The Hook (1963)

Fantastic!

Don't listen to the negative reviews

The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Copyright 31 December 1962 by Perlberg-Seaton Productions. Released through Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. U.S. release: 16 January 1963. New York opening simultaneously at the Embassy 46th Street and the Kips Bay theaters: 15 February 1963. U.K. release: 9 June 1963. 5 reels. 8,794 feet. 98 minutes.SYNOPSIS: To transport a dangerously high-octane plane fuel from an abandoned airstrip on a Korean island, is the mission of a four-man navy team, whose base is low on fuel. COMMENT: An unusually talkative and pretentious film from M-G-M, usually the home of slap-happy escapist entertainment. There's hardly enough action for a half-hour TV serial. For the rest of the time, the three principals, led by Kirk Douglas, who is the chief culprit, just stand about yakking on the moral dilemmas of war. True, the few action spots are excitingly handled, but the rest of the film is both stupefying and routine. It is also cluttered with lots of unnecessary close-ups — especially of Mr. Douglas. A bit of location filming helps, but otherwise production values and credits are well below M-G-M's usual slick standard.

I enjoy watching movies and will most often make a selection because of the actors, then maybe because of the theme, or occasionally because of a recommendation. "The Hook" is a movie that I had never heard of, so seeing Kirk Douglas on the cover is what hooked me for this war movie. Also Robert Walker Jr is someone that I first saw in TV's _"Star Trek" (1966) {Charlie X (#1.2)}_ (qv) playing a 17yr boy, so what would he be like in a movie produced 3 years earlier.The opening of this movie includes "This is a story of men in war, not men at war. And the two are not the same." To understand my view, I am a baby-boomer who has never served in the military, but I have known many who have served. Most of these men don't really talk about their experiences, so I often wonder if my views on war movies would be very different of those people who have served. My preference would be that countries would not be at war, but regardless of this I believe we need to support those who chose to serve in the roles in which they are assigned."The Hook" is a title that showed no relevance before I watched the movie, and I never did catch. Is this an anti-war movie, or a personal interaction story, or war conflict drama, and this question repeats itself for 90 minutes. Regardless the movie itself is compelling. We are engaged with three surviving servicemen vacating a military post upon a 'neutral' merchant vessel, plus an enemy retrieved after he has bailed from his failing aircraft. Your journey is to imagine your response to their scenarios. Would you have rescued the enemy at all? How would you treat him on this merchant ship? Just imagine how you would respond to engaging an enemy on the battlefield; how is it different or the same, across an eating table? Kirk Douglas, Robert Walked, and Nick Adams are the enlisted men facing these scenarios.I enjoyed this movie, in spite of moments of "I wouldn't do that!". The movie is a must for Kirk Douglas fans, and highly recommended for anyone interested in war movies. I don't know if actual enlisted people would behave this way, but "The Hook" is wonderfully acted and does not need the tonnage of special effects that are today's production norms.

For fans of the taut and psychologically grueling and philosophically provocative filmed one-act play, The Hook is right in the class of Lifeboat, The Petrified Forest, Obsession, The Desperate Hours, 12 Angry Men, and Time Limit -- all among my personal favorite movies. The movie hinges on one dilemma: What does a military man do when given a direct order from a Commanding Officer to kill an unarmed POW in cold blood? The questions of right and wrong are further blurred by the fact they are informed that all the other soldiers in the unit have all been wiped out by a brutal North Korean attack. Aboard a friendly vessel en route to reconnoiter with another fighting division, a Sergeant (Kirk Douglas), Corporal (Nick Adams), and Private (Robert Walker Jr.) have two days to dispose of the prisoner or disobey a direct order. For his part, the prisoner shows every sign of singlemindedly waiting for an opening to escape. He speaks no English and only one of the three speaks even a few words of Korean. The Sergeant orders each subordinate, in turn, to execute the prisoner, but they are both quite conflicted also. Kirk Douglas is perfectly cast as the tough-as-nails-on-the-outside-Sergeant Briscoe. But, Nick Adams truly steals the movie as the Corporal who nearly relinquishes his humanity trying desperately to support his Sergeant. Walker gives a solid if unremarkable performance as the Private that Briscoe relentlessly tries to bully into executing his dirty work. That's all of it. So, if you are looking for a war movie with lots of action and visual effects, look elsewhere. But, if you wish to look into the souls of three enlisted men faced with Hobson's choices within an unrelenting pressure cooker, this fast-moving and well-acted psychological study will haunt you for the rest of your film-going life. I give it 10/10 for its genre.

Kirk Douglas runs the gamut of emotion from about A to C, and most of the rest of the performances are similarly limited. In other words, some better actors would have made this a better picture. The most convincing performance comes from Enrique Mangalona as the POW, who, speaking no English, is almost silent throughout.It's by no means action-packed. The action all takes place on board a neutral ship, on which three US servicemen wrestle with their consciences which get in the way of their murdering a Korean POW.It's a psychological think-piece, but it's tense and quite involving. It's not in the class of Twelve Angry Men, but it's that sort of genre.Not worth staying in for, or renting the video, but very likely better than the crud on the other channels, given that it's most likely to be shown as a space filler in the small hours.