JamesHitchcock
Joined Dec 2003
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Ratings2.4K
JamesHitchcock's rating
Reviews2.5K
JamesHitchcock's rating
A "leatherneck" is American slang for a member of the US Marine Corps which, unlike their British counterparts, have their own air arm. Hence "Flying Leathernecks".
The film is set during the Guadalcanal campaign of 1942/3. The "flying leathernecks" are carrying out ground attacks in support of the American offensive against the Japanese positions. A new commander, Major Dan Kirby, has been appointed to the squadron. He is a strict disciplinarian and orders his men to carry out risky low-level attacks. These make it easier for his pilots to hit the Japanese targets, but also make it easier for the Japanese to shoot down the American planes with anti-aircraft fire, leading to a high casualty rate.
Kirby comes into conflict with his more liberal second-in-command, Captain Carl Griffin. Although they are always outwardly polite to one another, it becomes clear that the two men dislike one another. Griffin resents the fact that he was passed over for promotion in favour of Kirby and feels that Kirby's tactics are risking his men's lives unnecessarily. Kirby thinks that Griffin is not suitable for command because he does not have the strength of character to make hard decisions, especially hard decisions which might lead to his men being killed. Eventually, however, the two work out an uneasy way of working together.
The two leading roles are played by John Wayne and Robert Ryan. It may have seemed like a strange idea to team these two men together, as they disliked one another, largely because of their very different political views, Ryan being as far to the left as Wayne was to the right, but director Nicholas Ray deliberately chose Ryan to play opposite Wayne. It was a gamble that paid off, because the tension between Wayne and Ryan comes across in the form of a similar tension between Kirby and Griffin, and both give excellent performances (It might have been a different matter if Wayne and Ryan had been required to play two characters who were the best of friends).
The scenes of aerial combat are well handled, although they were to be surpassed in some later films such as "The Hunters", "The Blue Max" and"Battle of Britain". Unlike some American (and British) war films from this era, this is not one which glorifies war. It is one which makes the human cost of war all too clear, a cost which is paid both in terms of the loss of young lives and in terms of the mental strain of command which affects both Griffin and Kirby. Kirby may outwardly seem hard and unemotional, but the tough decisions he has to make undoubtedly affect him emotionally. "Flying Leathernecks" is therefore more than just a war movie, it is also a compelling psychological drama, and as such it works very well. 7/10.
The film is set during the Guadalcanal campaign of 1942/3. The "flying leathernecks" are carrying out ground attacks in support of the American offensive against the Japanese positions. A new commander, Major Dan Kirby, has been appointed to the squadron. He is a strict disciplinarian and orders his men to carry out risky low-level attacks. These make it easier for his pilots to hit the Japanese targets, but also make it easier for the Japanese to shoot down the American planes with anti-aircraft fire, leading to a high casualty rate.
Kirby comes into conflict with his more liberal second-in-command, Captain Carl Griffin. Although they are always outwardly polite to one another, it becomes clear that the two men dislike one another. Griffin resents the fact that he was passed over for promotion in favour of Kirby and feels that Kirby's tactics are risking his men's lives unnecessarily. Kirby thinks that Griffin is not suitable for command because he does not have the strength of character to make hard decisions, especially hard decisions which might lead to his men being killed. Eventually, however, the two work out an uneasy way of working together.
The two leading roles are played by John Wayne and Robert Ryan. It may have seemed like a strange idea to team these two men together, as they disliked one another, largely because of their very different political views, Ryan being as far to the left as Wayne was to the right, but director Nicholas Ray deliberately chose Ryan to play opposite Wayne. It was a gamble that paid off, because the tension between Wayne and Ryan comes across in the form of a similar tension between Kirby and Griffin, and both give excellent performances (It might have been a different matter if Wayne and Ryan had been required to play two characters who were the best of friends).
The scenes of aerial combat are well handled, although they were to be surpassed in some later films such as "The Hunters", "The Blue Max" and"Battle of Britain". Unlike some American (and British) war films from this era, this is not one which glorifies war. It is one which makes the human cost of war all too clear, a cost which is paid both in terms of the loss of young lives and in terms of the mental strain of command which affects both Griffin and Kirby. Kirby may outwardly seem hard and unemotional, but the tough decisions he has to make undoubtedly affect him emotionally. "Flying Leathernecks" is therefore more than just a war movie, it is also a compelling psychological drama, and as such it works very well. 7/10.
Between 1971 and 1978 the BBC used to dramatise a ghost story every year under the title "A Ghost Story for Christmas", and the first five entries in the series were all based upon tales by that great master of the genre, M. R. James. The tradition has been revived in recent years, and ten more Christmas ghost stories have since 2005; at first these were shown at irregular intervals, but the practice of making one every year has been revived since 2018. (There was, however, no offering in 2020, possibly because of the Covid pandemic).
"Lot 249", shown on Christmas Eve 2023, is set in an Oxford college around the year 1890. It is based on a story by Arthur Conan Doyle, of "Sherlock Holmes" fame. It opens with a conversation between two men who, at first sight, appear to be Holmes and Watson. One is tall, thin and clean-shaven with a long face; he clearly believes in solving problems by rational deduction. The other, shorter and stockier with a moustache, is clearly from a medical background. We learn, however, that this man (rather younger than normal depictions of Watson) is Abercrombie Smith, a medical student at Oxford University. We never learn the name of the other man; he is referred to in the cast list simply as "the friend".
Smith is worried about his neighbour in college, Edward Bellingham, an expert on the ancient cultures and languages of the Near East. Bellingham keeps an ancient Egyptian mummy in his room which he calls "Lot 249", that being its catalogue number when he bought it at auction. Smith believes that Bellingham is using magical Egyptian rituals to revive the mummy, and fears what this might lead to. His fears are worsened when another college student is mysteriously murdered.
The revived "Ghost Stories for Christmas" have varied in quality between the very good ("A View from a Hill", "The Mezzotint") and the disappointing ("Whistle and I'll Come to You", "Count Magnus" and the most recent offering, "Woman of Stone"). I would, however, rank "Lot No. 49" towards the upper end of the spectrum. There is a nice contrast between the two leading characters, Kit Harington's Smith, a decent, dogged, common-sense rationalist who discovers to his horror that there may be things in heaven and earth not dreamed of in his philosophy and Freddie Fox's Bellingham, the sort of fey, decadent hedonist that seemed to abound in the 1890s, the Aubrey Beardsley of Egyptology. The film may not quite match the standards of the best productions of the seventies series, such as "Lost Hearts" and "A Warning to the Curious", but it nevertheless makes suitably scary viewing for a winter's evening.
"Lot 249", shown on Christmas Eve 2023, is set in an Oxford college around the year 1890. It is based on a story by Arthur Conan Doyle, of "Sherlock Holmes" fame. It opens with a conversation between two men who, at first sight, appear to be Holmes and Watson. One is tall, thin and clean-shaven with a long face; he clearly believes in solving problems by rational deduction. The other, shorter and stockier with a moustache, is clearly from a medical background. We learn, however, that this man (rather younger than normal depictions of Watson) is Abercrombie Smith, a medical student at Oxford University. We never learn the name of the other man; he is referred to in the cast list simply as "the friend".
Smith is worried about his neighbour in college, Edward Bellingham, an expert on the ancient cultures and languages of the Near East. Bellingham keeps an ancient Egyptian mummy in his room which he calls "Lot 249", that being its catalogue number when he bought it at auction. Smith believes that Bellingham is using magical Egyptian rituals to revive the mummy, and fears what this might lead to. His fears are worsened when another college student is mysteriously murdered.
The revived "Ghost Stories for Christmas" have varied in quality between the very good ("A View from a Hill", "The Mezzotint") and the disappointing ("Whistle and I'll Come to You", "Count Magnus" and the most recent offering, "Woman of Stone"). I would, however, rank "Lot No. 49" towards the upper end of the spectrum. There is a nice contrast between the two leading characters, Kit Harington's Smith, a decent, dogged, common-sense rationalist who discovers to his horror that there may be things in heaven and earth not dreamed of in his philosophy and Freddie Fox's Bellingham, the sort of fey, decadent hedonist that seemed to abound in the 1890s, the Aubrey Beardsley of Egyptology. The film may not quite match the standards of the best productions of the seventies series, such as "Lost Hearts" and "A Warning to the Curious", but it nevertheless makes suitably scary viewing for a winter's evening.
