source: The Bridges at Toko-Ri

Throughout the decades of film making, there are many stories concerning the wars America has been involved in. A good retrospective study reveals how the celluloid industry is easily influenced by the military. At the beginning of every war, the industry at the behest of government propaganda promotes the death and utter destruction of the inhuman enemy. Towards the end of the war, the same government promotes the enemy as 'victims' of their own government and looks forward to 're-intregrating' them into democracy. The film "Bridges of Toko-Ri" focuses on Lt. Herry Brubaker, (William Holden) a Naval Officer, who's not overly concern with the "Domino Effect" of Communist power as re-iterated by his commanding officer, Rear Admiral, George Tarrant (Fredric March). His main contention and that of thousands of Servicemen, is 'Why me' again? Repeating what James Steward asks in Strategic Air Command. The question stems from a nagging but valid fear of attacking several dangerous supply bridges spanning a narrow gorge in North Korea. They are fully protected by numerous artillery batteries and murderous rocket crossfire which few survive. The strength of this film derives from Holden's character and that of his friends, Mike Forney (Mickey Rooney), Nestor Gamidge (Earl Holliman) and Charles McGraw as Cmdr. Wayne Lee. Perhaps that's why this film is one of my favorites as it promotes rational thinking instead of slavishly adhering to obsolete, archaic and oscillating military and government rhetoric. ****

War is one of the most tragic human events that can occur. The "Bridges at Toko-ri" is an illustration of such. Harry Brubaker(William Holden) was a Denver attorney who happened to be a naval combat pilot in WWII and an inactive member of the reserve. For reasons that he did not understand, he was recalled to active duty for the Korean War and assigned to flying duties aboard an aircraft carrier. This recall forced him to lose his law practice, lose his home, and be separated from his family. After several harrowing experiences, he is eventually killed in action, leaving behind a beautiful wife(Grace Kelly) and two lovely daugthers. Happily, yet sadly, he was able to see them during leave in Japan prior to embarking upon his ill-fated mission. The title of the movie concerns this mission, a dangerous air raid against highly defended strategic bridges. After overcoming profound pre-mission anxieties, he and his fellow pilots amazingly emerge unharmed following a successful raid on the bridges. Ironically, the squadron subsequently raided a "secondary" target, where Brubaker's aircraft received a hit that caused him to lose fuel. After losing fuel too quickly to make it back to sea, he attempted and survived a dramatic crash landing in enemy territory. Eventually, he and two would-be helicopter rescuers, Mike Forney and Nestor Gamidge(portrayed by Mickey Rooney and Earl Holliman Jr.), who had successfully resuced him from a crash landing at sea earlier in the story, are killed by enemy infantry. Our country has been served by many military reservists who can empathize with Harry Brubaker, even though they may not have been called upon to make the "ultimate" sacrifice as he was. From an entertainment perspective, there are some moments for laughter and an outstanding cast. The picture also features some superb aerial photography. Like most movies, each time I watch it, I seem to get a little more out of it. I wrote to Mr. Rooney a couple of years ago and told him that each time I watch this movie, I hoped that he and Mr. Holliman could rescue Mr. Holden again at the end. I appreciate and accept, though, that many war stories cannot have a "happy ending." It is certain that all wars have an unhappy ending for someone.

Spoilers herein. Wars are fought so that people (usually an elite) can feel better about themselves. In modern (democratic, media-driven) nations movies play a large role in defining what those values are and who deserves them. Hollywood and the military have, since WWII, had a mutually beneficial partnership. Hollywood gets to use war machines if they deliver the `right' message. Here is one of the best examples we have, rivalled by `Top Gun,' because it has nothing at all but those two elements. The reason we watch films like this is for the experience on ship and aloft in the neat gizmos. Nominally, these belong to the citizenry and exist on its behalf, but constitute an abstract world that in 1955 was as remote as that of Star Wars 25 years later. The element that is the attraction (rather than the `commercial' of the film) is the exposure to the carrier and the various dramas associated with war flight. In its day, this footage was startling. (It requires an odd use of the disembodied loudspeaker to tell the viewers what is going on.) The other half of the film is the message: the US citizens are ignorant of the greater threat, complacently sleeping while evil is at work. Grace Kelly (who would retire into precisely this protected situation) dutifully and charmlessly does the job as surrogate for US women. The surrogate for men is a more interesting situation because the passing of time has goofed this up. 1955 was a time when one could actually think of a lawyer as honorable and representative of typical American wholesomeness. What a hoot this is today. Anyway, Holden plays the solid citizen-soldier who gets killed. It its day, this was a strong statement, one that underscored that sacrifice was required. Students of war films will note the radical shift away from blatant racism. The yellow maniacs of WWII have been replaced. Here, the North Koreans and Chinese are faceless clients of the greater evil, Russians. The Japanese are played as friendly resource, here as a cache of lovely women. Check out `Sayanora' of the following year, a nuanced milestone in the evolution of Japanese-specific racial attitudes. The end has the famous scene of the Captain wondering where these men come from. Movies create them in society, that's where they come from. Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 4: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.

I viewed "Bridges at Toko-Ri" today on TMC and brought to mind when I saw that movie as an army brat when my dad was stationed at Itami Air Force Base near Osaka, Japan during the Korean War. My dad made friends with several marine fighter or bomber pilots at the base and continued that friendship until he died in in the mid'90's. My Dad recounted that a Major Redman and his squadron played golf on the weekends and flew out that evening on a combat mission in Korea. They'd fly back early next morning and play golf again that morning as though nothing happened during those missions. After they played, his friends would say," see you, Harry, tomorrow at 9am for our tee-off. They were brave souls that still stick with me to this day. This movie exemplified that courage and sense of duty our military men have even to this day. A great movie. Shame on those who believe otherwise.

William Holden is sent to bomb the "Bridges at Toko Ri" in the 1954 film also starring Frederic March, Grace Kelly, and Mickey Rooney. It's a very good film about the carrier operations in Korea, and according to one of the posters here, very accurate. The Korean War was the first war that utilized jets, meaning that the pilots had to be educated in new techniques to take off and land on aircraft. Sometimes there were problems, and they had to ditch into freezing water and be saved via helicopter. There were a lot of technical aspects of the work of the pilots shown in this film. Holden plays an attorney who is called into service and has to leave his practice and family. He is chosen by his commander (March) to perform a very dangerous mission bombing bridges from the air - in this case, there's no way to hide from the enemy; they can see you coming. There are some very exciting moments and some striking air fights throughout the film, as well as good acting. It's a little heavy on star power - why was Grace Kelly in this? She has a very small role that could have been played by any young leading woman. Nevertheless, she's lovely and very pretty, certainly a good match for Holden. Holden was an ideal film star, and ideal for this sort of film, with that rugged, handsome face and very masculine persona. He also plays the role with a likability and vulnerability - you really can't lose with him. Frederic March gives a strong performance as his commander. The showiest role belongs to possibly the showiest actor, Mickey Rooney, as a brave helicopter pilot who is a little bit short-tempered while on leave. As the jailer in Tokyo tells Holden, "Keep an eye on him. There's still a part of Tokyo that's unharmed." All in all, a very good and sobering film. The old men send the young men off to war - and they're still doing it.

The best thing I can say is that it's clear the U.S. Navy cooperated a *lot* making this picture, as there's very nice and real plans and ships and everything all over the place. Unfortunately, this is one of those movies where the exposition--you know, the part kind of 'setting up' the major conflicts--takes up 3/4 of the movie. Up until the titular attack on "the bridges at Toko Ri," we have an hour and a half of, well, I'm not sure--mostly of Mickey Rooney being alternately silly and angry, Holden's family spending time together, and an absolutely astonishing amount of airplanes taking off and landing. Landing (or inability to land) airplanes accounts for right about 100% of the conflict in this film until the last 10 minutes. For a film that I suppose was trying to be a thinking, feeling man's war film, there is a curious lack of thinking or feeling. Various characters appear for a scene or two, engage in some overwrought meditation about war or male bonding, and then other characters replace them. The most consistently significant character throughout the film is actually Mickey Rooney, who unfortunately is stuck playing a silly, one-dimensional role. And that's really the #1 problem here: this film wants to be more about the characters than about the war, but the characters are cliché and contrived. Well, that and it's just plain dull.

English language novels of the past century had a particular genre typified by authors such as James Clavell, Herman Wouk, Arthur Hailey and James Michener. Their novels were best-selling sagas, often released for summer reading, with cardboard characters inserted to move the story along. The Bridges at Toko-Ri is an adaptation of one of these novels. Grace Kelly, William Holden, Fredric March and Mickey Rooney do good service in this project. And project it is. Imagine the complexity of filming, in colour, aircraft carriers, planes and stars. Now, imagine inserting among the battleships such otherwise wonderful scenes as an American family confronting a Japanese family in a Japanese bath. The movie is disjointed. It tries to fit the novel into a two hour story board and fails. It becomes boring. And finally, the high drama of the ending turns the whole project into a US Navy recruitment movie, circa 1950.

I can't say enough good about this movie.It was made for its time. The public needed to be shown what it meant to be part of the military. What could be squandered without realizing how quickly one could lose that which was so prized. There is always a price to be paid. Its not until the true value of ones life is realized will one come to fully value the life they have to live. This movie presents this realism to us. Its not always the perfect presentation. But, then again what is in the real world. I would suggest however, that one reads Micheners' Book, The Bridges at Toko-Rio, before seeing the movie. More insight might be gained beforehand. The novel only adds to the movie. This movie was made when America was at its zenith in its place in the world. America stood alone as the first superpower. As yet unchallenged, but soon to be by the very nation whose personnel manned the planes, guns and radar stations seeking any incoming planes onto Korean airspace. Still, even though the hero dies in the doing, he still dies while doing something considered noble, worth dying for. Even the hero's wife, who agonizes over the whys and wherefores of her husband being part of something most of America has no idea is even happening. And, the hero is not even an enlisted man. He volunteered. He shouldn't even be there! Before seeing the movie, read the book. The movie was great.

This is an exceptional picture, which clearly depicts the personal difficulties, particularly which Fighter Pilots must endure in times of combat. Mr Holden and Grace Kelly give fine portrayals of the young married couple, who must overcome the obstacles of a dangerous mission--A certain bombing Raid ( mentioned in the title) As the left behind wife, Kelly does a wonderful job, showing empathy for her husband, concern for herself, etc, and Holden is equally compelling as a troubled aviator in a difficult situation--All in all a fine Movie--good performances all around. T(W) G.