FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Plustown A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

Murphy Howard I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Josephina Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

MartinHafer "Cry of Battle" is definitely a different sort of war movie. Clearly, it's NOT the sort of film you would have seen during WWII and even in 1963, it was pretty adult and modern in its sensibilities.When the film begins, David is living with his rich family in the Philippines when WWII breaks out. He's nearly killed by a group of thugs--after all, law and order have disintegrated. But he's fortunately saved by some Filipino insurgents--men who have taken to the countryside to fight a guerilla war against the invaders from Japan. However, one of these benefactors, Joe (Van Heflin) is a completely amoral sort of guy. Sure, he'll fight and kill the enemy but David is horrified to find out that he's also just raped a local girl! David naturally hates him but is forced to stick with him due to the war. Over time, they fall in with another group of rebels and David's naivete about these people and war is challenged, as he finds Joe isn't the exception to the rule...there are many others with severely challenged moral compasses...to say the least. Can David manage to remain morally pure while also becoming a man who must kill? And what of his lady, Sisa (Rita Moreno)? I am a bit surprised that Van Helfin agreed to play such a sleazy character. As a supporting actor, of course he had to play jerks now and then...but a rapist? It certainly is one of his more challenging portrayals! Overall, a very good but strange war film...and seeing James MacArthur (Danno from "Hawaii 5-O") playing the lead makes it all the more interesting...and jarring!

atlasmb "Cry of Battle" was released in 1963--the same year that "Spencer's Mountain" hit the big screen. Both star James MacArthur in a coming of age story, but it would be difficult to find two films so different from each other. Where "Spencer's Mountain" is filled to the brim with scenes about the virtues of family bonds and living in harmony with the land, "Cry of Battle" is nearly morally bankrupt. In fact, I am surprised the novel was chosen for filming.Set during World War II, the film features MacArthur as the son (David McVey) of a wealthy businessman, trapped on a remote island of the Philippines. He is befriended by a creepy opportunist named Joe Trent (Van Heflin)--a man for whom he feels both revulsion and loyalty.In refreshing contrast to the script, which is distasteful, is the performance of Rita Moreno as Sisa, a Filipina who is caught up in the tragedy of the war and the stormy relationship between the two men.The final scenes try to resolve the moral ambiguity of the film, but end up being abrupt, unsatisfying and enigmatic.

edwagreen I thought that Rita Moreno wanted to break out and have someone sing for her as was done two years before in her supporting Oscar win for "West Side Story."This picture, as far as I was concerned, was a first-class stinker. You don't feel a World War 11 atmosphere in the Philippines. The Japanese enemy is rarely seen and you begin to wonder who the good and bad guys are in the film.The Van Heflin role as Joe is so complex and complicated; you don't really know where he is coming from. Rita Moreno is not exactly Pilar (Katina Paxinou) in 1943's "For Whom the Bell Tolls."James MacArthur, as the spoiled son of a wealthy American businessman stranded in the area, is about the only bright spot in this rather dull film.

SimonJack I normally review films with a positive bent, but make exceptions from time to time. This is one of them. Only a few people have commented on "Cry of Battle," and I wonder if any of them saw the same movie I did. I don't see how it can be considered a war movie at all. There are two short scenes with any shooting between the "good" guys and the Japanese. There isn't much intensity about evading capture. And the one supposed mission to knock out a Japanese warehouse never comes to pass on film. So, most of this film is about crime. Van Heflin, one of the stars, is a rapist, a racist and a murderer. Most of the "good" guys that he and James MacArthur tag along with are bandits taking advantage of the war. They rob, pillage and kill their own people. Some may argue that this shows a part of reality that is seldom shown about war, especially in the Philippines. Was there really such a situation with all bad eggs doing no good? There have been a number of good films made about resistance fighting in the Philippines during WWII. They show the struggles, the persecution of the Filipinos by the Japanese, and the heroic efforts of the people. This film shows none of that, and only alludes to one true resistance group fighting the enemy. The plot is weak to start with, and the characters and acting for the most part are all quite bad. MacArthur is fighting mad about Van Heflin's rape of a young Filipina. In the next scene he's almost forgotten about it. Van Heflin spends much of his time getting drunk on the local coconut liquor. In the movies based on true stories about the Philippines, the few Americans and the Filipinos themselves were rightly scared, wary of the Japanese and too alert to go on frequent drunks. And, just think of all those other war movies we have seen that show Americans getting drunk while trying to elude the enemy and save their lives. Is it any wonder why there aren't any? The only way I can see that this film relates to a war movie is that it bombs out. Or, maybe the filmmakers just wanted to make a movie about ugly and dumb Americans.