from the beginning, but rescue is nowhere in sight, and no one covers himself with glory. Minnelli's characteristic melancholy is contagious, and this viewer regrets a missed opportunity.Find the silent. It's long, but unlike this one, it pays off.