AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

Contentar Best movie of this year hands down!

Verity Robins Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

Haven Kaycee It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

MartinHafer This film is set in Europe during WWII and concerns a couple of American soldiers who fall for the same French girl. However, while the notion of two guys falling in love with the same person isn't particularly novel, how this is handled is.The movie is narrated, at times, by Frank Sinatra and is told from the viewpoint of his character, Sam. Sam is in charge of a unit of soldier and when they are in France, he falls hard for a gorgeous French lady (Natalie Wood). Unfortunately, this is not reciprocated as although Sam is very nice, she only sees him as a friend. Unfortunately for her, however, she soon falls for Britt (Tony Curtis)...and Britt is a grade-A heel and only is interested in using this sweet girl.This is a very good film. However, you really wonder how much better it might have been if the studio had been brave and cast the black actress, Dorothy Dandridge in the lead (as they originally intended). I am NOT complaining about Miss Wood's performance...she was EXCELLENT as a French woman. But the idea of having an obvious interracial romance would have made the film much more interesting and brave. As it is, Wood is supposed to be biracial but she really doesn't look it...and the film loses some of its punch. But it's still a good film and well worth your time...just not quite what it could have been. Sinatra is great in the movie, by the way...really, really good. And, Curtis plays an excellent fast- talking heel. Well written and unforgettable.

secondtake Kings Go Forth (1958)I shouldn't have loved this movie as much as I did. But it touches on those basics of love and life and rivalry and goodness I couldn't help be manipulated. And it's set in Villefranche, one of my favorite places in the world, and it's set during WWII, when life for Europe was its most on fire. And there I was, crying and loving it."Kings Go Forth" is actually a slightly late in the game WWII flick that shifts attention at first to luxuriating soldiers in the south of France just as the war was ending. It's not as much about war (though there are some remnants of fightings which are tense). It's more about a bunch of decent guys, two of them in particular, and their misunderstandings. And it's about love. The south of France and the Mediterranean is about as decent a setting for romance as you get. It's idealizing (everyone loves the Americans in their Jeeps, which must be half true, but not entirely), and it's all sunny weather and champagne. Except that love is never easy, and it gets more and more intense, sad, and profound. Yes, profound.Tony Curtis is terrific as usual. As Brit Harris he is charming, funny, and clever. Natalie Wood in one of many great roles between "Rebel Without a Cause" and "West Side Story" is rather perfect, except maybe her French accent. But she represents, as Monique Blair, something perfectly innocent and yet ravaged by war. The other lead, the main character Sam Loggins, is played by Frank Sinatra, and Loggins also loves Blair. At first Loggins is noble and lets Harris win the girl's heart, but then it gets complicated.There is a fabulous last war scene for the climax, featuring a special mission needing just two men--our leads, now enemies and distrustful. But in the heat of their battle, Harris gives some real wisdom about character, and Loggins shows true compassion. It's war, the worst and the best of it. And it's the worst and best of love, too, with an ending just slightly hanging in mid-air.Director Delmer Daves pulls off a lot of great, nicely felt films. They often lack an edge of innovation or of real probing triumph, but this is one of those that brings a lot of issues, including racism at its simplest, to a believable story. Don't brush this movie off. And don't be put off by the first twenty minutes or so when the establishing scenes seem like just another good war film. This one goes places, at least for the romantic.

skiddoo Does anyone know if the racial story that turned out with no one getting the girl allowed it to be played in the South? Was the fact that Natalie really wasn't part black and was a big name make sure it was shown there? I think viewers today underestimate what it was like then and why they wouldn't want to risk profits by hiring a woman not thought to be totally white for a romantic role with men thought to be totally white. Putting it into the past, as in Show Boat, and far away also made it seem more remote and potentially less threatening. That was then but this is now, sort of thing.For some modern viewers it would have been horrible to see Natalie Wood act dead from drowning, knowing that's how she really died. For a woman who was afraid of water, she got wet a lot in the movies.

TCManiacs Basically I enjoyed the movie and would recommend watching, but there were some major flaws that prevent me from calling it a great movie. In my opinion the basic plot was novel and appealing, but there are some glaring problems with the movie. The first problem was the substitution of a well written dialog, with the monotonous voice over by Sam; Frank Sinatra's character was used as a narration throughout the entire movie. Despite some decent lines from the character, Monique, Natalie Wood's French accent made me cringe each time she spoke. The story line of the two soldiers seeking the affections of a woman that turns out to be biracial was intriguing. A story explaining the reality of interracial love was novel for those days. The movie courageously lets Monique use the "n" word when she exclaims, "I guess 'nigger' is one of the first words you learn in America, isn't it?" Then Sam's character realistically illuminates American racism through his initial reaction to learning the girl he loves is part Negro. Unfortunately, the overall story lacked unity, the plot was forced and the sequence of events seemed unnatural. For example, the way Monique suddenly turns all of her attention to Britt during the first date with Sam after he had made her so happy with his return and acceptance her blackness was not realistic. It made the supposedly sensible good girl, Monique turn fickle and the otherwise dominating lieutenant, Sam turn passive as he set back and let the charming handsome Britt, Tony Curtis, take over his date.Although the film was classified under the war movie genre, the parallel plot involving Allied military operations was disconnected and irrelevant to the primary romantic drama. In fact the battle scene with the Germans seemed created just for an opportunity for Sam to extract vengeance on Britt lying about his intentions with Monique. After Sam's long narration on his intent to kill Britt, I felt frustrated and disappointed when he fails to take advantage of the perfect opportunity to carry out his vengeance with the dead Germans gun. Although, it may have been quite natural that he could have decided not sully his own character by resorting to murder, I don't think he would have forgiven Britt's transgression just because Britt admits his own lack of character. Despite these flaws, the unique story and the three starring actors make this movie worth watching.***I won't revise my original post, but I will make an addendum now that I have knowledge that the screenplay was based on novel by Joe David Brown. The book was written in stream of consciousness, which explains the heavy narration and limited dialog. The movie script has significant deviations from the books plot which explains its disjointed flow and unnatural character evolutions. I'd like to find a documented reason for the change from the books ending.