MovieChat Forums > Hell in the Pacific (1968) Discussion > Close, but no cigar. (Spoilers)

Close, but no cigar. (Spoilers)


I've seen Hell in the Pacific several times over the years. I really liked it the first time because Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune are a couple of my favorite actors, and the basic story of two WW2 combatants marooned on an island in the South Pacific makes for an interesting situation. The location and cinematography were very good also.

In subsequent viewings though, I've found too many errors and unrealistic aspects of the story which just don't make sense, severely detracting from the overall believability of the film.

1. Both actors were too old to play the characters; Marvin was 44 (but looked older) and Mifune was 48 when the movie was made. Realistically, they both should have been in their early 20's at the oldest.

2. Both actors had neatly trimmed beards through most of the movie, when the only cutting instrument available to them was Marvin's KA-BAR (knife).

3. When they first became aware of each other's presence, most likely one would have killed the other (but then there wouldn't have been much of a story).

4. Since they didn't kill each other, it doesn't make sense that they would harrass and torture each other just for kicks. It seems more likely that, once they realized that they could survive better as a team, they would have cooperated more.

5. Both before and after they became friendly, Marvin never made any effort to secure water or food on his own. He just kept stealing it from Mifune and lounging on the beach, playing with hermit crabs. If he was supposed to be a Naval Aviator, he would have been trained in survival skills.

6. Neither made any effort to learn to communicate verbally with the other. They just kept yelling at each other in their own languages.

7. The "This is MY log" scene was absurd and not even funny. (Marvin peeing on Mifune however, was funny.)

8. While the two of them are paddling the raft through the surf of the surrounding reef, Marvin is rowing with a single oar on the left side of the raft while Mifune is propelling the raft from the rear with his oar in a "stern sweep" (fish-tail) motion. This would have had them going in right-hand circles.

9. While on the raft at sea (at night), Marvin hears a plane flying overhead and starts blowing his whistle to attract attention. If he's an aviator, he'd know that he was wasting his energy.

10. In the last scene, they are getting drunk in an abandoned building at night, when they hear the sound of an incoming naval gun projectile. Immediately thereafter, an exterior shot shows the building exploding... in daylight, followed by the ending credits.

These are only the most glaring inconsistencies which for me, make for a disappointing movie. It could have been much better.


reply

[deleted]

I suppose if *you* were making a movie about the Battle of Britain, you would select Tom Cruise to play Winston Churchill.

reply

But it's not nitpicking, these were all glaringly obvious and really were a detriment to the movie.

reply

Interesting point of view, but...

1. Why they were too old? Mifune even looks younger than his real age.
2. The beard volume may be a little tangential, dont you think? :)
4. I think the time they waste not cooperating is not only essential part of the plot, but also part of the anti-war message: They are not able to coexist in a (big enough) island, and that makes them lose resources and time.
5. Marvin is much more inept than Mifune in all the movie, so is somehow coherent. You see him trying to get water from leafs and failing, he is unable to invent the systems of the japanese (maybe this is also metaphorical) so he tries to steal them.
7. The "You scared me! I thought you were a japanese" bit from Marvin, was really funny.
9. He was obviously desperate in that situation, so you cant ask him to be 100% rational. That would have been much more unrealistic.
10. I didn´t like the ending either, but at least it offers some debate about the rest of the movie.

I think you judge all the time in a literal level, when this is not always the purpose of the movie.

Nonetheless, I have some complaints too:

-There is some logic hole since they leave the island, then everything changes and they react in very different ways.
-Sometimes is too slow-paced for me.
-the story is incomplete.

But I really enjoyed most of it, and find it original and clever.

reply

Speaking of unrealistic plot lines, don't get me started on The Wizard of Oz.

reply

[deleted]