MovieChat Forums > The Bridges at Toko-Ri Discussion > Where was this picture filmed?

Where was this picture filmed?

posted 18 years ago by catwhispereralh
13 replies | jump to latest

Hello,

I can not seem to find any information on exactly where The Bridges at Toko-Ri was filmed. I read incorrectly in several books about Grace Kelly (I have never heard a woman's life told so inaccurately by so many people), that they filmed in Japan. Obviously they did not - but the terrain is unfamiliar. Does anyone know where the - for example - last 10 minutes were shot? The Bridges, "the ditch", etc?

Thank you! I've been so curious and thought for sure imdb would have it!

C

[–] BigIdeasMolitz 18 years ago

As I understand it, there were scenes shot in Japan, some scenes shot in the Pacific of the west coast, probably near San Diego Naval Base or Los Angeles Naval Base. The final crash landing and ditch assault was most like shot in inland in the farming region of sountern California.

The bridges were real bridges for long shots with jet fly overs and miniatures for the close-up attack and bombing shots.

This is one of my favorite pictures. She looks sensational, Holden looks sensational. Rooney's career was being resurected with this picture. Frederick March is very good as the Admiral and his stateroom talk with Brubaker about "where should we make ourstand...the Mssissippi?" is the basis for the domino theory that dictated our foreign policy from the post war period until the fall of the SOviet Union. Just one small scene, a simple speech...two men talking...no CGI, no computor images or trickery.

A really sensational picture at a time when Holden and Paramount were really hitting on all cylindars.

[–] Gemini730 18 years ago

Re;
I`m not sure if some scenes were actually filmed in Japan but the Naval Air Craft Carrier scenes were filmed while the ship was somewhere out in the Pacific Ocean- I think it might have been the Sea Of Japan.It`s one of my favorite films too.Reportedly Bill and grace were involved romantically off-screen during the making of this film.Their kissing scenes are very convincing-they look like they can hardly bear to tear them selves away from each other. I love the scene where Bill is looking down at Grace from the top deck of the ship.Bill`s smile is beautiful and immediately after you can see him capturing for all time in his mind, the memory of her beauty as she is standing on the dock,smiling and blowing him a kiss.
Lorraine

[–] DoctorStrangelove 18 years ago

I was very impressed with the special effects in this movie. Going in (and judging by the trailer) I was afraid they'd ruin the illusion for me, much like Destination Tokyo... but during the bridge bombing runs I honestly couldn't tell when or if they were using real footage or models! The only giveaway for the model shots was maybe they were moving too slowly, like in Air Force (although those shots were good, too). Although it felt like the movie should've been 15 minutes shorter, Holden was his usual excellent self and the "hot springs" scenes were quite funny.

Last Seen:
The Bridges at Toko-Ri - 7/10

[–] coupedevillle 18 years ago

Realistically speaking, what made me chuckle was having a squadron of 12 jets attack such a vital [and large] target as those bridges. And they're carrying very small bombs - maybe 100 pounders. For a target so strategic, you could imagine waves of B29's or B50's carpet bombing the whole area with 500 or 1000 pound bombs.

But hey, it's just a movie.

[–] culebra-1 18 years ago

Jet fighters were in fact the main bombing plane in Korea, hence the term fighter-bombers. The reason fighter-bombers were used are numerous:

1) No good locations nearby to stage large bombers. Fighter-bombers, on the other hand, could be based on the peninsula on shorter airfields as well as from carriers;
2) Russian MIG fighters were deployed by the North, and larger bombers would have been sitting ducks.
3) Fighter-bombers could engage the MIGs and still drop the bombs.
4) It does not take a huge bomb to knock out a bridge.
5) Jet fighters are also much faster than bombers and better at eluding anti-aircraft fire.

So, actually, the movie is very correct with regard to the use of fighters as bombers.

For more information on the real details of the configuration of the strike force, you might want to check the article "Bridges at Toko-Ri: The Truth Behind the Fiction" at the following link:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3897/is_200410/ai_n9427824/pg_1

which describes in detail both the real events behind the book and the 6-week stay of James Michener abord the aircraft carriers Essex and Valley Forge, where he was able to sit in on planning sessions and de-briefings of operations Michener was able to describe quite accurately in the book, even if the movie had to of necessity take some liberties. The flight configuration actually consisted of all of the types of aircraft on the carrier: The ADs carried the bigger bombs (1K, 2K pounders), the Corsairs carried 500 pound ordnance, and the F9F panthers carried 260 pound fragmentation bombs that were used on the first pass to knock out the antiaircraft batteries. Takeoffs from the carrier were carefully staged so as to allow all the different types of aircraft speeds and ranges to arrive at the target area in order to support a coordinated attack by all types on first the fortifications and then the bridge.

[–] CmdrCody 18 years ago

The ship "USS Savo Island" was actually USS Oriskany CV-34, an Essex Class carrier that saw lots of real action in Korea and Vietnam, which just recently towed from Pensacola out into the Gulf and sunk as an artifical reef.

CmdrCody

[–] Reedmalloy 12 years ago

Your link has been long since broken, and while I concur with everything you've said, Neil Armstrong (then with VF-51) told his biographer, James Hansen for "First Man: The Life of Neil A. Armstrong" that the Panthers did not bomb the bridges because they could not carry the larger bombs. They did however perform the equally (possibly more) perilous mission of flak suppression. The ADs actually bombed the bridges at Majon-ni and Changnim-ni. The rescue attempted depicted actually took place in a later mission.

[–] jpleslie01 17 years ago

I can definitely tell you that the scenes at the port where the carrier pulled in and the crew went on shore leave was at the US Naval Base Yokosuka Japan. I know because I was stationed there for 3 years and recognized a lot. I was pretty neat to see it as it existed in the early 50s and that it hadn't changed all that much (at least the parts shown in the movie) by the time I was there 25 years later.
I also noticed they mentioned the name of the base one time and they incorrectly pronounced it just like so many Americans who were stationed there did - Yo-koo'-ska. It's actually pronounced Yo-ko'-ska.

[–] larry-hakari 16 years ago

I have no idea where the film was shot. I see this movie every chance I get. I will try to find it on DVD, I suppose. What I did want to say was that my 8th grade history teacher (this was back in 1964) is in this movie. He is one of the pilots. I believe that his role was uncredited. His name was Frank Kelley. Was a good teacher and a big influence on my life. Just felt like telling that little story. Thanks for listening. PaPa Larry H

[–] schappe1 16 years ago

The thought occurred to me that, if it was filmed in Southern California, it might have been filmed in or near the location MASH was later filmed, which would ironic.

There were so many good movies made in the 50's and this was sure one of them.

[–] rockmail 14 years ago

No, there's nothing "ironic" about that. Both productions were representing Korea, where is the "irony"?

[–] craigbhill 10 years ago

And both films are anti-war. This one may extol war for some, but it also sickens many to war as well. Too bad as a culture we don't get sick often and loud enough to stop it.

I rank this film up there with 12 O'Clock High as an excellent, very adult, underrated war film, in the sense that it shows what it does to the nerves, both of the characters and of the audience. Many lesser war films also do in passing, but not like those two.

I also especially like Toko-Ri for the lack of music instructing us how and when to emote, which when it appears always lessens the impact for me. I noticed the music only in the interregnum of the leave to Tokyo, some of the Grace Kelly scenes, not in the war-zone ones. Hitchcock knew that as well, knew when to stifle the music and let the silence build the suspense instead much more effectively. Too bad 99% of the producers of action films never learn that.

~ Native Angeleno

[–] Gratefuldreads 9 years ago

Here is an article that talks about the filming and should answer some of your location questions.

http://www.usni.org/magazines/navalhistory/2013-07/navys-aerial-oscar