I wish sometimes that IMDb had two ratings for each review--one for the technical quality of a movie and one for its watchability. HELL AND HIGH WATER is very, very watchable and enjoyable, though the film has several big shortcomings.
HELL AND HIGH WATER begins when there is evidence of nuclear testing going on in the Pacific. Who and where exactly and why this is occurring is unknown. In an odd move, a group of scientists have formed their own private investigating organization to look into the mystery. So, they pay to have a WWII vintage sub rehabbed and buy a crew--led by Richard Widmark as the skipper. Now where this money and organization came from is never explained in the least in the film--a rather big shortcoming--especially because for all any of the crew knows, this shadow organization is behind the nuclear testing (which they weren't).
Eventually, the sub is able to locate a secret base that is run by the Chinese Communists. On it, a fake B-29 bomber is waiting to take off--and drop a nuclear bomb in Korea or Manchuria in order to make the US look bad and start a new war. The final scene where the sub takes out the bomber is pretty exciting and possible as the bomber would be very vulnerable at take-off.
Let's talk about a few problems with the film. When Widmark is ready to take the ship out there is a GIANT cliché thrown into the plot. A top nuclear scientist and his young, sexy and brilliant assistant (Bella Darvi) accompanies him. The idea of a hot female scientist is such a bad cliché from the 1950s (in such films as THIS ISLAND EARTH). First, why couldn't it have been a man or an unattractive or unattached woman. Second, while this COULD have been a big step for feminism, in the end she is really just a piece of meat (albeit a very sexy one). Third, because it is a cliché, the entire crew behave like the wolf from a Tex Avery cartoon--even though they are just going to sea. Now if they'd been on duty for six months or longer, I might understand the panting wolf routine, but not in the case of this film.
Another problem about the film is one that might not be a serious one. Last time I checked, I was not a submariner or specialist in underwater warfare, but the idea of a ship without torpedoes fighting and sinking another sub by repeatedly ramming it seemed,...well,...stupid. It was tense and cool...but stupid. However, I actually am pretty good when it comes to aircraft and was surprised at how wrong the B-29 bomber looked in the film--like a model made by someone who had only briefly seen a B-29 and made it from memory. But, having a B-29 as a weapons delivery platform for a nuclear bomb DID make sense, as the Soviets "appropriated" several that landed in their territory during the later days of WWII and the Russians DID make their own knock-off (an exact copy) of this bomber. So the idea of the Chinese using such a bomber is plausible--just very unlikely.
The final silly cliché involves the nuclear scientist selflessly giving up his life to sneak onto the island with the bomber. He seemed to do this more because it was a cliché (thus allowing Widmark to live and supposedly have Darvi for his very own) than because it made logical sense. That's because only a few minutes earlier, the Doctor had argued against taking out the bomber--he wanted to rush back and report on what they'd seen. Now, he volunteers to be a commando! And, what really makes no sense is the idea of sending an old guy (with no military training) on such a super-duper important mission. Everything hinges on this old thumbless guy! Now although the story is very tough to believe and Darvi really has no reason to be in the film (apart from her boobs), the film is still well worth watching. It's one of these cases where you can really enjoy the film if you suspend your sense of disbelief. That's because the action is very good, there is a lot of tension and because although it's implausible, it's exciting and a wonderful "what if" scenario. Widmark, as usual, is great and the direction by Sam Fuller is excellent--though he is usually not a man for so many clichés.
HELL AND HIGH WATER begins when there is evidence of nuclear testing going on in the Pacific. Who and where exactly and why this is occurring is unknown. In an odd move, a group of scientists have formed their own private investigating organization to look into the mystery. So, they pay to have a WWII vintage sub rehabbed and buy a crew--led by Richard Widmark as the skipper. Now where this money and organization came from is never explained in the least in the film--a rather big shortcoming--especially because for all any of the crew knows, this shadow organization is behind the nuclear testing (which they weren't).
Eventually, the sub is able to locate a secret base that is run by the Chinese Communists. On it, a fake B-29 bomber is waiting to take off--and drop a nuclear bomb in Korea or Manchuria in order to make the US look bad and start a new war. The final scene where the sub takes out the bomber is pretty exciting and possible as the bomber would be very vulnerable at take-off.
Let's talk about a few problems with the film. When Widmark is ready to take the ship out there is a GIANT cliché thrown into the plot. A top nuclear scientist and his young, sexy and brilliant assistant (Bella Darvi) accompanies him. The idea of a hot female scientist is such a bad cliché from the 1950s (in such films as THIS ISLAND EARTH). First, why couldn't it have been a man or an unattractive or unattached woman. Second, while this COULD have been a big step for feminism, in the end she is really just a piece of meat (albeit a very sexy one). Third, because it is a cliché, the entire crew behave like the wolf from a Tex Avery cartoon--even though they are just going to sea. Now if they'd been on duty for six months or longer, I might understand the panting wolf routine, but not in the case of this film.
Another problem about the film is one that might not be a serious one. Last time I checked, I was not a submariner or specialist in underwater warfare, but the idea of a ship without torpedoes fighting and sinking another sub by repeatedly ramming it seemed,...well,...stupid. It was tense and cool...but stupid. However, I actually am pretty good when it comes to aircraft and was surprised at how wrong the B-29 bomber looked in the film--like a model made by someone who had only briefly seen a B-29 and made it from memory. But, having a B-29 as a weapons delivery platform for a nuclear bomb DID make sense, as the Soviets "appropriated" several that landed in their territory during the later days of WWII and the Russians DID make their own knock-off (an exact copy) of this bomber. So the idea of the Chinese using such a bomber is plausible--just very unlikely.
The final silly cliché involves the nuclear scientist selflessly giving up his life to sneak onto the island with the bomber. He seemed to do this more because it was a cliché (thus allowing Widmark to live and supposedly have Darvi for his very own) than because it made logical sense. That's because only a few minutes earlier, the Doctor had argued against taking out the bomber--he wanted to rush back and report on what they'd seen. Now, he volunteers to be a commando! And, what really makes no sense is the idea of sending an old guy (with no military training) on such a super-duper important mission. Everything hinges on this old thumbless guy! Now although the story is very tough to believe and Darvi really has no reason to be in the film (apart from her boobs), the film is still well worth watching. It's one of these cases where you can really enjoy the film if you suspend your sense of disbelief. That's because the action is very good, there is a lot of tension and because although it's implausible, it's exciting and a wonderful "what if" scenario. Widmark, as usual, is great and the direction by Sam Fuller is excellent--though he is usually not a man for so many clichés.