the audience applauded

Good movie but grossly overrated

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Sorry to say this but, this movie would have rated much higher if a different lead was cast. Don't get me wrong this movie is very watchable. With Wayne & Bacall starring, Paul Fix supporting, good writing, solid acting by leads and bit players it had it all but one thing... John Wayne is out of character. This movie as I said before would probably have been rated at between 7.5 to a 9 if Robert Mitchum had not been fired from the lead role early in the picture. Since this movie was being produced by Wayne's fledgling BATJAC Productions, he was forced into the role by Warner Bros., saying they would pull the plug on distribution if he did not star. Too bad. I can easily see Kirk Douglas sending this over the top. Just think of his performance in the movie In Harms Way and you'll get the idea. Jimmy Stewart would have been great also. Think Harvey....see what I mean! If your a Wayne fan as am I, you'll scratch your head and wonder.....hmmmmmmmmm. Later Wayne would have had the clout to say no. I'll rate this at 7 paddles on the River-boat wheel.

"Blood Alley" details the story of a Chinese village trying to escape Maoist oppression during the 1950's. It is definitely anti-Communist in its theme and pro-West (United States) in showing the very common desire by those under Communist rule to escape that rule. The performances were okay, not memorable. The chemistry between Bacall and Wayne was okay, but not like Maureen O'Hara (whenever you saw Wayne and Ohara you honestly thought there was something between them). But there was chemistry, also shown later when Wayne starred opposite Bacall in "The Shootist". Basically, this is one of those movies where John Wayne played "John Wayne" – a remark Travolta made in "Get Shorty" referring to "El Dorado" and "Rio Bravo" about John Wayne movies. In some John Wayne movies, John Wayne showed his acting depth ('The Cowboys", "True Grit", "She Wore A Yellow Ribbon", "Fort Apache", "Stage Coach", "Red River"), some he just played "himself". This was one of them. That was not necessarily a bad thing: because the "himself" character was the stereotypical American Ideal of manhood, who is strong, independent, flawed, a man that loves liberty, and will fight to the death for the weak. That is the type of character that "Tom Wilder" played by Wayne in "Blood Alley".Since "Blood Alley"'s main theme is escape from a communist state: Communism is the "bad guy". So the movie must take the early portions of it to illustrate how bad the "Bad Guy" is. Once the escape takes place, then it is a classic chase movie with some good moments of suspense with rescue in the nick of time. The movie is uplifting and of course has a happy ending. The things that leave this movie open to criticism should be taken in context with 1955. Casting Paul Fix, Mike Mazurki, and Anita Ekburg as Chinese would be unthinkable today in the "uptight" period that we live in: I call it leftist Puritanism. But we must remember, there were not a lot of Asian leading men or women- and certainly not that many Chinese – as a matter of fact there are very few today if you think about it. So it is not strange to have Caucasians playing Chinese. One might laugh at having Anita Ekberg playing one, blond hair and all. What people also don't realize is not all Chinese nationals have the typical features that we consider Asian (the epicanthal folds or "slanted eyes"). I lived in China for many years, there are a large number of ethnic Russians from Inner Mongolia and they get extremely insulted if you call attention to the fact that they don't "look" Chinese. Furthermore, to the Chinese: casting a Japanese as a Chinese is far more offensive. Just ask a Mainland Chinese what they think of the Japanese. Casting based on the eyes is ignorance and arrogance of the American "thought police" who enforce this correctness. These "technical" issues with the movie that I saw are understandable and I place them with Derek Jacoby fulfilling the role of narrator in his cashmere ensemble right out of GQ in Henry V (Kenneth Branaugh). "Blood Alley" is a very good period piece to understand the fear and lines drawn between Communism and the Liberty found in the United States. To understand what really happened reading/watching histories that are produced 50 years later after never illustrates why people did what they did. This movie is not right-wing because Lauren Bacall was extremely liberal, but like most Democrats of the 1950's she was extremely ANTI-COMMUNIST and was a patriot like John Wayne: she wanted America to win. It was propaganda, like all movies are propaganda, because it tries to lead the viewer to a certain conclusion. If the director can't do this, he is a lousy story-teller. "Blood Alley" makes the following points: 1 Communism is bad. 2 Communists oppress their populations: True 3.People desired to leave Communism: True 4. Communists murder those who won't conform: True. The fact that you want the Chinese village to get away means William Wellman is good. "Blood Alley" was also allegorical. Because at this time, Hungary was in revolt and thousands of Hungarians were making their escape using the bridge at Andau. You really could not make a movie about escaping over a bridge because it would be boring. So "Blood Alley" was a morale building movie reminiscent of the movies made during World War 2 where Hollywood cooperated in the war against Nazism and all its evil. This movie was made during the Cold War with Hollywood at that time divided between avid Anti-Communists and Communist apologists. I have always been intrigued by the hypocrisy of liberals that wholeheartedly fought Nazism which was not really a threat against the United States, they really only threatened Europe, but dismissed Communism that was openly and passionately trying to overthrow the republican (not party) system of government in the United States and replace it with a socialistic Marxist/Leninist System. Communists had shown their willingness to be the aggressor already in Korea, Hungary, and Viet Nam. This movie was raising alarm bells. Strangely for all those who have this neutral view toward Communism, Communist countries had to put walls up to keep their people within their borders and employ trusted guards to shoot anyone trying to escape. But still with this reality, people tried to escape, because the value of freedom was worth the risk of death. They wanted freedom, and that meant leaving one political system to live under another – the American System. With the current political climate in the US where we have those who would like to change that system of Liberty to a Socialistic system with Marxist undertones, we should ponder the legacy of those people commemorated in "Blood Alley". "Better Dead than Red" was not just a cliché to some during the 1950's and now in the early 21st Century.

This film has an abrupt, jarring opening, even by 1950s B-Movie standards. The "chemistry" apparently sought between John Wayne and Lauren Bacall was a blatant effort to reprise 1951's Humphrey Bogart pairing with Katharine Hepburn in THE AFR!CAN QUEEN. But Bacall makes a second-rate Kate at best, while tagging the Duke as a third-string Bogie is a charitable description. Picture Sylvester Stallone and Talia Shire starring in a 1977 remake of BONNIE AND CLYDE, and you'll know what a misfire BLOOD ALLEY is. For a movie nearly two hours long, the close is just as off-putting and curt as the beginning. While Susu's pidgin English and the just off-camera attempted rape of Cathy Grainger (Bacall) by a Chinese soldier are quaint period touches, the real drama was in which of their friends Ronald Reagan, John Wayne, and Charlton Heston were ratting out to Joe McCarthy's U.S. Senate witch hunt around this time. If Bogie isn't the never-revealed key to the imaginary friend of BLOOD ALLEY's "hero" Captain Tom Wilder (Wayne), perhaps the drunken Senator Cheesehead IS?

really, a comment by nnnn45089191 is exactly what this movie is, Right-wing propaganda of the 50's Author: nnnn45089191 from NorwayMost of the views here are from western countries, where people had tunnel vision of what china was about in the 1950s. propaganda is a universal tool used by Germans, Japanese, Americans, Chinese, English, in fact all government in that chapter of earth's history.the movie didn't even try to depict the real environment in china, having westerners dressed in feudalism period Chinese costumes and speak cantonese (mandarine is the official Chinese language and cantonese is only spoken in one Chinese province - canton) is just hilarious. And it also shows how desperate the film producers are trying to convey the story, no matter how unprofessional the movie looks.and when the "Chinese navy" fired, the battleship officers were speaking cantonese too... and Chinese army had absolutely no such fire power in the 1950s. if you don't get the hang of this, try imagining this way, 1. American's war against the native indians, 2.a bunch of white Americans dressed like indians, speaking a minority Indian language poorly 3.indian army's fighter jet rains deathreally, the film makers have no idea what china really is and they clearly showed no intention of even trying to convey the true image... the whole story was a make up.u really need to ask, what is it that they want to achieve by making such a film.i think they just want to evilize the Chinese communist government (they may be or not be, now their people are manufacturing for the world), like what GW Bush did to the old iraq regime whom was once supported by the USA government itself.