MovieChat Forums > The Sand Pebbles (1966) Discussion > Shockingly Old School for 1966

Shockingly Old School for 1966

posted 17 years ago by zillion29
10 replies | jump to latest

I viewed this movie for the first time today and I have to say that, although I appreciate the sweeping epic nature of it, I found it to be a monotonous movie that was shockingly old fashioned for something released in 1966.
From the music to the dialogue, it felt more like something from 1946 than 1966. And the white-guy-falls-in-love-with-Asian-chick-and-fights-against-society-to-keep-her subplot was already played to death in Sayonara and World of Suzy Wong.
I'm not crazy about McQueen's performance. He acts like a dazed retard through much of the film - kinda like Nevada Smith. It's almost painful to see such a cool actor portraying a mental defective. It isn't until the last 15 minutes that he gets his sh*t straight and kicks some ass McQueen-style with the BAR.
This movie takes an almost sadistic delight in testing it's audience's patience. The brothel boxing match that takes 17 minutes to establish that a drunk fattie will tire himself out when taking on a timid coolie. The "Holman come down" scene that drags on long after we get the point. The gratuitious repairing of engines and turning of dials and twisting of wrenches. And lots of dock-to-ship transports and . . . marching scenes. Ick.

[–] BilligerVogel 17 years ago

Run out of lithium didja?

Because the world is rushing toward entropy. What's your excuse?

[–] rwsmith29456 17 years ago

It WAS old fashioned. It was set in a time decades before either 1966 or 1944. And the marching scenes were there to show the unrest that the Navy had to face to protect their 'interests'. I don't think the character McQueen portrayed was meant to be a brain trust. I also don't require a movie to be 'kick ass' to be enjoyable and entertaining.

[–] Lonixcap 17 years ago

When this movie first came out, it got a great deal of attention because it was critical of America's military during the time of Vietnam. It IS an old fashioned Hollywood epic, made as a "Roadshow", a special event.
I agree the the Maily subplot was a bit much, even the director, Robert Wise said many years later that he should have left it out.

McQueen is excellent, and all of those details you say are boring give this film something that a lot of big films don't have: characterization. You get a sense of who these sailors are, a feel for the time and place that only a three hour film can do.

This is the type of film that they kept making in the 80', only they were TV miniseries by then.

The Winds of War, etc.

[–] haristas 17 years ago

Look at most movies from 1966 and THE SAND PEBBLES seems very "adult" in comparison. Movies were still under the old rating codes then and couldn't be as "open" as they'd be in just another couple of years. Also, the was a major studio film, very expensive, and so meant as entertainment for the entire family, though not the little kids. You also should not compare films from a certain era against the current books or music or whatever, based films suffered from production code restrictions. Finally, Robert Wise was a director who was a little "dull" in his style. In fact, he had little in the way of a personal style.

[–] hkronin 17 years ago

Have you Seen other movies that came out in 1966? Shoot, the Sound of Music was in 1965.... I guess that looked like The Dark Knight to you????

[–] Polaris01313-1 16 years ago

It may have been Shockingly Old School for 1966, but it still got the message out to the cinema going audience/public.

[–] rwsmith29456 16 years ago

Um, this film is about US Naval presence in China in the 1920s. I disagree with everything you say and your idea of what this movie should be would make a typical, crappy, modern day movie. Why don't you go watch Titanic?

[–] Memories-Of-Murder 16 years ago

OP, you couldn't be more wrong about this movie even if you tried harder. Man, talk about being wrong, you pratically wrote the book with your coments about this movie. I'd hate to be you.

If people like you calling yourself movie geeks, cinema doesn't need any enemies, you are doing all the ruining and destructing just fine. Small wonder Michael Bay keep making movies, with people like you around.

"This are Nice shoes! Couldn't you afford some real Nike?"

[–] bradford-1 15 years ago

Go watch the following films that were released in 1966, then come back and critique SAND PEBBLES:
A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS
WHO'S AFRAID OF VIRGINIA WOOLF?
ALFIE
A MAN AND A WOMAN
BLOW UP
THE FORTUNE COOKIE
THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING, THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING
GEORGY GIRL
THE PROFESSIONALS
MASCULIN, FEMININ
MORGAN!
OUR MAN FLINT
ARABESQUE
LORD LOVE A DUCK
HARPER
THE GROUP
THE CHASE
THE BLUE MAX
BATMAN (Adam West, that is)

[–] RazzberryBeret 14 years ago

I guess it takes all kinds to people this planet. McQueen came across as a retard? Though I have to say, you'd lost me long before that particular turd. All the scenes you described as too long were perfect in length. What you seem to be looking for is a checklist of plot movements and character traits rather than a cinematic experience. The worst is, there's more of your type of moviegoer cropping up everyday. These are dire times indeed.