In 1940, an American claiming to be Canadian volunteers for the British Army's paratroop school.In 1940, an American claiming to be Canadian volunteers for the British Army's paratroop school.In 1940, an American claiming to be Canadian volunteers for the British Army's paratroop school.
Featured reviews
Not too bad for a typical Alan Ladd movie of its time (released in 1953). Not a must-see but it is entertaining. Having seen this movie a number of times, I was recently surprised to see what appears to be a lot of blue screen shots overlaid on backgrounds. Much of the static dialog seems to be shot on a sound stage and then superimposed on whatever was supposed to be going on in the scene.
Of particular interest is the difference in equipment and training between British and American paratroopers. As with most Alan Ladd movies he's portrayed as the arch-typical quiet loner who, when pushed, reacts with sufficient violence as to be given plenty of space. In reality, Ladd was too small to be much of a menace to most (unless he's pulling a trigger). To give you an idea of how diverse his career was at this time, this movie was released in the same year as his hits "Botany Bay" and "Shane".
Of particular interest is the difference in equipment and training between British and American paratroopers. As with most Alan Ladd movies he's portrayed as the arch-typical quiet loner who, when pushed, reacts with sufficient violence as to be given plenty of space. In reality, Ladd was too small to be much of a menace to most (unless he's pulling a trigger). To give you an idea of how diverse his career was at this time, this movie was released in the same year as his hits "Botany Bay" and "Shane".
From the onset, this movie starts with a serious deficit. Like too many Alan Ladd movies, it inexplicably has Ladd playing an angry man--too angry. He sulks and barks incessantly--like he's suffering from a bad case of PMS. While this sometimes works, here it just makes no sense. Even when you later learn about the supposed source of his anger, it still makes no sense. Having Ladd play a NON-CRAZY guy would have made this a better and more realistic film.
Angry Alan has joined the Canadian Army and has volunteered for paratrooper duty. He's such a good soldier that they want to make him an officer but he refuses each time it is offered. Through the course of his training, he somehow gets a girlfriend--though what she see's in grouchy-boy, I don't know. The audience knows that despite his attitude, somehow Alan will make good by the end of the picture.
In some ways this is a very good production and in others it's a disappointment. The paratroop scenes are very good and appear pretty realistic. Genuine American and British planes were used and the fights look nice as do the jumps. However, at other times it comes off poorly--because the little details were wrong. A few examples include post-WWII markings on an airplane (a minor problem but it should have been fixed) and a scene where the sky color changes back and forth in a sloppy manner. So, in a jump early in the film it's dusk and then looks about half an hour earlier and then half an hour later. Again, not a huge problem but seeing the change so quickly was baffling. The final odd thing is a common cliché--but a dumb one. Again and again you see guys pulling the pins from grenades WITH THEIR TEETH! This is a great way to lose teeth--and no one really ever did this--yet you see it in films repeatedly.
As a result of some decent action, wooden characters (especially Ladd) and a few flubs, I think this is in the category of 'time-passer' and nothing more. Even if Albert Broccoli, Terrence Young and a lot of other future James Bond film crew worked on this, it's only average at best.
Angry Alan has joined the Canadian Army and has volunteered for paratrooper duty. He's such a good soldier that they want to make him an officer but he refuses each time it is offered. Through the course of his training, he somehow gets a girlfriend--though what she see's in grouchy-boy, I don't know. The audience knows that despite his attitude, somehow Alan will make good by the end of the picture.
In some ways this is a very good production and in others it's a disappointment. The paratroop scenes are very good and appear pretty realistic. Genuine American and British planes were used and the fights look nice as do the jumps. However, at other times it comes off poorly--because the little details were wrong. A few examples include post-WWII markings on an airplane (a minor problem but it should have been fixed) and a scene where the sky color changes back and forth in a sloppy manner. So, in a jump early in the film it's dusk and then looks about half an hour earlier and then half an hour later. Again, not a huge problem but seeing the change so quickly was baffling. The final odd thing is a common cliché--but a dumb one. Again and again you see guys pulling the pins from grenades WITH THEIR TEETH! This is a great way to lose teeth--and no one really ever did this--yet you see it in films repeatedly.
As a result of some decent action, wooden characters (especially Ladd) and a few flubs, I think this is in the category of 'time-passer' and nothing more. Even if Albert Broccoli, Terrence Young and a lot of other future James Bond film crew worked on this, it's only average at best.
In real life, Alan Ladd was scared to death of flying (he preferred trains), but you'd never know it in this exciting action adventure set in early World War II.
The old English method of training paratroopers by jumping from balloons is accurately depicted, as is the result of landing with an unopened parachute (the British, like the German airborne, eschewed the use of reserve parachutes).
It's actually a pretty standard war movie, though the score is exciting and memorable, and the combat scenes, though dated now, are pretty well done, considering this movie was shot in 1953.
Definitely worth watching!
The old English method of training paratroopers by jumping from balloons is accurately depicted, as is the result of landing with an unopened parachute (the British, like the German airborne, eschewed the use of reserve parachutes).
It's actually a pretty standard war movie, though the score is exciting and memorable, and the combat scenes, though dated now, are pretty well done, considering this movie was shot in 1953.
Definitely worth watching!
Like THEY WERE NOT DIVIDED, THE RED BERET is a 1950s war effort made by the team (Albert Broccoli, Terence Young, etc.) who would later go on to make the early James Bond films and thus kick-start a whole genre of cinema. This film stars Alan Ladd as an Canadian soldier who joins forces with a squad of British paratroopers to go on missions behind enemy lines in both France and North Africa.
It's a fairly typical war movie from the era, a little stodgy in places and ridiculous in others. The silly bar-room brawl is straight out of a western and seems to come from nowhere, it's so sudden. Ladd plays a perpetually grumpy fellow but Susan Stephen doesn't have any trouble falling for his less-than-ideal charms. The supporting cast of British talent is better: in his first film role, Harry Andrews is a scene-stealer as the RSM, and there are parts for Stanley Baker, Donald Houston, Anton Diffring, and Leo Genn.
THE RED BERET seems to be suffering from a low budget, because the action sequences aren't quite up to scratch and never convince too much, although there's a novel use for a bazooka which is worth something. The skydiving stuff is better and more thrilling, and Ladd's back story, when it eventually comes to light, is an acceptable one.
It's a fairly typical war movie from the era, a little stodgy in places and ridiculous in others. The silly bar-room brawl is straight out of a western and seems to come from nowhere, it's so sudden. Ladd plays a perpetually grumpy fellow but Susan Stephen doesn't have any trouble falling for his less-than-ideal charms. The supporting cast of British talent is better: in his first film role, Harry Andrews is a scene-stealer as the RSM, and there are parts for Stanley Baker, Donald Houston, Anton Diffring, and Leo Genn.
THE RED BERET seems to be suffering from a low budget, because the action sequences aren't quite up to scratch and never convince too much, although there's a novel use for a bazooka which is worth something. The skydiving stuff is better and more thrilling, and Ladd's back story, when it eventually comes to light, is an acceptable one.
Somehow 'The Red Beret,' by no measure a fine film, remains one of my sentimental favorites, perhaps because in my teens it aired often on late night TV, under its U.S. title 'Paratrooper.' Alan Ladd, even when he wasn't acting, appeared as the sexy strong stoical silent type, and here he again fills that bill. I also love this film because it's one of the many that carved out for Harry Andrews his reputation for playing tough-tender sergeants and sergeant majors; in 'The Red Beret' his last-words line, "Pity the man who hears the pipes and was na born in Scotland," has stuck pleasantly with me into my sixth decade; he also gives a lovely little take when the red berets are issued to him and his men and his character must part with his beloved regimental headgear. Also very sexy here, in his own astute, urbane way - quite different from Ladd's, is Leo Genn (who, in my experience, never gave a poor screen performance, and who was very good as the psychiatrist in 'The Snake Pit' and as Mr. Starbuck in John Huston's adaptation of 'Moby Dick'). Pert, pretty Susan Stephen - in a curls-and-frizz hairdo that was fifteen years ahead of its time! - doesn't act very well here, but I still find her effort affecting as Ladd's character's love interest.
I suppose my affection for 'The Red Beret' is one more proof that "There's no accounting for taste." Which helps to explain, if not to excuse, most of the rubbish studios churn out nowadays for uncritical mass consumption. I wish 'The Red Beret' would release on disc so that once, and many times over, in the wee hours I could snuggle down on the sofa and enjoy it as I did when I was a teenager.
I suppose my affection for 'The Red Beret' is one more proof that "There's no accounting for taste." Which helps to explain, if not to excuse, most of the rubbish studios churn out nowadays for uncritical mass consumption. I wish 'The Red Beret' would release on disc so that once, and many times over, in the wee hours I could snuggle down on the sofa and enjoy it as I did when I was a teenager.
Did you know
- TriviaStanley Baker is dubbed.
- GoofsRight before the raid on the airfield at Bone, some of the paratroops bolt for a taxiing DC-3 and, without official authorization, climb aboard, so as not to miss their chance to take part in the airborne assault. This DC-3 has distinctive side markings, including a very visible "602" on the tail. Yet, when these same paratroops jump from this same plane, the side markings are now completely different, not the least of which is the total absence of the "602" tail number. The serial appears as "TG602". TG602 was an RAF Handley Page Hastings C1, the standard RAF Transport Command aircraft used for para dropping and current at RAF Abingdon, in 1952-1953. RAF Hastings served at that time in a natural aluminum finish. The filming of this particular aircraft occurred prior to 12 January 1953, which is when it was lost in an accident in Egypt.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Everything or Nothing (2012)
- SoundtracksRed River Valley
(uncredited)
Traditional, lyrics modified as a parachutists' song
Sung on the pub, and whistled and hummed throughout the film as a theme
- How long is Paratrooper?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $700,000 (estimated)
- Runtime
- 1h 28m(88 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.37 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content