Force of Arms

People keep comparing this film with "A Fairwell To Arms" (1932). If that is true, then it can also be seen as a stepping stone to "The Americanization of Emily" (1964) — highlighting how changing American attitudes toward war have become gradually more cynical.

Seems like the "Emily" team — writers and director — might have been influenced by Sgt. Joe 'Pete' Peterson (Holden character), transposing Garner's Charlie Madison to be an updated version of same. 1932 > 1951 > 1964.

All three successfully integrate Romance and War, ably supporting the theme that Love is the stronger force. So why do we keep on making war?

The original story behind Force of Arms was written by Richard Tregaskis, war correspondent from World War II, best known for Guadalcanal Diary. Of course some would argue that Tregaskis borrowed a lot of the plot from the previous war that Ernest Hemingway chronicled in A Farewell to Arms.

Still it's a nice romantic story brought to life by the teaming of William Holden and Nancy Olson who did four films together back at this time. Nancy Olson in fact got an Oscar nomination in the Best Supporting Actress category for Sunset Boulevard which was their first film together.

After his company is relieved on the San Pietro front in the Italian theater, William Holden meets WAC Nancy Olson and a romance blooms. But it's back to the front, in fact Holden gets himself wounded twice during the course of Force of Arms.

Actual combat footage from the Italian campaign is used along with newsreels from the liberation of Rome where the climax takes place. There are good performances here also by Frank Lovejoy and Katherine Warren as the respective commanding officers of Holden and Olson.

This was Bill Holden's first great romantic role along the lines of Humphrey Bogart in Casablanca. It's a harbinger of what we would later get from him in films like The Bridges of Toko-Ri and Love Is A Many Splendored Thing.

It's a sadly neglected film, one of Bill Holden's better films and should not be missed.

I wasn't sure what to make of this at first since I had never heard of the movie before I saw it on Turner recently, but almost right off the bat this earnest war/romance drama shows it's mettle.

William Holden is a GI on a short leave in Naples during the Allied advance up Italy. He meets WAC Nancy Olson , and after a short resistance on her part they fall in love , more or less at first sight. I liked the dialog between the two of them during this 'courtship' , it is well written and though Holden plays the wisecracker he so often did in his roles, it seems natural in these scenes.

The rest of the film tracks their time in Italy, together and apart, as Holden returns to the front and faces the need to prove his courage and cool under fire.

The thing that made this movie stand out is the treatment of a war time in service romance that is neither played for laughs or pathos. It is slightly melodramatic at times, but appropriately so for the material.

One of the better films of this type I have seen.

Some have called this an updated version of "A Farewell to Arms," but if the time has been moved forward from World War I Italy to World War II Italy, the quality has also been moved down from "memorable" to "routine." There's really nothing much wrong with this production but there's little to distinguish it, either, and one sometimes gets the uncomfortable feeling that the death and destruction of the greatest war in human history is simply being used as the background for yet another boy-meets-girl story.

William Holden has a shower scene which shows he was still, at this point in his career, in his "hairy-chested" mode. Just a few years later, beginning with "Love Is a Many-Splendored Thing," he entered his "shaved chest" period.

Dick Wesson supplies some "comic relief" which is just as grating as his work in "Destination Moon."

I really liked this movie. I fast forwarded through the love scenes though. I am a Holden fan and I seem to like his snide comments he always seems to make. His comments are usually like "gallows humor". In times of stress everything seems to take on a different view or meaning. I also liked where Holden seems to exhibit PTSD. He talks about the horror of the battlefield and his men dying for no reason. I liked this because I thought the US Government did not want anything but us the good guys and the enemy the bad. Most war movies show us never getting hurt and the enemy all dying, What tipped me off was the word "San Pietro". John Huston made a movie called that and it was banned by the Government and not shown because it showed people actually getting killed. Lastly, all the equipment looked real and used in the real manner even down to the mail room! Usually I can find many errors in guns and ammo. Another good movie to watch is, "Pork Chop Hill" with Gregory Peck. You actually see men using body armor and guns and ammo used in the proper manner.