Inchon Reviews

  • Jul 23, 2020

    You know a movie is gonna be bad when it warns that the events depicted in this fictional movie are fictional, but that's the least of the problems with the over-budget, over-directed, and overly long wet blanket war epic Inchon. The movie takes place during the Communist overthrow in Korea and the Battle of Inchon in 1950. It also throws in stories involving Barbara (Jacqueline Bassett) driving through South Korea with orphan children to meet her ex-husband Lt. Hallsworth (Ben Gazzara) and Douglas MacArthur (Laurence Olivier) setting up plans for battle and raiding a lighthouse to signal the battleships. I guess Terence Young was trying to channel David Lean with a giant cast of extras in grand sets and landscapes, but in Inchon, the story and subplots connect so little it feels more like a pilot for a 1950's TV show than a movie. However, the cornball melodrama, overabundance on pyrotechnic effects, and horrendous writing makes it more on par with the material for B-movies. More problems: the Korean invasion scenes tie very little to what's going on in the story, the battle sequences seem randomly scattered for no coherent reason, every extra overacts when blown up, and the love story is meaningless. Worst of all, when MacArthur showed up thirty minutes in, the movie seemed to jump ship on one story and steer focus to another, almost as if the screenwriter forgot who the main characters were and wanted to mimic Patton. Well to my knowledge, Laurence Olivier is no George C. Scott and Robin Moore and Laird Koenig are no Francis Ford Coppola and Edmund H. North, either. To compare Inchon to Michael Bay's Pearl Harbor would be an extraordinary insult, as Mr. Bay has more respect for explosions and knows how to keep his schlocky storylines consistently. Inchon, on the other hand, is a complete messy disaster from start to finish. (1 Corn Cob Pipe out of 5)

    You know a movie is gonna be bad when it warns that the events depicted in this fictional movie are fictional, but that's the least of the problems with the over-budget, over-directed, and overly long wet blanket war epic Inchon. The movie takes place during the Communist overthrow in Korea and the Battle of Inchon in 1950. It also throws in stories involving Barbara (Jacqueline Bassett) driving through South Korea with orphan children to meet her ex-husband Lt. Hallsworth (Ben Gazzara) and Douglas MacArthur (Laurence Olivier) setting up plans for battle and raiding a lighthouse to signal the battleships. I guess Terence Young was trying to channel David Lean with a giant cast of extras in grand sets and landscapes, but in Inchon, the story and subplots connect so little it feels more like a pilot for a 1950's TV show than a movie. However, the cornball melodrama, overabundance on pyrotechnic effects, and horrendous writing makes it more on par with the material for B-movies. More problems: the Korean invasion scenes tie very little to what's going on in the story, the battle sequences seem randomly scattered for no coherent reason, every extra overacts when blown up, and the love story is meaningless. Worst of all, when MacArthur showed up thirty minutes in, the movie seemed to jump ship on one story and steer focus to another, almost as if the screenwriter forgot who the main characters were and wanted to mimic Patton. Well to my knowledge, Laurence Olivier is no George C. Scott and Robin Moore and Laird Koenig are no Francis Ford Coppola and Edmund H. North, either. To compare Inchon to Michael Bay's Pearl Harbor would be an extraordinary insult, as Mr. Bay has more respect for explosions and knows how to keep his schlocky storylines consistently. Inchon, on the other hand, is a complete messy disaster from start to finish. (1 Corn Cob Pipe out of 5)

  • Nov 28, 2019

    Ironic, but a documentary about the behind the scenes of this pile of film, would be more interesting than 1981's Inchon!

    Ironic, but a documentary about the behind the scenes of this pile of film, would be more interesting than 1981's Inchon!

  • Dec 27, 2016

    Hell will freeze over before the DVD of this movie comes out.

    Hell will freeze over before the DVD of this movie comes out.

  • Jul 12, 2014

    Well,its horryfying stupid. The characters are boring,the plot is absurd,the dialogs are corny and.it´s poorly acted,it´spoorly directed and it´s poorly writed.Inchon is Boring and Stupid. It´s Worse than The Last Airbender.

    Well,its horryfying stupid. The characters are boring,the plot is absurd,the dialogs are corny and.it´s poorly acted,it´spoorly directed and it´s poorly writed.Inchon is Boring and Stupid. It´s Worse than The Last Airbender.

  • Jun 29, 2014

    Tedious and uninvolving, Young's tale of a key part of the Korean war is nothing short of slapdash. Nothing really fires. The all star cast are dull, the production values are cheap and tacky, and even the score by Jerry Goldsmith is more phoned in and lackluster than anything. And as for plot, 'Inchon' tries to balance a number of threads on top of the main invasion, and it just falls apart.

    Tedious and uninvolving, Young's tale of a key part of the Korean war is nothing short of slapdash. Nothing really fires. The all star cast are dull, the production values are cheap and tacky, and even the score by Jerry Goldsmith is more phoned in and lackluster than anything. And as for plot, 'Inchon' tries to balance a number of threads on top of the main invasion, and it just falls apart.

  • Alex r Super Reviewer
    Aug 29, 2013

    Terrence Young's Inchon has had the reputation of being one of the worst films ever made in the history of the medium. Is this movie as bad as its reputation suggests, it's not, but it is a mediocre war film with below average performances. The film is quite inaccurate and is dull and boring. This could have been a better film, one that should have been exciting and action packed. Inchon was a great success during the Korean War. I think this as a poor effort in telling of this legendary feat of military strategy. The acting is bland, and no one really stands out. This had the potential of being a grand war film by the likes of Patton, Saving Private Ryan and other WWII epics. Unfortunately it flopped big time, and you can clearly see why. The script is lacking of effective ideas to really make it a stand out film, and the cast seem bored with the material. The Inchon landing was impressive and the story behind Douglas MacArthur's dedication of his plan is truly legendary. In the movie, the invasion is quite exciting, and it stands out as the best thing about this film. The film overall has little to none interesting content, and it's a great shame because this should have been a classic. However it is remembered for only one thing, that it is among the biggest of cinema's flops. Inchon is a misfire, but like I said, the invasion sequence is entertaining, and the part of the movie where it picks up. However it's too little too late, and it doesn't make this one worth checking out. Go into this one expecting nothing remarkable. In the long run, this picture is forgettable.

    Terrence Young's Inchon has had the reputation of being one of the worst films ever made in the history of the medium. Is this movie as bad as its reputation suggests, it's not, but it is a mediocre war film with below average performances. The film is quite inaccurate and is dull and boring. This could have been a better film, one that should have been exciting and action packed. Inchon was a great success during the Korean War. I think this as a poor effort in telling of this legendary feat of military strategy. The acting is bland, and no one really stands out. This had the potential of being a grand war film by the likes of Patton, Saving Private Ryan and other WWII epics. Unfortunately it flopped big time, and you can clearly see why. The script is lacking of effective ideas to really make it a stand out film, and the cast seem bored with the material. The Inchon landing was impressive and the story behind Douglas MacArthur's dedication of his plan is truly legendary. In the movie, the invasion is quite exciting, and it stands out as the best thing about this film. The film overall has little to none interesting content, and it's a great shame because this should have been a classic. However it is remembered for only one thing, that it is among the biggest of cinema's flops. Inchon is a misfire, but like I said, the invasion sequence is entertaining, and the part of the movie where it picks up. However it's too little too late, and it doesn't make this one worth checking out. Go into this one expecting nothing remarkable. In the long run, this picture is forgettable.

  • Jun 06, 2013

    I Don't Like Critically Panned Films.

    I Don't Like Critically Panned Films.

  • May 09, 2013

    Inchon: The Unification Church's Battlefield Earth. Scientology member John Travolta's epic science fiction film Battlefield Earth based on the novel of scientology founder L.Ron Hubbard, is notorious for being a bad movie and a box office flop. Battlefield Earth is said to be John Travolta's pet project to glorify L.Ron Hubbard. It was not the first time an epic film was produced with the involvement of believers of a controversial religion. In 1981 the Korean war movie Inchon was released. Directed by Terence Young it deals with the battle of Inchon, a battle that is considered to be the turning point of the Korean war. The film was financed by Sun Myung Moon of the notorious anti-communist christian organisation the Unification Church, through one of his companies One Way Productions. Moon not only financed the movie but also served as a special consultant. Inchon had budget of $ 46.000.000 and starred among others Laurence Olivier as general Douglas MacArthur and Jacqueline Bisset as a United States Major's wife who has to flee from Korean village when the communists invade while she is shopping for furniture. Although imdb doesn't state any box office revenue, the movie is considered to be a flop. Of course there are plenty of differences between Battlefield Earth and Inchon. Inchon is based on a true historical battle and Battlefield Earth is not. Also the message of Inchon is much clearer than in Scientology. Which could be because Inchon had a more direct involvement of the church than Battlefield Earth, which is more L.Ron Hubbard fanfiction than a propaganda piece. Although it lacks the gore like in movies as Men Behind The Sun, it shows the communists of North Korea clearly behaving as the bad guys. In Battlefield Earth it is not clear, what the story has to do with the specifics of the Scientology religion. Is it as bad? I have to admit that I didn't think Battlefield Earth wasn't that bad. Although I'm not a hardcore science fiction fan and/or a continuity error fundamentalist. Some aspects of Battlefield Earth were unrealistic, but it didn't matter much to the story. A science fiction film for me is a form of entertainment not something that has to be scientific accurate. As for Inchon: The entertainment factor really under the slow pace of the story. The subplot isn't intresting or enjoyable and doesn't add anything to the story. I think is supposed to be a heart warming story where an American woman safes 5 cute little asian kids. The part of the movies where General MacArthur lays out his plans are very pretentious and bombastic "The plan will succeed because God is on our side". The action scenes are alright, although it uses a lot of stock footage. But don't expect any blatant scenes like the more obvious blatant propaganda movies like Men Behind The Sun: The Rape of Nanking. As for the historic value. It still isn't clear to me how the battle of Inchon was one. Something with a white american and a black american stabbing an North Korean watch soldier to death and rigging a light house. As a propaganda piece? The movie doesn't really appeal to the emotions of the viewer. For the rest, it depicts the North Korean as the bad guys. But I would consider that most of the target audience already saw the North Koreans as the bad guys. The war crimes depicted in the movie are pretty random: north korean soldiers shooting in a crowd of civilians. Which is of course bad, but the crowd is too anonymous to feel emition about them.

    Inchon: The Unification Church's Battlefield Earth. Scientology member John Travolta's epic science fiction film Battlefield Earth based on the novel of scientology founder L.Ron Hubbard, is notorious for being a bad movie and a box office flop. Battlefield Earth is said to be John Travolta's pet project to glorify L.Ron Hubbard. It was not the first time an epic film was produced with the involvement of believers of a controversial religion. In 1981 the Korean war movie Inchon was released. Directed by Terence Young it deals with the battle of Inchon, a battle that is considered to be the turning point of the Korean war. The film was financed by Sun Myung Moon of the notorious anti-communist christian organisation the Unification Church, through one of his companies One Way Productions. Moon not only financed the movie but also served as a special consultant. Inchon had budget of $ 46.000.000 and starred among others Laurence Olivier as general Douglas MacArthur and Jacqueline Bisset as a United States Major's wife who has to flee from Korean village when the communists invade while she is shopping for furniture. Although imdb doesn't state any box office revenue, the movie is considered to be a flop. Of course there are plenty of differences between Battlefield Earth and Inchon. Inchon is based on a true historical battle and Battlefield Earth is not. Also the message of Inchon is much clearer than in Scientology. Which could be because Inchon had a more direct involvement of the church than Battlefield Earth, which is more L.Ron Hubbard fanfiction than a propaganda piece. Although it lacks the gore like in movies as Men Behind The Sun, it shows the communists of North Korea clearly behaving as the bad guys. In Battlefield Earth it is not clear, what the story has to do with the specifics of the Scientology religion. Is it as bad? I have to admit that I didn't think Battlefield Earth wasn't that bad. Although I'm not a hardcore science fiction fan and/or a continuity error fundamentalist. Some aspects of Battlefield Earth were unrealistic, but it didn't matter much to the story. A science fiction film for me is a form of entertainment not something that has to be scientific accurate. As for Inchon: The entertainment factor really under the slow pace of the story. The subplot isn't intresting or enjoyable and doesn't add anything to the story. I think is supposed to be a heart warming story where an American woman safes 5 cute little asian kids. The part of the movies where General MacArthur lays out his plans are very pretentious and bombastic "The plan will succeed because God is on our side". The action scenes are alright, although it uses a lot of stock footage. But don't expect any blatant scenes like the more obvious blatant propaganda movies like Men Behind The Sun: The Rape of Nanking. As for the historic value. It still isn't clear to me how the battle of Inchon was one. Something with a white american and a black american stabbing an North Korean watch soldier to death and rigging a light house. As a propaganda piece? The movie doesn't really appeal to the emotions of the viewer. For the rest, it depicts the North Korean as the bad guys. But I would consider that most of the target audience already saw the North Koreans as the bad guys. The war crimes depicted in the movie are pretty random: north korean soldiers shooting in a crowd of civilians. Which is of course bad, but the crowd is too anonymous to feel emition about them.

  • Apr 08, 2013

    It's like a ridiculous history lesson, told by a loud, uninterested history teacher.

    It's like a ridiculous history lesson, told by a loud, uninterested history teacher.

  • Mar 28, 2013

    Inchon is too good looking in it's many battle sequences to be considered one of the worst films ever made, but considering the misappropriated budget overruns reminiscent of Apocalpyse Now!, yet resulting in a bigger flop than Heaven's Gate, it's easy to see why some would consider it that bad. Of course, at least Inchon has plenty of good looking battle sequences which in honesty is one of the many reasons i watch war films. I mean, the general quality of the war scenes is just top notch and is exactly where the massive budget went into, and it comes off looking mostly very good. The musical score is also very good. On the largely negative side, Laurence Olivier gives his worst performance yet in a disturbingly unemotional role, considering he's in a war setting and considered one of the all time greatest male actors. I mean, his performance wasn't as bad as the ones in Pearl Harbour, but Laurence Olivier's emotionless and poorly delivered monologue when General Douglas MacArthur is at the lighthouse summarises the weakness his role in Inchon. The surrounding drama in Inchon is just poorly delivered and it's intention to explore how it affected various characters is a promise not kept due to the major focus on the war over any characters and so the intention becomes all too forgettable. It's also obvious that Inchon struggles to tell it's story because the editors have titles imposed on the screen to clarify just what's going on, and in the end we actually don't know. Inchon also has complicated cinematography, terrible audio quality and poor lighting. Plus, eventually it just becomes boring and tedious to watch. But i've never seen a korean war film in my life, and although it only approrpiated the battle sequences properly, it was definetely interesting to see and miles away from being as horrible as so many critics claim it to be.

    Inchon is too good looking in it's many battle sequences to be considered one of the worst films ever made, but considering the misappropriated budget overruns reminiscent of Apocalpyse Now!, yet resulting in a bigger flop than Heaven's Gate, it's easy to see why some would consider it that bad. Of course, at least Inchon has plenty of good looking battle sequences which in honesty is one of the many reasons i watch war films. I mean, the general quality of the war scenes is just top notch and is exactly where the massive budget went into, and it comes off looking mostly very good. The musical score is also very good. On the largely negative side, Laurence Olivier gives his worst performance yet in a disturbingly unemotional role, considering he's in a war setting and considered one of the all time greatest male actors. I mean, his performance wasn't as bad as the ones in Pearl Harbour, but Laurence Olivier's emotionless and poorly delivered monologue when General Douglas MacArthur is at the lighthouse summarises the weakness his role in Inchon. The surrounding drama in Inchon is just poorly delivered and it's intention to explore how it affected various characters is a promise not kept due to the major focus on the war over any characters and so the intention becomes all too forgettable. It's also obvious that Inchon struggles to tell it's story because the editors have titles imposed on the screen to clarify just what's going on, and in the end we actually don't know. Inchon also has complicated cinematography, terrible audio quality and poor lighting. Plus, eventually it just becomes boring and tedious to watch. But i've never seen a korean war film in my life, and although it only approrpiated the battle sequences properly, it was definetely interesting to see and miles away from being as horrible as so many critics claim it to be.