Oh! What a Lovely War (1969) User Reviews

To the millions who died thinking they were making this a better world...

[patrick.hunter · 8/10 · 1 November 2006]

So many of us in the United States are clueless about the significance of the red poppy which recurs so often in the movie. First of all, it is not an opium poppy. It is a symbol for peace. John McCrae, one of the great poets who were killed in World War I, wrote in the following in his anti-war poem "In Flanders Fields":

In Flanders fields the poppies blow

Between the crosses, row by row,. . .

If yea break faith with us who die

We shall not sleep, though poppies grow

In Flanders fields

Anyway, shortly after WWI, in the early nineteen-twenties, the red poppy became the symbol of remembering and honoring the heroic dead. The day for remembrance became November 11, the date World War One ended. These days, I fear, most people in the United States think of November 11 not as "Remembrance Day" or "Armistice Day" but more as just Veteren's Day. It rarely even falls on November 11, and, when it does, most Americans view it simply as time off work.

As critic Roger Ebert once said, OH! WHAT A LOVELY WAR really isn't a movie at all, but a theatrical tableau. Like many a British muscial review, it contains little plot, much spirited music, and--in this case--the story of World War I. Some portions, as even director Richard Attenborough admitted, go on too long; however, so many other portions are just brilliant. Like other Attenborough movies, one hates to dislike it because its subject matter is so worthwhile and commands respect (will anyone do a remembrance film honoring the fallen dead of the present Iraqui conflict?) I know I gave it an 8, but I must say I don't quite know how to rate a movie like this one. There's nothing else in cinema like it.

the futility of war

[didi-5 · 7/10 · 21 November 2006]

A clever piece of work, this film - Richard Attenborough's first as director and an adaptation of the production by Joan Littlewood's Theatre Workshop - considers the pure futility and waste of World War One by presenting it as a 'war game' based in and around Brighton; on the West Pier, atop a Helter Skelter, etc.

The central characters are the Smith family - several sons and nephews, a grandad, mother, wives and younger children. All have tickets for the game, welcomed in at Douglas Haig's booth (Haig puts his own words to 'I do like to be beside the seaside' = 'I do love to see a man in khaki'). They are the routes by which we follow the various battles and conflicts through the war, punctuated by a soundtrack of popular songs of the period ('It's a Long Way to Tipperary', 'Keep The Home Fires Burning', 'and so on).

Oh! What a Lovely War manages to be daring, funny, and moving, and boasts a starry set of cameos including Olivier, Gielgud, Richardson, Maggie Smith, Dirk Bogarde, Kenneth More, Ian Holm, and Vanessa Redgrave. It covers all of the conflict, from the assassination of the Archduke of Austria, through to the Christmas truce in the trenches, to the war's conclusion. Poppies play their part, as well they might, to indicate the scale of loss of life; and a final tracking shot on the Sussex Downs attempts to give some indication of the wanton destruction of 'cannon fodder' by the powers-that-be.

As a pure war film, this would never work. As a satirical musical, it stands up extremely well, and has many memorable moments to reward the viewer when they see the film again and again. Attenborough himself of course would go on to greater things, culminating in the Oscar-winning Gandhi some 13 years later, but this is an excellent debut, sure of itself and without getting bogged down in cloying sentimentality.

A brilliant, moving, anti-war film

[klg19 · 8/10 · 5 August 2000]

I first saw this film when it came out. I was 10 years old, the Viet Nam war was still going on, and it blew me away completely.

I saw it again 5 years later, in a revival house. I went with a high-school friend, happy to be able to introduce its power and brilliance to someone new. It blew her away completely.

That was 27 years ago, and I would give almost anything to know if the film could still move me as much as it did those first two times. It is not available on video, and I've never seen it broadcast on any TV channel.

This is truly one of those films that burned itself into my memory at first viewing. I urge anyone who finds the chance to see it to run, not walk, to the theatre! The Great War -- the War to End All Wars -- has faded deep into the past for most people, and we forget that the death-toll from that conflict blighted an entire generation. This film makes that loss all too vivid, using the music of the war itself.

Truly a classic, in the most literal sense of the word: a film for the ages.

"Old Soldiers Never Die - The Young Ones Wish They Would!"

[stryker-5 · 30 January 1999]

Richard Attenborough's directorial debut translates Joan Plowright's theatre concept onto celluloid. "Oh What A Lovely War" tells the story of World War One through the popular songs of the time, some of them sarcastically re-worded by the soldiers at the Front. Made in 1969, the film rides the wave of contemporary 'make love not war' sentiment, and uses humour and avant-garde zaniness to avoid seeming portentous. Brighton Pier represents the First World War, with the British public entering at the turnstiles, and General Haig selling tickets. The Smith family stands for the nation, and the film follows several young Smith men through their experiences in the trenches, most notably Freddy (Malcolm McFee), Harry (Colin Farrell) and George (Maurice Roeves).

The opening sequence, set in a wrought-iron Nowhere, tries to explain the diplomatic chicanery which (allegedly) caused the Great War. This passage is dull, unnatural, garbled and much too long. It does not harmonise with the rest of the story, and the film would have been better without it. Of the cavalcade of ageing English thespians which populates this sequence, only Jack Hawkins as the profoundly melancholic Austrian emperor is at all memorable.

1914 was the season of optimism, shown here by the cheerful seaside scene and the first Battle of Mons, both flooded in pleasant sunshine. When the casulaties start to mount, a shocked theatre audience is rallied by a rousing rendition of "Are We Downhearted? No!", a song which expresses something deep in the English psyche: "While we have Jack upon the sea/And Tommy on the land/We needn't fret".

The government's cynical drive to recruit a volunteer army by 'milking' the simple patriotism of the people is superbly satirised in the 'Roedean' section. Pretty girls onstage sing "We Don't Want To Lose You, But We Think You Ought To Go", and once the young men in the audience are suitably softened up, Maggie Smith lures them into taking the King's Shilling by enticing them sexually.

Class divisions are emphasised. Wounded men from the lower ranks have to wait for treatment, but officers have taxis laid on to take them to hospital. The War forces an aristocrat to converse with one of his retainers, but the conversation is hollow and awkward, as if the men speak different languages. The working-class men in the trenches fraternise with their German 'brothers', and a staff officer in the comfort and safety of England punishes them for their inappropriate behaviour. The pacifist who addresses the workers falls foul of their instinctive patriotism, and doesn't help herself by referring to her audience as "You misguided masses".

The film has many delicious ironic touches. A wounded man arrives back in England, relieved to be out of the hell of war, and is told by a nurse, "Don't worry - we'll soon have you back at the Front". Upper-class war dodgers carry on as before, but they think they are making noble sacrifices - "I'm not using my German wine - not while the War's on". The staff officer who visits the Front is patently unfamiliar with life there, and desperate to get away, but happy enough to have the men live (and die) in these conditions.

By 1915, the optimism has died. The parade of wounded men is a sea of grim, hopeless faces. Black humour has now replaced the enthusiasm of the early days. "There's A Long, Long Trail A-Winding" captures the new mood of despair, and the scene with the tommies filing along in torrential rain is powerfully evocative. Poppies provide the only colour.

We see English soldiers drinking in an estaminet. The chanteuse (Pia Colombo) leads them in a jolly chorus of "The Moon Shines Bright On Charlie Chaplin", a reworking of an American song, then shifts the mood dramatically by singing "Adieu la vie", a truly great tragic song.

The Australian troops have an easy, informal approach to discipline. They make fun of the 'proper' English reserves who are replacing them on the battlefield, and the contrast between the two cultures is depicted by the stiffness of the English drill compared with the sprawling comfort of the Aussies. Naturally enough, the Australians deride the staff officers who arrive to inspect the reserves.

Another passage in the film which simply doesn't work is the religious service in the ruined abbey. Its purpose is to point out the hypocrisy of the great religions, which all came out in favour of the War, but the scene drags horribly and slackens the film's otherwise brisk pace.

1916 passes, and the film's tone darkens appreciably. Now the songs have a wistful quality, laced with the chirpy stoicism of the British soldier - "The Bells Of Hell", "If The Sergeant Steals Your Rum, Never Mind" and "Hanging On The Old Barbed Wire". The trench scenes are terrific, powerfully evoking the squalour of the Front. The wounded are laid out in ranks at the field station, a mockery of the healthy rows of young men who entered the War. Harry Smith's silently-suffering face is one of the film's great images.

The War is drawing to its close, but still the ironies are piling up. The Americans arrive, singing (in travesty of Cohan) "And we won't come back - we'll be buried over there!" Freddy notices with disgust that after three years of this nightmare, he is literally back where he started, fighting at Mons.

As the Armistice is sounding, Freddy is the last one to die. The film closes with a truly stunning aerial view of soldiers' graves, dizzying in their geometry and scale, as the voices of the dead sing, "We'll Never Tell Them". It brought a tear to this reviewer's eye.

A Masterpiece

[AmyLouise · 10/10 · 12 April 2005]

It is a mystery to me why this film isn't on everybody's top ten films listing. It is truly a masterpiece of acting and direction, and without doubt the best anti-war film I have ever seen. Yet it was never released on video, and it took over 20 years of waiting to see it repeated on television and tape it for my collection.

It is all the more telling for its simplicity - none of the many great actors taking part delivers a weighty pronouncement on the evils - or otherwise - of war; it is enough to see the awful toll posted on the cricket scoreboard that keeps the daily tally of dead. The ordinariness of the Smith family, who lose every last one of their young men to the conflict, the cheerful patriotism of the proud families waving their loved ones off to war, and the stupid banalities of the officers who daily send their men out to be killed only serve to highlight the absolute futility and waste of WWI and all the wars that followed.

Scenes of upper class twits at play while their servants are dying to preserve their privileges; the officers' ball where military leaders try to score points off each other, concerned only with protocol and promotion; and the brilliant black humor of the outdoor church service are juxtaposed with scenes from the trenches as we watch the young men die one by one, all the more harrowing for their cheeky humor and fatalism.

Why this brilliant film has been allowed to sink without trace is baffling; I first saw it in the early seventies, and today it still has the same impact. And sadly, it is just as relevant now as it was then - a testimony to our inability to learn from our mistakes.

Lavish, colourful, with an all star cast

[Leofwine_draca · 6/10 · 1 March 2018]

OH! WHAT A LOVELY WAR is Richard Attenborough's lavish, colourful, all-star-cast feature film version of the popular Broadway stage musical satire of WW1. It presents a heavily stylised look at the war, from its inception in the rivalries between various European dynasties, through to the massive toll on the armies of those taking part. It's an outlandish production that time and again hits the mark in skewering the craziness of the whole war, particularly focusing on the propaganda dished out to both the soldiers and those they left behind at home. The cast is incredible and features more big and small stars than you'd expect to see in a single movie. In the end, however, a musical lives or dies on the strength of the songs it contains, and this film's songs are very well written, highly catchy, and most of all, funny. The second half in particular features one song after another and it makes the running time just fly past.

Should be subtitled: Don't Go Near the Poppies

[eberly1 · 10/10 · 10 July 2001]

I first saw this movie in the theater in 1969. In my opinion it was by far the most powerful anti-war movie I had ever seen. I came to IMDB looking for a place where I could order a copy so that my children could see it. I can not think of another movie which makes use of the media so effectively. For instance, the party atmosphere of the boardwalk where we see a toy merry-go-round with puppets which blends into a real merry-go-round with real soldiers and real women which blends into real soldiers in a real battle. And the scene where the "upper class" lady is enticing men to join the army morphs into a whore soliciting anybody she can drag onstage. Then the camera moves to the men gathered backstage and the backdrop of the curtains in the theatre becomes the canvas cover of the truck carrying the men to the battlefront. Death is symbolized by poppies. The surrealistic atmosphere allows the characters to pass by poppies, or be handed a poppy rather than being shot or dying from mustard gas. And I particularly liked the scoreboard where the result--regardless of the men lost or the ground lost was always VICTORY! The final scene with the women and children having a picnic in a beautiful field requires the scope of the "big screen." When the child comes running up to his mother and asks, "What did Daddy do in the war?" the answer comes not from the mother but from the camera pulling back very slowly from the picnic. We see a cross and some poppies and then we see more poppies and more crosses until all we can see are the crosses and poppies of Flanders Field and we are no longer able to distinguish the people having the picnic. This is a film for those who enjoy surrealism and satire. It is a must for anyone studying anti-war films. And as an added treat, it has in it practically everybody who was anybody in British theatre at the time it was made.

OH! WHAT A LOVELY WAR (Richard Attenborough, 1969) ***

[Bunuel1976 · 7/10 · 9 February 2007]

Attenborough's directing debut is patchy but impressive (even garnering a Directors Guild Award nod), immediately demonstrating his affinity for grandiose subjects; however, it was brave of him to go against the typically romantic view of British Imperialism (not that it was an isolated case during this time - witness the comparable military caricatures depicted in Tony Richardson's THE CHARGE OF THE LIGHT BRIGADE [1968] or, for that matter, Lindsay Anderson's irreverent expose' of the education system in IF... [1968]).

The all-star cast assembled for the film looks extraordinary on paper but, actually, only a few of them are given substantial roles - Dirk Bogarde's contribution is especially insignificant if still amusing. I was under the impression that the musical numbers featured in the film were written for the stage show which inspired it: interestingly, they're really a collection of songs that were popular around the time of World War I - notably sarcastic ditties 'improvised' by the soldiers to take their minds off the grueling experiences on the battlefields; best of all, perhaps, is a sequence in which a popular hymn is sung simultaneously by a church gathering and an army troop (with the latter replacing the verses altogether to give it their typically cynical and anarchic perspective!).

Production values are top-notch but the overall structure, though generally admirably transferred to the screen, remains somewhat disjointed - the film coming across too often as a series of revue sketches which alternate between the cheerfully jingoistic (Maggie Smith's stirring recruiting song), the broadly comic (as in the scenes involving John Mills' fanatical yet foolhardy Commander) and the immensely poignant (the wonderful sequence in which hostilities mutually cease over Christmas and the soldiers of both sides decide to meet in No Man's Land in order to share drinks and each other's company, not to mention the famous closing tracking shot over the endless graveyard), or else serve merely as expository passages (as in the recurring stylized pier scenes where the leaders of the various countries - among them Ralph Richardson, John Gielgud, Jack Hawkins and Ian Holm - are seen converging to examine the progress of the war).

One of the Great Anti War Films!

[rube2424 · 10/10 · 27 August 2003]

I first saw OH WHAT A LOVELY WAR! when I was living in London in 1969

and it blew me away. I dragged friends to Piccadilly Circus over and

over again and each one emerged from the theater as shaken as I. A

truly great anti war film adapted brilliantly from Joan Greenwood's

theater piece by Richard Attenborough, OH WHAT A LOVELY WAR deserves to

be seen today by a new generation of filmgoers. Here is a scathing

burlesque of the idiocy of war set in WWI and driven by to tunes of the

time, each one seemingly innocuous, but loaded with irony and acid just

below the surface. The film is in brilliant color, but the audience is

always made aware of the blackness of death hovering above it. From

early on with Maggi Smith coercing the boys to "take the shilling" and

join up, to the shattering last scene where the camera pulls back to

show row upon row of crosses, this is a genuine masterpiece. A true 10+

I believe this was a Paramount film so if any of you Paramount execs are

reading this, wouldn't this would be a perfect time for a 35th

anniversary DVD release??

A very unusual musical, full of irony and tragedy. Well acted and directed.

[paulfwb · 7/10 · 29 December 2001]

This film stands out as one of the best protest pieces

of the 20th century. It would stand well next to Catch 22 as an anti-war film.

It is unique in its style.

An interesting and beautifully filmed piece of parody and anti-war propaganda.

[mark.waltz · 5/10 · 2 January 2016]

Perhaps more potent in the mid 1960's as the Vietnam war was unfolding and creating all sorts of protest, this musical revue today seems very much a product of its time and is a mixed bag. Veddy British in its themes, it has a music hall feel about it, and the individual sequences are more interesting than the film as a whole.

Stunningly photographed, this documents the events of what was to become known as "the great war", one that is greatly overshadowed by the memory of its sequel yet had a tremendous impact on Europe and lead to many changes, not only in the map of the world, but how governments were run. Subtle metaphors are tossed in to give a psychological view of historical incidents, and representations of real figures are added to make an interesting commentary. Red flowers are a symbolic prop throughout, with colorless battle scenes only given that touch of red to off-set the carnage.

A music hall number with a singing Maggie Smith sets off patriotism with cynical irony and a single scene with Vanessa Redgrave as an anti-war speaker is also very profound. The emotional highlight of the film is a battleground meeting between British and German soldiers on Christmas day where they each put aside their duty to share brief brotherhood and verbalize their own distaste over what they are forced to do. All of a sudden, bombs go off and they each rush back to their side, preparing for a battle where they just might end up killing each other after all.

There are certain scenes with representational sets that appear to be fantasies over an England that will never be again. At times profound, often perplexing, this may not appeal to general audiences. Interesting in a historical context, this is sort of a war-set "Cavalcade" where the life of one family, the plot box around which this is sent, is profoundly changed forever. Thanks to the artistic vision of first time director Richard Attenborough, this may not stand the test of time as a whole, but isn't quite a failure, either. The ending is a true heartbreaker.

Brilliant Tour de Farce

[Jastrzebiec · 9/10 · 3 October 2010]

This is a superlative film. Though based on the Joan Littlewood stage play (itself derived from a Charles Chilton radio piece), the film has the creativity, visual sense and sardonic wit of Len Deighton throughout. Apparently, it also was Len who had the brainstorm to set the fantasy sections at Brighton, which worked brilliantly! Inexplicably, he asked for his name to be removed from the writing and producing credits. (Later, after swearing off the film industry, he got his revenge with his novel "Close-up.") Whatever "corporate changes" (in the sense of group-think) were made to his script, it still works. And it works extremely well. Not only as an anti-World War I piece, but as a powerful critique of the British class structure and the amoral diplomats and generals who sent millions, nearly a generation, to early graves. I can't think of another film that has so artfully blended satire, farce, tragedy and history. This film is "Dr. Strangelove" caliber, but it's a musical, using the patriotic tunes of the day with the sarcastic alternate lyrics that the troops themselves created.

Kudos go to first-time director (now Lord) Richard Attenborough, and a stellar cast that was essentially the British Pantheon, circa 1969.

I have never seen anything remotely like this, and I doubt if I ever will again. Emotional? If you don't have a few tears by the time they're playing "No, We'll Never Tell Them,"...better check for a pulse.

Oh! What A Lovely Disappointment

[CitizenCaine · 6/10 · 9 February 2009]

Richard Attenborough's directorial debut is not an anti-war film as much as it's an anti-World War One film. The film attempts to tell the horrendous story of how World War One unfolded with biting satire and through staging a series of musical numbers with their origins in British history at the time. Sometimes the lyrics are changed to fit the intent of the filmmaker, which is to clearly point out the absurdity of the war. Attenborough combines cinematic ideas with the theatrical origins of the piece in a way that does not completely satisfy the viewer. Instead of a cohesive narrative, we get a series of music hall sketches strung together, some which have retained their theatrical roots and others which have been relegated to the outdoors. At well over two hours, it is easy to understand why the film is rarely screened on television. To cut even one or two musical numbers to fit a particular time slot would create a gaping hole in the film, more so than in others. The first song in the film,"Oh you beautiful doll", is a curious choice though, as it was written three years before the outbreak of the war. There are several isolated scenes in the film that are grand and poignant: the scene with Maggie Smith as a brash aide for recruitment of soldiers, the soldiers from both sides meeting on the battle field, and of course the terrific ending. However, in between are scenes which are tedious and do not always work, like the churchyard scene. There are several moments evocative of the times the film was made in, coincidental or not, which detract from the film. One gets the notion while watching that the intended impact of the film was probably better suited to the more intimate confines of the theater than the big screen. The film features a who's who of British cinema: Olivier, Mills, Gielgud, Richardson, Bogarde, etc. and look for Jane Seymour as one of the chorus girls backing Maggie Smith during her number. **1/2 of 4 stars.

Overblown,overacted,overlong, and overpraised.

[ianlouisiana · 2/10 · 2 August 2006]

This is a Richard Attenborough film.Too long,sledgehammering its point home,running off in all different directions,lots of his "luvvie" friends in small ("but very telling dear")parts,much given to patronising its audience with vaguely anti-Establishment statements and treating the working class like rather dim children in a Nativity Play. When Joan Littlewood produced "Oh what a lovely war" on the confines of the stage at Stratford East it was a far different animal.Broadening it out into a major movie did the play no favours at all.Perforce it lost its intimacy,its subtlety,its interaction with its audience and its immediacy.Mr Attenborough replaced those attributes with bombast,bathos and all the monotonous single-minded slogan shouting of the currently fashionable demonstrations against the Vietnam War. He propounds without question the ,to say the least,debatable "Lions led by Donkeys" concept of the British Army ,a comment attributed to various German High Command officers,but never actually admitted to by any of them.It's far more likely to have been an invention of some jingoistic Fleet Street editor looking for a headline, a "Gotcha!" for its day. It is conveniently forgotten that a very large number of those Donkeys also perished in the mud of Paschendale or on the Ypres salient or the blood - soaked fields of the Somme. It's sixth form anti-militarism now seems embarrassingly naive. The First World War,with its origins in the struggle between two greedy colonial powers,was the bloodiest conflict in history.An obscene number of young men of all countries slaughtered each other for four years before Germany-brought to the point of starvation and ignominy-surrendered and descended into a chaos that lasted until the rise of the Nazis.And so it goes,as Mr Vonnegut says. Nobody would dream of classifying it as a "Good Thing".It follows then that we do not need to have it screamed in our faces(complete with not very subtly interposed Music Hall songs) that it was a "Bad Thing". War is hell,Dickie dear,yes,we worked that out for ourselves thank you.

One of the best movies of the seventies

[benoit-3 · 10/10 · 6 January 2000]

I was just commenting to a co-worker that I thought the 70's were a total blank as far as quality pictures are concerned, Oh! What a Lovely War being an exception (if you can actually count it as a 70's picture). It is a pacifist tract that is actually opulent in its period detail, incisive in its satire of the English establishment's foibles and lyrical in its description of the ravages of war. It also shows actual intelligence, culture and wit at the service of a good cause at the start of a decade which was inaugurated with self-indulgence and ended in gross excess. With all the talents involved (working for scale, I'm sure), it was a monumental undertaking and remains a movie that stays with you forever.

War-what good is it?

[alicespiral · 10/10 · 28 February 2007]

Now on DVD with additional features including comments from all the major players. An all time favorite film because of the satire and today its nothing new same old thing. Each War seems to be worse than the last-lessons are never learned. Its the rich versus the poor-the officers who only got their commissions because they were born privileged. The film is obviously Anti War and wastes no opportunity to make pointed comments at the Masters of War. The cavalier attitude to Death is emphasised when one leader reads out the figures of "Casualties-201447 privates and officers killed yesterday.Ground gained-NIL" This movie says more about the futility of War than any other

Very likely my favorite movie ever.

[arden_warner · 27 June 2004]

It's been thirty-five years since I first saw this movie. I remember it as well as any movie I've seen. I check every few months to see if it is available in any format. So far I haven't found it. It would be good if someone could be influenced to create a DVD version. I'd buy it in a minute. I'd probably buy several copies and give them to special friends. It may be my favorite movie of all time.

Until I saw the movie, I didn't realize that there was some special music that accompanied WWI. It's music that now brings a tear whenever I hear it. The portrayal of pompous generals and their subservient minions, as they are posting the numbers of deaths and casualties for the day, is beautifully done. They were simply putting up numbers. But each number was often a death. A death of a promising young person. This movie makes war appear as brutal as it can really be. The poor always die first. It would be nice if international law demanded that the political and military leaders of a country be required to send their own children into war first. If that were the case, there would likely be no more war.

The film I most want to experience again

[rodsmith_alberta · 9/10 · 8 October 2004]

I saw this movie once, thirty years ago, and it still has the power to choke me inside.

This is the first film I look for on any movie site I go to. Every other movie I just browse for.

Along with the original "All Quiet on the Western Front", I find it one of the most powerful war movies ever. All the other movies have actors that you know didn't die - no matter how realistic the scenes.

This movie truly affected me at the time.

I would drive a long way to purchase, or see this movie. Why has this movie never been released when so many worse have been? Other movies might be considered entertainment, but not this one.

A little disappointing considering the cast, with just the rare stand out moment.

[rdolan9007 · 5/10 · 15 December 2011]

I wish I had been more moved by this film. It had the cast, it had the poignancy of the soldiers' songs, it had a celebrated director. Yet the film is hidebound, by mostly lack-luster direction. This may be a common side effect when transferring a stage production to film, but some stagy scenes should have been cut, or removed.

The most obvious failing is the tedious start created by trying to have leaders of the countries in the lead up to war explain their positions in a contrivance which does not work for me. Maybe if the film had concentrated more on the musical aspects of the film, and less on stagy exposition, I would have been more involved in the film.

The musical numbers despite the fame of some of the songs, are not - with only a couple of exceptions - that well produced. Ironically the best number is set on a stage near the beginning were the men in the audience are being recruited by an attractive dance troupe. The shock of using such overt sexuality to try and recruit men for war was one of the sharpest moments in the film. The other being when a nurse tells a badly injured man that she'll soon get him fit enough to go back to war. That was an unexpectedly savage moment in a film, which despite the subject matter lacked for them.

The acting honours were about even through out the cast, no one really seemed to stand out, perhaps Ralph Richardson as Sir Edward Grey, and Joe Melia as a photographer in a cameo role are the most memorable. The ending of the film is disappointing low key, the Americans come, and the film basically ends soon after that. Maybe the low key ending was deliberate, but the film seemed to come to rather an abrupt end. This is more surprising because the film is comfortably over two hours long, and yet I will say the film did not drag after the slow start at all. It's just the film lacked enough visual flourish to make the impact it should have. I'm glad I watched it, for it does have an important message, and it's entertaining enough.

It however should have been an experience that left you being moved, and openly angry and bitter at the first world war's futility. It ends up being a rather flat experience, with just the rare moment of truth making this film a worthy if mostly uninspiring experience.

A rare successful transition from stage to film

[loza-1 · 8/10 · 17 June 2005]

It is not often that a musical is transferred to screen and not look awful. This film is an exception. If anything, it is even improved by the transition to film.

From the moment the imperial families of Europe are invited to "take their partners," the watchword of this film is irony. There are some memorable scenes: the face of the now-voiceless Jack Hawkins as the Austrian emperor, the officers playing leapfrog, and finally the rows upon rows of gravestones at the end to make the audience ask :"for what?" The film is well shot, and is a very good directorial debut for Richard Attenborough.

War! Huh! What is it good for?

[JamesHitchcock · 4/10 · 10 August 2021]

"War! Huh! What is it good for?" Thus Edwin Starr, who immediately answered his own question. "Absolutely Nothing!" Although his song "War" does not specifically mention Vietnam, it was written in 1969 when the Vietnam War was raging and was widely taken as a protest against that conflict. "Oh! What a Lovely War" is a film which also came out in 1969 (although it is based on a stage musical from several years earlier) and likewise tries to persuade us that war is good for absolutely nothing.

Of course, anyone in 1969 with any historical knowledge could have pointed out that it was only by going to war in 1939 that we were able to protect democracy and prevent world domination by the Nazis and their allies. (Or, as Monty Python might have put it, "What has war ever done for us? Apart from saving us from Nazism, absolutely nothing!") The makers of the film, however, like the producers of the original stage play, avoid the Second World War altogether and concentrate on the First. The story of that war is told in a series of comedy sketches and musical numbers, many of them set on Brighton's famous West Pier, since destroyed by fire. The songs are all taken from the war period itself, some of them cheery and optimistic, while others, generally those sung by the troops themselves, are cynical and sarcastic. The whole point is to demonstrate that the First World War achieved nothing and was a useless waste of millions of lives.

The film-makers probably thought that by pointing this out they were being daring, original and satirical, but in reality they were doing no more than reinforcing an existing received idea. By 1969 the idea that the First World War achieved nothing and was a useless waste of millions of lives had become the standard; this was certainly the version of history which I was taught at school a few years later. Moreover, this is a received idea from which I would not dissent. This is a film I greatly dislike, but my dislike has nothing to do with my politics. The truth is that in 1914 the nations of Europe blundered into war following the assassination of Franz Ferdinand by a Balkan terrorist, and having made that initial blunder found it impossible to extricate themselves. British propagandists (some of them disguised as historians) tried to pretend that the Germans bore sole guilt for the war, but in truth that guilt was shared by all those, on both sides of the conflict, who preferred to go to war rather than sacrifice what Wilfred Owen called "the ram of pride".

So why do I dislike the film? Apart, that is, from the unbearable smugness which is the inevitable hallmark of any production that believes it is saying something daring, original and satirical when it is actually saying something commonplace. Well, for a start it recycles the absurd "lions led by donkeys" myth that all the Allied commanders of the Great War were incompetent idiots. The British generals, especially Haig, are portrayed not only as buffoons but also as callously unconcerned about the human cost of war. In reality Haig and his French and American counterparts, Foch and Pershing, were correct in their belief that the war on the Western front could be won by a series of large-scale offensives. The film-makers do not dare tackle the question (which has stumped armchair strategists for over a century) of how the war could have been won with significantly lower casualties. They merely suggest- indeed, one young staff officer puts forward the idea- that the Allied high command should have pursued a purely defensive strategy. Which would only have played into German hands. Their successes on the Eastern Front meant that the Germans did not need to march into Paris- still less London or Washington- to claim victory. All they needed to do was force a stalemate in the West, which would have led to a negotiated peace which left Germany the strongest power in Europe.

That might have been no bad thing. Geopolitical and economic logic, as well as common humanity, should have dictated that the political leaders of the warring nations should have sat down and negotiated a compromise peace. The film, however, never explores why this never happened. Unfortunately, both sides were so convinced of their own moral rightness and of the total moral depravity of their enemies that any talk of peace was regarded as a near-treasonable betrayal of the cause of freedom and of the men who had already died for it. Those who thought like this were not just motivated by jingoism and stubborn pride; there was also a genuine idealism and a belief that the triumph of Our Cause would lead to a brave new world in the morning, while a compromise peace would merely have reinforced the bad old one. Hence slogans like "The war to end all wars" and "The war to make the world safe for democracy"; these were Allied slogans, but there were German equivalents.

Today, of course, these slogans sound very hollow. With the benefit of hindsight we know that the war to end all wars merely paved the way for a second conflict, even bloodier and more destructive than the first, and the war to make the world safe for democracy merely made it safe for new forms of tyranny, far crueller than anything that had existed in 1914. But hindsight was a luxury that the generation of 1914-18 did not possess. The makers of this film, in their haste to condemn, seem to have forgotten that. 4/10

A goof. Kaiser Wilhelm and Tsar Nicholas were not first cousins; they were only distantly related. (Both were cousins of King George V, but on opposite sides of his family).

Maggie Smith's depiction of Anticipation versus Reality

[rozmarija · 8 December 2004]

What struck me most about the film was Maggie Smith's remarkable transformation as she was at first an alluring young girl,- the Music Hall star as recruiting agent - the epitome of that era's romantic glorification of Going To Do Battle,then as the blood and death became evident, her character was transformed into a painted, ravaged whore.The heart-rending ending aside,the acres and acres of crosses dotting a hillside,her symbolism is what stays with us.My sister's-in-law first husband was next to Rudyard Kipling's son when he got blown up,and the sensitivity and denial of that time was such that the Kipling family only received notice that their son was "lost".This film managed to show just that attitude.And-- it resonates in today's view of the current lost cause.

No Escape

[john-3109 · 10/10 · 26 November 2006]

Richard Attenborough's (1969) film of Charles Chilton's play is set in north west Europe during World War I.

For somebody who by 1969 was only 13, this film seemed to me a radical departure for the director who had portrayed Big X - Squadron Leader Roger Bartlett (eclipsed only by Steve McQueen's epic motorcycle leap) in 'The Great Escape' only six years earlier.

His most successful war film to date had already begun to populate bank holiday Monday viewing on BBC TV to the exclusion of all others.

Pre-figuring the uncomfortable mixture of contemporary songs juxtaposed with authentic realism - which became the hallmark of the later work of Denis Potter - it marked a coming of age of the romantic notion that war was 'absolutely thrilling' and the best thing that ever happened to some people.

This film lifts us up with all the fun of the fair, to drop us unceremoniously onto the platform of Victoria Station aboard a boat-train for The Somme.

It's a powerful film, which somehow manages to celebrate the songs which grew out of the spirit of ordinary people bound up in the conflict, while at the same time leaving us in no doubt where it was all heading.

Bitter-sweet and evocative of the spirit of the times in represents.

All-Star Cast headline first rate film

[GMPasqua · 10/10 · 11 June 2003]

I first came across "Oh! What a Lovely War" one night on the BRAVO channel. The first ten minutes or so were slow going but then the film takes off. A clever and adult anti-war film filled with musical sequences. Richard Attenborough does a wonderful job in his film-directing debut. The film concerns the adventures of the "Smith" family as they become involved in the start and finish of World War One. The cinematography is beautiful and the performances all around are perfect. Maggie Smith steals the film which her rendition of "I'll Make a Man of You" and John Mills and Lawrence Olivier give subtle comedic performances as Sir Douglas Haig and Sir John French. The cast features many of Britain's top actors including Michael,Corin and Vanessa Redgrave, Ralph Richardson, John Gielgud, and Susannah York. The musical parodies are staged inventively, some quite moving - "They Were Only Playing Leap Frog", "Adieu la Vie" and the final "They'll Never Believe Me" which is sung as the camera pans back to reveal the endless graves of the soldiers who lost their lives in World War One. There is a lot of `symbolism'. Poppies are handed out to symbolize death and the amusement park pier at Brighton represents WWI with it's shooting galleries and stage shows, all inter-cut with footage recreating the battles of WWI. The film has aged very well, looking like it could have been shot this year, and holds up to repeated viewings. Highly recommended. Will this film ever be released on Home Video?

A genuine labor of love

[updf · 9/10 · 25 February 2007]

By Hollywood rules, it should never have been made; no studs or ingénues as leading characters, no love interest,or heroic exploits,length more than two hours.. the humor is ironic, and makes you think more than laugh... But this is a great film. The original stage production had made a deep impression on John Mills, and it seems as though he, Olivier, Attenborough, Gilegud, Richardson and probably most of the rest of the star-studded cast thought they simply had to make this film, and it shows...(Yes, actual personal commitment, what a concept..)

The subject is how the British nation were sold a war, and how the British military command refused to realize it when it became disastrous, and continued to waste thousands of lives to no purpose. Not your typical musical...But despite the theatrical setting on a Brighton Pier for some of the scenes, there's real history there. John Mills, as General Haig, really uses Haig's words, from his diaries, in all their comforting, delusional splendor. I only wish the film could have been re-released prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom, ( or whatever they're calling it now).