HotToastyRag I'm filled with admiration for Robert Aldrich—and Lukas Heller, who co-wrote the script—that he was able to craft such a delicately balanced film. I've never seen a war film with the same unique tone as Too Late the Hero.The film starts with music from Gerald Fried that doesn't reveal anything about the plot; the audience doesn't yet know if they're in for a comedy, drama, or sarcastic commentary. The visual is equally as startling: on an island in the South Pacific, soldiers are literally laying out on the beach working on their tans. A very bronze Cliff Robertson is summoned to his superior, Henry Fonda, and given a new assignment, which he promptly refuses. He clearly has a callous attitude about his part in the war, for he'd rather take his shore leave than accept his transfer to the Philippines. Henry Fonda delivers a very impassioned speech about seeing the bigger picture, and he sends Cliff to the jungle.Cliff's apathetic attitude is met with a host of different personalities as he joins his British allies in his new post. Michael Caine is not optimistic that he'll make it out alive and oftentimes considers deserting, Denholm Elliott is extremely gung-ho about the war effort, Ian Bannen is a loose cannon and could be interpreted as not entirely well, and Percy Herbert isn't particularly loyal. Their assignment is to enter the Japanese-occupied jungle, destroy the enemy's radio, and return to the safe area.It's an extremely dangerous mission, but when they first set off, as Cliff gets to know his fellow soldiers, the tone still balances the extremely fine line of not taking the war seriously and not making the situation comical. As they venture further into the jungle and start fighting the enemy, the tone of the film grows darker. Every section of the film changes the tone, from careless to ominous to hopeless to realistic, and every section is properly motivated by an excellent script and constant obstacles.War films aren't for everyone, and more often than not—just as in every genre—they're not very good. The good ones are worth watching, and Too Late the Hero is excellent. Michael Caine fans are in for a treat, since he's not only dreamy, blond, and in uniform, but also gives a very good performance. And if there's anyone out there who thinks of Cliff Robertson as Spiderman's uncle, they should rent this film to see him in his younger days. Watching this movie is an experience. You'll run through so many emotions that you'll be depleted by the time Ken Takakura shows up, even with so much more of the film to watch. At that point, it'll be hard to believe the film can and does get more suspenseful, and finally, when the ending has stripped you of all your energy, you'll feel utterly exhausted. But then you'll probably tell your friends to go see it.

Robert J. Maxwell Something of a proxy for the Vietnam War, it's the story of a handful of British soldiers and one reluctant American translator trekking through the bush on a Japanese-held island with the mission of destroying a Japanese radio station.The director, Robert Aldrich, is a Hollywood craftsman but adds little to a kind of paradoxical tale. Some of the men are killed -- by rifle bullet, by throat-cutting, by land mine -- and within minutes the others are laughing at land crabs or having petty fist fights about who owns a pack of Woodbine Cigarettes. They sneak through the enemy's jungle shouting, singing, and joking with one another. The gun shots don't sound like rifles at all. Your disbelief must not only be suspended. It must be hung by the neck until it is dead.The cast is fine, though, full of British character actors whose faces, if not names, will be familiar to many American viewers. Harry Andrews, of whom we don't see much, is unimpeachable as the colonel who plans the mission. Ian Bannen is always reliable and brings something personal to every role. He has the best lines in the script, if in fact they were in the script. His mates are schlepping a wounded Bannen across a muddy stream and he warns them in a Scots accent, "Watch out for those man-eating trout." When someone suggests leaving Bannon behind, he shouts out, "Listen to me, you bloody Glaswegian queer! That blood is worth bottling!" Denholm Elliott (later to die of AIDS) projects the personality and fixed expression of a frightened and neurotic worry-wort but proves to be pretty cold blooded. The young Michael Caine, as the medical orderly, has a winning smile. And Cliff Robertson, as the seconded American Japanese translator, doesn't damage the proceedings. His switch from slacker to determined leader takes ten seconds.The problem is that it's an ensemble movie and none of these fine actors has a chance to do very much. They die, one by one, with little drama and no visible remorse on the part of the remaining group. And the script is so self-contradictory that it virtually undoes the entire film. When Aldrich gets hold of a halfway decent script -- "The Dirty Dozen" or "Flight of the Phoenix" -- he handles it very well but he seems to have been reckless and put no effort into this rather ordinary war movie.Suspense in a movie like this is inevitable and it increases after the radio station is destroyed and what's left of the team tries to get back to the British base, with the enemy in hot pursuit. The Japanese are not treated as fools or as evil monsters. Ken Takakura, in his brief appearance as a major intent on capturing the patrol, is handsome and reasonable.Overall, this looks like what it is, a colorful Hollywoodish production. The score should have been written by Malcolm Arnold and conducted by Muir Mathieson. And I can't help wondering how David Lean would have handled the whole affair.

greschiem2002 Robert Aldrich had something of a renaissance in the 70s with films like "The Longest Yard" and in particular "Ulzana's Raid" and "Hustle", however this film is not at the level of those films in my opinion. The ideal conditions for making unusual and risk taking films appeared to have been in place in 1970s America when mainstream Hollywood was making original, daring and interesting films like never before or since. These conditions could be said to have roughly existed between 1966 through to 1981-82. On the positive side this film has those classic Robert Aldrich dark touches, where we see humanity at its worst and weakest and we also get glimpses of how horrible War can be. The performances of Michael Caine and Denholm Elliot are both very good. And as one other reviewer has noted, you can really see that these guys are running around the jungle and not on a set or in a botanic garden somewhere, this film really has a sense of place and the film's Production values are high.However on the downside, the action scenes lack the vitality and realism that suggests that these characters really are fighting to the death, something I believe that this era of War films lacked. This element of realism in War Films didn't really come into place until "Cross of Iron" and "A Bridge Too Far" (both made in 1977). I also found the ending to be unimaginative, contrived, and over the top and it is always disappointing when a film does not end well. This is not one of Robert Aldrich's best films, but it has enough interesting about it to be worth checking out if you like films from this era.

Ref 65 Too late the hero is one of the most boring movies that I've ever seen,well its not that bad,the action was good,the acting is decent and the battles are good.For a start,half way throughout the movie some things can just drive you insane and I'm not going to talk about that.It's about an American lieutenant who leads a platoon of British soldiers into a jungle somewhere in the Pacific to destroy a Japanese radio station.At that time a Japanese Major captured two men and are threatening the rest of the survivors to surrender or else he will kill them.As a lot of WWII movies are found interesting I found absolutely nothing interesting at all.The atmosphere for this movie is good and the effects are crap.This movie is nothing but sheer disappointment nd nothing can change that(yes,even a remake).The blood wounds are cheesy for a movie that was made in 1969.I don't know what the deal was on making this movie,it was probably seen as spectacular for its time.I was going to give it a 5 at the start but the boring parts made me give it a 4 instead.Mostly if you see a war movie you are expecting to see a lot of action but this is a war movie that should be avoided because there is barely any action in this movie.War movie fans will be disappointed with this heap of junk.