A dedicated, decorated war veteran, Master Sergeant Callan, is posted in France in 1952. Finding a lack of discipline under the frequently drunk Captain, he takes charge in a tough, no-nonsense manner. But distracting the sergeant is a physical attraction to one of his men, Private Thomas Swanson, that seems at odds with everything in Callan's personality. He makes Swanson his orderly and befriends him socially, but behind his back scares off the private's girlfriend. Callan's confusion and depression grows and he begins to drink. Filled with self-loathing and unable to act on the natural attraction he feels for Swanson, Callan's affection festers into antagonism. He pushes Swanson constantly with verbal assaults and undeserved punishments. Oblivious to Callan's attraction to him, Swanson comes finally to feel enmity for his Master Sergeant. Eventually, unable to resist the urge, the sergeant attempts to kiss Swanson and is violently warded off. He turns up for morning formation hungover and is relieved f his duties. He goes off to a nearby woods alone, rifle in hand, and commits suicide.
I am not sure if the every first scene of the film where the Sergeant is shown to chase and strangle a young escaping Nazi has in some way connection to the way his eventual end in jungle happens. But it seemed too co-incidental to ignore. Back to the film, its obvious from the moment that the Sergeant lays his eyes on Thomas that he has a thing for him and I think part of it is also known to the young lad but he doesn't have a say since the Sergeant uses his position of power most. In todays times this would be considered completely inappropriate. It was interesting to see the lengths he would go to spend time with Thomas hoping to ignite some sense of love or passion for him, which is unlikely to ever happen. Both the leading actors do an amazing job of playing their roles. Sergeant as the no noises military head and Thomas Swanson as the young, tall and extremely handsome lad. The film was overall decent but in the larger scheme of things I missing out on what it really wants to say and the message it wants to drive through and this is my big issue with it. It was still interesting to see a perspective from the 60s on the simmering study of repressed homosexuality back in the day. (4.5/10)
Comments