THE 100 BEST WAR MOVIES: 29. The Dawns Here Are Quiet (1972)

 

 

                “The Dawns Here Are Quiet” is a Soviet film released in 1972. The title has a similar irony to “All Quiet on the Western Front”.  It was nominated for the Best Foreign Language Film Oscar (losing to “The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie”).  Director Stanislav Rostotskiy was determined to make a movie honoring females who served in the Great Patriotic War. A nurse helped him survive being run over by a tank in the war. The screenplay was based on the book by Boris Vasiliev. It was a bestseller in 1969. The book is considered one of the last “lieutenant prose”. These were books by lower-level officers who had served in the war. He wrote two other books highlighting patriotic contributions by female soldiers. Filming was done on the Karelian peninsula. It still showed signs of war damage and most of the crew had been in the war. The shoot was very difficult with cold temperatures and having to film in a swamp and forest. To better portray exhaustion, the actors put bricks in their backpacks.

              It is set in a village near Finland in 1942.  Sergeant Vaskov (Andrei Martynov) is in command of a unit that is noted for drunkenness and fraternizing with the village females.  His superior solves the problem by taking away his men and sending an anti-aircraft unit to replace them.  An all-female ack-ack unit!  Hey audience, Russian women could do men’s work. The girls laugh at Vaskov’s insistence on following regulations.  The village becomes like a girls summer camp.  They sleep together in a barracks.  They sing songs.  They dance with each other.  They take a steam bath together (with nudity, guys!).  But when there is an air raid, they kick ass.  They efficiently use their KPV multi-barreled heavy machine gun and shoot down a bomber.  Rita (Irina Shevchuk) coldly stitches a parachutist

            The first half of the film is entitled “In the Second Echelon”. There is a tonal shift from comedy to drama in the second half which was called “A Minor Local Fight” to stress that the movie is not about a significant incident. Lisa spots two German paratroopers in the woods and Vaskov decides to take her and four others to track them down before they can do whatever sabotage they are tasked for.  They cross a swamp and set up a strong defensive position to ambush the pair. Unfortunately, the pair turns out to be eight pairs.  Vaskov sends Lisa (Yelena Drapenko) back through the swamp for reinforcements. He and the remaining four will attempt to delay the Germans.  The movie now shifts to “who will survive?” mode. Get ready for some heart-tugging deaths.

ACTING:   B                 

ACTION:   C  (6/10)

ACCURACY:  N/A          

PLOT:  A-                     

REALISM:   A (there were female anti-aircaft batteries)          

CINEMATOGRAPHY:    A

SCORE:   C             

SCENE:  shooting down the German plane

QUOTE:  Vaskov:  War does not mean shooting better than the others. It means thinking better.

                “The Dawns Here Are Quiet” is not as renowned as other Soviet films like “Come and See” and “Ballad of a Soldier”.  The opening scenes seemed to confirm this.  Vaskov is a buffoon and the girls are giggly.  I was wondering if it was a comedy and whether it was truly a war movie.  Not that the first part isn’t entertaining.  The ladies are fetching and some are hot.  How often do you get a nude frolic in a steam bath in a war movie?  (A Soviet war movie at that.)  The director had to pursuade the actresses to perfom nude. He convinced them the scene would emphasize that when bullets hit them the bullets would be hitting female bodies. The same bodies that gave birth. Actually, only a war movie about the Red Army in WWII could realistically portray female soldiers like this movie.

  The air raid is a seriously good combat scene, but appeared to be an aberration in an otherwise fluffy movie.  Not that the movie was standard up to this point.  Early on a series of striking flashbacks kicks in.  The movie is crisply black and white, but the flashbacks are in color and slightly surreal.  They are used to give back-stories to the main characters.  For instance, Zhenya (Olga Ostroumova) had an affair with a married officer.  The cast is an ensemble and they are excellent, although only Ostroumova was famous at the time. By the end of the film, the five women who go on the mission have had their characters developed well.  It is a heterogeneous group.  There is the slut (Zhenya), the revenge-minded widow (Rita), the mousy (Lisa), the poetry lover (Galya), and the timid (Sonia).  More important is the character evolution of Vaskov.  He goes from a buffoon to a crafty leader.  He also shows commendable empathy for his charges in a big brotherly way.  And he turns out to be quite a warrior, as do the girls.  They participate in fire-fights using their Mosin Nagant rifles and captured German MP40s.

Director Rostotsky served in the army in WWII and went on to become a decorated film-maker after the war.  The movie is technically proficient.  The decision to show the flashbacks in a different style added pizazz to the movie.  The cinematography in the forest scenes is remarkable.  The biggest accolade I can bestow is that you do not realize without reflection how difficult it must have been to smoothly film the running about in the forest.  There is some POV and even some hand-held.  The lensing contributes to the fog of war aspect of forest fighting.  Rostotsky’s themes are apparent.  Female soldiers could be feminine and yet serve the Motherland effectively.  The movie is an homage to them.  They deserved it.

“The Dawns Here Are Quiet” is a must-see for anyone interested in Soviet war movies.  It belongs in the discussion about which is the best of this subgenre. It is no surprise it is beloved in Russia. It was at the top of the box office in 1973 (66 million Russians saw it) and polls have shown that it is the most popular film about WWII. This certainly can be credited to being very appealing to female viewers. But that is not because it pandered to women. It was based on actual heroism by females in the Red Army.

All the Young Men (1960)

                The Korean War is sometimes called the “Forgotten War” and that refers to the fact that Americans wanted to forget about it. American’s did not want to be reminded about a war that ended in a draw and was very frustrating. It was a far cry from the “Good War” – WWII. Korean War films, with a few exceptions, never caught on with the public. The ones made during the war mostly resembled WWII movies. The first one, “The Steel Helmet”, was a good film, but it was low budget and resembled a Western as much as a war movie. “Retreat, Hell!” (1952) did something you rarely saw in WWII movies – it depicted Americans retreating. “The Bridges at Toko-Ri” emphasized the futility of the war. But both movies, while bleak, still showed American soldiers fighting bravely. “All the Young Men” was made seven years after the war and had to tread new ground to make an impact. Director and writer Hall Bartlett (his “Zero Hour” was parodied in “Airplane!”) wanted to make a film with a message. A disciple of Stanley Kramer (“Judgment at Nuremberg”), he decided to tackle racism, specifically reactions to integration. Clearly, Bartlett was inspired by Kramer’s “The Defiant Ones”.  In 1949, President Truman had used an executive order to integrate the military. Despite howls from Southerners, the mixing of blacks and whites in units was a success. Starting with “The Steel Helmet”, Hollywood routinely put blacks into the films, but stayed away from the racial tensions that undoubtedly occurred. Bartlett’s film crossed that line.

                The film is set in North Korea in October, 1950. American forces are battling to take the port city of Wonsan. A platoon (actually, more like a squad since there are only 12 men)  is sent to hold a farmhouse in order to block an enemy movement through a strategic pass. The white Lt. is mortally wounded early and before he dies, he turns over command to Lt. Towler (Sidney Poitier). Towler is reluctant to accept because he, and EVERYONE else in the platoon feel that the veteran Lt. Kinkaid (Alan Ladd) should be the obvious choice. This is the first clue that the script is going to manipulate the situation to push its message. Kinkaid grumbles, but Towler is forceful in establishing himself in command and he backs down. For plot purposes (a phrase I could use at the beginning of every sentence in this review), Kinkaid does not want to hold the farmhouse, although that is clearly their orders and the battalion is counting on them.  The real problem will come from a stereotypical Southern bigot named Bracken (Paul Richards). There is no universe where this character does not appear in a movie like this. Bracken not only rocks the boat at every opportunity, but he proves to be a vile human, even without the racism. He is beyond redemption. The rest of the unit is heterogeneous. There is the class clown (comedian Mort Sahl), the singer (James Darren), the Indian, the medic, and the hunk (boxer Ingemar Johansson). Do not expect all of them to survive. Especially the guy who pulls out a picture of his wife. 

                Once the unit reaches the farmhouse, which has a woman in it, the movie becomes a hold the fort scenario. The North Koreans are the Indians. Moments of lame banter and singing by Darren are mixed with combat full of fireworks. Actually, the format is talk – dysfunction – fight, repeat. The action is decent with plenty of grenades and pyrotechnics. There are some surprisingly not fake looking tanks. Kinkaid and Towler make a good pair, so add buddy film (specifically “The Defiant Ones”) to the influences. Guess who gives Kinkaid a blood transfusion. (It’s a shame Dr. Charles Drew did not live to the see the film.) Will the cavalry arrive in time? Stick around to see if Bartlett eschews that cliché.

                It is hard to be harsh on a movie whose heart is in the right place. It is a strange movie because while it is full of cliches and stereotypes, the central premise was ground-breaking. It’s a shame it was marred by some ridiculous moments. I have made it clear that one of the few false notes in “Hell Is For Heroes” (1962) is the comedy routine by Bob Newhart. Mort Sahl has a similar scene. It is cringe. And then we also get Bobby Darren doing the teen idol sings a song routine. Where the hell did he get a guitar from?  On the other hand, Sidney Poitier. The movie doesn’t get made without him. Credit should also go to Ladd, who was apparently the only star that was willing to play the role.

                “All the Young Men” is slightly above average for a Korean War film. It benefits from being an important film.  You can’t say that about more than a few Korean War movies. It acts as a window into how the armed forces were on the cutting edge of civil rights in the early 50s. If you find it quaint, I suppose that is a good thing.

GRADE  =  C

100 BEST WAR MOVIES: 30. Escape from Sobibor (1987)

 

                “Escape from Sobibor” was a British made-for-TV movie that appeared in 1987.  It was directed by Jack Gold and is based on a nonfiction book  by Richard Rashke.  It covers the most successful escape from a concentration camp.  A camp survivor named Thomas Blatt served as technical advisor.  The camp was located in Poland and approximately 250,000 Jews were murdered there.

            The movie opens with three inmates cutting through the wire and making a run through the mine field surrounding the camp.  A new train arrives to waltz music. There is realistic chaos, but the Jews are in pretty good shape and there is no evidence that any died on the trip.  The “selection” occurs and most of the Jews are taken to be “disinfected”.   The expendables march off waving bye to the lucky few who have skills (seamstresses, tailors, etc.) or are adult men.   A good scene and not overly emotional.

            We are introduced to the main characters.  One of them is a new arrival who is hiding a baby.  Some of the other women in the barracks are not thrilled about this.  Another character is a man who is told what actually happened to his wife and son when they went to the “showers”.  Others get a similar revelation. 

            Life in the camp is tense.  During a work detail, thirteen men escape but are soon caught.  They are ordered to select a partner to die with them or the guards will execute 50 at random.  Everyone is forced to watch.  It appears that escape attempts have severe consequences at this camp.  This causes the escape committee led by Leon Feldhendler (Alan Arkin) to adjust the escape plan to include all 600 inmates.

            The seemingly impossible plan gets juiced upon the arrival of some Soviet Jews in September, 1943.  Many of them are prisoners of war.  Their acknowledged leader is a charismatic fellow named Aleksandr Pechersky (Rutger Hauer).  He is called Sasha.  Sasha is put in contact with Leon and agrees to help with the escape.  In fact, he becomes the leader.  His developing relationship with a woman named Luka gives him an excuse to visit the Polish Jews’ barracks for plotting purposes.  The camp allows a shocking amount of socializing (which does allow for character development and dialogue).  It is decided that the only hope for success is to kill the guards and exit through the front gate.  Home-made weapons and reliable Jews are recruited to do the killing. The plan is to kill all the SS officers and guards and in the confusion, escape through the front gate.  

ACTING:   A                 

ACTION:   N/A, but there is a lot for a Holocaust movie

ACCURACY:  A          

PLOT:  A                     

REALISM:   A           

CINEMATOGRAPHY:    B

SCORE:   there is not much music until the escape              

 

SCENE:  choosing who will die with the 13 who tried to escape

 

QUOTE:  Leon Feldhendler:  Did you know that tomorrow is the beginning of Sukkot?

Lt. "Sasha" Pechersky: Yes. 'Tis a Holy Day.

Leon Feldhendler: I forgot. And my father was a rabbi.

Lt. "Sasha" Pechersky: They kill on Holy Days. Why not the other way around? God will forgive.

Leon Feldhendler: There are those here who are wondering if we can forgive God.

                How accurate is the film?  I have no major complaints with any of it.  The elements that seem most likely Hollywoodized appear to be based on reality.  My research confirmed that some of the Jews shipped to this camp did not have a particularly nightmarish experience on the train.  The disposal of most of the arriving Jews was pretty standard procedure at any of the death camps.  What the movie does not show and I found interesting was Sobibor used exhaust fumes from a Soviet tank engine to do the job in the gas chamber.  It was the policy of the camp to kill one inmate for every escapee although I could not determine if they chose who would be murdered with them.  Let us assume technical advisor Blatt vetted this. 

            The main characters were real people.  Pechersky was an above average Soviet soldier before his capture and he did have a strong personality.  When he first arrived at the camp he got a lot of cred for standing up to one of the more sadistic guards.  He did have a relationship with a woman named Luka, but claimed it was just platonic.  She did not survive the minefield.  Surprisingly, the camp had a reputation for allowing an amazing amount of socializing.   Feldhendler is accurately depicted as the leader of the Polish Jews.  The breakout is essentially as shown.  Eleven S.S. guards were killed as well as an unknown number of Ukrainian guards.  They did have to exit through the minefield with results as reenacted.

            The film ends at the right moment for entertainment purposes because what happened after was not very positive.  Pechersky led about fifty survivors in the forest.  He and the few in the party who were also Soviet soldiers hatched a plan to sneak into the local town to get food.  They took most of the groups’ weapons and then did not come back.  Pechersky later claimed that it was every man for himself.  The movie conveniently does not mention that the vast majority of the 300 were rounded up in the manhunt and were executed along with all the inmates who did not get out of the camp.  As a matter of fact, the camp was bulldozed and trees were planted on the site after the incident.  Many of the successful escapees died after joining partisan groups. Only about 60 survived the war.  Feldhendler hid in the city of Lublin and ironically was murdered at the very end of the war.  Pechersky survived the war, no surprise there. 

            “Escape from Sobibor” is no “Schindler’s List” but it is one of the better members of the Holocaust subgenre.  It deserves a substantial amount of credit for covering a significant event that is not well known.  Most Holocaust films depict the passivity of the Jews.  It is exhilarating to see them shown fighting back.  People need to know that there was a successful escape (actually there were two).  The movie does a service to history and the strict adherence to what actually happened is an added bonus.

            “Escape from Sobibor” holds a unique position among Holocaust movies. It is inspirational as opposed to the usual horrific. There are aspects that evidence the low budget, but the fact that it tells a true story dramatically overcomes its shortcomings.  The camp set is satisfactory, but not memorable.  The cinematography and score are average.  The strengths are in the acting and characterizations.  Hauer and Arkin are very good.  Hauer won the Golden Globe for Supporting Actor.  The cast is fine, if basically B-List.  You do care about the characters and there are some poignant deaths. Some of the most appealing characters do not make it across the field. The courage of the Jews belies the usual victimhood portrayed in other movies.  The S.S. are appropriately heinous. This is the rare Holocaust movie that sets up the evil Nazi characters and then kills them off. It’s satisfying.  

            In conclusion, “Escape from Sobibor” is a must see for anyone interested in the Holocaust.  It covers a unique event that should be better known.  Film can sometimes play an important role in bringing history to the masses.  As much as I complain about cinema abusing that power, it is fair to emphasize the times cinema gets things right.