MovieChat Forums > From Here to Eternity (1953) Discussion > A real army man debunks this movie...

A real army man debunks this movie...


My sisters Father-in-law is a retired Sergeant of the Canadian Armed Forces and he said; "I don't know about the US Armed Forces policies but in the Canadian Forces someone like Holmes wouldn't have lasted two seconds as a Captain if he bullied a subordinate for preferring to put a trajedy behind him by refusing to box and focus on his career as a soldier, but Holmes wouldn't even allow that.

I agreed with him and I think that this movie was more like a High School drama of a mean Coach or Principal (Holmes) allowing his teachers pet (Galovitch) to harass a former member of the football team (Prewitt) to get him to rejoin the team rather than care about turning out good scholars (soldiers) over winning trophies until a sympathetic teacher (Sgt. Warden) comes to his rescue.

All-in-all he said this was a stupid movie that didn't depict real army life at all.

Mind you then it would have been a rather boring film if it did.

reply

Okay, now was he active-duty during 1941?

reply

The Army was MUCH different before WW II, the Sergeants ran almost everything and things were much more lax-particularly in Hawaii.

reply

"The Army was MUCH different before WW II, the sergeants ran almost everything and things were much more lax-particularly in Hawaii."

Yes I see. But maybe that's precisely why the Japanese were able to walk all over Pearl Harbor-metaphorically speaking-BECAUSE of @-hole officers like Holmes and his tendancy to put personal ambition before true duty because they so poorly disciplined the men.

It would have been interesting to have had the movie end in the aftermath of the attack with Holmes getting court-martialed because he displayed incompetence at commanding the troops during the attack rather than bullying one poor private. It would have made a different point but equally effective.

Ironically the book has Holmes go unpunished for his actions, but when they wanted to shoot this movie on the Army base the US Armed forces demanded that they cashier Holmes for his actions as they feared that it would tarnish the integrity of the US Army if they showed an @$$ like Holmes not be held accountable for his actions. That shows how the US Army tightened up their attitudes by the 1950's after having gone through two wars.

reply

My late uncle was on active duty in Hawaii at the start of the war. He says FHTE was the only movie he ever saw that got if right. Exactly right, according to him.

reply

@nedhorn.

Exactly right as in the officers were ambitious, social climbing @-holes instead of responsible leaders?
And it was up to the Sergeants to really run things?

reply

My uncle is dead, so alas I am not sure, but from what he was saying I got the impression it was right on all counts.

My uncle was an officer, so that is the side he would know best.

reply

Well, from what I've gathered, the officers that came from the aristocratic academy of West Point tended to be unsympathethic martinets towards the enlisted men because they entered the Army right off as officers and had no empathy for them and treated them like pawns.

Whereas the officers who were ROTC were soldiers first before they earned their promotions and tended to play more fair with them because they could relate.

reply

I know we are starting to stray afield from the original topic, but as my oldest brother, and his daughter are both West Point grads, I think I can add a little enlightenment.

First of all, the military is blue color. White color means you shower before work; blue color means you shower after.

Second, West Point, and the other academies are mostly based on merit. Some people are automatically eligible, if they meet the physical requirements, to enter the military academies. A Congressional Medal of Honor recipient is elgible, for instance. You can't get any more into the ranks than that. Audey Murphy, the most decorated soldier in WWII was eligible, except his war injuries were too severe.

My folks raised us on a farm in the middle of Kansas. When we were young, our parents were so poor they had to borrow to pay attention. There's nothing aristocratic about being dirt poor!

reply

"Borrow to pay attention"?

Proofread!

reply

@richard-pottorff.

Hm, interesting!
So in short good and bad Officers can come from any academy.

This movie simply showed how some Officers like Holmes abused their authority and used it to further their own ends rather than use it for what its purpose was for; leading enlisted men and serving as an example.
While Captain Ross demonstrated the proper way to be an Officer and made it clear that you would earn your promotions the proper way, by being good soldiers, not athletes.

All poor Prewitt wanted to do was put the past behind him and focus on being a good soldier, but couldn't even do that because of all the @$$-holes around him.

My brother-in-laws father was simply saying that in his day in the Canadian armed forces Officers weren't allowed to let personal ambitions and feelings dominate their sworn duties and its obvious that because America felt complacent in the pre-war years and felt the war in Europe and in the Chinese continent wouldn't reach them, their military got lax and Officers started to get self-entitled. Whereas since Canada was obligated to the war because we were still part of the British empire, such self-serving actions would have been forbidden.
America however got knocked out of their complacency at Pearl Harbor and tightened up the attitudes and no doubt either cashiered or reprimanded such Officers as Holmes, and this attitude was prevalent in the movie which had a different ending than the book.

The book was written about pre-war military life and so Holmes went unpunished.
But because the movie was made AFTER the WWII and Korean war that the military didn't want to give civilians the impression that types like Holmes ran the show in the military they demanded the ending changed to have Holmes be punished to demonstrate that such conduct in Officers was no longer tolerated.

Speaking of West Point, tell me if this is true.
Unlike regular boot camp where the drill-instructors are usually Sergeants, at the Officer academy the instructors are PRIVATES, the lowest of ranks, drilling future Officers.
Do they have that power structure as a means of instilling some humility into the future Commanders by having them get put through the paces by someone that they will be commanding some day?

reply

No, the drill instructors at the United States Military Academy, West Point, New York are not privates. It takes a minimum of three years to train a drill instructor and only those who demonstrate high excellence will be selected to train the Plebes at USMA.

Also, the majority of Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) cadets have no prior military experience. Some are prior enlisted military, but most earn their ROTC scholarship as high school juniors or enter ROTC as college freshmen.

Personally, I entered the Air Force Officer Training School as part of an education program for exceptional enlisted people who were eager to study the physical sciences or engineering. I had 13 years of enlisted time behind me when I was commissioned a second lieutenant.

The United States military system was far different before WW II from what it became afterwards. It would take a book to describe those differences. The best novel that covers it is "Once an Eagle." However, the structure of the United States military had virtually nothing to do with our lack of preparation for war.

It will take far too long to describe here, but one could argue that the United States was as well prepared for war as any of the allied participants in spite of American reluctance to face the upcoming war. England (Great Britain and the Commonwealth) and France declared war on Germany on 2 October 1939. In spite of this, they were still unprepared to meet the German invasion of France in May 1940. Seven months after declaring war, they were unprepared to engage in combat with a country that was distinctly weaker than their combination. In addition, They had mad no significant effort in those seven months to engage the Germans militarily. They surrendered the initiative without a contest.

Meanwhile, President Franklin Roosevelt, not my favorite president by a long shot, argued, cajoled, and flim-flammed an isolationist congress into making some preparations for a war that he clearly expected. By the summer of 1941 the US Army Air Force was growing rapidly, the US Army was building a new national headquarters building (when finished The Pentagon would become the largest office building in the world and remain so until the 1970's), and newly built US destroyers were escorting British convoys across the North Atlantic (a violation of the Neutrality Act that might have resulted in President Roosevelt's impeachment had things turned out a little differently).

It's easy to criticize the United States for not saving Europe from itself sooner than we did, but we have always been reluctant to allow the affairs in The Old World to affect us too directly. After nearly eight years of keeping the world "safe for democracy" from the communists and later from terrorists, the American people are increasingly demanding a new military isolationism. You and I may live to see (less than a generation, 20 years from now) a world in which the United States is exerting little influence and shows little concern for the affairs of the world. I think that is going to happen and if it does no one is likely to enjoy the consequences. I predict that the result will be a new world war that will start in Asia, specifically in the South China Sea. The Republic of Korea, Japan, Indonesia, Vietnam, and the Republic of the Philippines will ally against an aggressive People's Republic of China over control of the economic resources there.

Eventually, the United States and Europe will be drawn into that war because of the global nature of war as well as the global nature of the economy.

reply

Sad but true.

Every time America gets involved with another nations problems they're told to mind their own business.
Then when they don't get involved they get cursed out for not helping.

It's enough to make anyone throw up their hands in disgust!

reply

"So poor they had to borrow to pay attention." It's a joke. Think about it.



www.freerice.com

reply

For what it is worth there is a note at the start of the book which says something like "the events in this book are true,they happened on a base in the United States".

The novelist was ex US army.
People should remember as well that the army shown in the film was a peace time volunteer army,the people in it,at least the enlisted men were often escaping poverty and/or personal problems.
After 1941 there was conscription and the army had to treat people a little better because the soldiers had been forced to join up and were citizens in uniform.

reply

No, it's not a true story. The book is loosely based on Jones' time in the Army, but the story and characters are fiction.

This will be the high point of my day; it's all downhill from here.

reply

US conscription started in October of 1940 but inertia would keep the attitudes of the volunteer Army in place for a while.

reply

Yes, it's a pun.

This will be the high point of my day; it's all downhill from here.

reply

lol The phrase is blue/white COLLAR, not color.

"'scuse me while I kiss this guy!"


This will be the high point of my day; it's all downhill from here.

reply

R. Pottorff:

The phrases you want are "blue-collar" and "white-collar", not "blue color" and "white color".

Also, the name of the famous actor and war hero (which you ought to take the care to spell correctly) was Audie (not Audey) Murphy.

reply

Doesn't sound like your sister's father in law is very smart .. Like Canada was some saving force in WWII .. lol .

......


I'd like a chance t' shoot at an educated man once in my life .

reply

Well many histories of World War 2 say that the best allied soldiers were from either Canada or Australia.

I am British so will not take sides on that debate.

But would I be wrong to guess that you are 1)a young person and 2)from the USA? 3)have not actually studied much history of world war 2?

I think America is a great country but comments such as your's will draw negative comments from people who support the cliche that all Americans are ignorant.

The ignorance of some Americans about their neighbours is sad.

The bravery and skill of Canadian soldiers in all the wars they have ever fought in is something for the history books and if you don't know anything of the campaigns they took part in in the two world wars then perhaps you should go to the library and do some light reading ,or even look up some stuff on the internet?

There is an excellent miltary museum in Ottawa,they no doubt have a website.


Numbers wise Canada did provide a saving force in World War 2,they contributed an amazingly large numbers of soldiers,sailors and airmen considering the population at the time and the fact that the French speaking community was not united behind the war effort.

Canadians provided an important number of units to RAF Bomber Command and also to other parts of the allied air forces,the Canadian navy was an important force in the Battle Of The Atlantic and Canadian soldiers fought well in all the campaigns they took part in but sometimes they were badly led.

They helped liberate much of Belgium and the Netherlands and people in these nations know about the Canadian contribution to World War 2 even if you don't.

Finally Canadian industry provided much material for the allied war effort and did not even make Britain pay for much of it.

reply

Doesn't sound like your sister's father in law is very smart .. Like Canada was some saving force in WWII .. lol .. case closed .

......


I'd like a chance t' shoot at an educated man once in my life .

reply

My sisters father-in-law was simply stating that abusive officers like Holmes were not tolerated in the Canadian forces any more than insubordinate soldiers were.

He openly admitted that his statement was based upon his own knowledge of Canadian armed forces of his time and he therefore stated that he couldn't judge the American forces of the time but simply that Canada's army didn't tolerate that kind of behavior.

reply

As a matter of fact, Canada made a disproportionate contribution to the Allied war effort, especially considering it wasn't forced into it by being directly attacked, as the US was. Canada's armed forces had tremendous esprit de corps, professionalism, and effectiveness.

If you want to learn something, watch The Devil's Brigade, which is basically the true story of the formation in 1942 of an elite American-Canadian commando unit which served with great distinction. It was at Anzio that the nickname "Devil's Brigade" originated - by the Germans. They supposed the force was much larger than it actually was because it was kicking the butt of the world's most formidable army.

The movie shows how the American elements initially made fun of the Canadians but quickly came to develop a deep respect for them.

By the end of the war Canada had the world's third largest surface fleet and fourth largest air force - from a tiny population of 11 million. One of the 5 D-Day Beachheads was Canadian. The crucial Battle of the Atlantic would have been a very much more dreadful affair for the Allies without the enormous Canadian navy contribution, the outlook would have considerably more dire, and the outcome even more in doubt than it was. The Canadian army made key contributions in the fighting for Normandy and the Low Countries.

I'm not going to comment here on who it is who doesn't sound "very smart" because it would be neither politie nore constructive.

reply

I'm not going to comment here on who it is who doesn't sound "very smart" because it would be neither politie nore constructive.


It kind of looks like you already did.😉

Just to be clear, Canada followed Great Britain's lead in declaring war, a move that wasn't all that popular at the time with most Canadians, but was sold originally as a "limited" involvement. Despite being a sovereign nation, Canada still shared a monarchy and a close political allegiance with Great Britain.

While the Devil's Brigade is an entertaining movie, the idea it's some sort of blow by blow documentary about the group is misguided. The American soldiers involved were not a bunch of convicts and Dirty Dozen rejects. They were regular army troops that volunteered for the assignment, and all the over-the-top friction was strictly Hollywood. It would be better if people looked to the actual history of the group.

All that being said, I agree that Canada doesn't get enough credit for it's contributions in WWII. I chalk it up to the lack of Canadian movie studios.

reply

So, yeah, Kartoon, you actually have "debunked" nothing other than your own credibility.

"Don't drink that @$$hole, you'll get malaria!..."

reply

What's MY credibility got to do with this?
I'm only quoting what my sister's father-in-law said.

Don't jump to conclusions...you might not like where you land.

reply

In fairness, the Army would only support the production of the film (filming at Schofield Barracks and providing soldiers as extras) if the film made major changes from the book; broadly a toning down of language and sexual themes, and specifically that Captain Holmes ultimately face punishment for his actions.

Give Blood Today
God Bless!

reply

As I said in another thread it was possible that the book itself was just the bias of the author himself.
Maybe he had some bad experiences in the army with a bad officer who managed to dodge the bullet and get away with his misconduct. It can happen, some sharks slip the net.

And maybe my sisters father-in-law was lucky enough to be in an army at the time when discipline for both soldier and officer alike was tighter and ultimately more beneficial for all.

reply

I'm happy to acknowledge the contributions Canada made in both World Wars, but I am exceedingly cynical that the Canadian military in them was full of paragons of virtue or better than any other army. They all have corruption and martinets somewhere in their ranks. That happens when you have a rigid hierarchy where you don't get to pick your comrades or superior officers.

Innsmouth Free Press http://www.innsmouthfreepress.com

reply

I was an officer in the Navy in the 1980's and spent three and a half years working right next to Schofield. Don't know about the Army, but as of the 1980's there were still some pretty messed up, super-ambitious officers who treated people pretty badly. And it had to have been much worse in the 1940's, so I think Captain Holmes was fairly plausible.

reply

@bccct:

So did some of those bad officers (like Holmes in the novel) get promoted in spite of themselves.

And did some of them (like Holmes in the movie) get their @$$es busted for it?

I find it believable that even in the 40's some officers got away with it and some didn't.

reply

There doesn't seem to be a lot of logic in who gets punished and who gets promoted...like in politics or large corporations, some people are like Teflon--nothing sticks to them. While others barely do anything wrong but for one reason or another they get screwed over. A lot of it has to do with the long-standing friendships people have. Like suppose officer A works for officer B when they are fairly junior officers. Officer A covers B's butt a lot, covers up some of B's mistakes,etc. Then 10 or 15 years down the road A does something wrong and B is in a position to make a few calls to smooth things over. Everybody has a few skeletons in his closet, and owes somebody a favor.

reply

Not sure how things were in Canadian between the wars, and in the army at the.Same time---!BUT

In the U.S. it wasn't so bad. A lot of repetition

A captain the age of.Holmes, not. Sure if he was an academy man, but promotions were few and far between

Captain is lower middle management I believe the.Gen. mentions he'd been passed over for Major twice.

It was time for him to go


You don't have to stand tall, but you do have to stand up!

reply

James Jones based the book on his service in World War II.

reply

What I get from this thread, and years of discussion, is that there are as many different experiences in the military as there are in the civilian world. Sure, in an ideal world, every officer does everything correctly and fairly all the time. But real life is not like that. There ARE officers who are ambitious and will compromise other values in order to advance in rank. They may not be the majority, but it only takes a few to have their experience under those officers record be spread far and wide. What gives this so much credibility is the well known way that drill sergeants in basic are reputed to intentionally abuse the recruits in order to 'break 'em down so we can build 'em up', as my brother in law described.

reply

In every job there are people who.abuse their authority. I'd have thought that a good boxer would possess many qualities needed for a good soldier- self discipline guts physical fitness.

reply