Hell in the Pacific

SPOILER ALERT : If you have not seen this film, you should get the MGM released DVD with the director's alternate ending included in the special features. I recently watched this movie for the first time, and was enthralled by the story of two men, stranded on a deserted island, sworn enemies whose countries are at war with one another, who are faced with a great dilemma. Can enemies work together to insure their survival under the harshest circumstances, or will hate prevail and both men die? It is a very touching story about how friendship is formed out of necessity, and fueled by the human survival instinct. At the end of the film, Marvin and Mifune escape one island and land on another that had been conquered by U.S. soldiers, then abandoned just as quickly in the swift series of battles throughout Pacific islands toward the end of World War II. With supplies left behind on the island, the two men get cleaned up and shaven, and are able to find something to eat and even find sake on which to get drunk. While drunk, Mifune finds a copy of LIFE Magazine which shows Japan losing the war rapidly. Mifune understandably gets upset and angry, then he and Marvin get into a drunken argument. In the theatrical release, bombing can be heard in the background during this argument, and the movie just ends abruptly with an explosion that tragically takes the lives of these enemies-turned-friends. End of story, war is hell, now go home. Luckily, I was watching the 2004 released MGM version DVD, which has the alternate ending that presumably director John Boorman had submitted to the studio as the ending for his film. In this ending, no bombing can be heard in the background. Mifune reads the magazine, gets upset, and the argument takes place. This version, however, contains no convenient explosion to make it seem like both men became enemies again, only to be killed together. The tragedy here happens when both men seem to realize, with dialogue-free fantastic physical acting by two legendary actors, that despite everything they have been through, and despite having becoming friends, their place in this world is not meant to be together. They both exchange sad final glances, and quietly walk off in opposite directions. I like to think that both men returned home to their respective countries, and became actors, who went on to star in movies like The Seven Samurai, and The Dirty Dozen. This "alternate" ending is a much more complex, more interesting, more ironic, more tragic, and infinitely more satisfying ending than the one that was slapped on the end of the film for the theatrical release. I hope this movie is restored to the better ending, and featured as a Criterion Collection release with commentary from director John Boorman some day soon.

John Boorman's allegorical story of two men stranded on an island during the latter part of WWII is a very powerful and cinematic experience. Boorman approaches the subject boldly, providing a mere two characters and opting not to use subtitles when the foreign character speaks. Many films would fail under these circumstances, but Boorman works wonders with this one and the result is a fascinating film indeed. There are a few weaknesses, such as an ambiguous and abrupt ending and some longueurs in the narrative, but on the whole the film is recommended viewing. A Japanese captain (Toshiro Mifune) and an American pilot (Lee Marvin) find themselves marooned on a remote Pacific island in 1944. Initially, there is understandable hatred between the pair, as their nations have been locked in conflict for so long. The Japanese soldier attempts to smoke his opponent out of the jungle; the American pilot repeatedly attempts to steal his adversary's fresh water. On and on their feud goes, until eventually they begin to realise that they are stuck on this lonely speck of land, with no-one on the way to rescue them and no chance of survival unless they work as a team. In spite of the cultural and linguistic differences between them, the duo manage to construct a makeshift raft and launch out upon the Pacific waves in search of help. After an arduous trip across the sea, they come to another island, apparently formerly used as a military outpost but now deserted and totally in ruin. Amid the rubble, the two men find alcohol, newspapers and scissors, among other things. After a long overdue shave, and a few drinks, they seem almost to be returning to the realms of civilisation after their trying ordeal. Marvin and Mifune are superb in largely wordless roles as the two sworn enemies stranded together. Their frustrating inability to communicate is brilliantly interwoven into the story, and via gesticulations and expressions the two men eventually manage to get their message across to each other and the audience. The film is visually beautiful, with very appropriate Palau Island backdrops used to emphasise the isolation that each man feels. There is an element of comedy about the film, too, which is cleverly underplayed but very funny if you watch closely. The scene where Marvin urinates on Mifune from the trees is simultaneously vulgar and hilarious; also amusing is the scene where Marvin is startled by Mifune and growls "for a second I thought you were a Jap!" The sequence in which the two men attempt to navigate the ocean aboard their fragile raft is thrilling, and culminates in an unforgettable shot of the pair slumped, exhausted, side by side – a perfect metaphor for the draining and pointless effect of war upon their respective nations. Indeed, Hell In The Pacific is full of intelligent allegorical imagery – the experiences of both men can be viewed as a microcosmic representation of the whole Japan vs USA war. Hell In The Pacific is a great film that deserves better recognition.

Anti-war movies have come in many shapes and sizes – from the shocking to the satirical, from the blunt to the oblique – but few are as simply effective as Hell in the Pacific. At turns suspenseful, mysterious, cartoonishly funny and touchingly human, it boils the conflict down to the adventures of two men on opposite sides forced to share an island, but rather than just being a trite allegory, it convincingly demonstrates the benefits of co-operation over competitiveness, and shows that mistrust and enmity are not necessarily innate. Ignoring the ridiculously abrupt ending, Hell in the Pacific is excellent in its structure. Considering that the target audience is going to be English-speaking (although the experience would not be too diminished for a Japanese audience) the story is told in the beginning from the perspective of the Japanese man. The American character is a mere presence amid the trees, and the fact that we can understand him is of little consequence because he doesn't say much of relevance. The Toshiro Mifune character is more loquacious, even though most viewers won't know what he's saying, and Lee Marvin's relative quietness emphasises the wordless savagery of the first half. It's only as the picture progresses and the men become more amiable towards each that they become recognisably human characters. But even this is done more through imagery than words, giving us an equally good impression of the two of them despite the language barrier. This telling from the Japanese point-of-view is also reinforced in the methods of director John Boorman, who often makes the camera Mifune's eyes or keeps him up front while Marvin lurks in the background. Other than that, Boorman's style as a director is like a love letter to Akira Kurosawa and Sergio Leone, the latter especially. He gives us gnarly close-ups, a dynamic rhythm and eye-catching tableaux such as the shot of Marvin and Mifune as they arrive on the second island, like statues about to leap into action. It is all very overtly stylised, but it is a pretty neat way of keeping this story of such simple elements constantly interesting and engaging. Toshiro Mifune is well-known to even the most casual of foreign cinema buffs, being the favourite star of the aforementioned Kurosawa. It's nice to see him used well in this less familiar context. The only other non-Japanese picture I have seen him in is a bizarre British-made Western called Red Sun, which is incidentally one of the worst films I have ever seen. You notice, seeing him here opposite Lee Marvin, he is not a tall man, but he makes up for this with his strong presence and irascible energy. But it's not all about the rage. I like here his passively bemused responses when Marvin is ranting at him. Lee Marvin shows his easy capacity for turning a serious-sounding performance into something surprisingly comical, such as his acting out of throwing the stick and picking it up. Appropriately for a movie of few words, music plays a big part in Hell in the Pacific. The Lalo Schifrin score is by turns haunting, playful, and sometimes teasingly melodramatic. It is an unusually big score for a movie that is otherwise so minimalist, but its constant variation and inventiveness suits the action very well. And, aside from the power of its message, this is part of what makes Hell in the Pacific so appealing. It is all of a piece, a mesmerising tone poem on a the fate of humanity.

This film, of all the ones I have ever seen (much less reviewed), has the distinction of being one of the most perfect examples of a pure cinematic experience. The story is remarkably compelling. Told nearly exclusively in a visual language, it is fascinating to see these two great actors, Mifune and Marvin, relate to each other as human beings, while being completely unable to understand each other verbally. This film should be a must-see for any cinemaphile. Brilliantly directed in two very different ways: first of all, visually and then from a stand point of the acting. The challenges of making this film had to be enormous... filming on the water, dealing with the language barrier, and all the while never letting the core themes of the film suffer. This film is a great achievement. Bravo!

Might be an artistic wonder, but failed on entertainment. A Box Office Flop. The struggle is never resolved, it just re-ignites at the end. Then poof its over. Lee Marvin and Misfune do great jobs considering they are it, that's a lot of acting. The direction was good the acts are believable, but predictable. The camera work is excellent, probably wasn't an easy location to shoot. Its hard to write 10 lines about this movie. Two men trapped and surviving on an island, nothing much to eat or do except dream about rescue. If you're a Lee Marvin fan, well this isn't the blood and guts tough guy you like to see. Not much humor here either, its a struggle movie, but not good against evil.

In World War II, a shot-down American pilot (Lee Marvin) and the marooned Japanese Captain Tsuruhiko Kuroda (Toshiro Mifune) are stranded in a small island in the Pacific. When they find the presence of each other, the American tries to steal the water provision of the Japanese that protects it, initiating their personal war. After a period fighting each other, they decide to join forces and build a bamboo raft to seek a larger island. "Hell in the Pacific" is a good movie about how struggle to survive supersedes any other feelings even in times of war. The Japanese and the American soldiers find how pointless is their fight and resolve their situation joining forces and learning to accept and respect their culture differences despite the language barrier and warfare. Surprisingly they also become friends but the abrupt conclusion is too stupid and meaningless, apparently imposed by the studio. The alternate ending is also terrible but better then the original one. In 1985, Wolfgang Petersen used the same idea in a futuristic environment in "Enemy Mine". My vote is seven. Title (Brazil): "Inferno no Pacífico" ("Hell in the Pacific")

When "Hell in the Pacific" debuted, it lost a buttload of money. And, after having just watched it, I can understand exactly why. It's slow beyond belief...and a great cure to insomnia! There really is no context for the film--you just have a Japanese soldier (Toshiro Mifune) and an American (Lee Marvin) stranded on an island during WWII. You later gather that Marvin's character must have been a pilot who was shot down...you know almost nothing about Mifune's. And, for much of the film, they torment and try to kill each other. Later, they call a truce and build a raft and leave. My wife kept saying "I hope they drown" during the raft sequence and I can't fault her. The film ran at a snail's pace and it mostly consisted of the two idiots yelling at each other in their native languages (oddly, they never figured to try to teach the other their language) and this made for a film that practically yelled "Turn me off" because it was so slow and unsatisfying.

This is a truly cinematic experience: character and plot develop through visual storytelling. The two characters can't even speak the same language, but compelling performances speak volumes to the audience. The often breathtaking scenery provides a dramatic contrast to the ugliness of Man's cruelty. Marvin and Mifune show Man is bound to 'return to where he started;' sin spoils moments of grace despite our noblest intentions. The devastating ending perfectly completed the metaphor of the film. The primal setting (in Panavision) and "Twilight Zone" ending reminded me of "Planet of the Apes." Fans of the Boorman-Marvin director-actor collaboration must see "Point Blank." Those who don't like island-survival films with controversial endings should avoid "Limbo."

Sorry but no other comedy in history matches the greatness of this one. I was ROFLing through every second. The movie is about a Yank and a Jap whose planes crash into an island during WWII. Hilarity ensues. The highlight of the film is a urination sequence involving Toshiro Mifune getting peed on by Lee Marvin and then he goes all crazy and starts washing himself. I bet you're laughing already. Another powerful moment is when Marvin gives a heroic speech about how he owns a log. This is obviously an analogy which refers to the fact that the Allies had "logs" while the Axis didn't. Like I said, hilarious.

Not only is this film a fascinating account of survival against odds, its a reflection of cultural differences within a crucial historical timeframe. Its narrative may be flawed, a little too stylized, but it features two of the greatest faces of 60s cinema history: Marvin and Mifune. Looking back on the second world war, it seems ironic that the Japanese believed their culture was superior in warfare, and the Americans believed theirs was superior for peace. In the end it will turn out to be the other way around. This film touches on that subject, highlighting Marvins aggressive, loud, and brutal behavior, and Mifunes quieter, more methodical survival methods. But in their battle to survive, the two men become almost indistinguishable. The most touching scene in the film: Both men collapsed in their sinking raft, dejected, exhausted, dehydrated, totally at their mercy of nature, a symbolic scene for human life. The DVD i saw contained both endings, the original, never seen in TV prints, much more believable and satisfying.