Hart's War (2002)

 On this day in 2002, "Hart's War" was released.

        “Hart’s War” is a POW / court room hybrid. It’s like a mash-up of “A Soldier’s Story” and “The Great Escape”. It is based on a novel by John Katzenbach. It was directed by George Hoblit. The movie was filmed at a studio in Prague. 

            Hart (Colin Ferrell) is a green staff officer who has no worries about combat because he is a Senator’s son. Unfortunately, the Battle of the Bulge sneaks up on him (it is quieter in this movie than in others) and he gets taken captive by some of those Germans-disguised-as-Americans. Within a two minute section, the movie also manages to toss in a reference to the Malmedy Massacre. I was surprised they didn’t throw in McAuliffe saying “Nuts!”  Hart is interrogated by your typical suave Nazi. He wants to know where the fuel dumps are. You know, like the one at the end of “Battle of the Bulge”. Does Hart talk? Unsure. He is put on a POW train which passes by a train full of Jews. Check that reference off. At one point a P-51 strafes the train in a scene reminiscent of the crossing the Volga scene in “Enemy at the Gates”. There are explosions, quick cuts, and generally frenetic running about.

            When Hart arrives at Stalag VI A, he is greeted by the sight of three Russian prisoners hanging. The German commandant Col. Visser (Marcel Iures) is evil and the opposite of Col. Klink. The ranking American officer is Col. MacNamara (Bruce Willis). He suspects Hart ratted out the fuel dump. This conveniently results in Hart being relegated to an enlisted man’s barracks so the movie can move in a new direction. The plot is roiled by the arrival of two Tuskegee Airmen. Would you believe they are not welcomed by the white soldiers? One of them commits an act that gets him sentenced to death by the Germans. McNamara insists on a court-martial since it will distract from the tunnel they are digging. Visser agrees to this for his and our entertainment. Hart is appointed defense attorney. Now we have hybrid POW/military justice movie. Two for the price of one.

            “Hart’s War” is a war movie for people who do not care about war movies. It is aimed at the generic audience. The producers appear to have doubted whether a regular prisoner escape movie would be profitable so they added a court room drama and then threw in a Tuskegee Airmen / Red Tails subplot so the film could have some gravitas. The fact the movie did not do well at the box office tends to show that you shouldn’t structure a war movie based on demographics. With that said, it is not a bad movie. It is entertaining, if you can suspend disbelief and just sit back and watch. The acting is good. Willis is strong and seems to have bought into the character. Ferrell is adequate. Iures is sufficiently malevolent as the commandant. Terrence Howard should be able to play a Tuskegee Airmen in his sleep at this point. The characters are not one-dimensional.  This includes the commandant who is much more intriguing than your typical POW movie commandant. The dialogue is fine and includes a speech by Scott on the witness stand.  He includes reference to the treatment of blacks at Tuskegee contrasted to that of  German POW's en route to camps in the South.

            The major flaws in the movie are due to aiming at a mass audience. The themes are trite. Redemption of Hart from being a rat. Sacrifice for your country and men (McNamara). Honor is more important than life (Scott). The biggest problem is that in order to develop the themes, the script has to pile on implausibilities and unrealities. For instance, the whole opening scene where Hart is captured is absolutely ridiculous to anyone familiar with the Battle of the Bulge. Even small touches can be aggravating. In the trial, Scott claims to have shot down nine German planes in thirty missions. No Red Tail came close to that figure. Some cool twists partly make up for the predictability of the themes. Another balancing factor is the production values are strong. The camp is one of the best in the subgenre. Real effort went into it. The tunnel is also well done and similar to that of “The Great Escape”. However, I’m not sure if reminding people of “The Great Escape” is a good idea when your movie is much inferior.

            How does it compare to the book by John Katzenback?  First, let me mention that one of the two screenwriters claimed that he did not read the book.  In the novel, Hart is the only survivor of a B-25 crash in the Mediterranean.  The commandant sets the vibe by refusing to bury two prisoners who die in a tunnel cave-in.  Bedford (Cole Hauser in the movie) establishes his racism by proclaiming “It’s a damned n*****!” when the black pilot named Scott arrives.  The fight breaks out in the barracks when Bedford accuses him of stealing.  McNamara breaks it up.  The next day, Bedford’s body is found.  Evidence points to Scott.  Visser, who is a Gestapo agent, observes the trial.  Hart is just one of three defense attorneys.  Hart gets the real killer to admit it by confronting him in the tunnel.  Hart is the rope tugger in the escape. He kills Visser when he discovers the tunnel.  By the way, the escapers have on intention of blowing up a munitions plant.

            The movie makes several significant changes to characters.  Hart is not a newbie.  He has been in the camp for two years before Scott arrives.  MacNamara is not a major character in the book.  Hmm, I wonder why they enhanced his role in the movie.  The commandant is not as evil in the book and of course, Visser is not the commandant.  The case is much more complicated.  The movie adds a few crowd pleasers like the P-51 strafing scene and the dog fight over the camp.  (I guess the book did not have access to CGI.)  There are some nice twists, but the book is too long.  It tends to be repetitive.  Katzenback is a bit pedestrian in his writing and he can be trite and preachy.  

GRADE = B-