User Reviews

Maybe there should be a genre called "situation drama". The 50s was the era of the double feature. Often there was a main feature with what was called a supporting feature. Often independently produced, they were films made to a price and sold outright to a studio. There were a load of "westerns" which were made restricted to a tiny and mainly ethical plot as opposed to the non-stop action of the so-called juvenile westerns. They were largely shot in the studio and on a tired town set on the back lot. Outdoor dialog scenes were shot on clever but artificial sets. Action could be shot MOS. Even if made in cinemascope they were shot B&W. A "name", usually a faded second line star from the late Golden Age would be employed and then a few actors and pretty women to set him off, then some anonymous background people. These would populate a space but were limited in numbers. The secret of these films is the scheduling. Crowd all the crowd scenes would be shot in one or two days. Supporting actors would have their scenes shot in two or three days. Most of the scenes are contrived to be dialog, two shot, three shot, and four shot set-ups. Most of the time the town seems to be inhabited solely by the principal players. The leading actor would get a handsome but not astronomical salary. I remember working for a producer in 1980 and discovering the prices for some of the actors- it was possible to hire the likes of Chuck Heston or Bob Mitchum for $400,000 and virtually any actress in the world except for a dozen stars for $4,000 a week. That was in 1980 (in any case this was way out of the ballpark for my producer). Never the less, most of the pictures weren't all that terrible, at least at first. Late, when the formula became known, everyone and anyone could turn out films like sausages I believe is the cliché. Some of the later ones are merely perfunctory. At their best they were training grounds for new talents and a place to revisit the heroes of the recent past. Its also a world where one becomes aware that the casting for name recognition meant that a producer who didn't see the innate dignity and urbanity of, say, Dana Andrews, would think it would be a good idea that, well, he's a good looking guy, we'll put him in a western.

What does this have to do with a film called THE BATTLE OF THE CORAL SEA? First of all, the title is misleading, as Peter Griffin said when he was being escorted from the poop deck. Forget the prequel to Midway tag. It's a war picture but the sub-genre isn't navel warfare, but rather a POW picture. The only things representing the battle are the bookends, stock footage (some anachronistic) of navel warfare kind of stuff. The set-up: Cliff Robertson is a sub commander sent out on a recon mission before the aforementioned battle with the strong suggestion that if he has to sacrifice his boat, his men, and himself he must not reveal the dingus, the rendezvous point. Emphasis. So of course that's just what happens. Japanese Navy frogmen in post war scuba (!) gear attach mines to the sub and Robertson gives up after scuttling the boat. That's the first half hour.

So Robertson and some character actors are separated from the crew who were never so numerous anyway. They are taken to Club Med, I mean the Japanese POW camp. This film was made at the beginning of the "rehabilitate Japan period". The men are forcibly put to work walking on a wheel to dredge up the drinking water for the camp. This is no Bataan Death March. But for no more than one hour at a time. There are people in my neighborhood who pay several hundred dollars a month to do that. There is a knockout blond Australian nurse who lives with them and a dark woman, daughter of a planter, who may be either French or Italian but claims to be "neutral". The POWs have more room for fewer people than even Hogan. The Japanese commandant makes several strong requests to Robertson to reveal what he knows but he refuses. All they have to do is survive 3 days (that's when they're supposed to rendezvous. The dingus again. Time, like the studio sets, is compressed and confined. The commandant fails and either he's going to be replaced or Robertson is going to be taken away to be interrogated to death or both.

So they escape and some of them get killed and the rest get back home safely and the Battle is fought and we win. The end. (BTW- the secret ID code is Fancy Free, which was the name of the wartime ballet about three sailors on leave in New York that was developed into ON THE TOWN)

It was an important battle, but not the greatest sea battle in history. I think maybe Jutland or Port Arthur were both larger. It was the first sea battle fought between aircraft carriers and where the opponents never saw each other. It was usually accounted a tie but important as a step in turning the war back to Japan but really just a curtain raiser to the epochal Battle of Midway.

THE BATTLE OF THE CORAL SEA is merely another time passer, somewhere between a real movie and TV. The only scene that I remember from seeing this film as a kid was the one where the American Sgt., played by a frequent face on TV, wins a wrestling match but is shot in the back by his defeated opponent. But during those long double features it was good to have a picture where one could leave to go to the bathroom or buy popcorn without missing much that was going on.

I'm a big fan of WWII movies - even though Im a 40 yr old female. Go figure?! So I was glad to come across one I hadn't seen yet.

The basic story of the movie follows events leading up to the Battle of the Coral Sea, not the actual battle itself. One thing I'm unsure of is whether the storyline of the movie itself actually took place. The basic synopsis is a Sub commander, Jeff Conway (played by Cliff Robertson}, is given basically an intelligence mission to go scope out a build-up of Japanese navy ships & carriers in the Pacific. They aren't to engage the enemy, just capture photos & record details of the specific ships and their locations. In the process, their sub is discovered and ordered to surrender. The main crew is sent to a regular POW camp but the commander and his officers are sent to a special island interrogation camp in order to try to force info regarding their mission out of the commander.

As I mentioned before, there isn't a tremendous amount of action since its the events that precede the actual battle. But it still kept me interested enough to keep watching. I think Cliff Robertson plays his role very well and is the best in the picture. I also liked Teru Shimada who played the Japanese commander Mori at the POW camp. I like when he & Robertson first meet and play a sort of cat & mouse game trying to size each other up.

This movie may not keep you on the edge of your seat, but is still worth the watching to see whether or not Robertson's character gives up the info or is able to get off the island.

This was one of a series of military flicks offered by TCM in the wake of Memorial Day and the D-Day anniversary and I put it on while I did my work-out. It proved to be a very watchable, if not historically accurate WWII yarn about the crew of submarine assigned to keep track of the Japanese fleet to see what their next move is. It turns out it's toward Port Moresby to threaten Australia, (although I think the petroleum sources in Indonesia were probably or greater interest). Unfortunately they get captured and are made POWs at a rather mild prison camp until their captain, played by Cliff Robertson, in a role that might have been what JFK saw when he recommended Cliff to play him in 'PT 109', four years later, leads an improbable break-out.

This is at least as good a film as that one and can also be favorably compared to 1962's 'No Man is an Island' in at least one respect: the resulting battle is not one-sided. In NMIAI, the Japanese are just mowed down like it was the St. Valentine's Day Massacre. In this film, both sides have substantial casualties until three men and two women get a boat and manage not only to escape but to make contact with US forces so they can describe the Japanese fleet and where they are going so they can get defeated at the titular battle in the last five minutes, (authentic WWII footage and stock footage from previous films representing the battle). I have a feeling the allied navies had other sources of information to prepare them for this battle besides escaping POWS.

Still, it was a reasonably entertaining 86 minutes with good performances and action. One aspect that interested me is the character of the intelligence officer in charge of the prisoners, (Teru Shimada), who is presented in a sympathetic light, something that would not have happened if this film had been made 15 years before. But it was 1959 and the Japanese were our friends and allies now. Things can sure change quickly in this world.

A double sad note: there are two female characters in this, an Australian POW and the daughter of a plantation owner whose island was taken over by the Japanese and who has remained neutral - until she falls for Robertson's character. They both escape with the three remaining POWS. Both actresses, Patricia Cutts and Gia Scala, died from barbiturate poisoning some years later. Cutt's death was ruled a suicide. Scala's an accident - but there had been previous suicide attempts. Beauty and talent isn't enough. You need happiness, too.

The few other reviewers at the time of my writing this review point out some of the goofs in this film, and it had many. I think that's inexcusable for a war movie so close in time to the end of WW II. Were there no Navy veterans among the production company? Were there no Navy experts to advise on the film?

Others have noted also, the misnomer in the name of the film. What was supposed to be the Battle of Coral Sea was maybe five minutes at the very end of the movie. It was film footage of naval battle action.

Now, all that aside, the plot for the story we see unfold in this film is a good one. That is, it could have been made into a very good movie. But the script is quite horrible – almost written in stiff, wooden segments. The characters are unbelievable. Aussie captives who immediately try to talk the newly arrived captured American sub commander into giving the enemy the information they want. I really suspected the Aussie nurse, Lt. Peg Whitcomb, to be a Japanese spy, and even thought the Aussie Major Jammy Harris was a plant.

The direction is equally bad. And the acting is weak at best. This is surely one of weakest roles and poorest performances Cliff Robertson ever had. My six stars for the film are because of the plot, with its possibilities. And, there was just enough intrigue, in spite of a poor script, to keep one interested in the outcome.

This is a particularly ridiculous film in just about every way. If you can overlook the utterly weak swiss cheese of a story, the astonishing incompetence of the captain and all of the Japanese, the notion of a woman POW in a men's prison camp, the inability of two dozen Japanese ships to spot a periscope, the unawareness of the Navy that a sub is not a ship but a boat, and that the battle the film is supposed to be about doesn't happen until eighty minutes in, it provides passable entertainment.

BATTLE OF THE CORAL SEA is a complete misnomer of a title for this B-movie WW2 flick about the crew of a US submarine finding themselves at the mercy of the Japanese navy. It's not a battle film at all, it's too cheap for that, and the titular event merely takes place in the last five minutes of the production thanks to some aged stock footage. No, what we have here is a typical prisoner of war film, with the submarine crew forced to surrender to the Japanese, faring on a remote island, and eventually rising up against their oppressors.

The cast is headed by genre favourite Cliff Robertson with the likes of L.Q. Jones in support, and there's a tiny role for a debuting George Takei if you can manage to spot him. Generally the production is hampered by a small budget which means that this is a very talky production without much in the way of action or excitement, although the eventual uprising scenes are quite well handled. Sadly they come too little too late for this to be an enjoyable production.

This is an extremely wrong and stupid feature film, and there needs to be a better one about the battle. As far as I know, a U. S. sub was never surrendered like that. They would have fought it out with their deck gun until sunk, and then survivors might have been captured.

My Uncle John was a teenage sailor aboard USS Moray SS-300, and I can only imagine his reaction, if he saw this thing.

As someone has written below, this was an obscene propaganda piece obviously intended to smooth over the hideous Japanese atrocities throughout the war, so that Japan could be rehabilitated to be our military ally in the Pacific.

The Japanese did not lose 3 carriers in this battle. They lost only light carrier Shoho, while we lost fleet carrier Lexington - a tactical Japanese victory.

As to the film footage used for the actual battle in the last few minutes of the film, that of the aircraft was actually fairly good, with Coral Sea era film used. Our insignia roundels often had the red dot in the middle of the star, and the TBD Devastators (massacred later at Midway) were prominent.

Meanwhile the model ships used were laughable, let alone inaccurate, and the underwater shots of the sub in the goldfish bowl are cringeable.

Our sinking of Shoho did strip the Japanese invasion convoy of its air cover and force the cancellation of the Japanese landing at Port Moresby, so it was a (costly) strategic victory for us.

Our Marines on Guadalcanal would later stop the other Japanese prong.

As our Admiral Fletcher said, this Coral Sea first carriers-only battle in history was "a hell of a lot of groping around" (through terrible storm and visibility conditions).

It takes forever to even get to the hint of a battle occurring, with the real life 1942 incident occurring during the last tenth of the film. The submarine commanded by Cliff Robertson is seen going through the Japanese infested sea with all sorts of mechanical contraptions left around indicating that their presence will be discovered. They are indeed captured and end up on an island war prison run by the ruthless Teru Shimada who dares anyone who thinks that they can swim 200 miles to dare to try to escape.

So the viewer has to sit through countless scenes of torture and shootouts as the prisoners (which includes a young Tom Laughlin) try to escape, and then there's still half an hour left. Gia Scala and Patricia Cutts are present in the prison camp which questions the side these two women are on. So the fact that the audience believes that they're getting a dramatization of one of the great battles of the war only gets a brief glimpse, and the result is your typical late 50's B war movie, where the black and white photography doesn't show the majestic surroundings of what is found inside the coral sea.