Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotesOverview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditsAwards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage boardPlot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotesDid You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQOther Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDeskPromotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo galleryExternal Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clipsReviews & Ratings for
Hellcats of the Navy More at IMDbPro »
| Page 1 of 2: | [1] [2] ![[Next]](http://i.media-imdb.com/f86.gif){kind=small} |
| Index | 11 reviews in total |
17 out of 20 people found the following review useful:
Admiral Nimitz, 18 February 2004
Author:
bkoganbing from Buffalo, New York
Most of the comments about this very ordinary war film concerns the
fact that it is the only film that co-starred Ronald and Nancy Reagan.
Both of them did better work in Hollywood.
The real story is that Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, CINCPAC Pacific
Theatre in World War II chose to make a personal appearance in this
film about submarines. That's like having Eisenhower or MacArthur make
a personal appearance in an army war film. Unheard of.
Nimitz's background was in submarines and our submarine fleet may very
well have been the tipping factor in the Pacific War. We did to Japan
what the Nazis tried to do to Great Britain, cut off their raw material
and food. Nimitz was no hypocrite however. He admitted as much during
the Nuremberg trials and that fact saved the Nazi U-Boat commander Karl
Doenitz from the hangman for war crimes.
All the clichés about submarine warfare in the pre-atomic era are
present in this film. It's a B Picture made just as B Pictures were
being phased out of existence. The cast is competent enough, but it's
all been done before.
I think the real story is why did Admiral Nimitz choose this submarine
film to make an appearance in.
13 out of 14 people found the following review useful:
Too often over scrutinized, 10 January 2004
Author:
Rich Harding
This film is primarily for Ronald Reagan buffs or for those who want to see Ron and Nancy on screen together. The story centers around an initially unstable relationship between a submarine commander, a nurse, another officer showing interest in her and an executive officer who questions the motives of the commander, both personally and militarily. Is it one of the 'great' WWII submarine movies? No. Is it worth a look? Yes. It doesn't contain the depth or intensity of Cary Grant's "Destination Tokyo" or Clark Gable's "Run Silent, Run Deep," but could be considered comparable to Glenn Ford's "Torpedo Run."
13 out of 15 people found the following review useful:
modest sub movie, 25 March 2005
Author:
Robert J. Maxwell (rmax304823@yahoo.com) from Deming, New Mexico, USA
You have to feel sorry for anybody who tries to write the screenplay
for a submarine movie. How is it possible to avoid all the established
clichés? The shattered chronometer, the bursting pipe, the ritual
commands, the toy submarine nosing through the murk, the wounded
skipper lying on the deck and ordering the boat down, the periscope
slicing the sea, the tin can approaching at high speed, the pinging
sonar gear, the tense sweaty faces, the walloped camera as the depth
charge explodes, the conflict between the CO and the Exec, the playful
bantering of the crew, a down-the-throat shot.
Added to that are the problems that any Navy movie has. The men have no
chance at individual heroism and practically none of being dramatically
wounded. (Unless one of them gets appendicitis or has a torpedo fall on
him, which happens from time to time.) Basically, the crew are there
for comic purposes, so the burden of the drama must fall on the
officers. The question can never be about who is going to rush out with
his tommy gun and save the rest of the patrol, so it can only be about
whose judgment is correct, the skipper or one of his officers.
(Sometimes a romantic conflict on the beach is thrown in, but that's
rather arbitrary, kind of like the appendicitis patient.) This one
isn't too bad, as sub movies go, but it arrives late in the post-war
genre. Nobody in it is weak. The enemy is dehumanized, the dialogue
trite and exhausted, the action scenes shot on the cheap, and the story
is twisted, hard to follow, and sometimes pointless. (Example, midway
through the movie a great deal is made of Captain Reagan's having
brought back an accurate chart of the Japanese mine fields, but when
the subs are sent out en masse it turns out the mines have been moved
around so the chart is now irrelevant.) The performers do as well as
they can under the circumstances, although Nancy Reagan is definitely
in the wrong part here. The right parts would have been those taken by
the elderly Bette Davis. The cast has a lot of familiar faces, but none
of them memorable because of their having given good performances
elsewhere, only memorable because we've seen them so often before.
The director should be spanked. A man is knocked about during a depth
charge attack and is taken to sick bay. After he's been treated and
bandaged up, there are still trickles of blood down his chin and the
side of his face. Once winces at such sloppiness. And there is another
painfully staged scene, when Reagan and Davis are saying good-bye.
Davis's face is in the foreground. She stares unblinkingly just to the
left of the camera's lens while Reagan stands behind and speaks to her
over her shoulder. This particular part of cinematic grammar must
antedate cinema itself.
Should you see it? Well -- why not. It's a historical curiosity if
nothing else.
11 out of 14 people found the following review useful:
World War Two Submarine Saga Featuring Mr. & Mrs. Reagan, 13 February 1999
Author:
Michael Coy (michael.coy@virgin.net) from London, England
US Navy submarines bravely try to penetrate the heavily-mined entrance
to the Sea of Japan, in order to sink enemy shipping which is carrying coal,
food and iron from China to the Japanese homeland.
On one level a simple war action movie, this film is also a commendable
study in the morality of leadership. The central question posed by the
movie is whether a commander's duty towards a single seaman in obvious
danger outweighs his overall responsibility to his crew.
Ronald Reagan is very good as the straight, correct Captain Casey
Abbott. Back at Guam he has a girl, a nurse in the military hospital (Nancy
Davis, to give her her professional name). When a frogman who is also a
rival for the nurse's affections gets into difficulties, Captain Casey has
to try to separate personal and professional motivations.
Casey's Executive Officer, Dan Landon, clashes with his skipper but by
a twist of fate finds himself having to make a very similar decision. Will
he call the plays differently?
The film works as an uncomplicated war story, but does contain a few
infelicities. The submariners are depicted as nice guys in order to enlist
viewer sympathy, but this is a little overdone and the sailors come across
as childish simpletons, stealing cookies and hiding their dice. Wes Barton
has to be portrayed as a popular guy so that we will resent
his
treatment at the Captain's hands, but to have sailors pleading for a Barton
story as he is entering the airlock on a dangerous mission is just
unbelievable. The crew of the USS Starfish get sealed orders for a special
mission. They are to enter the Straits of Tsushima, land a party on a
fortified island, and destroy its defences. Would an ordinary submarine
crew really be entrusted with such a specialised task? The frogman
sequences are shot in murky water and are hard to follow. Penetration of
the minefield channel is effected in a few seconds, when such an undertaking
would surely last many hours.
For contemporary viewers, much of the film's interest will lie in the
unique experience of watching Ron and Nancy onscreen together. They had
been married for five years when "Hellcats" was made, and at the time of
writing, 42 years later, they are still going strong. It is tempting, if
unwarranted, to scrutinize their lines for significant snippets. Ronald
Reagan's character is asked what he will do after the War and he announces,
"I'm going into the surplus business." Given his leadership style, some
would say that was an accurate prediction of both his gubernatorial
performance in California and his presidency. Much of Ron's dialogue is an
essay on the burden of leadership, and how only a special few are fitted to
bear it. Nancy confides to him, "You know I was fresh out of a bad marriage
when we met. I wanted to be sure this time. So we played it safe, until I
knew you were Mr. Right." In fairness to the Reagans, that, at least, has
proved to be autobiographical.
4 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
OK movie, 26 August 2007
Author:
pageiv from Flint, MI
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I'm sure the tactics used in this movie bar little on how things really
went down, but the movie OK, or a solid "5".
The story was decent and actually kept this thing moving along, action
was good for a sub pick, acting was what you would expect from the
cast. Only drawback was, like I said, the tactics and equipment used.
PT boats as Japanese fast attack ships is one example. Like someone
else mentioned, if Capt. Reagan was a commander of a sub in real life,
he would've been fired or possible shot for the why he exposed his ship
to the enemy. Which oddly enough was how the movie started when he
saved his ship instead of one of his crew.
I'm sure if Ron and Nancy weren't in it, it would've long ago been
forgotten and rated a couple stars lower. But they are in it, and which
makes it worth while to give it a view once, plus Fleet Admial Nimitz
has a cameo!
2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Formulaic Little Programmer Featuring Ron and Nancy, 26 March 2009
Author:
kellyadmirer from New York City/Colorado Springs
This little oddity features the future US President, Ronald Reagan, and
wife Nancy in a B-movie of the kind that disappeared shortly
thereafter. It is more a historical curiosity than entertainment, but
for that reason alone is watchable if you are in the mood.
Ronnie is Cmdr. Casey Abbott, a US Naval officer in charge of a
submarine entrusted with a mission to chart a key minefield in a strait
leading to a Japanese strong point. Arthur Franz is Lt. Cmdr. Don
Landon, second in command, and Nancy Davis is Nurse Lt. Helen Blair who
is Ronnie's flame back at the base. One of the sailors on the sub also
is interested in Nancy, though very little is shown of that. The film
depicts the sub's mission and how everything is resolved.
Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz, who basically ran the overall sea and
land war against Japan in the central Pacific as well as being the
direct Commander of all US Naval forces there, makes a few brief
introductory remarks in full uniform about how important the submarine
force was in defeating Japan. It's odd to see such an important
historical figure in a film which is barely a step above a TV movie,
but he lends an air of prestige that serves the film well. Perhaps he
was a friend of Ronnie (who did a lot of wartime films for the
government) and wanted to do him a favor, or was just very interested
in reasonably realistic sub movies (he spent a lot of time in them
during his youth).
The plot is formulaic and hokey, and no better than most TV episodes of
"Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea" or "Sea Hunt." Captain Ronnie has to
abandon his rival for Nancy's affections at sea "to save his men," much
to Landon's dismay, and then Landon later has to make an identical
decision about Ronnie himself. Ah, the burden of command. There are
numerous shots of the sub surfacing and diving, and of naval frogmen of
the era, which may interest you if you are into classic naval ordnance.
Pretty much every cliché from sub movies makes it in at some point
("Someday, you will have your own command and have to make tough
decisions, too"), close-ups of the sonar guy's face as he tracks a
Japanese ship above, etc.
Oddly, there is really only one scene of any significance between Ron
and Nancy, and it is as stiff as humanly possible. Not only do they
barely look at each other, they hardly touch at all. It's hard to
detect any warmth between them. There is more warmth shown between the
Reagan and Franz characters, that male bonding thing being another
cliché of sub movies. Reagan did much, much better work, as in the
later "The Killers," but does a competent job as the approachable but
rather grim commander. I don't find Nancy either attractive or
interesting in this film, but she and Ronnie do look like a middle-aged
couple that might get together in reality and not just in the fantasy
world of the movies.
Worth viewing simply to see how Ron and Nancy interacted on screen. I
have to think - well, hope, anyway - that they were more affectionate
in real life. They sure don't show much here.
A solid movie..., 25 February 2012
Author:
JoeB131 from United States
It seems to me a few reviewers are letting their feelings for Reagan as
a president seep into their views on the movie. Probably doesn't help
matters that this was his only on-screen pairing with his future first
lady, Nancy Davis.
This movie is pretty generic in its conflicts. A captain has to make
tough decisions in wartime, decisions that cost people their lives.
Considering the budget, the scenes were well shot.
This was one of Reagan's last movies, before he went on to be a
pitchman and then a politician.
Also surprising is the participation of Admiral Chester Nimitz playing
himself. perhaps Nimitz felt the submariners didn't get their due, with
all the war movies being made about pilots and infantry, so he lent his
credibility to this film.
If you check your feelings about President Reagan at the door, you can
enjoy this film for what it is.
0 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Just Say No to Not Exactly Hail to the Chief **1/2, 28 March 2009
Author:
edwagreen from United States
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Routine submarine warfare film engaged in the old story of how one
reacts when one is in command. Obviously, when the shoe is on the other
foot, we act accordingly.
Nancy Davis did a poor job here. She was certainly no Jane Wyman. Thank
the lord that she just said no to a further movie career and went on
her way with her Ronnie and the rest is history!
Reagan is a real commander here. Am surprised he didn't want to cut men
in his never ending assault on cuts. O yes, this was the military and
he was strong on defense.
No wonder, after seeing this tedious film, that it is said that Jack
Warner told Reagan that his career was over. Look what Jack didn't know
what was in store for us.
The film itself has some strengths, particularly where the bombs go
off. It ably showed that team effort will pay off, especially when the
code of discipline is enforced.
The film might have worked better if it were in color and Ann Sheridan
was the nurse. That would have made a 15 year reunion between the
future president and Ann, after the marvelous King's Row. That was
President Reagan at his best in his movie career.
5 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
If Ed Wood ever made a war movie!, 6 January 2007
Author:
vawlkee from OC California
I've seen this film a few times and it makes me cringe......And believe
me I know my sub films!
Ronny is as stiff as a board throughout the film....In fact, he conveys
the claustrophobic feeling of being cooped up in a fleet boat during
WWII better than any other film does...He's grim and wooden...It's nigh
unto impossible to build up any feelings or emotions for anyone in the
cast.
Arthur Franz shines - as always, as the exec.......He's the one guy
that manages to rise above the banal (make that abysmal) script and
Nathan Juran's limp-wristed direction....It's kinda' like "Ed Wood does
WWII".....Araggh!
You can see swipes from all over the place.....The scene with the guys
swimming underwater with flaming fuel above was lifted from 1943's
"Crash Dive" done by Fox!!!! Also the footage from the scene with the
jap sub surfacing was actually Dana Andrew's sub from the same film!
Neat huh?....Then you take the underwater scenes with the divers
wearing 1950's scuba equipment(!) dealing with the japs....Looks like
it too was influenced by Fox - this time from 1951's: "The
Frogmen"....Ouch!
The few high points in this film stem from good location shots which
appear to be off of Long Beach and Palos Verdes Penninsula aren't
bad...No doubt shot on an old Gato class sub that was part of the
active reserves....
Take note of the typical cheesy Columbia budget-that's all too obvious!
Mischa Bakaleinikoff's (Columbia's in-house composer)hokey soundtrack
sounds like sloppy seconds from Columbia's 1955 sub/sci-fi flick: "It
came from Beneath the Sea".
This film might have been credible with a decent script, decent
direction and decent acting.....But it isn't....
If this movie were a sub wreck, even Bob Ballard wouldn't touch it!
Try watching "Hell Below" if you want to see an outstanding sub
film...They don't get much better!
1 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
As bad as it gets, 25 July 2000
Author:
williamodouglas
Leaden acting. Awful special effects. Every time the submarines go out, so does the sonar (amazing, huh?) A forced conflict between the captain and his executive officer. It also has some of the worst dialogue imaginable, especially in the Ronald Reagan-Nancy Davis scenes. All in all, I would have rather watched an old television test-pattern.
| Page 1 of 2: | [1] [2] |
Related Links
| Ratings | External reviews | Plot keywords |
| Main details | Your user reviews | Your vote history |
Copyright © 1990-2012
IMDb.com, Inc.
Terms and Privacy Policy under which this service is provided to you.
An 
company.