I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

You won't be disappointed!

I'll tell you why so serious

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

It's rare to the point of nearly impossible to find someone who fights in a war to be truly pro-war. So, when the phrase "anti-war" is so easily tossed around in Hollywood circles, it implies a falsehood. That falsehood is that one has to divorce himself from the notion of professional duty to be anti-war.In the years between the world wars, it was perhaps chic to label war as so utterly evil that the only moral men to engage in warfare are those who's souls are eaten up by it. Witnessing the wholesale slaughter of the World War I battlefields, combined with the horrible events after the war ended, one could understand being jaded.But, this film takes it to a whole other level. Cynically portraying the star of the film as so totally destroyed psychologically that he committed suicide, and then has his suicide covered up by another member of the squadron who takes him up in a plane while already dead to fake his death by enemy action, might play well to the "war is for losers" crowd, but hardly fit in with the stark truth of why war is sometimes the last resort against evil.The end credits of the film start with the scene of a plaque inscribed: "Captain J.H. Young, who gallantly gave his life in aerial combat to save the world for democracy."The obvious message is that fighting to preserve democracy is a cheap act, rendered amoral by the evil of warfare. Such drivel was driven entirely out of public discourse just a few years later with the rise of the Nazis. The reality that sometimes war can be fought out of simple survival was driven home plainly enough. Moreover, war is sometimes the only way to defeat true evil. And in that effort, those who sacrifice their lives deserve more than to be thought of as psychotic beings.The reason this film went into obscurity is that this truth became so crystal clear when war in Europe erupted in late 1939. By the time the brutal reality of the Holocaust was fully revealed after 1945, the need of war to vanquish evil was no longer a theory, but a reality soaked with the blood of millions.There is nuance to the evils of war, as well as to the reality that sometimes war is necessary. This film attempts to strike no such balance. It is a blunt force effort that sets out to show war as entirely evil, an exercise of pure butchery devoid of necessity, and one that in the act must resort to deceit to portray itself in false heroic terms. It renders war as little more than senseless violence, much as a dog getting run over by a truck.Worse, a film like this one openly projects anyone who seeks to understand these nuances as being perverted. Such paternalistic rubbish might have appealed to an audience chaffed by the experiences of World War I, but not to audiences wizened by the cataclysm of World War II. After that war, no theater would have dared to play it to the public for risk of provoking anger.Most who have fought in war are affected in many ways, physical and psychological. But, in a more nuanced manner than portrayed in this film, and for the most part not in a manner that renders pointless the reasons for war, especially a war to fight against barbarity that seeks to enslave humanity.Mankind best lives in a world of peace, but peace is not merely the absence of war, but instead is the presence of human liberty. Consequently, the true lesson of war is that it is evil, but those who fight it can be heroic men of duty, who nonetheless recognize the better nature of true peace.

Fredric March and Cary Grant star in "The Eagle and the Hawk," a 1933 film about World War I.March plays Jerry Young, a Flying Corps pilot responsible for filming documentary positions. It's extremely difficult for him; a sensitive man, seeing all the tragedy devastates him.Crocker (Cary Grant) is an ambitious gunner, anxious to get in the air, and loves killing Germans.The film has wonderful aviation scenes (and Mitchell Leisen is rumored to have been the actual director of this film) which are very impressive.A powerful antiwar statement, and very unusual for its time. The ending is quite stunning and partially unexpected.Both men give excellent performances - in today's world, March may seem a bit over the top, but it was the style in those days. Carole Lombard has brief scenes as someone who tries to be helpful to him.The overall atmosphere of this film is depressing, so don't watch it if you want to be entertained by something light. However, it's ahead of its time and definitely worth seeing.

Eagle and the Hawk, The (1933) **** (out of 4) Extremely hard-hitting and emotional anti-war film from Paramount features Fredric March, Cary Grant and Carole Lombard but for some reason it seems that history has forgotten this movie. March and Jack Oakie play pilots who are sent to France to lead up a group who, with gunners as protection, fly over hot zones to take pictures of the enemy. March quickly becomes a hero but his soul begins to hurt as he feels responsible for the gunners who are being killed on his mission. Soon the third pilot of the group (Grant) shows up to be a gunner for March but by this time the veteran pilot finds himself questioning the war and his missions. I had never heard of this film or even heard a mention of it when early war films were discussed and that's a real shame because this film deserves to be known by more people. I was really shocked at how brutally honest and at times heart breaking this film was and it's wasn't afraid to show it's feelings towards war. Most war films from this era always ended with a strong victory but this one here isn't about the victories but instead the deaths that it takes to get a win in battle. The film is also rather graphic in some of the death scenes with one of the biggest scenes coming when March must wipe blood off his hands. I've always called March one of the greatest actors in the history of film but this might very well be the best I've seen him. There are two sequences in the film, which the actor just really amazed me and surpassed the greatness he delivered to countless other films. One sequence is where he's having a nightmare about seeing pilots on fire and falling through the air. The second comes when he is being toasted for killing an ace pilot and March finally lets his feelings known. Grant is pretty good in his role as is Oakie. Carole Lombard has a brief, two scene role as a woman who helps March. As with many war films from this era, the aerial scenery is quite breathtaking with some beautiful stunts. These stunts are very good but they never take away from the main goal of the film, which is to show what costs there are to victories. I had never heard of this film but I'm so glad I watched it because it's certainly one of the best of the decade.

THE EAGLE AND THE HAWK is well on the way to being the best film of it's day and contains Frederic March's most impressive performance, nicely set against Cary Grant who had yet to make his own screen presence identifiable.This stands along side any of it's cycle of aviation films - the great WINGS, HELL'S ANGELS, THE LOST SQUADRON, the draggy Hawks version of DAWN PATROL, THE LAST FLIGHT. The impact is not from the air action but from the way the familiar breaking point material is worked out in terms of character. The mess hall climax and subsequent resolution can't be faulted.It is amazing that a film saying something so substantial, so well was not singled out by critics or subsequently "discovered." The same may be said of several of March's other films of the day. He remains the most underestimated film star we have.Though credited to Stuart Walker, it is widely held that the film is the director debut of Mitchel Leisen who did the later and presentable plane movie I WANTED WINGS.Though just over an hour the film does not have the feeling of slightness. It's tempo is impeccable. I'm impressed every time I run this one.