This film's main story hinges on the tactically stupid decisions Bogart's one-dimensional character makes. All the other characters of various nationalities humbly agree to go along with the Americans, despite their better judgment (sound familiar?)!
Phippster
That's the point. This was released during the War and the Office of War Information was pushing movies that were basically propaganda. They had to portray Americans as superiors to convince audiences that, hey, this war is good because Americans are good and other ethnicities are not as smart or good.
shareAll the Allied soldiers were portrayed sympathetically. They even had the escaping Nazi prisoner killed by the Sudanese, a black man (the brilliant Rex Ingram), as a symbolic blow against the Nazis' bogus claims of racial superiority. It was one of the few films of the era to show a good black man killing a bad white man. It was a propaganda film made for American audiences during a war of unmatched ferocity and sacrifice, and should be viewed in that historical context.
It whitewashed the Italians because it didn't want to offend Americans of Italian ancestry. Unlike their cowardly European cousins, they were among the most numerous enlistees and for the most part served well. Remember, 1943 was the year Italy surrendered and switched sides.
It was an American film and so naturally the Americans dominated it. I have seen a number of British war films with American characters, and the British dominate in them. In fact, a few have offensive stereotypes of Americans. A common character is an American called "Tex" who is dumb and impulsive. However, for the most part Americans are treated fairly, as are British characters in American films (I admit a few of ours stereotype Britons too.)
It was a Bogart picture at a time when Bogart was at his peak in popularity and box office value. To expect his character to play a secondary role to a British character is unrealistic. As for perhaps casting him as a Briton - Humphrey Bogart? Oh come now!
uhhh , its a movie.
let me guess, you hate the grinch whole stole christmas too, dont you?
and of course you believe dorothy is a rotten little tramp for wandering off
and getting lost in kansas too...
simple comments from a simple mind. off to your hole troll.
-- “A hot dog at the ball park is better than steak at the Ritz.” Humphrey Bogart
[deleted]
I thought that this was a fairly accurate movie, considering the time it was made. There was a war going on. So what if the "Germans" had on helmets from WWI? WWII was still going on and the real Germans were still using theirs. Sgt. Gunn was actually a Master Sergeant, just a notch or two below a Sgt. Major, but it's a Bogart movie and the Sgt. Major joined up a little later in the film. Water is a very important part of desert warfare, so it's a natural target and strategic resource. And while the M3 may not have been the best tank of the war, when it's the only tank around, it IS the greatest tank there. :-)
(his nation having remained neutral till the previous year selling arms to both allied and axis powers)
Hey, it was his tank and his rules! What's so hard to understand about that?
shareMost of the discussion in this thread is pointless finger pointing and arguing over history. The movie was made in 1943, when the outcome of the war was very much in doubt and the United States was only just getting its feet wet against the Nazis. Its audience was the American public, and its sole purpose was to reinforce their patriotism and support for the war. It is first and foremost a propaganda piece. I don't say that to be critical of the movie, only to point out the obvious. So quibbling over the way it portrayed the various nationalities and their roles in this fictional action as compared is inane. Recent revisionist trash like Pearl Harbor or U-571 is a completely different matter, but this movie wasn't trying to be accurate; it was trying to inspire and motivate a partisan audience.
shareits a movie. dont like it dont watch it.
there are tens of thousands of crosses in europe, africa, pacific islands for american troops who died to liberate NOT AMERICA but europe china, etc..
you forgot to mention that in your stab against america.
no problem, ya twit.
-- 'I dont mind a reasonable amount of trouble.' Humphrey Bogart, The Maltese Falcon
No
shareThis film's main story hinges on the tactically stupid decisions Bogart's one-dimensional character makes. All the other characters of various nationalities humbly agree to go along with the Americans, despite their better judgment (sound familiar?)!It was a feel-good propaganda film, and life-imitating-art(?), ... And of course in the time of global conflict, who better to 'go along with?' What does one expect some 70-years later in seeing this?