The Gallant Men

It seems with all the forces going against this series, it wasn't surprising it only lasted 26 episodes. The networks really struggled against each other for high rated shows at prime time 7pm to 10pm for me. Altman was much more needed then only directing the pilot. ABC had a better eye on Combat having a better production team, big name guest host every episode, & a cast that worked exceptionally well. William Reynolds admitted he didn't have the drive to become a better actor. Vic Morrow on the other hand took the show over Rick Jason even though both agreed to split top credit. Warner Brothers wouldn't take on guest hosting like Combat did. The competition for prime time slots was furious with shows like Jackie Gleason..... The Gallant Men could of lasted longer had there been more money to doe out. The cast was good & Reynolds also. He left acting early, just lacked personal desire to become a career actor even though he had what it took to be one with his looks on his side. Gallant Men was a good show fighting the war in Italy. The war affected every country in Europe, not just France. Combat covered that country. There was many battles in Italy, where one of my uncles fought. I read a review regarding Robert Conrad being casted into the Gallant Men, yea that would be one of a few more things they could of kept TGM on TV longer. Combat focused on a squad & TGM should of done the same but added two more regular characters. Again this is a money matter. Italy had a lot of mountain battles where writing some episodes tied together in two parts would of really made some great episodes, a string of them. Story telling in a series is a must to have good writers. I believe with a bigger number of cast members where the likes of a Robert Conrad would of fit in snuggly & fighting in Sicily also another major battle ground gave TGM more lasting. There was a lot of actors to hire for the show. Richard Boone, Ty Harding, Peter Brown, Peter Breck, comes to mind. I do not think that two TV WW II series running different days of the week would of tired audiences. Both being in different countries. Look at the decade of the 1950s of Westerns on every channel & network 7 days a week. .

This was a fun show to watch!! Not has good as Combat or 12 O'Clock High, but quite enjoyable. I thought William Reynolds as Capt. Jim Benedict and Robert McQueeney as Conley Wright were pretty good. Most of the story lines were predictable, but nevertheless fun to watch. Had some really great guest stars( Robert Conrad, Peter Breck, Peter Brown, Guy Stockwell and Van Williams to name a few). This was a Warner Brothers show so I guess that they used most of the T.V actors that were under contract to them and starring in shows of their own as guest stars to help boost the ratings..I also thought that it had the most gut-wrenching theme song that I had ever heard!( I was 8 years old at the time and I damn-near cried every time I heard that song at the end of each episode). The action was enjoyable, but not of the same quality as Combat. This show was canceled after one season. With some better writing, this may have lasted longer.

Just a quick correction to one of the other comments....The Gallant Men took place in Italy, not in the Pacific. Combat was set in France.

I was nine when this show aired...and the son of a WWII vet....and loved the show. Not as much as Combat....but well enough. During those few years...8 to 11 or so....I would join my pals of the same age group on weekends....and all thru the summer....and "play army"in the woods across the street....with stuff we got at the War Surplus store....or got from our dads'.....and back then..toy stores sold the most amazingly realistic toy weapons...I had a very detailed plastic replica of the Thompson submachine gun...as well as a replica of the old Springfield rifle. We were inspired by both Combat and The Gallant Men to play the most realistically detailed "war games"....as only innocent 10 year-olds can...today was Normandy...next week...the French hedge rows....in winter..The Battle of The Bulge...in the heat of summer... Guadalcanal ...we had a blast.

That was 1962-3-4......

In a few short years...by 1968...war was no longer a game for us....but but a real event on TV every day...that we had to begin to reckon with.

As sobering as that turn of history was....I will never forget the the thrill of our games....perhaps because we aspired to be like our dads'...til life changed for all of us.

I watched this show with my father as a small child. He was a BAR man in an infantry squad. I liked Gallant Men much more than Combat as in Combat, you know the core group would never get killed and the music was very predictable. The Gallant Men was like what my pop experienced he said. Brief intense battles followed by lulls where you tried to find something to do without getting killed. The show gave characters more depth and the battles were more realistic than Combat. The men also appeared at times to really be in fear of their life instead of just acting. I recently acquired the entire series on DVD's and it is even better than I remember it.

The Gallant Men was Warner Brother's contribution tot he War genre of the early 60's, featuring many of the same contract players who had appeared in their western and detective series. It was a sort of rival of Combat, which premiered on the same network in the same year but which was produced by a different company. I was a kid then and my family started out watching The Gallant Men but began watching Combat when the former was canceled. I liked The Gallant Men very much but spent much of my childhood humming the "Combat March" with my friends, who always instantly recognized it.

I'd have to pick Combat as the better show because it's more consistently good but they shows are by their nature very similar and a good "Gallant Men" is as good as a good Combat. It's just that there are fewer of them. The writing, directing and acting on Combat is more consistently good. The characters are a little stronger overall, as well. Vic Morrow's Sgt. Chip Saunders is one oft he classic TV characters of all time. Rick Jason's Lt. Gil Hanley is almost as good, (but forgotten by many, for some reason). Jack Hogan's Kirby is also memorable. Pierre Jalbert as Caje and Dick Peabody as Littlejohn, (and he's the right size for it), offer strong support. The one thing The Gallant Men has is a sardonic narrator, Robert McQueeney's war correspondent, Conley Wright. William Reynolds is a forceful Captain Benedict. Robert Ridgely is OK as Lt. Kimbro. Eddie Fontaine is good as the wheeler's dealer of the unit, Pvt. DeAngelo, but not as good as Hogan's similar Pvt. Kirby on Combat. Roland LaStarza, a former boxer who once got KO'ed by Rocky Marciano, has some good comic moments as Lucavich, but isn't much of an actor. (In one show, the soldiers talk about what they expected war to be like. Lucavich said he thought they might name a country after him. "A country named Lucavich?!?", says DeAngelo.) Both shows were popular at the time but ABC decided they needed only one war show on it's schedule and Combat was getting the better ratings at the time so The Gallant Men was canceled after only one year. It was very disappointing to me. I had hopes that the two shows would work their way to the end of the war and meet up with each other in Germany. As it was The Gallant Men never made it to the end of the war and the Combat crew fought on for 5 years, which hardly seems fair, considering that the actually length of time from the Normandy invasion to V-E Day was only ten months. No wonder they complained about the war dragging on.

One thing the two shows had in common was the dilemma they faced in each battle. Obviously, a fire fight between a squad of American soldiers who are regulars in a TV show and a squad of German troops who are not is going to be rather one sided. The war could not have been that easy. So, if you see a guy in an American uniform who isn't one of the regulars, kiss him goodbye...