Attack

1956 "It rips open the hot Hell behind the glory!"
Attack
7.4| 1h47m| Approved| en| More Info
Released: 19 September 1956 Released
Producted By: United Artists
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

Battle of the Bulge, World War II, 1944. Lieutenant Costa, an infantry company officer who must establish artillery observation posts in a strategic area, has serious doubts about Captain Cooney's leadership ability.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

United Artists

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Hunter Lanier Robert Aldrich's "Attack" is a WWII film from 1956 that feels decidedly post-Vietnam in its cynicism, anarchism and flippancy. It feels somewhat akin, yet opposite, to the following year's "Paths of Glory," a film with its feet more firmly in the ground of defiance.The heart--and guts, one might say--of the film is Lt. Joe Costa (Jack Palance), a man with a personal set of rules that may or may not match up with God's or man's. He butts heads with Captain Cooney (Eddie Albert), a cowardly--and not the smart kind, the whimpering kind-- drunk who only holds his high rank through personal connections. Their animosity towards one another begins at a card table, but soon escalates beyond nasty words between drinks.One might be quick to label "Attack!" as an anti-war film, considering its disillusionment with top-down decision making; the problem with which is that it's like Christmas lights, in that if one goes out, it creates a chain-reaction of dysfunction. But, the film acknowledges chaos cannot reign as well, and the deals with that through Lt. Harry Woodruff (William Smithers). Nevertheless, the film could hardly be called reverent. Palance, as he always does, milks every last second in front of the camera, turning the simplest motion or grunt into an attempted Shakespearean monologue--I'm surprised the man doesn't have bruises under his eyes from blinking. Albert, as Palance's foil, is effective, but almost goes too far into sniveling baby territory and becomes too much of a "movie villain," but that's more the writer's fault. The film's middle-ground, Smithers shines in a dim role, anchoring the outrageous events around him.More than just philosophizing on the bureaucracy of war, "Attack!" brings the goods, and by "goods," I mean tense action sequences, thrilling "the horror, the horror" moments and shocking deaths. Chiefly, there's a moment where Jack Palance goes toe-to-toe with a tank, and, well, it's closer than you think.Despite its sensationalist title, "Attack!" is far more than flying bullets and pumping fists--though in short supply, it's not. While its phasers are set to stun, the film points a finger at the things law and order can't fix--sometimes you just have to kick the television to make it work. It's not a political film, but it's a film about politics.
Prismark10 Robert Aldrich brings this grim story set in the latter stages of World War 2 and conflict in a battalion where Captain Cooney sends men on a mission but is too cowardly to bail them out with firepower as he does not want to die.The film stars Jack Palance as the tougher subordinate Costa who has seen through Eddie Albert's cowardly and drunk Captain Cooney who has used his family connections with Lee Marvin's Lt Colonel Bartlett to get himself a nice number but finds himself out of his depth and quickly losing the respect of his men.From the opening scenes, filmed in a studio back-lot of RKO you can sense this is a low budget film. What we have is a film with some of cinema's hard men Marvin and Palance (both to be future Oscar winners) slightly playing against type. Palance is a good guy here, the platoon leader cynical about his masters. You can see ingrained in his face that he is battle worn, battle weary and sick of his superiors treating his men like some disposal commodity.Marvin plays an effective cameo. He knows Cooney is inept, he has known him for years and he a lot to be thankful to Cooney's father. When Marvin goes back home after the war he needs his father's patronage. Maybe he really did feel in the heat of battle either Cooney will man up, get killed by the enemy or even by one of his own men.William Smithers plays Lt Woodruff torn between his loyalty to Costa and dislike of Cooney but bound not to rock the boat but raises his concerns with Bartlett, but Bartlett dismisses his concerns as he has his own agenda.As the film is an adaptation of a stage play, it does have too many stereotypes and rather one dimensional ones. Robert Strauss is there for broad comic relief for example.Only Smithers comes across as conflicted where his plea to save Costa and his men when they go on a mission are rebuffed by Cooney and feels he has nowhere else to turn.The climax of the film comes across as weak and preachy. The conflict with the German tanks does not look well staged and the incident with Costa falls victim to censorship laws where the violence had to be toned down.I felt that the ending need to be punchier and more to the point which the showdown between Smithers and Marvin failed to bring.Its still a film with some powerhouse performances and a good contrast to the more gung ho war films of the time.
grantss This movie had heaps of potential: the cowardly, inept company commander, the good platoon leader who hates him and the politically-minded, turn-a-blind-eye battalion commander, the friction, all set against a WW2 backdrop.Unfortunately it does not live up to this potential. The characters are incredibly one-dimensional and stereotypical. No attempt is made on the parts of the actors to make them anything but this. The plot is mostly okay, but gets overly preachy and idealistic towards the end. Furthermore, as a basic war movie it doesn't measure up. Many of the military tactics and practices didn't make sense. Characters get unit designations wrong (eg at one point battalion and company are mixed up). And you have the usual US tanks-as-German tanks issues.The only thing that sustains this movie is the frustration at the ineptness and cowardice of Captain Cooney (Eddie Albert) and whether justice will be meted out to him. That part was very intriguing and the reason I kept watching.
runamokprods Powerful, complex war drama of a cowardly officer getting his men killed in WWII. Politically way ahead of it's time. In the 50s it wasn't common to question the heroism of any American soldiers, much less officers. It's a movie with very tense, well-staged action scenes, very well acted by the leads. Although the film had a low budget, it's hard to tell unless your looking for it.Jack Palance and Lee Marvin are terrific, and if Eddie Albert is a bit on the nose, he's still effective. More than most war films, it leaves you with ideas to ponder. Some of the supporting performance are a bit OTT, but not enough to cause any real damage.