ThiefHott Too much of everything

Pluskylang Great Film overall

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

ShangLuda Admirable film.

Leofwine_draca GUADALCANAL DIARY is an American WW2 movie made when the war was still in full flow. It's a surprisingly modern film in feel, with the battle sequences in particular feeling expansive and well-staged; they're chock-full of explosive action and gunfire, and they feel large budget and convincing as a result. Not bad when you consider the war effort going on at the time.The story is straightforward and, as it happens, true; a bunch of marines invade an island in the Pacific held by the Japanese and all hell breaks loose. There are many turns from famous faces like Anthony Quinn, Richard Conte, Lionel Stander, Richard Jaeckel, and William Bendix. The performances feel naturalistic and real, without any overt mannerisms or the like that can make them ring hollow. It's solid stuff throughout.

kngpanther Guadalcanal Diary is one of those rare films made during World War Two (1939-1945) that manages to show the audience what it was like for the men on the front lines, albeit not in the fashion of movies about this time that would be made years later. What really makes Guadalcanal Diary work and make it a classic, is the strong performances of its cast, mainly Preston Foster, Lloyd Nolan, William Bendix, Richard Conte, Anthony Quinn and Richard Jaeckel. The actors manage to convey the wide eyed wounder that many of the men had when going into battle for the first time, then how the grim reality of war changed them and the reality that not all of them may make it out alive.The later is best shown during the night attack by the Japanese air and naval forces. During the attack, Cpl. Aloysius "Taxi" Potts (William Bendix) gives a monologue in which he states that he is scared and doesn't care who hears him say it. "I can't tell them bombs to hit somewhere else." he says to his fellow Marines. During his speech, Potts states that this is all over his head and that its up to someone bigger then him. "Like I said before, it's up to somebody bigger than me, bigger than anybody. What I mean is I...I guess it's up to God. And I'm not kidding when I say I sure hope he knows how l feel. I'm not going to say I'm sorry for everything I've done. When you're scared like this, the first thing you do is start trying to square things. If I get out of this alive, I'll probably go out and do the same things all over again. The only thing I know is I didn't ask to get in this spot. And if we get it...and it sure looks that way now....then I only hope He figures we did the best we could and lets it go at that." This, along with Anthony Quinn's line "Its not so much dying, its having to sit here and take it!" really ram home what it was like for the men who fought at Guadalcanal. In the end, Guadalcanal Diary is a strong, character driven movie. At the same time, while the battle scenes are "clean" and the hardships endured by the Marines are not fully emphasized, the film still manages to show what it took for them to win this battle.

eronavbj-1 I can't be offended by the truth, and the truth is, GIs called the enemy in the South Pacific "Japs," "Slant-eyes," and a lot worse. If that offends anyone, then why watch a film that you know is about a bloody WWII battle, where passions were running high? After the Marine shoots the Japanese sniper out of the tree, would it have been less offensive if he would have said, "Well, I just dispatched another one of the Asian enemy." Really! I can just imagine what someone would say in the heat of battle. It'd be a hell of a lot more descriptive than "Slant-eye."As for the nameless reviewer who criticized the scene wherein the GI did not get mail, I can tell you first hand, that there were fewer sights more pathetic than the guys standing there after mailcall without a single letter in their hand. It was hard to watch. We all felt for those guys. You knew what they were going through, yet you couldn't do a damn thing to help them. I know how I felt when days went by without a letter from home--from ANYONE. Being in combat in a foreign land must have made it exponentially worse. I would bet that the reviewer who made that criticism never spent one day in his country's service.

ccthemovieman-1 This wasn't bad, when you compare it to the average World War II film made back in the 1940s. In the first half, it had too many of the same negative aspects that many of its contemporary war movies had at the time. The narration was corny and the dialog by the GIs here is so dated and so racist it's embarrassing. Hey, I am the first to acknowledge how political correctness has run amok in recent years and, in fact, is out of control, but, still, hearing "Jap" yelled out every third sentence, and guys making slant-eyed "jokes" all the time is offensive, even for me.In that 40 minutes, we had the normal William Bendix-role of playing--a-clown-from- Brooklyn, the priest who is a good guy but too often indistinguishable from the soldiers, the young kid who looks and acts about 15, and most of the other cliché characters you see in this old movies. However, part of this was for a purpose: to show how these guys went from cocky, almost- ignorant soldiers who underestimated their foes, to veterans who calmed down and had their arrogant attitude kicked out of them. In fact, Bendix wound up making some very profound statements about 20 minutes from the end when things really looked bad. There's a lot of honesty in this movie, as it turned out.But, despite that first 40 minutes of mostly-inane chatter which took away from the sense of the guys being in a brutal situation, which these GIs were in - the second half made up for it. It had tons of drama, suspense and action, plus a plea or two to the folks back home in the USA watching this film. I have no problem with that. Why not? Our soldiers should always be given whatever they need since they're putting their lives on the line for us back here. Some people didn't like those, nor the prayers or the religious angle in here, but that's today's secular-progressives who have no tolerance. I read one big-city critic who objected to the scene showing the soldier disappointed he didn't get any mail! Give me a break. Sorry, but sometimes it's good to see a war movie with some old fashioned patriotism, "religion" and sentimentality.Overall, however, these 60-some-year-old movies just can't stack up to the realistic ones made today, and that's understandable. But, credit this film with having easily more actual war action than the average movie of its day and totally switched from dumb to pretty intelligent the last half of the movie.These guys got pummeled from the land, the sea and the air. It would be interesting to see this movie re-made today. It might be tough to watch with all the carnage, but I'd like to see it with a appropriate tribute to these brave men.The DVD sports a good transfer. "Fox War Classics" always look pretty sharp.