One of the best anti-war movies ever made!
-
gebegb — 19 years ago(August 26, 2006 04:36 PM)
Curious.
It wasn't the
ending
which I found powerful.
I remember the dynamic conflict(s), on a ship, where half the men (the Chinese and the American sailors) didn't get along, but had to.
Holman didn't like the work (or the policy?) of the Chinese staff.
The captain didn't the restrictions placed upon his boat by high command.
The local Chinese didn't like the American military force.
With so many people at odds, the ending is the least-satisfying ending I've ever seen for a film.
We (the audience) don't get to see a real resolution.
I didn't see THE SAND PEBBLES as anti-war.
An argument could be made that THE SAND PEBBLES was anti-imperialist.
Likewise, the film can be interpreted as anti-military.
But anti-war? I don't remember a single scene where WAR was a factor.
It was the military, or the imperialism, or something else, which must have been the point of the movie.
Now I am curious whether the original novel was considered "anti-war."
Might be worth a look. -
hawks-bill — 19 years ago(October 31, 2006 07:52 AM)
" didn't see THE SAND PEBBLES as anti-war.
An argument could be made that THE SAND PEBBLES was anti-imperialist.
Likewise, the film can be interpreted as anti-military.
But anti-war? I don't remember a single scene where WAR was a factor."
Well I know that Fox Home Videos shares your skepticism, because it included with my DVD purchase of The Sand Pebbles a "Support Our Troops" car magnet along with a pamphlet calling my attention to other "great war films" in the Fox Home Video collection.
However, it most assuredly is an antiwar film. More than that, however, it is an anti-colonialist film.
SPOILER
The scene where Holman is cutting the barge rope and kills Cho-jen with the ax is a battle scene of great power and pathos that conveys antiwar sentiment. -
robbyx6-1 — 19 years ago(December 31, 2006 09:32 PM)
I agree with the view that the movie was anti-imperialistic.Just remember the scene in the beginning of the movie when the various politicians were discussing what was best for China. The premise of the movie still applies today. You can't make friends by imposing your will on someone else.
-
Citizenright1 — 19 years ago(February 01, 2007 11:58 PM)
I don't know. Gettysburg was a good anti-war film. Pork Chop Hill was good, infact, any war film that was the least bit accurate was a good anti-war film. The point is that it is good to be anti-warbut that doesnt mean one never fights in a war.
-
hawks-bill — 19 years ago(March 04, 2007 06:24 AM)
In an interview with George Hickenlooper, Robert Wise called The Sand Pebbles "an antimilitary film."
In this interview he also said:
"I thought that this story would give me a chance to remind the American public that the phrase "Yankee Go Home" was not something just born in WWII."
"And I thought it was time that we were reminded that we had strung our flag up around the world a lot. And I thought the whole process was very questionable."
Wise comments on the missionary character's statement about the whole concept of nation and state being obsolete, inviting only blind pride and bloodshed:
"Well, I sort of agree with him. The smaller the world gets, the less need we have for these barriers and different flags. And I think in a small way that's happening in Europe. The barriers are coming down." -
cineastral — 17 years ago(January 10, 2009 09:12 AM)
At the glance, the missionary appeared to be an idealistic idiot, but on second thought, that idealist knew exactly what he got into. He knew that his missionary works required the support of the local Chinese, and by coming in with guns blazing, the San Pablo's action had doomed him and others. He was right. The actions of the captain ultimate were foolhardy, and cost many more American lives.
-
phillipsdan83 — 12 years ago(January 28, 2014 11:12 AM)
Both Jameson and Lt. Collins are blinded by their outlooks. Jameson thinks a scrap of paper will save his life when the bullets start flyinga particularly nave belief in light that he's already under a death sentence for opium being on his property (though he didn't personally make it). Collins in the book buys into a mystical kind of patriotism that was already dangerously out of date by the mid-Twenties, and in the movie doesn't deal well with events when they spiral out of control. The near mutiny earlier in the film is seen by him as a stain on his honor and the ship that can only be expiated by provoking a fight with the Chinese on whatever excuse he can findand that excuse is "rescuing" missionaries who are put at further risk by the rescue attempt. Jameson would have been in danger sooner or later, but Collins guarantees that it will be sooner.
-
AnthonySocksss — 3 years ago(December 05, 2022 06:57 AM)
Fuckin racist… the death knell would be nuclear war which is what imperialist nation states USA and Russia want to bring us closer to. The only viable future of humanity is a world without borders or flags.
Melton1 Wanted for Pedophilia:
https://i.ibb.co/6cnPmJVr/IMG-0830.jpg
https://m.youtube.com/shorts/Zjxk307CND0 -
-
Homang-come-down — 11 years ago(July 06, 2014 11:43 AM)
Has there been a "pro-war" movie? Not sure if I've ever seen one. (Some numbskull is sure to shout "but what about John Wayne war movies?!?" - which, of course, were invariably as "anti-war" as anyone's.)
Yeah, The Green Berets, made just two years after this one, was clearly one of the great antiwar films of all time.
