The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957) * * * *

Directed by:  David Lean

Starring:  Alec Guinness, William Holden, Sensue Hayakawa, Jack Hawkins

David Lean's The Bridge On The River Kwai is epic in its length and scope against a World War II backdrop, but really concentrates more on the motives of its characters.     On its surface, the film is about a Japanese POW camp needing to build a bridge across the river Kwai using reluctant POW's as the workforce.     The film's other plot involves the British army's plot to destroy the bridge, using an American soldier who miraculously escaped from the camp.      What makes The Bridge on the River Kwai so complex and fascinating are the actions of Col. Nicholson (Guinness) and camp Commander Saito (Hayakawa), both of whom are naturally enemies but through mutual respect decide to complete the bridge by the deadline.     But why would they tacitly decide to work together when their country's interests are opposed?   

It doesn't start out that way for the Colonel, who foolishly believes he is really in command of his men even though they are now residents of a Japanese POW camp in the middle of the Burmese jungle.     Saito, desperate to complete the bridge as tasked by his superiors, wants to use all available hands to help construct it, including British officers.     Col. Nicholson opposes this, citing the Geneva Convention and even providing a copy to Saito, who smacks him with it and throws him in "The Oven", an iron hotbox in the hot sun.     Nicholson stays true to his principles while Saito sees he is losing control of the POW's and will fail to meet the deadline.     What is the price Saito must pay if he fails to complete the bridge?    Suicide by harikari.

The British sabotage the construction at every turn, which leaves Saito in a quandary.   If he kills the POW's, he loses his workforce and the bridge won't be completed.    He needs Nicholson and makes concessions to ensure his cooperation.    Why would Nicholson care if Saito commits suicide?    What's in it for Nicholson if they complete the project?    Oddly, Nicholson assumes command of the project and whips the workforce into shape.    To the amazement of Saito and his underlings, Nicholson wants to build a proper bridge, using any resources at his disposal.    Nicholson says he wants to keep prisoner morale high, but a later speech reveals his true motives.      He wants to be remembered for leaving something behind that will validate his self-worth.     He wants to feel he is in charge of something.     He also makes sure his name is on the sign identifying the bridge for posterity.    What the Japanese plan to do with the bridge is immaterial to him. 

Alec Guinness won the Academy Award for Best Actor for this role.   It is rich and complex.    His Col. Nicholson is a quiet man who maintains stern control over his soldiers.    His rigidity in standing by his principles at first gains the respect of the men and Saito.    But when the threat of failure is upon him, Nicholson even commandeers men in the sick ward to help out.    By the time the bridge is completed, Nicholson is more concerned about his legacy than the war.   

I also enjoyed Hayakawa as Saito, a proud man who sadly realizes he is not the leader Nicholson is and seems content to commit harikari even if his bridge is completed on time.    He keeps his knife close at all times.     His mission is more to save his own skin than further the cause of his country.    William Holden as the escapee Shears is also one who bends a few rules to further his safety, but heroically leads the mission to destroy the bridge.     He, unlike Saito or Nicholson, realizes there are bigger issues at play than his own personal motives, but he does so at great personal sacrifice.  

Other than the gunfire and explosions in the final minutes of The Bridge on the River Kwai, World War II seems a million miles away for these people.    Saito and Nicholson are fighting their own personal wars, while Shears wants nothing more than to stay escaped from the Burmese jungle.    There is much carnage at the end of the film and we see that Nicholson is primarily concerned with the British destroying "his bridge" and thus the only thing that will live on long after him.     One of Nicholson's men surveys the damage and says, "Madness, this is madness."    What is madness?    The building of a bridge only to destroy it?   Or the fighting that goes on endlessly in the name of national agendas?    It's not likely anyone knows the answers, but there sure is a lot of destruction of not only property and lives, but hopes and dreams.