Merrill's Marauders

Unfortunately, Jeff Chandler was already dead when the film hit the theaters. This was the culmination of a good career and I think he was getting better as he went along. This is an extraordinarily good film and came out more or less at the end of the great war film making era of the 40's and 50's. I think the public was tired of war films by the early 60's and so Hollywood cut way back on making them. There had been the war and then countless war films right afterward, so perhaps the public was just ready to move on from war. The US was barely involved in Vietnam as far as the public knew, so that couldn't be the cause for the apathy towards war films. At any rate, Hollywood tossed out one of the best in this film. It is a true film classic, a true story (more or less) and one that should be seen by any war film buff!

Samuel Fuller knew war, experienced it first hand, and it became apart of who he was artistically as well as impacting him from knowing those he fought alongside that may or may not have come back alive as part of the "Big Red One." This sets apart a film like Merrill's Marauders, which in more commercial hands or those of a hack-for-hire could be fun or exciting in a conventional sense but could also be entirely forgettable as a programmer on a double feature. For Fuller there's a need to tell the stories of such brave soldiers like the Marauders who kept going on and on past all common sense or reasonable action. How much it's truly based on fact would depend, be it on the research of the battle(s) or on the book itself the film is based upon. But what it lacks in fine tuning it makes up for with guts, lots of it, like an endless reservoir. This is indeed what sets apart all of Samuel Fuller's war movies, and he made some truly great ones from Korea (The Steel Helmet) to Germany (nearly lost Verboten!) to his own personal tale with the epic The Big Red One itself. With this story, which tells of Frank Merrill's trials and tribulations getting his troops across swamps and mountains and over hundreds of miles in Burma to stop an invading force of Japanese entering into India, Fuller may not always get the best actors for the job (some are alright, such as Jeff Chanlder, who sadly died shortly after filming ended but went out with a bang, while others are just contract players whom aren't remembered today for a reason of being by definition character actors), and once or twice his pacing goes off or the music doesn't quite click or gets schmaltzy. But damn it all to hell, it's still a Sam Fuller picture, which means there's plenty of truly gripping scenes of war violence, and plenty of small moments that make it stand out. I liked the attachment the one soldier had with his mule, so much so that he would carry what the mule had on its back so it could still walk along the mountains. I liked the little bit where the Philippino soldier refused to tuck in his shirt just because he was told to. I especially liked that calm interlude where the soldiers, for only a seeming moments time, get a respite in a small village where the villagers come to help the beat soldiers who are resting as much as they can before pressing on (with the one assumedly very tough soldier breaking down in tears from the kindness, or just utter frustration or exhaustion). There's also a camaraderie with the soldiers that Fuller knows like the back of his hand - this is where, at the least, it feels and is totally authentic, at least compared to its programmers. What also makes Merrill's Marauders worth watching is that despite the exterior appearance of being about perseverance in the face of all odds, overwhelmingly stacked it would seem, it's really an anti-war picture, or at the very least one that questions such missions as these. I almost wonder if Fuller had been able to make the film years after 1962, where he might have had more freedom to show more grit, more bloodshed, more of the reality that he knew so well and pumped into the soldier experience on the whole. It may be a story of courage, maybe an absurd one with its straight-faced veneer, but it doesn't feel like a true story's tale - it's more about the struggle, the sense that hope could be lost at any second, which is mortifying. It's a B-movie that for all its minor flaws has its heart more than in the right place but the exact one; an antidote for all of those bubble-gum Gung-Ho John Wayne pictures.

Ol' Sam Fuller kept trying to make the hard-nosed, gritty war epics that he felt he had in him from his experiences in the U.S. Army First Division in WWII, but Hollywood and audiences weren't ready for them. So, we get better-than-average but still mediocre stuff like "Merrill's Marauders." If you take away the fatigue/illness element from the movie you really have nothing more than stock characters and story. It's mostly one bloodless engagement (barely a bloodstain or wound to be seen in all this carnage) after another with top-to-down commanders grimly urging their men forward, at all costs. The soldiers, who VOLUNTEERED for this, gripe about it all; their superiors bitch about the whole rotten enterprise but feel forced to continue onward; and inevitably a phony "breaking point" is established. Of course, this "point" is disregarded in order to show that when the now despised Merrill collapses from a heart attack, his men muster the ability to rise up for one more battle, as the incredulous Doc, played by the overaged, unfit Andrew Duggan, questions in open-mouthed awe the reserves these amazing men must have to continue on (especially since the Doc has spent half the film stating over and over that the men are unfit to continue). It's not a bad movie at all, but not significantly different than any other war movie that came out during the fifties and early sixties. And Fuller is a talented director, yet he's always hampered by his own character writing, resorting to ham-fisted stock types. C'mon, the tough-driven-but caring commander (Chandler); the strong-but-too-close-to-his-men leader (Hardin); the gruff go-to sergeant (Akins); the appalled, worried doctor (Duggan)? That's a cast of characters that only evokes a war-movie buff's biggest yawn. More interesting is some of the aspects of the movie beyond itself. For instance, it is lumped together with "Objective Burma" by the British as the pair of films that slight the British war effort in Burma. My own riposte to that is that the U.K. film business has had decades to make their own Burma war epic to set the record straight. Where is it? Another bit of film history related to "Merrill's" is that it is Jeff Chandler's final film. He died before it was released (and in his final movie scene, we see his character Merrill collapse into unconsciousness from a heart attack). Both Chandler and the real Frank Merrill died of complications from botched operations. Then there is Chandler's co-star Ty Hardin who seemed to have a promising career going at the time (he was also a U.S. military officer during the Korean War) with a Jeffrey Hunter-like look and personality. But he frittered it all away and became a VERY STRANGE MAN. He went on to become a Jew hating, anti-government, "Christian Patriot" preacher involved in cult-like activities in Arizona. As I said, this kind of stuff is more interesting than the film itself.

It's too bad this great cast and interesting subject matter were squandered in this cliché-ridden, cheaply made production. The music is awful, except the bits they stole from "Objective Burma". The Phillipine Army, standing in for the Japanese, look way too modern and American with their equipment and uniforms. And from the look of it, the movie was filmed entirely in the Phillipines, which do not look like I imagine Burma to be. Jeff Chandler is fine as Merrill, but the script is pretty limiting. It's a shame this was his last film. Ironically, "Objective Burma", filmed entirely in California, has a much richer jungle feel than this movie. It's clear from reading about Burma that you need a machete to move about in the jungle and you see that in "Objective Burma". The Philipine terrain in "Merrill's Marauders" is much too open.

This is the story of the fore-runners of the US Special Forces, a unit of guerrillas headed up by General Merrill, played ruggedly by Jeff Chandler. They are relentlessly heroic, exemplars of the undaunted warriors who will carry on and push themselves, dragging up reserves of will and energy that Andrew Duggan, the MO, simply cannot believe. They shoot a lot of the enemy, a lot of them get killed, more get wounded, and only a minority survive. But it's very boring. It's simply a series of jungle warfare sequences. One can amuse oneself by awarding points for realism and artistic merit for the extras' deaths, but otherwise, unless you are completely addicted to jungle war movies, give this one a miss.

Though a war movie, "Merrill's Marauders" makes its deepest impressions in the scenes between the battles. As a unit of exhausted American soldiers claw their way along a rocky slope, one falls to a screaming death. The others pause a moment to watch, then resume climbing. At one village, a boy gives a crusty sergeant played by Claude Akins a bowl of rice. The sergeant tries to smile, only to break down instead. "When you lead, you have to hurt people," General Merrill (Jeff Chandler) tells his prize officer "Stock" (Ty Hardin). "The enemy, and sometimes your own." Sam Fuller was a war vet as well as a director. In making his war films, he struggled to keep it real while at the same time delivering popular entertainment. "Merrill's Marauders" leans too much in the latter direction, with hokey battle scenes and gung-ho narration. But Chandler and Hardin provide sympathetic rooting interests. The cinematography by William Clothier captures riverine landscapes in all their harsh and wild beauty. The real story of the 5307th Composite Unit and its role in retaking Burma provides a solid backdrop for Fuller's cold view of war and its human toll. Of the 3,000 troops that started out, only 100 remained standing at the end, typhus and Japanese taking equal measure of the rest. Merrill's decision to press forward ("If they've got a single ounce of strength left, they can fight!") is portrayed as a cruel necessity, this much softened from the real GI take on Merrill's boss, Vinegar Joe Stilwell. Stilwell was roundly hated by the Marauders for pushing his boys too hard. This is something we don't see here. Cooperation with the U.S. military required some futzing on Fuller's part, which he did in hopes of following it with a pet project regarding his own World War II experience that would only emerge 18 years later: "The Big Red One". The battle scenes feel forced and phony. Fuller himself would complain nobody dies in war as neatly as in movies, and you see that a lot here. A perversely favorite moment for me is when a soldier named "Bullseye" shoots a Japanese soldier off of a watchtower. The soldier starts to fall, then pauses, grabs a baluster, and performs a neat tuck-and-roll in the direction of an offscreen mat. The one battle scene that works, even with the inane fanfare scoring that is this film's single worst element, is a fight through a maze-like warren of train-support blocks at the railhead town of Shaduzup. Japanese and American soldiers appear and fall in random, endless waves. I don't think soldiers in World War II really called each other "knothead", but moments like those at Shaduzup really connect and help to pull this film over the finish line - however raggedly. Though probably a bit too rah-rah for Fuller's fans, "Merrill's Marauders" packs a punch and some moments of affecting surprise.

This film is about a unit that fought hard and suffered horrific attrition rates while fighting in Burma during World War II. It specifically focuses on the grueling and exhausting struggle they made to complete the objective against all odds. MERRILL'S MARAUDERS is a decent war film, though it's hardly one that stands above the genre. While it does receive high marks for not being overly sensational or adding unnecessary story elements, the film also seems a tad sterile and unsatisfying when all is said and done. Now perhaps I might not have felt this so strongly had the film not been directed by Sam Fuller--a guy very capable of making better war films (my personal favorite of his is STEEL HELMET--a very realistic and gritty Korean War film made on a minuscule budget). Fuller did well in not over-glamorizing the soldiers but because he didn't provide much in the way of character development, you really don't particularly care who wins or dies. This is really evident near the end when the general (Jeff Chandler) falls to the ground--does he have a fatal heart attack or is he okay? The film never even bothers to tell! And that is very telling about the soul of this film--very competent but not especially involving.

The fact that the film has no discernable introduction is entirely in keeping with Sam Fuller's B Movie style direction. It jumps straight into the action, with Merrill's army platoon stationed somewhere in the middle of the Burmese jungle. While it was quite hard to suddenly have to familiarise oneself with about 20 different characters, and determine the complicated relationships between them, it allowed for an epic war movie to be refreshingly condensed to a bite-sized 95 minutes. Merrill, his respected lieutenant, Stockton, and the rest of the boys spend the majority of the film in a sweat-drenched feverish confusion, which is so convincing, that you wonder what the director had to do to in order to produce such a performance from his actors. I have never seen so much agony and despair on the screen, as Merrill's men struggle through the seemingly endless swamps and mountains. Fuller adds to the attention by way of silent close-ups and good use of the location which suggests that anything might be around the corner, and it usually is. The film truly shows the horrors of war and the effects on the minds of the people who fought it. If there is a fault, it comes in the form of a patriotic voice-over commentary which bookends the film at the start and the finish. Otherwise, this makes for thrillingly uncomfortable yet exhilarating viewing.

This movie was definitely worth watching. I met Jeff Chandler when he came into the the photography shop where military could develop their own photos. He was quite a man. Very tall, with piercing eyes and that silver hair... Sad that he died in such a fashion. I was in the Air Force in the Philippines when this was made and I actually was in the movie as an impromptu stunt man :) They paid me $35 because I fell off of a horse in the race scene :) Watching other scenes being shot was quite humorous at times when men would be shot and fall and then, not wanting to be out of the scene I imagine, would get up and get back in the fight :))) The editors did a great job with what they had ... Just watch the film, it is really well worth it!

This probably was not Sam Fuller's lowest budget movie. In fact, if the information here on IMDb is correct, it had a fairly decent budget. But I suspect that makes no difference at all to his style or the movie that he made. There is no CGI, no jump cuts and no shaky-cam. He got his actors to act and made effective use of pyrotechnics and extras to put realistic and horrifying battle on film. I am not a prolific reviewer, in fact I probably average 2 or 3 reviews a year. That's because I normally only bother when a movie makes me feel something (or it really makes me mad). It might be laughter or it might be horror but to me a worthwhile movie has to make you react. And this movie certainly does that. The story is worth telling but like most of Fuller's work the focus is really on the people and not on glory. The acting is superb and supremely believable. The actors in this movie aren't really known for award quality work but they really impress here. Samuel Fuller ignores the usual formulaic tropes and tells the story his way. There's an unneeded intro and a bombastic outro that I suspect were added by the studio but it starts where it starts and ends where it ends. No attempts to make a neat little package. The story is gripping and Fuller makes you feel like you have a personal interest in the outcome. His writing is top notch and tight with no filler. There is no obligatory love interest in this movie and no cheesy flashbacks either. It's relentless and often grim but always effective. I'm not a historian but I feel that it captures the essence of the real life battles. His direction is masterful. From the claustrophobic to the panoramic he makes the land itself an important character in the film. And he gets amazingly good performances from his actors. You can feel their pain and exhaustion. Jeff Chandler is more believable than in any other role that I can think of him playing. Most people have likely forgotten that he was nominated for an Academy Award for his portrayal of Cochise in Broken Arrow. That was over-shadowed by the the fact that most of his roles were in B and C-grade pictures. Personally I would rate most of his work as competent but not impressive. However I was very impressed by his portrayal of General Merrill. Sadly this was his last film. He died of complications from back surgery before it was released. One other stand out was Claude Akins. A very competent character actor who really shines in his role as Sergeant Kolowicz. There is a scene with him and a young native boy and an old woman that blew me away. Not a word of dialogue but he makes you feel his pain and it made me tear up in sympathy. The only bad part about this movie is the knowledge that we will never see it's like again. Give one of today's hotshot directors 500 times the budget and he will probably spend 200 million on CGI that will be impressive as heck but won't really make you feel anything at a visceral level. I suspect that it's a difference in life experience. Sam Fuller and most of the actors in this movie actually lived and fought through the Second World War.