Men Must Fight
Men Must Fight
| 17 February 1933 (USA)
Men Must Fight Trailers

Prophetic tale of a mother in 1940 trying to keep her son out of war.

Reviews
Doomtomylo a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.
filippaberry84 I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.
Stephan Hammond It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,
Celia A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.
GManfred Old-fashioned movie of the kind no longer made. It is filmed like a stage play, which it was before brought to the screen by MGM. It is Pre-code, but there is nothing salacious or untoward in the screenplay which would raise objections. It is about a woman who raises her son to be a pacifist after her lover (his father) is killed in WW I. She marries a man who knows her secret, and who becomes adjutant to the Sec'y. of State. As the picture draws on the situation comes to a head with an agreeable resolution.The characters are hyperbolic and this story would never go over with contemporary audiences as illustrated here, especially the story's preachy message. It is saved by skillful acting performances and by the introduction of some glimpses into the future; the film uses a primitive form of TV, but it is used only in telephone conversations. Additionally, the writer has correctly foretold the coming of WWII almost to the year. An interesting and absorbing movie to watch and reflect on how far motion pictures have come in 85 years.
LeonLouisRicci Well Acted Prognostication and Warning About the Next "Great War". An Even Handed Dual Purpose Picture that Tries and Mostly Succeeds to Have it Both Ways.The Movie Starts in the Middle of WWI and Sets Up the Illegitimate Relationship of a Nurse and a Flyer Before it Leaps to 1940 and then Sets the Stage for the Beginning of WWII (remember, the Film was made in 1933) and the Clash Between Pacifists and Patriots.Noble and Notable as a Glimpse Into a Possible Future that Really Did Happen. The Film Also Manages to Foreshadow a Few Technological Advancements. Poison Gas was the Contemporary Horror and the Scariest Watch Weapon of the Period and it is Included Here Quite Forcefully. The Battle Scenes that Take Place Above the Air and In New York City are Chilling.Some May Consider the Ending a Lean Toward Pro-War, but there is Enough Anti-War Sentiment Throughout to Make This a "Fair and Balanced" Contrast of Philosophies. A Little Known Film that is a Gem of its Kind and is an Undiscovered, Utterly Thought Provoking Exercise of its Time and Any Time for that Matter.
Chung Mo A strange combination of political foresight, a moral philosophy debate and unchecked patriotic jingoism. This isn't a great dramatic film for a lot of reasons but is a great thought provoker. This film should be viewed in high schools and colleges precisely because it takes both side of the issue so strongly. For example, while the script blames the mother for making her son into a pacifist and goes about celebrating the men who go to a certain death defending their country, it lets the pacifist grandmother have the final word in the movie. The foresight about Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan's war plans is very chilling. It's also interesting that this was around the start of the US pacifist movement that some say was partially financed by Nazi Germany to keep the US out of their way.While the film is done in that creaky early thirties acting style, the script gives the characters quite a bit of nuance. By the end you can't tell what side the filmmakers were on. Almost all of the intelligent quotes come out of the pacifists but the US is attacked and thousands die because of them. The anti-pacifists frequently come off as very violent and crude. Triumphant military music plays when the troops march out and fly off.This film should be seen with the more entertaining but similar "Things To Come"Some technical notes: the sound is very bad at points during the last ten minutes on the TCM print which I assume came from the MGM vault. The destruction of the Empire State Building, which is very disturbing to look at these days, was ridiculous. It would have taken much more then the one dinky bomb that came off the enemy bi-plane.
Alan J. Jacobs The future (1940) as seen from the vantage point of 1933. A movie about preparedness for war, the main characters are woman who became a pacifist after her beau died in WWI; her husband, the Secretary of State, a pacifist who turns hawk when war is imminent; her son, also a pacifist, who disappoints his stepfather by refusing to use his knowledge of chemistry to create better poison gases ("the weapon of the future"); the boy's fiance, who refuses to continue the engagement because the boy won't join in the war effort; a dotty pacifist grandma; and Hedda Hopper as the girl's hawkish mom.With a bizarre cast of characters like this, you can just imagine the plot. It takes the destruction of the Brooklyn Bridge and the Empire State Building, plus the revelation that his real father was a war hero, plus the abandonment by his stepfather, to make the pacifist son realize that he must fight, and likely die (as the enemy, Eurasia, has already invaded New York and seems to be equipped with deadly poison gas).This is a gem, and thank god we have oddball cable stations that show such stuff in the middle of the night. It is a movie about patriotism that exalts ambivalence, which is the strongest feeling that most of us possess. Although ultimately the movie comes down on the side of the fighters ("Men Must Fight"), the notion that it would be better for all nations (led by the world's mothers) to refuse to go to war is a major theme of the movie. It is mildly based on Lysistrata.The sci-fi elements stand out as particularly amusing from the vantage point of 2003: both television and picture phones are the norm, but nothing else (and especially the grand old prop planes) is the least bit modern. The prediction that whoever controls poison gas controls the world is in line with the misguided Sadaam-aphobia of our own decade.For any number of reasons, this flick is well worth watching.