There are times when the most accurate, realistic portrayal of something in a non-comedy movie may be boring to some people. Maybe even most. Hollywood has known that for ages. Things that otherwise may be humdrum or so-so need to be spiced up. Often times, that's to the point of scenarios hardly resembling reality at all. "If that's what the public likes, give it to them," often seems the attitude in Hollywood.
At other times, Hollywood and certain producers, directors or writers, strive for realism, against the pressures for greatest box office appeal. I think "Force of Arms" is one such film. Oh, it has a fair share of reviewers who would have liked more blood and guts action, or hot romance with a local Italian, or something else. But I agree with those who appreciated this film for its realism and for its strong portrayals by the leads. There aren't many top stars here, but that seems to be how the plot was intended.
This is a story about one GI, and how he advances through the ranks leading his men from the early involvement of the U.S. in WW II Africa and into Italy. Then it becomes a story of two people --- the GI and an American female officer (WAC), and a deep love that blossoms between them. Then it is a story about their love surviving through the 5th Army's push to liberate Rome.
I agree with others who saw William Holden's portrayal as superb. He goes from Sergeant to Lieutenant Joe "Pete" Peterson. It is one of the best performances of his career. Nancy Olson is very good as Lt. Eleanor MacKay, and Frank Lovejoy is very good as Major Blackford. Whether or not the story was an imitation of Ernest Hemingway's "Farewell to Arms" about WWI, "Force of Arms" is a very good account of the Italian campaign in WW II. It follows the U.S. 5th Army in Italy. Peterson's 36th Infantry Division was actually there and did the things the film covers.
At one point toward the end of the movie, the 36th is moving up to again try to cross the Rapido River. During that action in 1944, the 36th Division lost a large number of its men in two of its three regiments.
The battle scenes and action are gritty and very realistic in "Force of Arms." The romance that blossoms is not far-fetched because during the Italian campaign, forward units were replaced for R and R. And, because they were near cities, the GIs behind the lines were able to see women in bars, cafes and shops. Some, mostly officers, no doubt fraternized with Army nurses and other WAC officers. That is the case in this film, with Pete and Eleanor.
Another realistic aspect of this film was Pete getting a battlefield commission. That happened quite a lot in the European theater, but few movies show it. My father received a battlefield commission while serving in the 5th Army in Europe. He later returned to the States and went through OCS (Officer Candidate School). It's interesting that the Major himself was a product of OCS. So, he would have been one of the early active Army GIs well before the U.S. entered the war. And, he would have been promoted as officers above him were taken out of action.
About the only questionable scene in this movie was the major leading a tank assault. Blackford was an infantry officer, and was CO of a battalion or regiment. There's no way that an infantry officer was going to command or lead an armored assault. That was stretching credibility too far. The only other unreal aspect was in the script when Pete talked to Blackford on the radio. The Army never used the expression, "Over and out." It's contradictory. A person who expects a reply says, "Over!" One who is ending the conversation says, "Out!."
This is a very good and gritty picture of the Americans fighting in the Italian Campaign during WW II. It's also a nice wartime romance and love story.
3 out of 3 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
