UnowPriceless hyped garbage

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

InformationRap This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

filippaberry84 I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

jr-565-26366 This movie tells the story of the cost of failed foreign policy decisions in countries that were contested during the Cold War. Filmed in 1963, it predicts what eventually happened not only in Southeast Asia, but in Central America and the Middle East. This movie used to be shown to classes at the US Army's JFK Center for Unconventional Warfare as late as the mid-1990s as an example of the country team operating in a country under siege.In 2003, a re-mastered and restored version of this movie opened the movie festival at Port Townsend, WA with both the director and screenwriter in attendance. The director stated that both he and Marlon Brando had considered making a movie about American diplomacy since the mid-1950s but never got any concepts off the ground until the novel was published in 1958. Even then, there were still issues to contend with to include the lack of support from the State Department and the Government of Thailand. It took JFK's personal intervention to get the movie made. JFK allegedly sent a copy of the book to every member of the Senate.This movie portrays the continuing mistake we made, and continue to make, when dealing with insurgencies. During the Cold War we considered any movement against an allied or friendly country as a communist inspired movement rather than a nationalistic one or one motivated by a need for justice. We ended up protecting and supporting unjust and oppressive regimes simply because they were combating a communist movement. The US Ambassador, played by Marlon Brando makes this same mistake. The movie also illustrates accurately how the Communists operated to stir up trouble and strife by creating and celebrating martyrs and casting American good intentions as evil and self-serving. The movie demonstrates how they hijacked and dominated these movements by first offering support, then insidious infiltration of and displacing the genuine nationalist leaders with communist or socialistic ones.Several scenes in this movie are so vivid they are unforgettable. The airport demonstration that turns into a riot is unusually realistic for a movie of this period. I should know; I've seen more than my fair share of riots in Asia and Central America. The attack on the opening ceremony of the Freedom Road is also realistically played out. The eerie silence right after the attack is suddenly interrupted by wailing from the wounded. As the Ambassador's wife tries to tend to one of the casualties, a relief worker walks by and casually tells her, "Don't bother, she's dead." The chaos at the besieged embassy near the end of the movie opens with the face of a bewildered and frightened child as US nationals scramble in the background to leave a country descending into hell.I believe Marlon Brando's performance as the American Ambassador is one his best portrayals. The scene when he realizes that he misjudged the whole situation with his friend Deong is gut wrenching. In the presence of his embassy subordinate and the Sarkhan Prime Minster, not only does he realize that he was wrong, but his diplomatic failure has committed his country to a needless, avoidable war. But Mr. Brando is almost up staged by his Asian co-stars. The articulate Thai actor, Kukrit Pramoj, who plays the Prime Minister of Sarkhan and who later became the real Prime Minister of Thailand after the military junta was tossed out in 1975. The scene where he out maneuvers the American Ambassador and directs his attention to, "the gentleman with the lump on his head" is priceless. And Japanese actor Eiji Okada, who plays the Ambassador's comrade in arms from their OSS days who now leads the revolution against the government the United States is supporting.The movie ends in a scene that captures the typical mood of the American people when it comes to all things dealing with foreign policy. In the decades since the end of World War II, thousands of American diplomats, servicemen and women, aid workers and missionaries have died anonymous deaths trying to bring democracy and a higher standard of living to jerkwater countries around the world. Yet the American people seemed to be indifferent to these sacrifices. Instead, all we seem to care about is the next episode of "American Idol" or the newest hi-tech gadgets or the latest news about the rich and famous. The ending scene of this movie made over 50 years ago is still relevant and true to this day.

Ddey65 (**POSSIBLE SPOILERS**) Movies like this set the political tone for the 1960's, and contrary to the title, it wasn't as anti-American as it looks. While it never denied that the communist bloc were the true imperialists, it never overlooked the fact that some issues are more complicated than whether or not one group or another was pro-communist. Marlon Brando plays Harrison Carter MacWhite, the new U.S. Ambassador to South Sakhalin, who tries to diffuse the growing political tension in the country. And from the beginning, we realize it's going to be one hell of a battle.The following factions must be distinguished here: The United States of America: Determined to stop the communist threat since 1945, and help other nations do so.The Soviet Bloc: Determined to spread communism by any means necessary, just like in real life.The Kingdom of South Sakhalin: A far-eastern monarchy split in half after axis and colonial occupation, by the Soviet Bloc.The People's Republic of North Sakhalin: A creation of the Soviet Union for the sole purpose of expanding communism throughout Sakhalin, just as they've done in real life in Europe(Karelo-Finnish S.S.R., Armenian S.S.R., East Germany, East Austria, Warsaw Pact), Japan(Kurile Islands), Korea(North Korea), Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia(North Vietnam).The people of Sakhalin: Prefers to wish the entire cold war away, despite the fact that their country is already being turned into it's next battleground.For the record, we must keep in mind that when the book this movie was based upon was written the USSR and Red China were still allies, so it's not so far-fetched that they would work together to spread communist terror. Are the rebels lead by Brando's ex-friend really lead by communists? Maybe and maybe not. But regardless, the reds are determined to steal the revolution from the people, just as they've done in real life. Also, contrary to the lies of the far-left today we have NOT "deteriorated into a war-mongering world-wide dictatorship." The moral of the ending is far too obvious -- if we ignore the facts and details of each situation during the cold war, we will lose. And part of the reason we lost in Vietnam, besides the fact that anti-war protesters distorted the truth about why we were there in the first place, was that many refused to take the grievances of those who were dissatisfied with the South Vietnamese government seriously.

raymundjohansen Southeast Asian freedom fighter is duped by communists and American bumbling into misidentifying his and his people's true enemies. Endlessly fascinating how this straightforward and beautifully told story is misinterpreted decade after decade. The film leaves the viewer with feelings of nostalgia for an America that was once confident of its own decency, while at the same time pointing out how that aspect of the American character (meaning our confidence) could lead to dangerous miscalculations. If you want to see a really disturbing segue, watch the last scene back-to-back with Colonel Kurtz's soliloquy on communists cutting off the arms of inoculated children.

Lee Eisenberg "The Ugly American" was released right before the Vietnam War started (depending on which stage of it), and now it seems more relevant than ever. Harrison MacWhite (Marlon Brando) becomes ambassador to the Southeast Asian nation of Sarkhan, which is on the verge of civil war between the Communists and the pro-US government. In Sarkhan, MacWhite begins to suspect that US intervention in this country might be prompting people to rebel. While he refuses to accept it, the situation becomes more and more tense, and MacWhite's officially neutral position becomes less and less sustainable.You can't say for certain what the movie's political message is, but we might take MacWhite's speech at the end as a good reminder. Either way, this is one of the many movies that showed how great an actor Marlon Brando was.