MovieChat Forums > Twelve O'Clock High (1950) Discussion > Repellant to the point of loathsomeness

Repellant to the point of loathsomeness

posted 19 years ago by pchas-1
80 replies | jump to latest

I am well aware that 12 O'Clock High is considered a masterpiece, but I find the character of Brig. Gen. Frank Savage (Gregory Peck) repellant to the point of loathsomeness, which undermines this otherwise well-made production.

Consider: Col. Keith Davenport (well-played by Gary Merrill) the commanding officer of a weary and battle-fatigued unit is removed from his command by Savage, who had been Davenport's friend. What did Davenport do wrong? In Savage's words: "He's a first rate guy who over-identifies with his men." As played by Gregory Peck, Savage is the most authoritarian martinet this side of Capt. Queeg. Unsurprisingly, every airman puts in for a transfer out of the unit. Aware that this will make him look bad, he conspires with his desk jockey ground officer Maj. Harry Stovall (Dean Jagger) to delay the transfers while he works to improve the units performance, and in doing so build cohesion and morale. When the Inspector General arrives, Savage is cleaning off his desk, sure that he will lose his command and be sent back to the Pentagon. But no, every man has cancelled his transfer request and Savage stays. I found this situation highly unlikely, considering that Savage had 1) relieved the popular Davenport of his command, 2) closed the Officer's club, 3) busted several of the airmen down a couple of ranks and 4) told them in a pep talk that they should think of themselves as dead men. I think it would be far more likely that they would have transferred out of the unit to get away from that neurotic mess of a general and that Savage would have been transferred to Washington. I was positively overjoyed when Savage finally broke down and was unable to carry out a mission.

What I find amazing is that several people in the comments said they used this film for leadership training (!) Maybe Savage's techniques work in the military, but anyone who tried to act that way in most modern organizations would find themselves in line at the unemployment office.

[–] rwsmith29456 17 years ago

What vindicates Savage for me is simply that he and the men did a horrible job that absolutely had to be done. It wasn't just that he was an ***hole, he knew that raising efficiency would also save the planes and the lives of the men.

[–] deeveed 17 years ago

I have watched this film many times. I agree with the comment that its arguably the greatest "leadership" film for all time. It's fascinating to watch Savage and use only his internal "self" to "get the job done" through others. It's impressive to see how he transferred his internal psychology to those who realistically were most probably going to die. I'm sure not many could have handled the responsibility..many are called few are chosen. I don't know how its done. Perhaps if I'm in the situation I'd have the wherewithal? I just don't know. How many would?

[–] aqualicy 17 years ago

This thread is the best thing I've ever read on IMDb. For getting off to such a poor start with someone hating on Frank Savage in their ignorance, the stories and discussions here from everyone else are a wealth. Funny how that worked out.

Sincere thanks to all the contributors. It's been a pleasure to read.

[–] rwsmith29456 15 years ago

Mean S.O.B maybe but his job was to put up airplanes and to do that he had to put men in them. He had to convince them that tighter discipline would result in fewer losses. He couldn't do that by having his men love him, except that they came to realize that he really was on their side. He appeared to tear down morale at first but what he actually did was build it. He was also tasked with finding out what "maximum effort" really meant. He used himself as a guinea pig to find out what that was. I'm sure a lot of people didn't like the way they were treated in WWII but that was not very high on the priority list of ways to win a war.

[–] vonmazur 14 years ago

I agree, this is the best thread on IMDB. It is telling that the current generation does not get it with General Savage, maybe spoiled and lazy has something to do with it.

I did two tours of duty in Nam as an Army Aviator, when I got there I was only 19, and this movie was my guide to duty. "Consider yourselves dead men...it's easier that way...." I attribute my survival in Nam to this movie, along with some luck and other factors....

This is a war movie, and critques from the "politically correct idiots" do not affect the content at all..or its effect.

Many 8th AF vets were in some of the scenes filmed in Florida, the Director rounded them up and used them as extras, as they still were wearing the WW 2 uniforms, or still had them available...The Air Force blue suit was not manditory until a bit later, but only those who served in the Army Air Force could still wear them. (My Father came home from flying B 29's at Tinker AFB, complaining that they could not wear the uniform of what they called at the time; "The Brown Shoe Air Force" any longer. This was during the Korean War or just before.)

Dale

"If those sweethearts won't face German bullets--They'll face french ones!"

[–] arcturus6 15 years ago

Thank God you were not in World War II

[–] vonmazur 14 years ago

Troll?

Dale

"If those sweethearts won't face German bullets--They'll face french ones!"

[–] deeveed 14 years ago

I just read a book callled "Tail-end Charlies', they were the airmen in the ball turrett. A nice comfy place up in the clouds...;-)....Unbelieveable what those bomber crews went through...and they did it almost EVERY day. I don't know ehre thjey got rhe fortitude to look at the plane and the sky and know that they have to keep on going up there knowing that they could be shot out of the sky in a second. And that was the brutal emotional challenge commanders like Savage had in front of them day in and day out during the air war.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] deeveed 14 years ago

Yeah I guess he had to. The guys above him wanted...... results!!! Not sure about this but weren't those commanders always "rotated"? Why didn't they get rid of Peck and the previous commander before they collapsed? Who could stand the strain of continually sending men to get killed falling out of the sky??

[–] dobravery 14 years ago

Don't forget that Davenports command was experiencing very high loss rates. I think a factor in the men canceling the transfers was that although they didn't like Savage, I think they realized they had a better chance at survival with him.

Savage's crack up wasn't that he got what he deserved. It was more about how can you go into battle with men and not learn to identify with them. That extracting the 'maximum effort' from every man brings even the strongest to their breaking point. It is more about what the system of war and responsibility does to us as individuals.

[–] Counter-Sniper 14 years ago

Wow, I just read your pathetic diatribe attacking the General and I would first like to point out that Savage did NOT relieve Keith the 2 star General did. If your gonna attack someone make sure you know what the hell your talking about.
Second and lastly I would like to make clear that Savage was a monumental leader and as you pointed out "this may work in the military but blah blah blah". Well perhaps you should stick to what you know and go over to the "Wall Street" comments and show em what you know and stay out of bad mouthing the military of which you have no clearly have no knowledge of......

Keyboard Kommandos Disgust Me! ..... Stand a Post or Shut Up!

[–] fnj2002 14 years ago

Ironic that the original poster, who has only a single post to his credit in his profile, should have created a thread with so many brilliant and thought provoking responses.

[–] deeveed 14 years ago

At the least all the foregoing could have provided him with a measure of geenrating some empathy with Savage and the extreme extent of the problems he was confronted with. There are some jobs in the world that really shouldn't exist and the one Savage had was one of them. Yet, like all great men who take on large responsibilities, men like Savage suffer but have the wherewithal to get through it and "get the job done" in spite of the difficulty. I don't know if they are born with that or learn it as they get on in the world but something tells me those qualities are hard to get and are few and far between in humans. Leadership say in a manufacturing is one thing but leadership in war is another and it's just like night vs day. The reason I think TOH is such a great film is the fact that it is one of the very few which shows the great psychological strain of soldiering in high command. And the fact that that occurs is because it reflects the genuine humanity of an individual who is involved in a "killing" occupation.

[–] rcs8 13 years ago

Have you heard of Joe Clark or Jaime Escalante?