User reviews

When the worst thing the drill instructor can call the new recruits at boot camp is "Meatheads", you know that the movie is pulling its punches. Not that I thought that about "Battle Cry" when I saw it at the age of nine in 1956 at the movies, then I lapped up every minute of this film devoted to those most cinematic of warriors - the US Marines.

The years have not been kind to "Battle Cry". It has dated in a way that "From Here to Eternity" has not. However it seems that many WW2 veterans like this film. They seem less critical of it than younger reviewers, and it's hard to argue with people who actually lived it rather than viewed it. To be honest, "Battle Cry" seems more truthful to the spirit of the marines of WW2 than a movie such as "Windtalkers" with all its gore and false heroics.

Leon Uris wrote the novel based on his experiences with the marines during the war. It contained passages that were thrilling, funny and outrageous. The book's description of boot camp and the lustiness of the marines pulled no punches at all. But 1950's censorship made the movie a different matter.

The story follows a group of marines from the time they head to boot camp until their return from battle in the Pacific. So many characters are introduced that some of them emerge as overly familiar stereotypes, but Tab Hunter and Aldo Ray hold their own. Although James Whitmore's performance as Mac, the master sergeant, is convincing, his narration often comes across as trite and intrusive.

The movie concentrated as much on the encounters in the bedroom as on the battlefield, split evenly between the women the boys leave behind and the ones they find on their way to war with Nancy Olsen giving the strongest performance as the New Zealand widow who falls in love with Aldo Ray's character.

The movie becomes more focused when the recruits pass through boot camp and join the battalion that takes them to war. Van Heflin as Major Huxley, the commanding officer, gives the standout performance in this film, providing the right combination of toughness and compassion as the professional given the job of moulding boys into marines. His performance goes a long way towards counteracting the negatives in "Battle Cry".

The film's best sequence begins when Huxley pushes his men to outperform another battalion in a gruelling cross-country hike in New Zealand. After reaching their destination, he decides to do the return journey as well, pushing the men to their limits. When it seems they can't continue, the other battalion passes them on their way back mounted on trucks. The sight galvanises Huxley's men and resentment turns to pride as they march on bloodied feet back to camp. "When we hit that camp gate, let's give 'em a look at the best outfit in the Corps", exhorts Huxley as his men swing past to the accompaniment of Max Steiner's rousing score.

Unlike music for war films of the last 30 years or so, which invariably play to the pathos and tragedy of war, Steiner went for the glory. Steiner's original marching song, "Honey Babe", provides an enduring memory of the film.

"Battle Cry" delivers its major battle at the end. The landing on Saipan is well staged if somewhat confusing, but it leads to an emotional ending as the surviving marines return home.

The success of "Battle Cry" indicated that audiences of the day needed the reassurance of some core values: honour, duty, patriotism and sacrifice. "Battle Cry" over-delivered on those qualities. Vietnam was still ten years away, and then the generation brought up on movies like this would face some harsh realities of their own.

It is difficult to recommend "Battle Cry" to a broad audience today. But with that said, it does boast a number of fine performances and a sequence or two that stay in the memory.

My rating of Battle Cry has more to do with my disappointment with the plot than the actually quality of the movie. I knew nothing of the movie before I watched it, but with a name like Battle Cry, I was expecting a war movie along the lines of Battleground (with which it is paired in the double feature DVD I bought). Instead, Battle Cry has more in common with a soap opera than a real war movie. The movie spends over two hours of its time on relationships and love affairs. When the real battle scenes finally begin, they're over and done with in less than 10 minutes. That's not to say I didn't enjoy the stories of the Marines and their women, it's just not what I was expecting.

I am sure that on repeat viewings my enjoyment of the movie and rating I've given it will increase. Most of the movie is very well done. Like most other reviews I've read, I am especially fond of the scenes involving Pfc Andy Hookens (Aldo Ray) and Pat Rogers (Nancy Olson). I found it a very believable, heartfelt story that's played perfectly by both actors. The rest of the cast is solid and their plot lines are almost as enjoyable.

I was shocked at the frank presentation of some of the subject matter in Battle Cry. I can't think of another movie from the 50s, especially a flag-waving war movie, where sex, pregnancy, drinking, and adultery are dealt with so openly. It's a nice change-of-pace from the sanitized WWII movies I've come to expect.

The title of Raoul Walsh's film would indicate a high level of visual war action, but the action in this film is more like a television soap: Peyton Place Meets Boot Camp. Battle Cry is not a bad film by any means, but a mainstream 50's romance, and because it is Walsh, there are excellent things to be found, as long as you don't expect superior battlefield heroics; Aldo Ray and Van Heflin both turn in finely-tuned performances, Ray as a macho player evolving into a loving husband, Van Heflin as a commander who fails to maintain distance from his charges; a young Tab Hunter caught on with teens when he was cast as heartthrob Danny Forrester, and acquits himself nicely.

Three years later, Stanley Kubrick would make the stunning Paths of Glory, a WWI film that revealed the true brutality of battle, and Spielberg would change mainstream war films for all time with Saving Private Ryan; Battle Cry involves the willing viewer in an intelligent adaptation of a best-selling novel and as such, succeeds.

My perspective of this movie is that of a Navy veteran of World War II. My ship landed Marines on Iwo Jima and I witnessed the flag over Mount Suribachi. I take exception to some who do not consider this realistic enough, but it was made in 1955 and for its time I thought the combat scenes were adequate. I read Leon Uris' book Battle Cry long before I saw the movie. He was there in the Pacificduring World War II not in some office in Hollywood and not long after the question of whether or not we would prevail was yet finalized. He mentions in his book and it is also mentioned in the movie that when the Marines left New Zealand they "boarded the ships known as the Unholy Four." Well, I served on USS President Jackson, an attack transport which landed the first Marines in an American offensive in WWII and this was 7 August 1942 at Tulagi in the Solomon Islands. An hour later the USS President Adams landed the first troops of Guadalcanal. These two ships plus the USS President Hayes and USS Crescent City made up what was known by sailors and Marines throughout the Pacific as the "Unholy Four." So, you see, Leon Uris knew a heck of a lot more about what went on in the Pacific than latter day critics of this movie whom I doubt were ever in the military let alone in the Pacific during WWII. I enjoyed the story, the characters, the love story woven through the plot. I and many veterans could well relate to a Marine on leave falling in love with a New Zealand girl and then going off to fight and returning in bad shape. Hey,pals of today, you really don,t have any idea of such things unless you experienced them. The battle scenes were not gory and perhaps not realistic; if they were you wouldn't be able to sit in the theatre without throwing up. The two Navajo indians portrayed were used to show how the Marines used the Navajo Codetalkers to thwart Japanese trying to listen in on their communications. Recently two real live Navajo Codetalkers where given medals at the White House and there is another movie to come out about the Code Talkers. The idea that a Marine Colonel might spend a long time training troops and then not being allowed to take them into combat may seem idiotic but if you trained hard for a long, long time for a job you wanted to get it done, at least that was they way men felt in those days. The training sequences were in my opinion quite good and showed how Marines were shaped into combat readiness. The story line about some of the Marines reflected just a little about the diverse nature of servicemen during the war. There were no blacks in the movie because during WWII all military services were segregated although the Navy had black mess cooks aboard ship. Whether you like it or not that was the real way it was then. The movie has James Whitmore as a top sergeant and does a fine job with one memborable scene when the Colonel asks if he is going to stay on base or base with the Old Man. He replies, "T think I'll go to town and see ikf I can scare up an Old Woman." He had previously done a fine job as a Sergeant with 101st Airborne in Battleground, in my opinion another very good war movie. Well, the movie ends with the Marines back hom on leave and what do they see as they get off the train but a newspaper with the big black headline: "Marines on Iwo Jima." If anyone thought this was a lousy movie they are entitled to their opinions, but for me, I say, "Tell it to the Marines!"

This is one of the best of a whole slew of WW2 films that were made in the 50's, some others of which are also very good. This one stars Aldo Ray and James Whitmore, a young Tab Hunter and others destined to become stars. The action scenes are all done pretty well in most of these films and this one is no exception. By today's standards, there are no real special effects, but what little are in the film are state-of-the-art for the time. This film should be seen to appreciate what our soldiers, sailors and marines did for us in WW2.

For all its box-office potential (notable credits, star cast, epic production), this WWII effort in color and widescreen does not seem to enjoy that much of a reputation. Having watched it for myself, I can understand why: the film spends a great chunk of its nearly 2½ hours exploring (or is that exploiting?) the dreary love lives of the various members of a marine unit; this atypical approach may prevent the film from being yet another routine actioner, but, it does come perilously close to soap opera at times – which is worse! Director Walsh was an action expert but, as I said, here this element is relegated to the last 20 minutes or so; popular novelist Leon Uris's screen adaptation of his own novel was by all accounts a watered-down affair (actually common practice for Hollywood at the time). Incidentally, Walsh would helm the similarly mild film of a classic war novel by another renowned author – Norman Mailer's THE NAKED AND THE DEAD (1958), for which he 'recalled into service' a number of actors from BATTLE CRY itself. The cast, then, includes established and up-and-coming stars: Van Heflin (despite being top-billed his role is virtually that of an observer), Dorothy Malone, Raymond Massey (a mere cameo), Nancy Olson, Aldo Ray (who comes off best) and James Whitmore (basically retreading – albeit effectively – his Oscar-nominated role in BATTLEGROUND [1949]) in the former category and William Campbell, Anne Francis, Tab Hunter, L.Q. Jones (formerly Justus McQueen, he stuck to his character's name here professionally thereafter!), Perry Lopez and Fess Parker in the latter. The narrative features, at least, three ongoing romances: Tab Hunter is even involved with two women (Mona Freeman, absurdly third-billed, and an unlikely dalliance with frustrated Dorothy Malone), bookworm John Lupton has an even less believable relationship with floozie Anne Francis, while tough/beefy Aldo Ray demonstrates his sensitive side when he falls for New Zealander Nancy Olson. These are developed intermittently between the training sessions and the aforementioned climactic action bout (which despite some obvious stock footage is fairly well handled on a grand scale); joining the various dots, as it were, within this episodic structure is Whitmore's sympathetic narration.

In "Battle Cry", there is more crying than battling, especially in the first half of the film. The story follows new marines as they leave home, engage in training, and become involved in actual deployment. There is a concentration on their relationships, particularly romantic relationships.

One marine has a girl at home, but becomes involved with another woman. A second marine finds a war widow from New Zealand to become involved with. Regardless of the scenario, the logistics of these relationships is difficult, given the wartime stresses and the uncertain futures of these men.

For me, these sections of the film were overly dramatic. The film is also plagued with clichés. This is too bad, because some portions of the film are excellent, only to be submarined by awkward writing.

Look for the tough-but-loving commanders. In fact, this is a staple of the film, which begins to feel like a commercial for the marine corps.

On a technical level, some of the scenes of tropical jungle look as if they were filmed in the California woods.

The extensive cast is impressive. Consider Van Heflin, James Whitmore, Raymond Massey, Tab Hunter, Aldo Ray, Dorothy Malone, Anne Francis, among others. Fess Parker makes a cameo appearance.

The Leon Uris screenplay, based upon one of his novels, falls short of "From Here to Eternity" quality, though it tries to be as expansive. Nevertheless, it's interesting to see what WWII looked like to those only ten years removed from its drama.

To those who insist that only the gore shown in films such as 'Saving Private Ryan' gives a genuine cinematic portrayal of the experience of war I say: Put up or shut up: ENLIST! Because 'Battle Cry' tells what most of the experience of the service in and out of war consists of: the loneliness of a man among strangers in barracks; the in-your-face, gratuitously belligerent bastards in barracks who get on everyone's already put-upon nerves; the long aching separations from family and girlfriends, wives and lovers; the monotonously contemptible chow; the soul- and mind-frustrating sheer bloody boredom of living in barracks, performing mindless repetitive tasks, and having always to "hurry up and wait" or to be roused from temporary respite to have to get up and at 'em all over again for the ten-thousandth wearying time; the having to take crap from foul-mouthed, mean, nasty sonsabitches whose only claim to authority is one more stripe than yours on their uniform. Those are just the monotonous low-lights of daily life behind-the lines. Up on the lines it gets worse. A lot worse. And then just having to live in icy muck or tropical insect swarms suddenly gets much worse when the you-know-what hits the fan: when a soldier has to go into the attack or to defend against sudden enemy attack - so that his life of monotonous discomfort and privation is now punctuated by brief, terrifying spasms of violence few of us can even begin to imagine.

This is why you hear combat veterans say things such as, "All the rest is gravy," because even the long, endless days and nights of soul-numbing monotony of barracks and drill and K.P. and loneliness are preferable to the terrors of battle - and even to the filth and privation of just trying to live on a quiet sector's front line. This is why 'Battle Cry' shows more of the daily, drudging experience of actual marines than those war films crammed with combat sequences ever show.

'Battle Cry' tells the truth that men in war are bored, lonely, chafed, irritated, often disgusting and disgusted, irritating, sh_t-upon constantly by every last ugly nasty bastard wearing one stripe more than you get to wear, and isolated in a big ugly, mean, bored, crowd whose members they didn't get to choose as company. Also, no one, except the very few top brass strategist-commanders, gets to choose his destination or his daily tasks: so that every day, every heartbeat, you feel very, very small, utterly insignificant and powerless almost all of the time, every day, every night, every time some mess cook slops a glob of something you'd never have ordered and which you'd never have otherwise forked into your mouth onto your baby-like (you are, after all, powerless) compartmented chow tray to there commingle with the other globs of slop already commingled on it. You just wish that someone would recognize you, single you out, maybe treat you as an individual, value you as a unique person who needs only to be himself - and not just a service number or a cog in a uniformly drab, communally responsive colonial animal-machine - to merit such simple attention and care. I heard many - men and women in the service - express simply: "I wish I were anywhere but here."

Go and hang out just outside a military or naval base and see the clip-joints, the hucksters, the whores who pitilessly roll drunken soldiers and sailors as soon as they'd light their next cigarette; let your eyes take in the fleecing tailor shops, the used car salesmen finagling their way to your very slender paycheck, the loan sharks, the gamblers fixing card and crap games to bilk servicemen, the drug dealers seeking to sell you God-knows-what-that-sh_t-might-be, the strip bars, the swarms of Mary Jane Rottencrotches who habituate soldiers' and sailors' bars, eager to marry a combat-bound serviceman just to get their names on the poor bastard's GI life insurance policy. It's only beyond this circus of lovely attractions that you find the nice clean, orderly, middle class residential districts whose patriarchs and matriarchs don't want you in their neighborhood - and want your sailor or Marine or soldier ass far away from their young daughters or their smart-assed college kid sons. These are the people and the institutions which you, the serviceman and servicewoman, face and wade through when the Powers That Be do let you out of the monotonous, soul-vacuuming confines of your barracks and the Daily Routine.

Yet the men and women in America's wars stuck it out, pulled together when they had to, and they deserve every respect for their endurance, grit, applied imagination, and courage. These experiences and qualities and the men who met such challenges to their spirit and flesh 'Battle Cry' shows in spades; and it also shows the experiences of women separated to toil alone in constant anxiety for their own and their children's' or their husbands's day-to-day welfare - for all of their loved ones whose experience and fate they can't directly influence. let alone improve. 'Battle Cry' shows the men and the women as human beings, as individuals caught up in what General Eisenhower rightly called "a Great Crusade." Only to the little people in it, it didn't resemble a Great Crusade; to them it looked like a hopeless, disorganized, screwed-up shambles: read Bill Mauldin's inimitable book of his WWII cartoons, and you begin to grasp how repulsive and exhausting, frightful and ludicrous that Crusade was for the poor bloody infantrymen. Or you can watch 'Battle Cry.'

My father was a squadron commander in the Marine Corps. We were stationed at Opa Loka Marine airbase north of Miami, Florida. My father had just finished a tour in Korea. His squadron was going with the fleet to Vieques Island Puerto Rico for carrier quals. and firing exercises. The grunts (a battalion) were to make an amphibious landing on Vieques Island and my father's squadron was to provide close air support for the landing. Vieques at that time was owned by the Navy and off-limits to most non-military personnel however the director of Battle Cry was given permission by the Navy to film part of his movie on the island during the ambhibous landings. In the film you only see my father's squadron for an instant as they roared in over the beach in echelon, which they would have not done in reality. My father had pictures taken with all the male stars and autographed by them. He also received outtakes of his squadron in the air which were left on the cutting room floor. Most of the Marines in the picture were real which is good because they were real SALTY. Utilities were faded etc. Equipment looked used. The japs were marines also. One error is that if you look close the jap. artillery is the same as the Marines, 105 hows. My father said the Marines loved to ham it up too much and had to take many take to get one scene but the director got everything except the stars for free!!!!in 1964 I landed on that same beach with a battalion of Marines, I was a company commander but no movies for us. Each night the stars and the pilots returned to the Navy Base at Roosevelt Roads. There was no airstrip on the island. I thought the authenticity was excellent, as a Marine I only caught one small error, when the General Raymond Massey was on the command ship a Marine Officer of the Day brought him a message about Huxley's difficulties. He wore a hat (cover) Marines do not wear covers indoors however he was under arms he was wearing a 45 pistol when underarms a Marine does salute and does wear a cover indoors only the generalRaymond Massey was covered and he was not under arms also the Admiral was covered and he was not underarms small detail really small considering such a complex movies about the Corps. One thing I did miss was the Browing Automatic Rifle or BAR which was a staple of the Corps in WWII. Semper Fi. Saipan was one of the bloodiest landings ever made by the Corps. Most of the real troopers in the first group to hit the beach were either killed then or in the many deadly, brutal days of combat after the landings. Most of Huxleys men would have come in body-bags or injured. The Navy used less ordnance on Saipan than they did on Guadacanal. But Saipan one the first base used by our B-29s to attack Tokyo.

Perhaps for 1954 this was OK, but I do not think it stands the test of time at all. Generally faithful to the book, I do not know if this movie or book created the formula of a intellectual, a street wise punk, a country hick, etc, etc in a unit - but this movie sure follows that formula.

It's very traditional. Kids who are patriotic enlist in WW2 to fight. They meet women, become Marines and want to fight. The battle scenes are OK for their time, I do not need to see gore to make it real and this movie does not glorify war.

I found it interesting the DVD cover - shows scantily clad (for 1954) women, and 1/2 of the movie centers around the men and women who meet, fall in or out of love. There are historical errors which normally do not bother me - one scene shows Black Marines, they were not integrated in 1942, Army units relieved the Marines on Guadalcanel, Tarawa was over in three horrific days.

If you fast forward to 1987, you see pretty much the exact same formula in Full Metal Jacket, but with more graphic gore.

Maybe I'm too harsh. It's exactly what you would expect of a 1954 war movie made about WW2 - patriotic, sentimental, clichéd.

For those of us who lived thru the War, BATTLE CRY is a splendid multi story Marines in Love and War drama, masterfully overseen by veteran Raoul Walsh, with a career perf by Aldo Ray, backed with fine work from Van Heflin, James Whitmore, Tab Hunter, Nancy Olson and others in a star cast. A huge box office hit from an equally big bestseller, marking a vast improvement on the book. Sentimental, exciting, plausible, involving and thoroughly entertaining; its 149 minute running time paced properly, unlike today's bloated epics, which seem to embrace overlength as a substitute for content and skill. Unlike Spielberg's yawner, CRY didn't need to resort to F/X bloodbaths to awaken the audience's attention.

I saw BATTLE CRY on Feb. 19, 1955 at the Laurel Theatre in San Carlos, a Saturday night at the movies in an Art Deco suburban house. Maybe you have to be 66 to appreciate this film for what it represents; and maybe you need to be 26 to swallow Spielberg's version of D-Day. I'll stick with BATTLE CRY.

Battle Cry was one of my favorite movies ever since I can remember. The more time I have seen, the better I like it. It has an honest feel of a story told by an author that actually lived it. Leon Uris's tale about the love and devotion of the boys of the 6th Marine Regiment of the 2nd Marines in World War II.

While some of the stories are a bit over simplified, the truth in the telling comes through very clearly. This is a tale of how both men and boys deal with the strains of training and the burden of combat.

I think it would be very wrong to compare this film, as some have, with movies made in more modern times, even those made by Steven Spielberg. Spielberg's films were more realistic to be sure, with better combat footage and more realistic carnage. Many veterans have said how frightening they actually are because they tell the tale of battle so well. This film is not about combat it self, but rather the relationships of men that are forced to endure it.

It is simply impossible to compare the two. See this film, and feel for Andy and Danny and L.Q. and Mac and the others as they help each other try to come home again to what really matters.

Sometimes I don't know which is the worse thing to come after a successful movie, the quick cash-in sequel, or the second-rate rip-off by a rival studio. In 1953 Columbia had a huge hit (and Best Picture Oscar winner) with From Here to Eternity, a multi-stranded story about the lives and loves of a group of soldiers in World War Two adapted from a novel by James Jones. In 1955 Warner Brothers produced Battle Cry, a multi-stranded story about the lives and loves of a group of soldiers in World War Two adapted from a novel by Leon Uris. Spot the difference? Oh yes, Battle Cry is in Technicolor, Cinemascope and has a few more explosions. It also happens to be a prime example of bad screen writing.

The badness of the Battle Cry script announces itself from the very first line. "My name's Mac. The name's not important". So why did you tell us it then, Mac? Five minutes in and "Mac" is introducing us to as lazily-written a gang of stereotypes ever seen outside of a satire, some of them a bit racist to boot. There's an ignorant and scruffy Hispanic, a Navajo who makes references to scalping and smoke signals, an intellectual who wears glasses (myopia and bookishness presumably having some esoteric medical link), a Texan who strums Home on the Range on an acoustic guitar, etc, etc, etc. Admittedly, a few of these stereotypes get challenged (slightly) later on, but the fact that they are established in the first place leads one to believe Battle Cry is going to be some jolly comedy, and yet it professes to be some deep and insightful drama on military life.

Or does it? Battle Cry doesn't really seem to know what it wants to be. At times it has an air of cheerful and nostalgic camaraderie, at other times it studies leadership, and other times still it seems to question the entire institution of the army. It's all very well for a story to tackle its subject from multiple viewpoints, but the trouble with Battle Cry is that none of these is fully explored or even clarified, and the whole thing is just a vague rumination. Similarly, none of the various story arcs interweaves particularly well. In the opening scene we are lead to believe Tab Hunter is the hero, only for him to suddenly dwindle to a bit player half-way through and for Aldo Ray (who, confusingly for viewers less familiar with the cast, looks very similar) to emerge as the main character. Other smaller parts are built up, only to be dropped with loose-ends flapping, and several once-prominent characters are killed off with a single line of dialogue. That "Mac" voice-over functions only to skim over the various undeveloped plot points and make the odd trite comment on the picture's woolly themes.

It's a shame the screenplay is so bad, because Battle Cry does have one or two finer things going for it. Director Raoul Walsh, despite clearly being a bit phased by the wider aspect ratio, shows his usual visual flair. At key moments he uses the trick of having someone looking almost-but-not-quite directly into the camera, such as the prostitute at the end of the barroom brawl scene, or (in a very neat moment) Aldo Ray's disappointed face suddenly revealed when Nancy Olsen walks away from him after their first date. You can also spot Walsh's somewhat risqué approach to realism. In the scene where the worn out soldiers are angered at the sight of another regiment in trucks, a couple of them are giving the finger. There are some good, solid performances here too, most notably the naturalistic James Whitmore ("Mac"), and Aldo Ray who gives off real presence in what is one of his best turns. Also check out LQ Jones in the role that gave him his screen name, adding a wild streak of comedy which is good fun even if it is at odds with everything else in the picture, although all things considered that hardly matters.

As a whole however it is pretty clear the studio did not lavish a great deal of attention on this production. It looks as if various boxes were ticked to make it marketable (including a rather tepid rehash of the famous From Here to Eternity beach scene) but nothing that would make it really exceptional, and there are some glaring bits of unprofessionalism. For example, anyone who has seen a handful of 50s war movies will be used to being distracted by the odd bit of scratchy stock footage, but Battle Cry even uses black-and-white stock footage, as if someone really thought that would blend seamlessly with the Technicolor. This is the sort of shoddy approach you would expect from a B-flick. And perhaps it actually would have worked a little better if it had been stripped down to some 90-minute quickie, losing a few of those dead-end subplots and getting some kind of well-paced balance between the action and the drama. However, with a runtime of nearly two-and-a-half hours, Battle Cry is pure tedium.

Let me start by saying I really enjoyed this film and have watched it perhaps a half dozen times. The comments by Mr. Glassey do seem unfair to me. This movie doesnt show us the guts and bloodshed and realism that is accepted and maybe even expected by todays standards but it does show the loss of war. The fear of war and the heroism that was a part of being a marine in WWII. It shows us 3 dimensional characters like "High Pockets" who loves his men as much as he loves the Marines. Yes, I suppose some of the situations are glossed over but that is to be expected when you are trying to tell a story this big in the time alloted. The beginning and middle of the film which focus' on training and shipping over seas to New Zealand is first rate entertainment. The last third where we go into combat with the cast is not as realistic as modern films, but how can it be? It is 1955 when this movie was made and the technology to show how war really looks was not possible then. And even if one may argue that it was, the desire and allowable limits of the day would have precluded that sort of realism anyway. All in all, this is a fair if not excellent portrait of marines going to war.

It's WWII. Various young men have answered the call to join the US Marines. The movie follows one squad being trained to operate radios. There is one of each kind in the squad. Many have romantic entanglements. First, they are sent to San Diego.

This is mostly romantic melodramas with the war in the background. It all feels very 50's. The stories and the characters are stuck in 50's morality and sensibilities. There are a couple of hunky guys from the era and some solid actors, too. It's not until the last half hour when the boys finally arrive at the war. Quite frankly, I would rather reverse the ratio. It's a war movie that needs more war. The war action starts with a lot of actual war footage. The production is fairly big and has some big action. It all becomes chaos anyways. This has some fine size, but is not one of the better war movies.

Good solid war story with what I believe may be the first instance of a "navaho Wind talker) being used in the field commumications. The short clip has a navaho "Phone Talker" speaking his dialect to another base to another navaho.

I found that this may actually be the first example in the War Movie of the 40's to show this little piece of American History. I think most folks only learned about the "Wildtalkers" of the Navaho Nation in the later war fields that can out since the 80's 90's when the last movie with nicholas cage and Adam Beach played in the movie "Wingtalkers" As an old film buff I had remembered that I had see at least 2 old 40-50's war movie with had a minor character who used Native Indian language as code talkers. The old BattleCRY is one of those movies. I am still lookin for the 2nd one from that time period.

Not the world's best movie But not its worst. What I am especially interested in this movie is that much of it is set in my home city of Wellington, New Zealand, and features the U.S. Marines saving us from invasion by the Jpanese. Leon Uris's novel, on which the movie is based, catches very much the mood of the 1942-1943 period when the men of successive Marine divisions passed through Wellington en route to the fighting in Guadalcalal and elsewhere in the Soloman Islands. The movie makes a fair effort to translate this to the screen. What also interests me is that a previous comment I made on this movies along the above lines has not been retained among the user comments in International Moview Date Base. I greatly admire IMDb and make much use of it. Has Amaerica's paranoia grown to the extent that even favourable comments are not welcome if they come from outside the United States ?

I saw this film in 1959 in a theater in Oceanside, Ca. I was in ITR, Los Polgas, Camp Pendleton. It was great then, but now, this 70 y/o watches it with a sad heart and a yearning for being back in. I recognized every building at Camp Pendleton, and much of the terrain. I'd walked, crawled and run over, around and through most of it. The San Diego ferry, now gone, was so neat. Believe it or not I used to catch to Grey Hound from Oceanburg to Dago, I had a sister that live at Imperial Beach. I'd take the ferry to Coronado. It was such a peaceful, serene short voyage, chance to gather one's thoughts. I do think the combat was well enough done, done so sure about all this blood and guts they show now. Even more so, the absence of the absolutely filthy language they feel they have to use now,aka "sewer pipe for a mouth", my analogy. We used a little profanity, but never filth like they do now. Didn't used to have to put that "some scenes my be objectable" stuff, the whole family could watch. Great movie, Semper Fi, especially to my brothers, the former Marine's. Keep your K-bar whet, and your haversack dry>

This film was a massive hit for Warner Bros. when it was released in 1955. It boasts a fine cast of veterans and young actors, many of whom found their main careers on television: Van Heflin, James Whitmore, Aldo Ray, Tab Hunter, Raymond Massey, Tommy Cook, Fess Parker, John Lupton, William Campbell, Anne Francis, Mona Freeman, Dorothy Malone, and Nancy Olsen. Battle Cry was directed by Raoul Walsh.

It's the story of young men going into the Marines to fight the war - the vigorous training, the girls they left behind, the ones they meet, and the battles they fight. Someone said this is an intelligent movie - and it is, even featuring Jonas Applegarth as a Navajo code talker.

The personal stories hold your interest. I watched this because I realized that I've never seen a movie with Tab Hunter. For some reason, this gorgeous man (even though I wrote about him at one point) was off my radar until I saw "Tab Hunter Confidential," which was wonderful. It turns out James Dean auditioned for his role in the movie.

It's not Saving Private Ryan, but I think for its time, Battle Cry was somewhat unusual. Of course, it wouldn't be the '50s without the shame of getting pregnant before marriage. Very different today.

As a former Marine, I really liked this film. I read the novel and saw the film as a little boy, and years later, in Vietnam, I reflected on how different war is from war films. I don't have the DVD or VCR tape, but never miss this one on late night TV. It has some corny characters, (the good-hearted whore, the rough lumberjack who turns out to be tender, the grizzled old first sergeant, etc.) but it hangs together. It is plausible and the personal lives of the Marines make it a real drama with some depth beyond rifles and helmets. The scenery is great and the fighting sanitized. A terrific old movie.

Lots of characters and dames. Not much to say, it's diverting for those who like military films. I liked the bookworm as usual, he's probably a stand-in for screenwriter Leon Uris himself.

A strange thought occurred to me during the film - this sort of patriotic stuff was the fodder that fed the young Americans who volunteered for the Marines knowing that they'd be sent to Vietnam. I was thinking about their later disillusionment and how films such as this might have contributed to it. Americans were always the good guys - always proud and squared away. Of course it was never true, not in 1965, not in 1955, and not in 1945. As Karl Marlantes said, maybe it would be a good idea to admit that we're not always the good guys. That war is bad, no matter what side you're on.

Anyway a fun film, and I really liked Aldo Ray with a humorous and yes even a gentle side.

An all star cast headline this WWII tale about soldiers gearing up for battle. Narrated by the platoon leader, played by James Whitmore, we follow the soldiers from boot camp to the battlefield w/the usual up & downs that come w/conflict. Scripted by Leon Uris based on his own book, the only novelty here is the battle is only seen at the tail end of the film w/the bulk of the running time spent w/the soldiers adjusting to enlisted life or the paramours they struggle w/while on leave. A cast which includes Aldo Ray, Tab Hunter, Nancy Olsen, Van Heflin & L.Q. Jones (who adopted his character's name as his own) hold their own even though the script at times falls into histrionics.