The Hook

A title card for 1963's The Hook makes an interesting distinction about war. Paraphrased a bit, it says that for war and all its major campaigns, violent battles, and conflict on such an epic scale, the actual art of war is a very personal thing that is based at the individual level. It is the individual doing the fighting. That's something that sounds incredibly obvious, but in terms of a successful anti-war movie, that idea is almost always present.

This little known Korean War movie has more or less been lost to the decades since 1963. Before it showed up on Turner Classic Movie's schedule in September, I had never even heard of it.  Because of its subject matter, it is pretty clear why it has been forgotten over the last six decades.  The story revolves around orders for three American GI's to murder their North Korean prisoner soon after capturing him. In other words, a story with the most obvious of anti-war messages. It doesn't always work with some holes in the plot, but the message comes through clearly without being overbearing.  Definitely a movie that deserves a better fate since its 1963 release.

Working to load barrels of fuel onto a ship as part of an American withdrawal, Sgt. Briscoe (Kirk Douglas) and two privates, Dennison (Robert Walker Jr.) and Hatchett (Nick Adams) are strafed by a North Korean plane, their commanding officer killed in the raid. The plane crashes near the ship they're loading, and Dennison swims out to save the wounded North Korean (Pancho Magalona). Moving out on the Finnish ship run by Captain Van Ryn (Nehemiah Persoff), the trio bring the wounded prisoner with, planning to turn him over to the authorities when they reach their base. Just hours into the voyage though, they receive a startling radio message. The base has been badly hit in a bombing raid, and all the North Korean prisoners were overrun and killed by the locals. The order is simple; execute the prisoner before they reach the base. The enemy is the enemy, but can these three do it?

As far as subject matter, 'Hook' is years ahead of its time, coming two years before the United States was even involved officially in Vietnam. Even the most naive among us can appreciate that brutal and horrific things are done in war, atrocities that are crimes against man. Often times, there are incidents that happen far from the battle as opposing sides meet as is the case here. That's what the story boils down to. All hatred and prejudices aside, the act is a war crime, out and out murder, no matter that they're doing what they're ordered to.  It is a talky movie, the three soldiers all battling with their inner struggles and personal morality about what they've been told to do. Acts like this have almost certainly been committed in war since the dawn of time, but does that make it any easier to handle? Not really. Death is death no matter how you cut it.

The individual face of the war comes across in the roles of the three soldiers, Douglas, Walker Jr., and Adams.  Looking for some sort of existential symbolism or meaning, Persoff's captain is even a bit of a God-like figure, watching from above as the situation deteriorates. Okay, enough with that mumbo-jumbo and deeper meanings. The performances keep the movie based, especially Douglas as Sgt. Briscoe, a 19-year Army vet a year away from retirement and his pension. As the highest ranking soldier, he is handed the unenviable task of carrying out the order, bullying his two men into the act. It's Douglas at his best, a brother/father-like figure looking out for their well-being balanced out with a manipulative, conniving way of getting things done. His monologue about a patrol gone bad on Guadalcanal in WWII is an actor showing how good he is at what he does. Both hero and villain, he makes Briscoe an interesting character, no doubt about it.

Some of my concern about 'Hook' was the casting of Walker Jr. and Adams alongside Douglas, fearing they would be overshadowed. That wasn't the case thankfully. Walker's Dennison is the smart, thinking soldier, questioning aloud what they're supposed to do. North Korean or not, their prisoner is a man, a father and a husband. He intends to fight Briscoe about the execution every step of the way. I think it would have been more interesting for Dennison's character if he wavered even a little about the orders, just for that added dimension, but he's resolute in his stance. Adams too does not disappoint, his Hatchett a diminutive soldier who Briscoe has a hold on. He starts to see the folly in his ways as he is pushed and pushed to do what he doesn't want to do. A Filipino actor who only starred in a handful of American movies, Magalona does much with a character that has no speaking lines, communicating his fear and terror with his eyes. It's a good part, one that could have been a throwaway piece, an idea more than a human being.

What prevents 'Hook' from being an anti-war classic is the ending, which I won't spoil here. As is, the ending works in George Seaton's film. It is effective with a touch of irony and hope for the future still there. The finale delivers a twist in that irony, going down a path I didn't see coming. Once the twist is revealed though, more -- much more -- could have been done to really slam home the anti-war ideas. There was potential for a shocking, startling, surprising ending that would have made this an even more memorable conclusion. As is so often the case, my issue is what could have been done. This ending does work, but it is a safer ending. Still, I very much enjoyed this movie. It has been wrongly forgotten and deserves more of a following or audience.

The Hook <---TCM trailer (1963): ***/****