Prisoner of War (1954) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
11 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
"Your Uncle Sam is a better man than their old Uncle Joe"
bkoganbing13 March 2015
The only big screen film that dealt directly with Ronald Reagan's anti- Communism was this film made post Korean War in 1954. By that time tales of North Korean atrocities were pretty widely known and at least the subject matter of Prisoner of War was generally accepted. As to how well done this film is another matter.

It's a bottom billed B picture where Ronald Reagan is given an assignment to actually infiltrate a prisoner of war camp in North Korea to see if the rumors of atrocities are true. His fellow prisoners are cross section of the American GI and as Reagan says they all have a breaking point. Toughest of the lot is Steve Forrest, easiest is Dewey Martin in their hut.

Oscar Homolka is a strutting Russian colonel is an 'advisor' to the North Korean commander. No doubt he studied the techniques of Dr. Mengele from the last war and he's experimenting on the men the way Dr. Pavlov did with lab rats. He does find out in an unexpected way just where some people's breaking points are.

With some better writing and directing and production values this could have been a classic like that other Prisoner Of War film released by Paramount the year before, Stalag 17. But MGM wasn't too heavily invested in this one as you can plainly tell by watching.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Okay Propaganda movie
agabustony19 March 2015
One reviewer found this movie quite hilarious. The film does have an unbelievable premise, that the military would actually send some one to investigate the POW camps. In fact in the opening scene, Harry Morgan (of MASH fame) tells Reagan that they have heard of atrocities but have no proof. but how did they hear? And why do they need proof? As if the Communists would actually be forced to behave humanely. That first scene was funny because Morgan comes off like he did as Gannon on Dragnet, the same stilted manner of speaking. Anyway, the film does portray the atrocities in a rather sobering way. And one neat thing is you get to see all these new actors in early roles: Strother Martin, Dewey Martin, Steve Forrest, Darrly Hickman, Dick Sargent and even Stewart Whitman. And One of the guards was Wesley Levy who played the communist leader on Satan Never Sleeps with William Holden. But it was a propaganda movie and so a bit forced and wooden except for Reagan. He was good.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A Sado-Masochistic Disneyland
dinky-416 April 1999
It's hard to imagine much of a paying audience for this movie which was rushed into production early in 1954 to capitalize on news stories about ill-treatment of American POWs inside North Korea. Many of these stories dealt with the disturbingly high number of POWs who seem to have collaborated with the enemy in various ways and there was ominous talk that something called "brainwashing" might be responsible for this sorry state of affairs. MGM's problem was to work this material into a commercial property which would patriotically support "our boys" while, at the same time, acknowledge those troubling charges of collaboration. The movie tries to solve this dilemma by showing American POWs indeed confessing to "war crimes" but stressing the fact that this occurred only after they'd been subjected to prolonged, unrelenting torture of both a physical and psychological nature. To adequately make its case, the movie presents scenes of torture intended to be persuasive and yet acceptable to a general audience. These scenes probably remained in the viewers' memory long after the movie's more routine and predictable moments had been forgotten. Three scenes in particular stand out. (1) John Lupton, later of TV's "Broken Arrow" series, is shown kneeling with his arms pulled back and over a horizontal pole passing behind him. Heavy rocks are tied to his hands, painfully stressing his wrists, elbows, and shoulders. Each time the pole is lifted and then dropped, Lupton groans in torment. (2) Steve Forrest and a dozen or so other POWs are forced to lie face-up in open graves for several days and nights. They're exposed to the elements, given no food or water, and become increasingly filthy. Eventually they're taken from their graves and lined up before a firing squad for what proves to be a mock execution. (3) Steve Forrest, Robert Horton, later of TV's "Wagon Train," and six other POWs are crucified with ropes to wooden frameworks at the top of a hill and left to suffer long, slow agonies. All these tortures were attested to as being authentic but their impact is somewhat diminished by casting as their victims only young, handsome actors with virile physiques which are shown off by having the actors wearing nothing but dogtags, undershorts, and a gleaming coating of studio sweat. The result is a parade of homoerotic "beefcake in bondage" usually found only in sadomasochistic magazines! In other respects, the movie benefits from MGM's film-making professionalism and there are just enough crowd pleasing moments of dialog and characterization to take the edge off some of the movie's grimness.

(May 2010) Revisiting this movie after more than 10 years have passed, one can't help but be struck by its competency as a piece of film-making. We used to take this nuts-and-bolts stuff for granted but compare the big-studio professionalism of "Prisoner of War" with the sloppy work done, especially in the script department, with "The Hanoi Hilton" -- a 1987 film which tells a similar story about the Vietnam War. Both films are failures but at least "Prisoner of War" isn't an embarrassment.
14 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Good movie with a great deal of fact behind it.
taggerez28 January 2009
I would suspect that some of the negative reviews of this movie stem from the fact that 1.) Ronald Reagan is the star and 2.) it would tend to fall in the very small category of anti-communist films produced by Hollywood. But for people who like good movies, this is a pretty good little film.

More importantly, the film has a basis in fact. The screenwriter, Allen Rivkin, drew on true stories from those who suffered in those camps. When the Army transport "General Walker" docked in San Francisco carrying the first group of returning American POWs from North Korea, Rivkin was there and personally interviewed sixty of them. These ex-POWs told him of the harsh treatment, lack of food, freezing weather, poor medical treatment, and brainwashing sessions that were just some of the horrors they had lived through. In addition, Capt. Robert H. Wise served as the technical adviser on the film. Wise, who had spent a year as a prisoner of the Germans during World War II, spent three years in a North Korean prison camp. He nearly starved to death, dropping 90 pounds during his ordeal. His input lent invaluable veracity to the details of the film.

So when you watch the scenes of torture, deprivation and mind control in "Prisoner of War," they are authentic. As for the statement that these scenes become homo-erotic "beefcake in bondage," the unfocused mind can conjure many things, but more often than not a cigar is just a cigar.

A small film shot on a low budget, there is much to recommend "Prisoner of War" including its treatment of the subject post-war American defectors. A handful of Westerners opted to stay with the communists after the war (as opposed to thousands and thousands of captured Chinese and North Koreans who preferred not to go back to the Reds)and this film has an interesting twist on the subject.

Might make a good B feature with "The Manchurian Candidate."
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
"I'll Sign!" "I'll Sign!" "I'll Sign!" "I'll Sign!" "I'll Sign!" "I'll Sign!"
wes-connors25 August 2007
Ronald Reagan and a bunch of US soldiers in a North Korean POW camp. They are tortured... We learn North Korean Communists are bad people... We learn Americans' beards grow very slowly during days of torture...

I tried to suppress it, but I finally burst out laughing at this movie. It was the scene when Mr. Reagan comes out from telling the Communists he wants to be on their side. Then, he asks for a bottle of brandy. Next, acting stone-cold sober, he takes a drunken companion, Dewey Martin, to get sulfur to cure Mr. Martin's hangover. Of course, the North Korean communist guard is as dumb as they come. So, the drunk distracts the guard while Reagan goes over to get something from a drawer, which is next to a bunch of empty boxes. I'm sure he boxes were supposed to contain something; but, of course, Reagan causes them to shake enough to reveal they are empty. Ya gotta laugh! I think "Prisoner of War" will appeal mainly to family and friends of those who worked on it - otherwise, it's wasteful.

* Prisoner of War (1954) Andrew Marton ~ Ronald Reagan, Steve Forrest, Dewey Martin
8 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Not one of Hollywood's more accurate portrayals
aerovian25 August 2007
I was able to hang in for only the first twenty minutes of this low-budget movie. The most glaring absurdity was that while the American inmates in a North Korean POW camp are all supposedly suffering from severe deprivation of food and medicine, going without bathing, shivering in flimsy and filthy parkas, and sleeping on bare floors, and - let's not forget enduring torture - they always manage to sport impeccably coiffed hair. With the exception of a suitably austere-looking Harry Morgan as an army Major, the casting and acting are simply awful. Ronald Regan cannot seem to stick to portraying a single character and instead creates a rather schizophrenic amalgam of past roles. A mostly Caucasian cast portraying the North Korean camp officers might have been forgivable, but when supposedly Russian officers acting as advisors to the Koreans strut around wearing re-badged Nazi uniforms complete with jodhpurs and jackboots (obvious costume-department recycles from WWII flicks) and speaking with accents like General Burkhalter from Hogan's Heroes, well, that's just six kinds of silly. Don't waste your time on this one.
8 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Pretty harsh for '54
L_Miller26 March 2009
Not a very good movie but according to the info it's pretty accurate in depicting torture techniques. The purpose of the film was to show the brutality of the NK POW camps and that's done effectively enough, with surprising frankness for the time. Whatever technical flaws exist (and there are plenty) by watching this you'll see a forgotten corner of a forgotten war and some pretty nasty stuff - again, nasty because it's being done north of the DMZ and not in Guantanamo Bay.

I don't think any of the Korean veterans brought up his torture when running for office, and if you watch the movies like this one and Pork Chop Hill in comparison to the Vietnam films. I don't know if it was the people in '54 being trapped in the WWII concepts (the boys tend to wisecrack a lot) or the war or what, but it's interesting to see this from the same system that 16 years later would be making movies like "Go Tell The Spartans".
4 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
How can I confess to a lie!
sol121817 April 2009
Warning: Spoilers
**SPOILERS** Hard hitting war drama with future President of the United States Ronald Reagan as US Army Captain Webb Sloane going undercover-as as an American POW-to get the goods on the Reds in how they brutally and inhumanly threat, against the rules of warfare, their prisoners of war in that hell that was the Korean War.

In order to throw off suspicion on himself Sloane becomes a Commie stooge, or collaborator, that makes his fellow GI's in the POW camp hate his very guts. Hard as he tries to be a Commie rat-fink Sloane can't help showing his true colors-Red White & Blue-instead of the ones-deep Commie Red-he masks himself with. That fact soon comes to light in Sloane coming to aid of his fellow American POW's when the chips are down. This has Sloane saving one of of the POW's lives when he came down with a near-fatal attack of appendicitis! In another heroic effort Sloane prevented another GI Cpl. Joe Stanton,Steve Forrest-who killed the camps brutal commissar Russian Col. Biroshilov played by Oskar Homolka-from being shot by hiding the evidence of what he did. This was after Cpl. Stanton killed Col.Biroshilov for having his cute little pet dog Eloise beaten to death, in order to make Stanton cooperate, in front of his very eyes!

***SPOILER ALERT***In the end Sloane did get the evidence of what a bunch of vicious and sadistic swines the Commies were but to his surprises he wasn't sent to the Soviet Union as he planned, so he can be a mole inside the Kremlin for the US. Sloane instead was shipped, after being released from prison, straight back home in the good old USA. That dubious honor, of being sent to the USSR, went to fellow US Commie collaborator and undercover agent Pvt. ???? who had less to lose in being that he's single and with no living family members back in the states, like Sloane has, for him to worry about.

The movie shows how the rotten Commies used captured GI's, through both threats and persuasion, to confess to war crimes that they didn't commit in order to turn the free world against the USA back then in the early 1950's. It took brave and patriotic Americans like Webb Sloane, by risking their very lives, to set the record straight in who, the USA/UN forces or Red Chinese/North Korean Communists, were really committing major war crimes in the Korean War. But sadly enough, like in the movie, many many patriotic American soldiers broke under the unrelenting pressure, of Commie brainwashing or just plain old intimidation, and ended up helping the Commie cause if just only in being used for propagandist purposes. These brave but later broken US fighting men who were in many cases driven insane by the Commies around the clock brainwashing tactics have to live with what they did, in helping Americas sworn enemies, for the rest of their lives.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Not terrible...not great either
planktonrules27 October 2022
Ronald Reagan stars in the anti-communist film "Prisoner of War", which is not a surprise as Reagan was one of the more vocal anti-communists in Hollywood during this Blacklist era. However, what is surprising is how dull his part is and clearly the supporting actor Steve Forrest has the meatier and more interesting part.

The story is set during the Korean War and a Captain (Reagan) is asked to do something strange by his commanding officer...to get himself captured by the North Koreans. This is because they want him to investigate the inhumane treatment of prisoners...and this seems like a rather strange and dubious request. Once in the prison, 'Corporal' Webb Sloane is a 'nice' prisoner...one who doesn't fight too hard to resist the indoctrination and brain washing of his communist captors. In contrast, Corporal Stanton (Forrest) is a true-blue patriot...fighting the dirty commies at every opportunity.

The film has some good and some bad. While the mistreatment of prisoners and strong attempts to brainwash them were well documented and could make for an interesting film, the movie itself comes off as rather obvious and not especially well written when it comes to dialog. It also didn't help that NONE of the North Koreans, Chinese nor Russians sounded the least bit like anything other than Americans! Overall, an interesting idea but one that is really just a time-passer instead of a strong statement against North Korean atrocities.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
A much too rarely seen screen gem that needs to be watched.
The_Ringo_Kid7 February 2007
Prisoner of War is one of my most favorite Ronald Reagan film. This movie also deserves the title of: "Classic" because it is just that, a classic.

Reagan is on a mission to infiltrate a POW camp by being behind enemy lines and once so, shortly manages to slip into line with a column of American prisoners being force-marched to a Chinese ran pow camp. The prisoners are starved and beaten and severely mistreated all the way to the camp. The camp is actually worse than the march was and could easily be called a: "Hell Camp." This hell camp is actually under the tender loving care of the Russians.

Reagan, once inside the pow camp, has to find a way to send messages to his commanding officer, on the conditions inside the pow camp. Reagan does so by joining a VERY small group of American pows who appear to turn traitor. They are of course, hated by all the other pows at that camp and soon they make radio broadcasts telling about ""how well they are being treated"" and ind doing so, that is how Reagan manages to use such a cunning code, that the Chinese and Russians never knew that he was doing so.

All the while, the camp guards try to break the morale of all the American pows by starvation, torture etc. Steve Forest portrays an Americam pow who's will just cannot be broken; no matter what the Russians do to him.

This movie is a bit of a flag-waver but, that is essential as part of this movie. This is another one of those great movies that is rarely shown and really deserves to be shown as much as movies like: The Great Escape and The Dirty Dozen.

This movie also needs to be released on DVD so that we all can enjoy viewing it.
18 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Peace and freedom
jarrodmcdonald-129 November 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Ronald Reagan only made two films at MGM. The first one was a Wallace Beery vehicle in 1940, on loan from home studio Warner Brothers. The second one was this war film which he made in the mid-1950s as a freelancer. Reagan was often used in support of other big name stars at WB in a variety of genres. Later, during a multi-picture deal with Universal, he was primarily assigned feel-good westerns and domestic comedies.

To say this is a different type of undertaking for the future president is an understatement. He has the lead role here, playing an officer who becomes a POW. Mr. Reagan had served in WWII, not in Korea which is the focus of this tale. And as many know, he took a hardline conservative stance about Vietnam while he was governor of California in the 1960s, after leaving acting.

The story begins with a message about the strength of the human spirit, in spite of communist tortures. Reagan is an officer being sent off on a mission to investigate abuse in North Korea. He parachutes into a forest and soon joins a group of soldiers that have been taken captive by enemy forces.

On their way to a camp, Reagan learns from a soldier (Steve Forrest) that their captors would likely prefer them to be dead.

One thing that impresses me here is the stark black-and-white cinematography. Also, the use of wind and snow to convey the bitter cold, harsh environment. Frequently, there are cutaway shots of corpses along the roadside. Still the men carry on.

This is a gritty story, with grim vibes. Supposedly an army captain named Robert Wise (not the director) served as a technical advisor; he had been an actual POW. Some contemporary critics complained that the film over-exaggerated the extreme conditions faced by these men. Unless a critic had actually been in such a situation, how would he know?

In addition to the rugged physical terrain, the lack of nutrition and the homesickness experienced by the men, there are deep psychological wounds that are inflicted on them. These abuses are overseen by a cruel Russian colonel (Oskar Homolka).

Of course the mental anguish includes brainwashing, which we see with Forrest's character. He refuses to let his mind be controlled, so he is ultimately strung up and hanged like a warrior Jesus on a crucifix. These scenes are a lot more chilling than what we find later in THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE (1962).

One has to wonder how many men still living today served in the Korean war, and what they might still recall about what happened to them in a prisoner of war camp. Maybe a better question is whether their sons, grandsons and great-grandsons appreciate what it cost to maintain peace and the freedom we all enjoy today.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed