Much has been written here, by those bothering to post a review, about "The Steel Helmet" being 'one of the best ever war films.' I always shudder when plaudits like these are used....how many films can really be 'the best ever?' I was curious to find out about this one.
Plot in a nutshell: In the early stages of the Korean War, a rag-tag band of American soldiers tries to get along with each other while searching for, and eventually taking positions in, a Buddhist temple.
Yes, that really is the plot. So if you are coming to this film thinking that it's going to be some sort of epic war adventure....think again. 2/3 of "The Steel Helmet" is set in one location, making this feel very much like it was taken from the stage; you will become keenly aware that this was a low-budget affair. From what I've read, it cost just over $100,000 to produce and it shows. Tanks made from plywood tend to have that effect.
What differentiates "The Steel Helmet" from most war films, especially war films of the era, is the social commentary director Samuel Fuller chooses to make. There are a few 'firsts' here....besides this being the first Korean War film, it is believed to also be the first film to mention the internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII. There is a frank discussion of the 2nd-class citizen status of African-Americans, with one character stating 'maybe in 50 years we'll be able to ride in the middle of the bus.' We also see an American soldier shooting an unarmed North Korean soldier, a violation of the Geneva Conventions. And the ending tagline "there is no end to this story" - as the soldiers move on to their next objective - is a powerful anti-war statement for sure.
All of the above was certainly thought-provoking but, unfortunately, was only a small part of the film as a whole. Excise the 5 minutes or so that are devoted to those elements, and what you are left with is a very pedestrian, low-budget run-of-the-mill war film that sometimes felt to me like it was a TV-movie. The lack of star power probably contributed to that. Many of the 'action' sequences are augmented with stock footage, some taken from WWII, and one in particular actually shows German cannons from Normandy. So the film loses some points/credibility there. Overall it's not bad, but be assured "The Steel Helmet" is more of a 'message film' than anything else. Epic war film it is not.
6/10. Interesting for the social commentary and for being the first Korean War film. Would I watch again (Y/N)? No.
Plot in a nutshell: In the early stages of the Korean War, a rag-tag band of American soldiers tries to get along with each other while searching for, and eventually taking positions in, a Buddhist temple.
Yes, that really is the plot. So if you are coming to this film thinking that it's going to be some sort of epic war adventure....think again. 2/3 of "The Steel Helmet" is set in one location, making this feel very much like it was taken from the stage; you will become keenly aware that this was a low-budget affair. From what I've read, it cost just over $100,000 to produce and it shows. Tanks made from plywood tend to have that effect.
What differentiates "The Steel Helmet" from most war films, especially war films of the era, is the social commentary director Samuel Fuller chooses to make. There are a few 'firsts' here....besides this being the first Korean War film, it is believed to also be the first film to mention the internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII. There is a frank discussion of the 2nd-class citizen status of African-Americans, with one character stating 'maybe in 50 years we'll be able to ride in the middle of the bus.' We also see an American soldier shooting an unarmed North Korean soldier, a violation of the Geneva Conventions. And the ending tagline "there is no end to this story" - as the soldiers move on to their next objective - is a powerful anti-war statement for sure.
All of the above was certainly thought-provoking but, unfortunately, was only a small part of the film as a whole. Excise the 5 minutes or so that are devoted to those elements, and what you are left with is a very pedestrian, low-budget run-of-the-mill war film that sometimes felt to me like it was a TV-movie. The lack of star power probably contributed to that. Many of the 'action' sequences are augmented with stock footage, some taken from WWII, and one in particular actually shows German cannons from Normandy. So the film loses some points/credibility there. Overall it's not bad, but be assured "The Steel Helmet" is more of a 'message film' than anything else. Epic war film it is not.
6/10. Interesting for the social commentary and for being the first Korean War film. Would I watch again (Y/N)? No.