Between Heaven and Hell

It deals with a prejudiced and wealthy Southern owner: Robert Wagner who cultivates cotton, having a beautiful wife : Terry Moore, and a powerful father-in-law : Robert Keith. Shortly after, he becomes enlisted into WWIi in the Pacific campaign, there he finds how wrong his misconceptions are, as the has to command a suicide platoon with unexpected consequences . Along the way the starring attempts to help his war colleagues and to survive at whatever means .Then a psychotic commandant : Broderick Crawford, assigns him along with his squadron to a suicide mission behind enemy lines. Decent WWII movie with worthy sentiments, thrills, battles and exceptional interpretations, especially for its enjoyable support cast. All of them make this rather simplistic tale a meaningful movie. Director knits the action together, providing spectacular battles, impressive fights and action enough. Stars Robert Wagner as the haughty Southern gentleman who is forced to buck his ideas when he is sent to a Pacific island , there the snob sergeant learns all about humility and humanity in the tough times that follow. The best roles go to Broderick Crawford as a stiff-upper-lip and psycho officer, he would subsequently play a similar role in the Spaghetti Western : Mutiny in Fort Sharp , furthermore, the great secondary Buddy Ebsen who is frankly magnificent. Other important secondaries appearing are as follows : Robert Keith, Brad Dexter, Harvey Lembeck, Mark Damon, Scathman Crothers , Frank Gorshin, Skip Homeier and L. Q. Jones, all of them would have notorious cinematic careers. It contains a rousing and thrilling musical score by the classic composer Hugo Friedhofer. Colorful cinematography in Cinemascope and Technicolor by Leo Tover. The motion picture was well directed by Richard Fleischer, though it has a few gaps. Richard keeps his head down and attempts not let the worthy feelings saturate the proceedings entirely. He was a good craftsman who directed a lot of films concerning all kinds of genres with a special penchant for Action, Fim Noir, Adventure, thriller, such as : "Red Sonja, Ashanti, Conan the Destroyer, The Prince and the Pauper, Mandingo, Mr Majestick, The Don is dead, Soylent Green, The new centurions, See no evil, Rillington Place, The Boston strangler, Fantastic voyage, Barabbas, Compulsion, The Vikings, 20.000 leagues under the sea, The narrow margin, Armored clay pigeon, Follow me quietly and Trapped". Rating 7/10 above average.

So what do we have, well it is in colour and widescreen and it is a world war 2 film set, we are told in the early title "on a island in pacific in 1945". So from the start we are in some imagined battle zone that never did exist. That soon becomes very clear as the war presented is a static one, in which the American's sit around a lot and talk while the Japanese swarm all over. The only battle that could fit any of the facts so far was Guadalcanal but that was 1942 not 1945 and by that time the Americans were advancing everywhere and the Japanese fighting defensively.Well no matter, its only a movie! Then there is how the film looks, clearly it is in the Californian hills with a few lonely rather comic looking palm trees some with the earth newly dug quite visible, and then there is the jungle which appears then disappears again While everywhere is bone dry as dust, no tropical conditions in this pacific war. No matter, the battle scenes fragmented and episodic flicker now and again but look as fake as our hero's wounds observed via red paint on a shoulder. Then for drama we have a battle fatigued captain given a battle fatigued sergeant busted down to private as a replacement who is sent to defend an exposed hilltop position, against great numbers, how Korean war is all of that? The viewers endurance is now tested by a series of dull to very dull flash backs, and worse we are shown his domestic love life.In full 1950's hair and make up our love interest looks from another era as she in fact is.Next up is the films pacing, slow and plodding while none of the characterisation's ring in in any way true at any time. In Fact Broderick Crawford is so bad and so ill fitting he had to be posted to MASH the 1970's comedy show about the Korean War. As for our star and hero of the movie who takes very unconvincingly to shaking, well hes a good looking kid pretending to be a actor but both Robert Wagner and as for this film it is poor spam pretending to be ham.Though out the film is clumsy muddled and flat and the colour and widescreen only add to all the film obvious short comings.Yet i am judging from the prospective of 60 years on but even by the standards of the day, Between Heaven and Hell must of insulted the intelligence of any ww2 vet who paid to see this fabrication at the movies in 1956 with the war still very fresh in the memory.All of the above said i have seen worse, but when a movie takes itself as seriously as this one it just better be good, and this was a film, that was far from really good.Enough Said.Enjoy at your peril.

It all comes down to the fact that it had to take the advent of World War 11 to change the thinking of wealthy landowner and share cropper Robert Wagner. He mistreats those who work under him, while marrying the daughter of another wealthy owner, David Keith, who had the foresight to see that war was coming and that the south would change again by war's end. Stationed in the Pacific, Wagner endures the hardship of war and sees incompetent as well as brutal leadership. His newly found friends are killed before his eyes, and is emotional shaking results. Buddy Ebsen co-stars as a fellow soldier and friend to Wagner. Broderick Crawford is memorable as the fast, tough talking unit leader, Waco, who can be brutal to the core, while remembering an army of strong discipline.

A stocky figure, loud mouth, bullish features and personality, fitted Broderick Crawford for the roles of a crooked politician, upwardly mobile gangster and a psychopathic commanding officer, three of his finest performances The film opens with Robert Wagner reassigned to a company posted up in the hills, a very isolated area under the command of Broderick Crawford (Waco) who almost breaks him, but the young man—seen to get a little shaky in combat—regains his resources and becomes a hero when he saves a fellow soldier (Buddy Ebsen). With brief flashbacks, we discover that Wagner plays a Southern landowner who treats his croppers badly… His beautiful wife Jenny (Terry Moore) just saw a side of him she never saw before… Gifford argues that Jenny has just seen his business side… But Gifford only comes to realize the error of his rude ways when he is called to active duty and put among the troops in the Pacific theater in World War II Aside from a beachhead landing made up mainly of stock shots and a final battle with the enemy, there was a lot of talk

I have a large collection of war movies and consider this one to be among the best ever made. Many of the war movies have what I consider to be too many flashback scenes of home and try to become love stories with a few battle scenes. These scenes in Between Heaven and Hell actually have a real purpose in the story. More than any war movie that I have seen, this one shows a trend in American history that is often overlook—the fact that wars and the men who serve in them traditionally return home with a more egalitarian outlook, hungry to reform the society that they left. Between Heaven and Hell shows a man's transformation into a better person as a result of his war experiences. Sam Gifford is a man on the edge of breaking from the strain of war. He has experienced loss and hardship and realized that in the past he has been the unnecessary source of it for others. Between Heaven and Hell has a psychological realism that most war movies lack. It shows war heroes for what they are—men who rise above their ordinary selves to do extraordinary things in adversity. This is great story telling with great characters.

Another reviewer said it best when he called this film 'unpretentious'. Today, of course, most films are pretentious and overblown. Maybe it's because we now live in a pretentious and overblown country, one where people would never listen to the message of a movie like this. This is one of those rare occurrences where a movie is so well done it seems to exist outside its era. This film was made in 1956, which is amazing, considering the outstanding photography and the striking characterizations. Nobody talks or acts like '50s characters. Things seem a little more dangerous, more savage, so that it would seem you were watching a film from the '80s instead. Of course, in the '80s they didn't make movies like this, they made pretentious ones. But they should have. The big war films of the '50s were usually full of stock characters and unlikely situations, crammed with out of place stock footage. An example of that kind of mediocre war movie is 'To Hell And Back'. This movie is everything that 'To Hell And Back' was not. 'Between Heaven And Hell' has more interesting and unique characters, more authentic weaponry, and the photography is of a much higher standard. The reasons why some rather dull movies become well known, while others, like this, remain obscure, has always been a mystery to me.

I expect this 1956 war movie was passed over by critics because its star, Robert Wagner, was considered just another light-weight pretty boy of the day. Nonetheless, the movie is better than just another celebrity vehicle, while Wagner is a much better actor than his good-looks suggest, and, I think, time has proved. Two features distinguish this film from others of the day. First is the subplot of tenant farmers and the class barrier separating them from the land owners they work for. A number of pre-Vietnam movies dealt with racial differences in the military; this is the only one I know of dealing with white Southern sharecroppers and their difficulties. Wagner's unit is a National Guard battalion which means that the unit is made up of men from the same locale with the same class distinctions of civilian life carried over into the ranks of the unit itself. Thus, Robert Keith a patriarchal rich man in civilian life is in similar command of the battalion as the colonel, while Tod Andrew's land owner heads up a platoon as a lieutenant. In short, land owners make up the ranks of commissioned officers, while share-croppers make up the enlisted ranks. Now, the screenplay departs from this logic in Wagner's case. Though a land owner, he's not an officer; instead he's a sergeant in the enlisted ranks. The reason I think is pretty clear. Officers do not fraternize with enlisted men. But for the plot to deliver its main message, it must break down the social barrier between tenant farmer Buddy Ebsen and land owner Wagner, and that requires that they fraternize. Hence, the screenplay makes Wagner an enlisted man. But this curious departure is for a good cause. Only by getting to know a man (Ebsen) personally can the haughty Wagner overcome the cruelty he has shown his share- croppers in civilian life. The lesson here is similar to that of racially inspired films—it's personal contact that ultimately humanizes and breaks down social barriers. Thus, once the social distance is overcome, the two can become friends and equals and be carried off to the same hospital ship, side-by-side. A humane message, well delivered. The second feature is perceptively pointed out by Kayaker36. There's an unmistakable homosexual subtext to Broderick Crawford's command center scenes. Today, that wouldn't merit much mention, but remember this is 1956 when about the only thing worse than being a gay was being a communist. And to even hint that gays might be in the military—and in a position of command—is really quite remarkable. The screenplay is adapted from a novel, and I suspect the idea comes from the novel and was rather boldly adapted into the screenplay. But, whatever the source or reason, this is the only war film of the post-war era I know of to even hint at that forbidden topic. Anyway, the movie is well produced by TCF, with just enough battle scenes to satisfy war- movie fans. The screenplay is also unusual in its depiction of death by friendly fire, a much more common occurrence among soldiers than movies led us to believe. On the other hand, note how, in passing, the script works in a love interest for Wagner so that Terry Moore's name could go up on the marquee and broaden audience appeal. Note too, how Crawford gets a rather lengthy and unnecessarily histrionic scene to justify, I suppose, his starring credit. Remember, he was only a few years past his Best Actor Oscar, at a time when his name still carried audience weight. Actually, combining this film with Tony Curtis's 1954 war movie Beachhead would make a revealing double-feature, showing again how slick and entertaining films from Hollywood's studio period could be. This may not rank with the best or most suspenseful war films of the period. But it does remain an interesting oddity.

source: Between Heaven and Hell

Trailer—Between Heaven and Hell

Between Heaven and Hell