Sahara

1943

Action / Drama / War

50
IMDb Rating 7.6 10 7,166

Synopsis


Downloaded 14,241 times
June 8, 2019

Director

Cast

Humphrey Bogart as Charlie Allnut
J. Carrol Naish as Giuseppe
Lloyd Bridges as Fred Clarkson
Peter Lawford as British Soldier
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
807.68 MB
1280*720
English
NR
23.976 fps
97 min
P/S N/A / N/A
1.54 GB
1920×1080
English
NR
23.976 fps
97 min
P/S N/A / N/A

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by bill-790 9 / 10 / 10

An excellent WWII movie

"Sahara" is interesting from several standpoints. First, it is an excellent drama, well acted and directed, with good production values. Second, it raises an interesting moral question. Third, it has implications regarding the main actor and his future movie career. "Sahara," the story of a rag-tag group of soldiers fleeing from Rommel's Afrika Korps in a US tank, is enjoyable throughout. The cast is fine, representing a number of nationalities and even races. I think this is one of Bogart's better acting jobs, and J. Carrol Naish, Lloyd Bridges, Rex Ingram, Dan Duryea, and the others are equally good. While this may be a propaganda film, it is no "our hero wipes out an enemy division without a scratch" potboiler. On the contrary, the decision made by Sgt. Joe Gunn (Bogart) to stay and fight a German regiment rather than heading for British lines is a desperate gamble little better than a suicide mission. This brings up my second point; the ethical question. St. Gunn gets the idea to stay at the oasis they have reached in order to fight and delay a German regiment in hopes that such a sacrifice may help the Allied cause. He must convince the others, and one or two do not go along without some persuading. "I don't mind fighting and dying," one says, "but this is pointless." Well, that's the issue. How easy it is to find reasons NOT to stay behind and fight! Makes me appreciate the plight of our soldiers on Bataan and Wake Island, who had no choice. But this little band does stay and fight, and the story hangs on their decision. My third point is a bit arcane, and has to do with Hollywood business practices of the 1940s. Bogart was, when this movie started production, about the biggest star in Hollywood. Remember, he had already made High Sierra," "The Maltese Falcon," and "Casablanca." Why then, did Warner Brothers lend him out to Columbia to do this picture? Columbia was still barely a second rank studio. What did they have to trade in return? Rita Hayworth? I don't think she made any films for Warners, but I may be wrong. Lastly, it's interesting to note that Bogart, when he started his own company (Santana Productions) in the late 40s, signed a releasing deal with Columbia. I guess he must have been impressed with Columbia while making this picture, as well as "Dead Reckoning" (1947). I strongly recommend "Sahara" to anyone who has not seen it. It's exciting action combined with interesting characterizations.

Reviewed by Kirasjeri 9 / 10 / 10

A Tough Gritty Desert War Movie

Bogart does well as an American tank commander early in WW II coming across some retreating British infantry. They later make a dramatic last stand against the attacking Germans. Two actors make this movie a standout. J. Carroll Naish was of Irish descent, and he never played an Irishman in his long and great career as an actor. Check his movies and look for his great performances. Here he is magnificent as a tormented and disillusioned Italian prisoner (a German ally) who has to fianlly decide if he'll fight with the Germans or stand with the Allies, who could have let him die in the desert. Rex Ingram was a fine black actor who here plays a Sudanese soldier in British colonial service. The depiction of a heroic black soldier was rare during World War Two (see my review of "Bataan"). He too was memorable. It's a fine film and worth catching whenever you can find it.

Reviewed by vitaleralphlouis 9 / 10 / 10

When Hollywood Used To Know How Good Movies Were Made

One thing to know about this enduring minor classic is that it was never included in the Harvard University based eggheaded revival of Bogart films. The super-brains there only recognized Warner-Bogart movies, never those made by Columbia; even though several of Bogart's best were Columbia Pictures and African Queen and Barefoot Contessa were United Artists. Columbia took a B-movie sized budget, a great story, excellent acting and made a classic which had a shelf-life in theaters and TV in excess of 40 years. The story was good enough to be remade as a western in 1953 called Last of the Comanchees. Two years ago, Hollywood used the same title (Sahara) to produce a huge budget color adventure movie (but with an altogether story). With unlimited resources and today's alleged high tech, Hollywood produced a mildly entertaining picture which had a shelf-life, not of 40 years, but way under 40 weeks. The Bogart SAHARA isn't easy to find these days, but have a look on eBay or request it from Turner Classics. Timeless, it won't disappoint even after 63 years.

Read more IMDb reviews

0 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment