Sahara Commentary
Sahara as a movie was an entertaining work of fiction. As a piece of political propaganda, it entices some interesting American values. As an observer watching for signs of American propaganda, it was fairly obvious to see the lines and actions that were placed in the movie for that effect, but I could see how someone in 1943 might not catch the patriotic undertones presented. I did like the fact that even in this early (chronologically) film, minorities and foreigners were portrayed as equals to the American soldiers. Much of the action in the movie is portrayed in an all or nothing fashion, where no matter what obstacle is presented to them, they must give it their all and risk death at every corner to survive and keep their way of life intact. Civilian responsibility is lightly touched in the movie with the example of the Italian soldiers uncle working in the steel factory in Pennsylvania. The film does a good job of covering all of the six themes outline by the government by portraying the war as a struggle between 'good' and 'evil' with the 'evil' forces embodying many characteristics that comic book villains contain. I believe that the government pushes the dehumanizing of the enemy to try an garner more support for the war.
I think the film showed some moral consequences of fighting and dying, but I don't believe that they were effectively represented. I think the best example of this is in the Italian character. He was giving up much of what he loved at home to go out and fight for his country, even though he didn't embody the ideals that the leaders of his country were trying to promote. I think Humphrey Bogart's character, Joe Gunn, does a good job of embodying the hardships of war through the misery shown by the fact that he thinks that he has little to lose since he has no wife or children.
The film somewhat reflects the reality of the segregated makeup of the American forces, but somewhat goes against that by showing the allied African soldier being one of the heroes of the movie. It seems to me to be a very valuable main role, and not a supplemental role as I thought he would portray. I think the purpose of his inclusion in the movie, and the role he takes is to dually include much of the African-American audience, and promote the values of togetherness and equality that the Nazi soldier hates. I think the lack of women in the movie is to try and maximize the masculinity of the film, as I believe it is trying to pander more toward the male audience. I think it increases its persuasive purpose, but only for the male populace.
-Dominic Nemmers