SEMI-FINAL: The Bridge (2) vs. The Unknown Soldier (2017) (3)

 

EFFECTS:

                “The Unknown Soldier” is a modern combat movie.  It follows a Finnish company of soldiers in the Continuation War from 1941-1944.  It covers the unit from the early bloom of victory to the late bust of a retreat.  It was the most expensive Finnish production at the time of its release, so you would expect the effects to be good.  Although CGI could have been afforded, the movie eschews it.  The special effects coordinator was very good with explosions.  The artillery bombardments are top notch.  The bullet effects make full use of squib technology.  War movie lovers underestimate the development of squibs in the mid-50’s.  It gives movies like “The Unknown Soldier” an advantage in realistic wounds over old school movies like “The Bridge”.  “The Unknown Soldier” also throws in the more recent development of blood sprays.  The sound effects are great, too.   GRADE  =  B  (8)

                “The Bridge” is on the other end of the spectrum when it comes to budget.  This applies to its effects as well.  There was no CGI in 1959, but that is not a problem because it is a movie that is not trying to be grandiose.  It is more a character study with a battle as the big pay-off and theme punctuation.  There is an embarrassingly fake tank (look for the wheels) in that battle.  The explosions that result from tank rounds are not realistic.  And it appears that as the explosions occurred, someone would throw dirt on the actors.  There is a plane attack that could have used CGI.   The other weapons are authentic, including a panzerfaust and an MG42.  Even though squibs were first used in 1955, they are not used here.  It is a low budget film with low budget effects, but that is part of the charm.  GRADE  =  C  (7)  

STRATEGY AND TACTICS:

                One of the strengths of “Tuntematon Sotillas” is the realistic portrayal of the relationship between the enlisted and the officers.  The common soldiers, especially if influenced by a cynical veteran like Rokka, have a tendency to do what they think is right for survival.  This means it is hard to determine if the strategy and tactics are sound.  Often the unit does not do what it is ordered to do.  For instance, during the retreat they are ordered to make a stand.  It is unclear if the order is correct or insane.  The soldiers decide it is insane.  Their tactics indicate that the technical adviser was hands-on.  They dig in to hold.  They get flanked.  There are preliminary artillery bombardments before attacks (although too brief, as in all war movies).  They use covering fire.  A soldier takes out a bunker with an explosive.  In an assault on an enemy trench, they throw grenades before rounding corners.  Most refreshing, these men run when they are being beaten. GRADE  =  A  (9)

                “Die Brucke” probably did not have a military adviser.  It is not that kind of movie.  It aimed at a general audience and was not focused on a realistic depiction of a battle.  The main strategy is to slow down the American advance.  The tactic is to defend the bridge.  There are problems with this scene.  It is understood by the boys’ commanding officer that the defense is merely a sham to keep the boys out of action.  The actual plan is to blow up the bridge.  If so, the bridge would have been rigged for demolition long before a team shows up to set the explosives.  Their plan calls for letting American tanks cross the bridge before blowing it.  That would be a questionable tactic although the Germans might have planned on isolating the tanks and taking them out with panzerfausts.  There is no evidence they had a solution for tanks rampaging through the town.  And if infantry accompanied the tanks that would have been a big risk.  The final battle does have tanks cooperating with infantry.  The tanks do fire their machine guns (a pet peeve of mine), but the shells they fire have no rhyme or reason.  It’s just random blowing up of things.  Surprisingly, the boys put up a decent defense of the bridge.  One is in an observation post (their old tree fort).  They make use of trenches.  They flank the tanks.  Not bad for kids who were in English class the day before.    GRADE  =  C  (7)

DIALOGUE:

                “The Unknown Soldier” is a bit more talkie than many war movies.  The dialogue is not forced and since the movie is not patriotic, the soldiers don’t spout propaganda.  Their banter feels right.  Rokka gets some great cynical lines.  “We’re not here to die.  We’re here to kill.”  When asked by a superior about his recent experiences, he says:  “Nowadays I model for the gun industry.”  An anachronistic comeback, but still cool.  GRADE  =  B  (8)

                “The Bridge”, since it is a character study, has a lot of dialogue to sketch out the characters.  The boys talk like teenage boys.  No matter the country or the war.  The screenwriter does not give them flowery speeches to make.  Their parents don’t give them speeches, either.  The only stereotype is the general who gives the “battle, victory, or death” yada, yada, yada harangue.  “Forward for the Fuhrer, the people, and the Fatherland.”  But the other officers are more realistic about the war situation.  When the teenage recruits arrive, their sergeant comments:  “They belong in kindergarten, not the army.”  GRADE  =  A  (9)

AMOUNT OF COMBAT:

                “The Unknown Soldier” has 38 minutes of combat.  That’s a lot, but the movie is 179 minutes long, so that is 21%.  GRADE  =  A  (9)

                “The Bridge” saves its combat for the end.  The defense of the bridge lasts 15 minutes.  That is 14% if the running time.  GRADE  =  C  (7)

FINAL SCORE:  The Unknown Soldier  34

                           The Bridge  30

ANALYSIS:

                Like with the other two semi-finalists, I love both these movies.  And I am not the only one.  “The Bridge” was big hit in West Germany when it came out and got worldwide recognition.  It was nominated for Best Foreign Language Film by the Academy Awards.  “The Unknown Soldier” was the third movie based on a popular Finnish novel.  The other two movies were well-received, but the 2017 version is considered by most to be the best of the trio.  Although, I do think it is a better combat film than “Die Brucke”, I have to admit the categories hurt the German film.  I was uncomfortable assigning C’s to an A movie, but that’s the way it goes.  In a combat movie tournament, it is no shame for “The Bridge” to bow out right before the finals.  It’s proof that you don’t have to rely on combat to be a great combat movie.  However, in a tournament to determine the best non-English combat film, “The Unknown Soldier” belongs in the finals.