The only thing that stops me giving this film one star is the cast. It's rare to find this many good character actors in one movie.
I didn't realise as I watched, but apparently "Too Late The Hero" is meant to be an allegory for America's war against Vietnam. Trying to draw parallels between Vietnam and WWII really doesn't work.
Despite a vehement anti-war streak, the movie seems to delight in its action sequences, almost daring us to cheer as the nominal bad guys get shot or blown up.
It's this inconsistency in tone that destroys "Too Late The Hero". What point is the film trying to make? Is Denholm Elliot's character a cowardly villain or a shot-away, crazy-brave hero? Why does Cliff Robertson's character refuse to accept a simple change of plan at a crucial moment? Is he a coward or a by-the-book officer? Why does Michael Caine's character alternate between anti-authority and gung-ho heroics? What, quite simply, is Ronald Fraser's character's problem? If he's that much of a coward, surely he'd have found a more effective way of invaliding himself by now? What makes Lance Percival's character follow a murderous and cowardly comrade into a Japanese trap? There are too many questions going unanswered, even before the film's "50/50 Chance of Survival" finale.
If you're looking for a more realistic portrayal of British soldiers fighting in South East Asia during WWII, watch the 1961 B&W film "The Long and The Short and The Tall". If you're looking for a more realistic portrayal of American troops in Vietnam, the choice is endless. "Too Late The Hero" was recently given away as a free DVD with a UK newspaper, which gives a good indication of how lame it is.
I didn't realise as I watched, but apparently "Too Late The Hero" is meant to be an allegory for America's war against Vietnam. Trying to draw parallels between Vietnam and WWII really doesn't work.
Despite a vehement anti-war streak, the movie seems to delight in its action sequences, almost daring us to cheer as the nominal bad guys get shot or blown up.
It's this inconsistency in tone that destroys "Too Late The Hero". What point is the film trying to make? Is Denholm Elliot's character a cowardly villain or a shot-away, crazy-brave hero? Why does Cliff Robertson's character refuse to accept a simple change of plan at a crucial moment? Is he a coward or a by-the-book officer? Why does Michael Caine's character alternate between anti-authority and gung-ho heroics? What, quite simply, is Ronald Fraser's character's problem? If he's that much of a coward, surely he'd have found a more effective way of invaliding himself by now? What makes Lance Percival's character follow a murderous and cowardly comrade into a Japanese trap? There are too many questions going unanswered, even before the film's "50/50 Chance of Survival" finale.
If you're looking for a more realistic portrayal of British soldiers fighting in South East Asia during WWII, watch the 1961 B&W film "The Long and The Short and The Tall". If you're looking for a more realistic portrayal of American troops in Vietnam, the choice is endless. "Too Late The Hero" was recently given away as a free DVD with a UK newspaper, which gives a good indication of how lame it is.