IMDb RATING
6.6/10
2.6K
YOUR RATING
Director John Huston documents the Battle of San Pietro Infine in December 1943.Director John Huston documents the Battle of San Pietro Infine in December 1943.Director John Huston documents the Battle of San Pietro Infine in December 1943.
- Director
- Writer
- Stars
- Awards
- 1 win total
Mark W. Clark
- Self - Introduction
- (uncredited)
John Huston
- Self - Narrator
- (voice)
- (uncredited)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
6.62.6K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Featured reviews
Okay, but a bit disappointing. 6/10
John Huston's World War 2 documentary on the taking of the Italian town of San Pietro by US forces in December 1943.
Okay, but a bit disappointing. Was interesting as it covers a battle that you never hear about in WW2 documentaries or read about in books. In a way San Pietro was a sample of the type of attritional war fought in Italy.
However, like "Report from the Aleutians" the main problem is John Huston's narration. Dull, verbose, flowery, and quite irritating at times. Not as bad here as the aforementioned documentary, but still off-putting enough.
Okay, but a bit disappointing. Was interesting as it covers a battle that you never hear about in WW2 documentaries or read about in books. In a way San Pietro was a sample of the type of attritional war fought in Italy.
However, like "Report from the Aleutians" the main problem is John Huston's narration. Dull, verbose, flowery, and quite irritating at times. Not as bad here as the aforementioned documentary, but still off-putting enough.
the extra minutes are worth fighting for
i recently saw the approx. 40min version of this film and i must say, knowing what is missing from the 32min version, that it is indeed far more impactful and superior. images of more fallen soldiers in white body bags appear and reappear throughout to the point of it being a reocurring theme. i'm sure it's just as brilliant without the extra footage, but if you can, try to see the extra footage. while i have not seen the true original (running approx. 50min), i'm quite positive it's even better than the one i was fortunate enough to see. a great documentary film all-around (even if some of it was staged).
It's all in the perception
While I agree with another reviewer here that " All Quiet On The Western Front" is one of the greatest anti-war films of all time I don't see this documentary as anti-war at all. San Pietro was of strategic value to the Allied Forces and yes we took it at great loss of life and yes nobody wants to die in some war in a foreign country but these brave young men died for a good cause. To try and use this film to argue that wars should never be fought does a great disservice to all the young Americans who died to free Europe from the Nazis.
War, Dark and Gritty
This documentary movie is about the battle of San Pietro, a small village in Italy. Over 1,100 US soldiers were killed while trying to take this location, that blocked the way for the Allied forces from the Germans.
Huston and his crew were attached to the U.S. Army's 143rd Regiment of the 36th Division. Unlike many other military documentaries, it was claimed Huston's cameramen filmed alongside the infantrymen as they fought their way up the hills to reach San Pietro. (Huston's claim that the film was made during the battle was proved false by the research of Peter Maslowski.) Huston quickly became unpopular with the Army, not only for the film but also for his response to the accusation that the film was anti-war. Huston responded that if he ever made a pro-war film, he should be shot. And this coming from a man who served. I think that is a great statement. We can support the troops, especially when they are fighting the fascists, but that should not make us "pro-war". Whatever is between pro- and anti- war, that seems to be the right outlook.
Huston and his crew were attached to the U.S. Army's 143rd Regiment of the 36th Division. Unlike many other military documentaries, it was claimed Huston's cameramen filmed alongside the infantrymen as they fought their way up the hills to reach San Pietro. (Huston's claim that the film was made during the battle was proved false by the research of Peter Maslowski.) Huston quickly became unpopular with the Army, not only for the film but also for his response to the accusation that the film was anti-war. Huston responded that if he ever made a pro-war film, he should be shot. And this coming from a man who served. I think that is a great statement. We can support the troops, especially when they are fighting the fascists, but that should not make us "pro-war". Whatever is between pro- and anti- war, that seems to be the right outlook.
Gritty and realistic...
I saw this film while watching my copy of the 4-DVD set "Treasures From American Film Archives"--a set of mostly ephemeral films that would have otherwise been lost.
"San Pietro" is a film assembled by the US War Department to chronicle one of many battles from WWII. Like so many government films made during WWII, it is narrated by a Hollywood star (director John Huston) and I assume it was made by film makers who were in military service for the war.
The film's narration and images are surprisingly blunt and free from extreme patriotism--making it highly realistic and gripping. In other words, the film is not all about American victory but shows casualties and describes how difficult this battle was--not some jingoistic rant meant to glorify war and make it seem like the troops were super-human. While some might have thought this would demoralize the folks at home (hence it was held for release for two years), it was direct, informative and well-constructed. At times, it felt almost as if you were there in the action and was very compelling--and a nice tribute to real sacrifices made by some very brave soldiers as well as an important historical record.
"San Pietro" is a film assembled by the US War Department to chronicle one of many battles from WWII. Like so many government films made during WWII, it is narrated by a Hollywood star (director John Huston) and I assume it was made by film makers who were in military service for the war.
The film's narration and images are surprisingly blunt and free from extreme patriotism--making it highly realistic and gripping. In other words, the film is not all about American victory but shows casualties and describes how difficult this battle was--not some jingoistic rant meant to glorify war and make it seem like the troops were super-human. While some might have thought this would demoralize the folks at home (hence it was held for release for two years), it was direct, informative and well-constructed. At times, it felt almost as if you were there in the action and was very compelling--and a nice tribute to real sacrifices made by some very brave soldiers as well as an important historical record.
Did you know
- TriviaThis film was considered so blunt in its depiction of the difficulties of the battle that the US Army refused to show it, believing it to be damaging to troop morale.
- ConnectionsEdited into Story of G.I. Joe (1945)
Details
- Runtime
- 32m
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.37 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content







