The other obstacle that had to be overcome was the lukewarm studio reaction to the project. Tom Cruise was damaged goods, although his performance in “Tropic Thunder” had generated a lot of good will. The idea of a World War II epic with a heavy dose of Nazism in it was also cause for concern. In spite of this, United Artists poured $75 million into the project. Some of that money went to building a replica of the Wolf’s Lair which took three months. When the movie was completed the studio was not sure what to do with it. The release date was pushed back until a test audience gave it a seal of approval. At that point the suits decided it warranted a Christmas release because nothing says Noel more than a Nazi death plot. The movie did not start off strong at the box office and got mixed reviews, but it ended up making $83 million domestically and over $200 million worldwide.
The movie opens with German soldiers taking an oath of loyalty to der Fuhrer. This is a crucial scene because it explains the anguish most of the conspirators will go through in violating that oath. This established the movies main theme which was that a person may have to make sacrifices to fight evil. One of those soldiers who breaks that pledge is a Col. von Stauffenberg. We meet him in Tunisia in the waning days of the Afrika Korps’ defense of North Africa. He mouths off about S.S. atrocities and clearly is at a tipping point in his loyalty toward Hitler. An air attack by two P-40s on his column results in grievous injuries including loss of an eye. Stauffenberg’s fighting days are over and his plotting days have begun. He will be a newcomer to the conspiracy as Maj. Gen. Trasckow (Kenneth Branagh) is already actively trying to kill Hitler. He manages to place a bomb on the Fuhrer’s plane when he visits the Eastern Front, but unfortunately it fails to work and Trasckow has to rush to Berlin to retrieve the incriminating evidence. This is the first scene that makes you wonder how much of the screenplay is enhanced for entertainment value.
Stauffenberg is recruited into the plot and takes charge of the disparate conspirators. He realizes that they have not given enough thought to what happens after Hitler is dead. He suggests they use the already in place Operation Valkyrie plan. That plan provides for the Reserve Army to deal with a national emergency. Stauffenberg daringly attends a meeting of Hitler’s inner circle to get him to sign off on adjustments to the plan. After two aborted attempts, Stauffenberg manages to bring a briefcase with explosives to a strategy meeting hosted by Hitler.
ACTING: A
ACTION: N/A
ACCURACY: A
PLOT: A
REALISM: A
CINEMATOGRAPHY: B
SCORE: C
SCENE: the explosion
QUOTE: Von Stauffenberg: I'm a soldier, I serve my country. But this is not my country. I was lying out there bleeding to death, thinking, if I die now, I leave nothing to my children but shame. I know now there is only one way to serve Germany, and doing so I'll be a traitor - I accept that.
“Valkyrie” is a big budget effort and the effort shows. The cast is international and stellar. Cruise is the only superstar, but the rest of the cast are recognizable for their talents. They are also recognizable as the real historical people they play. A sampling of their pictures alongside their characters shows the great work of the casting director and the make-up artists. This was not a vanity project for Cruise and although he is not the best actor involved, he does a satisfactory job portraying Stauffenberg. He deserves credit for the eight months of research he did in preparing for the role.
The money was not spent just on the salaries of the cast. Rebuilding the Wolf’s Lair must have been expensive. Singer went to great trouble to get the details right. He used authentic P-40s for the one combat scene. Not that anyone would notice, he acquired thirty period teletype machines for the scenes set in the communications room. To top that off, the messages we see arriving are all actual messages from the archives! The sets and costumes are spot on. I found little of the usual carping about improper insignia, etc. The score is fine and fits the mood well in an understated way.
The plot is suspenseful, especially if you don’t know much about what happened. The movie manages to juggle numerous characters without too much confusion, although a second viewing helps. One weakness is there is not a lot of character exposition. We do not clearly know why Stauffenberg is motivated to break his oath and kill a leader he admired at one time. Providing this insight would have substantially increased the length of the film probably. Most importantly, the movie does not smack of Hollywood excess. Stauffenberg is not an action hero. But he undoubtedly is a hero and the movie does an admirable job doing justice to the brave members of the conspiracy. Many viewers will learn for the first time that there was a significant resistance to Hitler. Not all Germans were cowed by the Nazis. However, the movie does leave the impression that if Hitler had still been winning the war in 1944, he would not have been in danger of assassination.
As far as the accuracy, the movie is reminiscent of “Downfall” and is an excellent companion to it. Like that other Hitler epic, “Valkyrie” is amazingly accurate. Nothing happens in the movie that is significant tampering with history. For instance, the seemingly Hollywoodish first attempt via a bomb on the plane is basically what happened with the tweak of having Tresckow retrieving the package instead of an aide. Why not use Branagh for that? All the real historical personages are portrayed as they were, not just in looks. The reenactment of the July 20 attempt is excellent and the movie even uses some Hollywood theatrics to show what should have happened. It is important to note that although some people are familiar with the bombing, the movie does an admirable job depicting the ensuing events which are less well known. “Valkyrie” is basically a big budget, all-star documentary. You need not look or read elsewhere if you want to know the story of the assassination attempt. This movie is the gold standard for its topic.
I have to admit that when I first heard about this movie I was upset. Part of that feeling was due to concern about Cruise making a historical movie, but mainly because I questioned the potential for a movie about a failed attempt to kill Hitler. I just could not imagine that there would be a substantial audience for that subject. Why would Hollywood spend $75 million on a war movie that no one wanted? I still feel the money could have been better spent on a film about the St. Nazaire Raid, for instance. However, I have to admit I was wrong. “Valkyrie” is an excellent movie on a subject that deserved treatment. It’s nice to know a movie like this can make money. It is definitely one of the 100 Best War Movies.
I think in terms of films about the 20 July plot, this one (at least for now) is certainly the one to recommend. I know Cruise gets a lot of flak but I actually thought he did a good job playing the Colonel. I also actually kinda appreciate the Hitler actor in this too, from small moments like him being a vegetarian, to him petting his dog, to ultimately giving a dark glance at the colonel in the briefing room.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, I recall you gave a review of the Michael Bay Pearl Harbour a few years back. Considering some critics noted it as an attempt to replicate the success of James Cameron's Titanic. Do you think you can do a review of the 2000 film Britannic with Edward Atterton and Amanda Ryan, set in WW1? It is on YouTube and there is hardly any making off material to find, so it should be smooth sailing.
Totally agree. I think Valkyrie is underrated and Cruise gives a good performance, he even looks like Stauffenberg.
ReplyDelete