By This is not your typical war movie. There isn’t much fighting action in it, and it’s a 1951 black&white, artsy film.
It is also the first Korean War movie made – which makes it worth 
watching just for that…
I don’t like telling too much about plot, because I don’t like knowing much about a film before I see it, so I’m not going to get into this one too deeply.
I can picture a percentage of Koreans not carrying for one of the first scenes that show civilian-clad North Koreans – or South Korean sympathizers – trying to ambush the GIs. Some younger Koreans would also say the opening scene with American soldiers shot in the back of the head with their hands tied is US propaganda.
Over the course of the movie, you hit quiet a few socio-political notes. Some interesting, some forced.
Occasionally the acting is too melodramatic.
I’d still recommend it — but my tastes are pretty broad and my friends and family have often not cared a whole lot for things I found value in….so….be warned.
I – myself – wouldn’t pay $5.99 for it in some Walmart impulse-buy bin near the checkout lane, but it is definitely worth a Netflix rental….
Maybe if any of you have seen it, you can leave a comment giving it a thumbs up or down?
Those of you who have been in combat might get more out of it than I did as well – because a good bit of the character-study it does is about men in a group in a desperate war….
6:06 pm on September 28th, 2008 1
This is one of the best US-produced Korean War movies ever made, hands down. I'm not sure if I'd call it artsy, though. Fuller was a so-called "modern primitive" more famous as a pulp director (his roots were in the newspaper business).
I'd also recommend the other Korean War movie he made: Fixed Bayonets (1951). It's notable for being the first feature film that James Dean appeared in. It's also set in the wintertime, so you get a nice seasonal contrast to Steel Helmet.
4:46 am on September 29th, 2008 2
The problem is that there were only a handful of US-produced Korean War movies ever made.
I'm reading a book Red Star Over Hollywood about the communist infiltration, and I'm wondering if this is not why so few Korean War films came out. Probably, though I haven't considered it before. The Korean War was part of the immediate Cold War and it along with the rise of the Iron Curtain basically killed the progressive/communist movement in the US (until the 1960s). I wonder how much we can thank the "Forgotten War" nature of the Korean War on the American intelligensia's fawning for communism/socialism and the Soviet Union???
11:39 am on September 29th, 2008 3
USinKorea, there are at least a hundred Hollywood movies about the Korean War. Some of the classics are Pork Chop Hill, The Manchurian Candidate, M*A*S*H, Men in War and The Bridges at Toko-ri. Ronald Reagan even starred in a Korean War movie called Prisoner of War.
Quite a lot of other Hollywood films feature characters who were Korean War veterans. I'm not sure if it's a simple matter of pinko Hollywood's biased sympathies. Indeed, a film like The Manchurian Candidate rose above the Cold War dialectic and offered a transcendent critique of both sides, which is one good reason why it is still considered a classic today.
1:45 pm on September 29th, 2008 4
Baeksu,
I would honestly be happy if you could find a list of those movies for me.
A couple of months ago, I did some searching for names of them, because I wanted to watch them, and I thought they'd be something I could review for GI Korea's blog, but I didn't find many names.
Here is the best source I can remember locating:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Korean_War_films
That's not hundreds. It isn't even two dozen if you take out the non-American ones and even less if you take out those made after the Korean War Era – say, after 1960.
And on my comment thought (not opinion, yet) —
The Manchurian Candidate was not made during the Korean War period. It was 1962. MASH was 1971 and it was an anti-war film along the lines of the farce tradition.
Which brings up a possible interesting point — I might make this a blog post after I look around, watch some of the movies, and think about it some more, but if you look at the movies from the Korean War Era, what do you get?
Steel Helmet certainly isn't a gung-ho, patriotic war film meant to inspire the men during the early days of the conflict.
Battle Hymn (1957) is a Korean War movie I can remember seeing long ago, and it was not exactly anti-war, but it wasn't the type of gung-ho patriotic flix like were made throughout WWII and in the years after it. It was about accidents of war and killing of civilians by air raids.
And there were hundreds of WWII movies made.
www(dot)wwii-movies(dot)com
Well, we could say that WWII was just much bigger than WWII and everybody knew it and it took a total mobilization including Hollywood.
Fine. But, as the Red Scare and support for McCarthy showed, many Americans believed as the Korean War began that we were heading into WWIII. The iron curtain was becoming iron. China was strong enough into its communist setup it could eventually wage war against us in Korea.
So, I question whether or not the disparity between the number of WWII movies made around the time of the conflict and the number for Korean War.
Which made me think of 9/11 and then up to Iraq War II….
How many big (or small) Hollywood productions came out of the shock of 9/11?
How many Afghan War movies have we seen?
There was enough time between 9/11 and Iraq War II for a few patriotic productions to squeeze out, no?
This is true especially if we consider how many big Hollywood productions have come out – with top line actors — against the Bush administration and Iraq War II….
I'm just starting to chew this over — at least where it concerns the Korean War and Hollywood —
— but some things are clear: progressives to communists were against the Korean War in a period in which they still had hope the Soviet Union would prove itself to be a shining example of how the world was evolving for the better.
1:49 pm on September 29th, 2008 5
I'm glad you brought up the Manchurian Candidate, though, because it reminded me of the 2004 (post-9/11 post-start of Iraq War II) version — in which even the subversive role of foreign enemy was cut out and substituted with American fascists.
2:28 pm on September 29th, 2008 6
USinKorea, if you search imdb you will find heaps of Korean War movies.
Bogart, Brando, Mitchum — all the Hollywood heavies made Korean War movies.
I'm too busy to go into this in detail now, but trust me, there are many, many Hollywood movies about the Korean War. I have a book called "Korean War Filmography" that is nearly 500 pages long.
When I have more time I can offer further thoughts on this… Good luck!
2:40 pm on September 29th, 2008 7
PS: USinKorea, my gut instinct is that you're barking up the wrong tree as far as pro-Commie Hollywood writers and filmmaker go vis a vis the Korean War.
There is, however, a subgenre of movies which focus on POWs and the issue of collaboration, which was a huge issue in the US during and in the immediate aftermath of the war. Prisoner of War was a rather cheesy look at the issue, but there were other more serious ones, such as "Time Limit" starring Richard Widmark.
It's hard to say that these films were pro-Commie or pro-collaboration. I think they honestly examined the issue from all sides.
3:20 pm on September 29th, 2008 8
Thanks.
I came across a Wikipedia category item that lists all the films for each year – at least films that have Wiki entries:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:1953_films
I only found 2 Korean War-related movies. I chose 1953 to start, because it was still during the war but also enough time since the war began for them to crank out some big budget films – but that is being a little generous too – because Steel Helmet came out in 1951…and WWII movies came out fast and furious early in the war.
Battle Circus was the only big movie of the two I located for 1953.
I'll have to watch the movie, and Wiki doesn't give much length to the review, but this line stuck out: "set in a story showing the tragedy of war"
It is about a MASH unit.
As noted, Steel Helmet isn't a gung-ho film either. An important part of the film is the moments where it briefly hits on socio-political items in America — like the internment of Japanese citizens in WWII and the on-going racism against blacks.
Keep in mind – however – that in both cases, the wronged individuals – wronged because of their ethnicity – support the US military and war effort….
But, that (and Battle Circus) is not exactly Corregidor (1943), is it?
www(dot)wwii-movies.com/index.php?content=moviedetails&movieid=421
Now, you can easily get carried away reading politics into literary items -I know, I was an English Lit major and half-way to an MA until I got sick to death of it —- but there is some validity to putting items in their context.
Today, as I was thinking about this and what movies to Netflix, I thought of Sergeant York
en(dot)wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergeant_York
A great movie, but then if you think about how it came out in 1941, and in the context of my post – it becomes fairly interesting.
The far left in Hollywood was against getting involved in WWII — after the Soviets and Germany signed the non-aggression pact. (Which broke many progressives from the communist movement — which had gained a good number of supporters because it was strongly against Hitler and Germany – before Stalin decided to cut a treaty)
But, of course, when Hitler invaded Russia, pacifism and isolationism went out the door with the far left in Hollywood and intellectualism.
Then comes along — surprise surprise (????) — Sergeant York — A movie about America's greatest WWI hero — who just happened to be a pacifist – who has a big moment in the movie – near the end – explaining why he decided he just had to kill his fellow man even though he had held out so long with his dedication to what he felt the Christian faith taught about that subject……….
I am doing some digging into the movie, and I found that one of the writers on it " was Howard Koch: (Quote from Red Star Over Hollywood)
"This was two falsehoods in one sentence. In fact, Howard Koch was probably a Party member for some time in the 1930s, and if not, he was clearly a fellow traveler of the Communists and the Soviet Union. Many of his correspondents addressed him as “Comrade Koch,” and his rhetorical jargon—labeling opponents of FDR as “fascist,” for instance—was standard for Party members and fellow travelers."
John Huston was also a writer on the movie. In the book quoted above, it says Huston was a progressive who distanced himself from the dedicated communists in Hollywood the more it became clear how tied their were to Russia and the most clear it became Russia was no democracy.
That was not the case, however, in 1941, not for a lot of people in the progressive movement (and certainly not the communist wing of it).
This is interesting to ponder…..
3:31 pm on September 29th, 2008 9
#7
As I'm getting at with the question of Sergeant York, it isn't about strictly "pro-commie" movies or overt or even covert propaganda. It is more about the influence of an environment.
Like in the American media — when the vast majority of the people on staff at a newspaper or TV news org are registered Democrats and lean toward the liberal side, they don't have to work hard/actively at distorting the news, it comes naturally.
And it comes in forms like what stories they chose not to tell as well as how they tell those they do.
Like Korean War movies seeming to focus on the psychological trauma of war or socio-political items from American society instead of gung-ho, patriotism stoking films.
I can think of a number of reasons why Korean War movies don't stand out like those of WWII. I do believe (so far) that at least one of the significant reasons is the lack of support the war had on the left (even before it began, I'd think…)
3:43 pm on September 29th, 2008 10
USinKorea, WWII was "the good war" whereas the Korean War was viewed far more ambivalently. In fact, it wasn't even defined as a war at the outset, but rather a police action. It also ended in a draw, which was a blow to America's status as a superpower and its own self-identity. Then you have the Vietnam War which was viewed as the very opposite of "a good war" by many. Thus, the Korean War falls somewhere in the middle of these two poles.
I believe the ambivalence of America's involvement in Korea is well reflected in most Korean War movies made by Hollywood.
4:03 pm on September 29th, 2008 11
"Like Korean War movies seeming to focus on the psychological trauma of war or socio-political items from American society instead of gung-ho, patriotism stoking films."
Truth not propaganda is the proper goal of art.
The Soviet Union and North Korea were masters of the propaganda film.
The US is a great country because it allows the freedom to express the truth for all. Indeed, that was precisely what we claimed to be fighting for during the Korean War, was it not?
5:27 pm on September 29th, 2008 12
But propaganda is a word that can be a pretty broad brush stroke.
Truth too is a word whose use has often led to it being fairly meaningless in discussions.
Was Sergeant York propaganda for not showing more of the ugly nature of war and the psychological damage it could cause?
Why would psychological damage and the ugly nature of war become so important to portray as "truth" as a core theme in the Korean War period but not particularly bothersome in so many of the WWII films???
Did WWII or the start of the Korean War teach us more about the hell of war than WWI did? The best war poetry you can read (in English) is from the British soldiers who fought in WWI. It is hard to even find WWII poetry on the Internet much less of the caliber of WWI poems (I tried for my middle school English class).
Why didn't that view of "war is hell" so strongly felt after the horrors of WWI not stick? Why was it not a primary focus in most WWII films?
I suggest the "righteousness" of WWII for the intellectual community, as well as common folk, is one partial reason (though not all the intellectual community was on board that bandwagon — Robert Lowell (one of my favorite poets) was not).
And I'd suggest (suggest) the reason Korean War films didn't come out fast and furious – and when they did come out – focused on non-gung-hoism could stem from not so "righteous" interpretations about not just the US effort in Korea but in the US in general during the first days of the full blown Cold War….
(I have absolutely zero doubt the primary reasons we have not seen a plenthora of 9/11 movies and anti-terrorism movies and patriotic war movies in the last 6-7 years is that — Hollywood does not believe in the mission or the government or the US as a superpower in the world in general…)
As for "it allows the freedom" — who hinted about not having the freedom to make any kind of movie Hollywood wanted????
I'm talking about choices in what to make – and especially what not to make – and how we might sift for clues as to why such choices were made….
2:34 pm on October 14th, 2008 13
[...] DVD CD online low price Sponsored by: http://www.koamart.com/ • Found on Ads by Google Movie Review: Steel Helmet (1951) – Korean War Sep 29, 2008 … USinKorea, there are at least a hundred Hollywood movies about the Korean War. [...]
9:08 am on October 27th, 2009 14
King Baeksu, it seems clear that you must have the Korean War confused with the Vietnam War regarding the supposedly abundant war movies that you claim exist. There most definitely is not anywhere close to a hundred Korean War movies, and The Manchurian Candidate has absolutely nothing to do with the Korean War. You might want to go watch this movie again to help clear up your confusion.
2:24 am on December 11th, 2010 15
Vibram Five Fingers Women’s Sprint