Brief reflections on “Hell in the Pacific” (1968)
Directed by John Boorman
Written by Reuben Bercovitch, Alexander Jacobs and
Eric Bercovici
Starring Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune
Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune play American and Japanese soldiers stranded on a deserted island in the Pacific during WW2.
In such a situation of isolation and mutual dependency, it is clear that it would be advantageous to set aside political, cultural and historical differences as both men have to confront the challenges of nature, a motif common to a number of John Boorman’s films, in order to ensure survival.
However, even here and in this situation, the clash of their political and cultural backgrounds carries over and each tries to get the better of the other. On top of, or perhaps because of a failure to communicate, each regards the other with suspicion and fear, showing scant understanding and consideration for one another as human beings, opting to maintain their established and ingrained hostility, seeking to prove superiority and refusing to share resources. Each also shows cunning, courage, determination and spirit, suggesting a positive outcome is possible if only they can overcome mutual distrust and fear.
This small island and the issues these men are facing may be viewed as the Earth and its human population in microcosm. Mankind is split into a variety of political, social and cultural factions who, ultimately, would benefit from cooperating with one another to ensure survival and security for all rather than vying with one another to ensure personal or national success.
Each of our protagonists does, eventually, get the better of the other and both show a fundamental humanity as neither can bring himself to kill the other, though they do try to hold one another in check and control one another. The Japanese soldier displays order and a need for precision, while the American is more relaxed and haphazard, but each shows himself capable and strong, and neither is obviously superior to the other.
The whole would seem to be a metaphor for warring nations and peoples seeking to gain control over one another or gain advantage at the others’ expense, with arguments over food, water, territory and property, all the while failing to see the bigger picture.
Finally, there appears to be a realisation that they are going nowhere, physically and figuratively. This is not verbalised, but there develops an underlying, if uneasy, trust between the two. This trust is doubted from time to time, and this doubt is based on previous “conditioning” rather than their experiences on the island.
Eventually, they find a common cause and take on nature together, helping and saving one another. By now their cultural differences have been forgotten as they focus on the here and now. After their escape across the sea, they come across land which could be under the command of either nation, and each is protective of the other.
Through these two soldiers, we are shown how people can live and prosper together if they focus on what they have in common, including common dangers and challenges, rather than concentrate on their differences.
However, once again surrounded by cultural memories and photographic reminders of “reality”, they start picking at one another, only for both to be killed in a bombing raid on the island, indicating the madness of war and the possible result for mankind if we allow our differences to overwhelm us.
Much has been made of alternate endings for the film. I have only ever seen the destructive one, but apparently there is another version in which they argue and go their separate ways. I must say I find the former more effective in terms of a warning of the implied ultimate result if we fail to make the effort to get on together.
This
intense and spare film, featuring just the two main characters, will not be to
everyone’s taste, but it does bring its own thought-provoking rewards. Although
the film fared poorly in terms of box-office results on its release, it is now
rightly considered to have cult status.
My thanks for taking the time to read this article. I hope you found it of some value.
Stuart Fernie (stuartfernie@yahoo.co.uk)
No comments:
Post a Comment