In
honor of the upcoming World Cup final match, I thought it would be appropriate
to review the only war soccer (sorry rest of the world, but that’s what I’m
going to call it) movie that I am aware of.
Talk about a tiny subgenre. It is
my favorite movie that combines war (specifically the prisoner of war subgenre)
and soccer. I actually saw it long
before I became a soccer coach. I now
use it in my Soccer P.E. class on rainy days.
The boys love it, what’s not to like? It combines their favorite sport
with war.
The
movie opens with an escaping prisoner being machine gunned while caught in the
barbed wire surrounding the prison camp.
This abuses you of any thought that it might be a comedy. There is no time frame given but it would
appear to be 1942 as there is a reference to British successes in North
Africa. A German officer named Von
Steiner (Max Von Sydow) proposes a match between a team of POWs led by a
British officer named Colby (Michael Caine) and the German national team. Both men are former professional soccer
players. Von Steiner seems sincere in
just wanting to have an international match, but Nazi propagandists quickly see
the potential for an ass-whipping display of Aryan superiority. Von Steiner facilitates a fair match by
allowing Colby’s squad to get special treatment and even gets Colby some
emaciated and mistreated Eastern European stars from other prison camps. Colby’s team includes a very talented Luis
(Pele) from Trinidad. It also includes a
typically obnoxious, cocky, soccer-challenged Yank named Hatch (Sylvester
Stallone). The subplot of Hatch escaping
from the camp is somehow blended into the soccer match plot which itself is
morphed into a prison escape. It is not
as pretzely as you would anticipate. All
of this builds to the match in Colombe Stadium in Paris. It is arranged for the team to escape at
half-time, but will they flee as losers?
“Victory”
(also known as “Escape to Victory”) was one of John Huston’s ("The African Queen") last films. I’m guessing most cinephiles are surprised to
be reminded that he directed it. In
fact, movie has been long forgotten by most. I was under the impression that it had bombed
when it came out, but my research shows that it was a moderate success and even
got mostly positive reviews. It was
filmed in Budapest because the city looked more like 1940s Paris than Paris
did. Budapest also had a 1940ish soccer
stadium.
The movie is technically
proficient with a well-constructed three acre prison camp set. The barracks are a bit too pristine, but the
settings are realistic. The
cinematography is nothing special until the match where Gerry Fisher does a
wonderful job lensing the action. We get
a mixture of close-ups, medium, and longer range shots that manage to avoid
making the game look fake. There is even
some slow motion (like on Pele’s bicycle kick).
Quick cuts work perfectly to make the game look like a battle. It also reduces the visuals that might have soccer
fans crying fake. The way the game is
depicted is among the best cinema contests.
The game was choreographed by a former pro with input from Pele (who I
would imagine was listened to when he spoke). Amazingly, on a key foul that results in a penalty kick, I rewatched it and could not determine if it was a bad call. That may not mean anything to a non-soccer fan, but trust me - I just gave the movie a huge compliment.
There is absolutely no comparison to the soccer piece of crap in “The
Boys from Company C”. The score by Bill
Conti is above average. The theme
rolling over the credits is old school reminiscent of “The Dam Busters”
ilk. The music matches the scenes well
and rises to a crescendo in the match.
The
acting is much better than you would expect considering a large part of the
cast is not actors, including Sylvester Stallone. Seriously, Sly does some acceptable work
here. The role of a cocky American suits
him and he certainly plays soccer incompetent well. Caine is solid although way too old to play a
soccer player. The movie has eighteen
international soccer stars appearing on screen. Some are quite famous and this explains why the movie was a bigger hit overseas than in America.
They do fine and it does not come off as just stunt casting. Pele is comfortable in front of the camera,
but none of the others embarrass themselves.
Of course, it helps that they are on screen with Stallone. I have to specifically mention Werner Roth
who plays the German captain with verve.
Roth is in the National Soccer Hall of Fame and was a key member of the
New York Cosmos back when teammate Pele was trying to bring soccer to America. Special mention has to go to the crowd at the
game. Aside from the anachronistic
clothing, they are as good as you could ask for. I am sure they were grateful that Stallone
was overruled when he insisted on scoring the winning goal.
Sly stopping a goal is infinitely more plausible than him scoring one |
I
was pretty shocked to find that a basis for the story could be posited,
although it is unclear whether the screenwriters were aware of this. There is no claim that it is based on a true
story. The seed could have been the mythical
“Death Match” in the Ukraine in WWII.
The FC Dynamo Kyiv played some matches against German military units during
the occupation. They were undefeated and
according to legend, after the last victory the team was arrested by the
Gestapo and they were executed. This
extreme version of the story has been refuted by modern scholarship, but when
the legend becomes fact, print the legend.
If
you were to read a summary of the plot, you would shake your head and you would
not green-light the production. Somehow it
works as light-weight entertainment.
Parts of it are implausible, but nothing is laughable. It is not totally predictable and the end is
crowd-pleasing without being cloying. The
game is above average and we all know how hard it is to realistically act out
game action. But the best thing I can
say about it is repeat viewings have not made me question my sanity. Is it more entertaining than a World Cup
soccer match? Decide for yourself.
GRADE
= B-
the trailer
"But the best thing I can say about it is repeat viewings have not made me question my sanity."
ReplyDeleteOne thing I like about your reviews is that you are willing to use your own words rather than merely regurgitating phrases that are popular with movie critics. Sometimes as a result you say reveal something about a movie that would be hard to explain in other words. In the case of this movie I think I understand your meaning perfectly and agree with you.
Thanks. I don't pretend to be a professional critic. I try to write as a fan of war movies, but a critical fan.
Delete