elvircorhodzic THE SAND PEBBLES is an adventurous war drama that, in a fascinating way, shows a confusion of an unstable society towards an external symbol of prejudice and an internal growth of nationalist revolution. The environment, which is a kind of collision of the culture and the traditions blended with poverty and ignorance, is fascinating. The photography is very impressive. The story shows an unbalanced relation between rebellious and responsible characters, which are exposed to impending, but shocking, events. It is based on the novel of the same name by Richard McKenna.In 1926, as China teeters on the edge of political revolution in the midst of a civil war, the USS San Pablo, is ordered to patrol the Yangtze River to represent and protect American interests. The ship is nicknamed the "Sand Pebble" and its sailors "Sand Pebbles". The new crew member is Machinist's Mate 1st Class Jake Holman. Because he takes an interest in mechanical work, Holman involves himself directly in the operation and maintenance of the ship's engine. As a result, the chief engine room coolie, Chien, is insulted. Holman also earns the antipathy of most of his fellow sailors. He does become close friends with one seasoned, sensitive seaman, Frenchy. A stern but inexperienced commanding officer Captain Collins frequently drills his charges, unsure what else to do. Holman's methods and his empathy for the Chinese population leads to frequent clashes. When Frenchy dies from a disease, Holman has found himself, protecting Frenchy's pregnant wife, at the center of a political scandal...This is the story of the anger, bitterness, reluctance and non-acceptance. The direction is excellent, the atmosphere is dark, while the plots are extremely turbulent. Well, there are present a kind of ironic attitudes, particularly in the case of political turmoil or, to say, in a case of rescue nationals who do not want to be saved. Of course, that irony can not be effective without a well-known inferiority, arrogance and hypocrisy. In such relations, we do not need a hero.Steve McQueen as Jake Holman is somewhat desperate and closed character, who has no confidence in his superiors and a common mission. He is an engineer, who does his job very well, takes care of his only friend, and run away from love, so as not to hurt a lovely missionary.Richard Crenna as Lieutenant Collins is a sharp and stubborn captain, who does not have enough self-confidence. Richard Attenborough as Frenchy Burgoyne is a sailor who tries to plant a life where the world is falling apart. Marayat Andriane as Maily is a touch of an exotic, who is associated with her cruel fate in an uncompromising society. Candice Bergen as Shirley Eckert is a beautiful missionary who gives love and kindness, and in return receives a war.

grantss Great performance by Steve McQueen offset by unfocused, badly paced, meandering plot.1926. China is in the middle of a revolution. US, British and French gunboats patrol the rivers, but are meant to be neutral in the conflict, though this does not stop them from being attacked. Onto one such US gunboat, the USS San Pablo ("Sand Pebble" to its crew) steps Petty Officer Jake Holman, newly-appointed chief engineer.Not your typical Steve McQueen movie. For the most part this is more a human drama than an action movie. McQueen here is more an anti-hero than a hero, and displays a rare sensitivity and vulnerability in his performance.The performance garnered McQueen his one and only Oscar nomination. Remember that at the next trivia night!The script, however, undermines his efforts. For the first two hours or so it meanders without any real point. Even worse, it is quite schmaltzy and trite. After a point the pace lifts dramatically and you feel that at last the movie has found its direction. This is then all undone by the last few scenes where we have naive idealism (that seemed to come from nowhere), idealism shown up (so, which side is the writer on?), implausible gung-ho military tactics and a very unoriginal, predictable and conventional conclusion. Overall, it's okay, though quite uneven, especially in the pacing and the message.

classicsoncall "The Sand Pebbles" is the film that cemented Steve McQueen's status as a leading man in Hollywood, one in which his character is the embodiment of a loner, a rebel at odds with himself and his environment. His portrayal is so effective because it's grounded in his own upbringing. Abandoned by a self absorbed father at the age of four months, and with an alcoholic mother who had little time for him, McQueen was raised by a succession of relatives and eventually wound up in a reform school. His early bitterness with the world is reflected in his performance as Jake Holman, more at home with inanimate objects than with human beings. He finds comfort in the machine room of the San Pablo, a naval gunboat patrolling the Yangtze River in 1926 China.There's a telling moment in the movie that's quite bittersweet; it's when Holman buys a caged bird from a street vendor for missionary Shirley Eckert (Candice Bergen). Holman explains that the bird is meant to be freed from it's cage. As Miss Eckert opens the door of the cage releasing the bird, it's gone in an instant, and the viewer is visually confronted with the notion of freedom and what it might mean to the population of 1920's China, a country of factions in a period of upheaval trying to find a way to unite.Through it all, the mission of the San Pablo is to remain neutral under the supervision of Captain Collins (Richard Crenna), a no nonsense commander who takes his duty seriously, and experiences a moment of personal crisis after he faces down both his own men and Chinese nationalists who demand that he turn Holman over to them following an incident on the mainland. It's at this point in the film that motivations and actions of the crew become a bit muddled to my thinking, as the crew of the San Pablo in turn defy the Captain, and then completely submit to his authority without further consequence. This was a confusing aspect of the story for me.Shot entirely in Taiwan, the making of the film was plagued with problems related to weather and equipment loss, extending the original eighty day filming schedule to seven months. The re-creation of the San Pablo into a 1920's era gunboat cost two hundred fifty thousand dollars, and what's fascinating to me was the way it was made to look as a worn out, dilapidated rust bucket. "The Sand Pebbles" went on to garner a fist full of Oscar nominations including Best Picture and Best Actor for McQueen, who lost out to Paul Scofield in "A Man For All Seasons". It's one of those pictures that when viewed today in relation to it's peers of the day, it becomes apparent that the major Academy Awards for that year went to the wrong movies.

zabokrugby8 This film, is not about politics, global or otherwise. It's not even concerned with the plight of the Chinese in their indebted servitude at the turn of the 20th century. Nor does it make a good case for or against the expansionist policies (some say 'gun boat diplomacy') of the new emerging world power: the United States of America. By the way, and maybe out of pure happenstance romanticism does make some fanciful suggestions in the plot. However, its inclusion is not done in any meaningful 'chick flic' sort of way. Thank Wise for that!Yes, those themes do resonant in Robert Wise's 'Sand Pebbles'. On careful viewing one would detect, I'd think, that the aforementioned are merely sub-themes; those in aggregate have all been reduced to doleful subterfuge of a much larger, poignant message: adventurism. In today's modern lingo that equates to: 'Exceptionalism'. And yes, I'm talking the American Brand: The kind of action films that Hollywood studios produced back then. And by way of clever, and not so subtle scripts the swagger of the those heroes were all induced into our culture.And who better represents the iconic 'cowboy' so fully inculcated in the American psyche since General Custer's halcyon filled though fateful raid along the Apache trails in the hunt for Geronimo, other than Steve McQueen. Moreover, it seems that since time immemorial, dating back even before the birth of Sparta, there would emerge a character, with such bravado and with universal appeal that males from every creed, race and historical epoch would try to emulate; the one possible sole exception was: Alexander the Great. Maybe I overshot... However, even the world's first hallowed conqueror would doff his colorful, plume adorned helmet after having experienced just one McQueen performance on the silver screen. I'm certain of this, if...By all accounts, this film really is a dedication. Call it a celebration. At its core, the entire focused lens is on Steve McQueen. Well, as far as he can fill out the Jake Holman main character. McQueen, not only lends his lean flesh, and right from the opening scene the real man's actor flexes his muscles; and in the process he adorns the ordinary Navy midshipman with layer upon layer of all the right stuff.Glorious stuff that heroes are made of: grace, make that courage under pressure, the willingness to act out of conviction. His 'I do give a damn' idealism is always on display. Foremost, McQueen as Holman, and always without hesitation backs the under dog even if that dog's form comes as a lowly 'coolie'; and at the risk of being ostracized by one's own peer group.Throughout the film, McQueen's rendition of the Jake Holman 'loner' persona was a joy to behold. His on screen performance was Oscar worthy. He alone is the film's tour de force. Why he didn't win one remains an enigma? I'm sure other McQueen fans share my same sentiments though also in disappointment. Because, in cinema, there is no better male thespian when it comes to handling props. Done correctly, a good prop man can give any screen shot the particular esoteric emphasis the director seeks; even to steal the spotlight. Be it staring down the barrel of a carbine after sighting his target or with a sturdy spanner at the ready in his grease stained hands, while listening attentively to the diesel engine for valve lash or to detect a worn main bearing on the U.S.S. San Pablo's refitted crankshaft, no one actor, past or present, is more adroit at getting his point across; and without sayin a word.Now that's exclusively Steve McQueen territory. And over the years, even the decades, since the Sand Pebbles release in 1966, so many have tried. However, the usurpers all failed. And in misery they all missed their mark. I'm not surprised. I'll even go out on the limb: not one of the current crop even ranks as a contender. And none will ever attain the mantle of success that Steve McQueen enjoyed while playing the strong, silent types. Maybe that's cinematic justice...