STALINGRAD (1990)

 

                       “Stalingrad” was written and directed by Yuri Ozerov. It was co-produced by the Soviet Union and East Germany. Ozerov directed the “Liberation” series as an answer to “The Longest Day” which he felt short-changed the Soviet contribution to victory in WWII. “Stalingrad” is a sequel to his film “Battle of Moscow”. In 1965, he was awarded the Honored Artist of the RSFSR (Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic). Warner Brothers agreed to help finance the film if the American actor Powers Booth was cast. Many of the extras were Soviet soldiers.

                       The movie starts with Hitler telling Gen. Von Bock about his plan to take the Caucusus. They will be the first of many famous WWII figures to appear in the film. The plot is going to jump between German command decisions to Soviet ones. Stalin (Archil Gomiashvili) meets with his generals, including Zhukov (Mikhail Ulyanov). The movie was made during Perestroika, so it was safe for Ozerov to accurately portray Stalin as not believing the Caucusus was the target of the German summer offensive. There is some combat between the headquarters scenes. There are plenty of tanks roving the countryside. Maps with arrows provide background.

                       The movie is basically a series of vignettes about the battle. Some of these include a Spanish soldier serving with the Red Army receiving a medal and breaking into a song. Stalin compliments a general for bayonetting 22 Germans. He tells him “Cruelty is a necessary quality for a front commander.” (I have seen a lot of Soviet movies and I can tell you this is not the way saintly Soviet officers are depicted.) Khrushchev’s son kills a comrade when trying to shoot a bottle of his head. Churchill visits Moscow. Hey, where’s the second front? Germans cross the Don River. The action is epic, but lame. Every time a tank is destroyed it is from an explosion in its rear. There are also a lot of buildings that get blown up. Naked Soviet women soldiers are sprayed. Full frontal nudity in a war movie. I guess that was glasnost.  Stalingrad is bombed by very fake-looking planes which makes sense since the city is a model. Powers Boothe is Gen. Chuikov! The Russians make an anti-tank minefield by planting Molotov cocktails that are then shot when the tanks get near. Hey, AI. Russian infantry make frontal attacks against machine guns to patriotic music. A German pilot is given to civilian women. This will not end well for him. A German tank runs over a statue of Stalin. (Very gutsy, 1990 Soviet filmmaker.) Pavlov’s House gets a brief shout out. House-to-house fighting. Zhukov launches the counteroffensive. Goering’s air supply effort fails. Manstein fails to break through to the Germans trapped in the city. German prisoners march by. Stalin refuses to trade Von Paulus for his own captured son. A narrator criticizes Stalin’s tyranny and cult of personality!

                       “Stalingrad” is educational for those unfamiliar with the battle. It covers the battle from preliminaries to the end. It does this by covering commanders as well as some common soldiers (not any Germans). The film does a good job depicting the German perspective. This was probably to attract a German audience. It is the rare WWII movie that portrays Stalin, Hitler, and Churchill. The acting is nothing special and surprisingly, Boothe takes the trophy. He is good as Gen. Chuikov and he gets to say: “Well fuck their soul into God.” The combat is brief in the first half, but picks up in the second half. It is marred by silly deaths. It turns out that real soldiers do not know how a soldier dies. It’s not just an extra problem. There is a subplot involving spies that goes nowhere.  

                       The movie is one of several movies about the Battle of Stalingrad. It is somewhere in the middle of the pack. It’s fairly accurate, but it does throw in some head-scratching stuff like the Molotov cocktail minefield. It get Stalin right, so if you hate him, this movie is for you. The movie did not do well probably because by 1990, Stalin was not looking so bad. Or maybe because the film is not very entertaining. Here is my ranking of them:

1.   Stalingrad, Dogs Do You Want to Die?

2.  Enemy at the Gates

3. Stalingrad (1993)

4. Stalingrad (1990)

5. Stalingrad (2013)

GRADE  =  C

DESTINATION GOBI (1953)

                       “Destination Gobi” is a film by Robert Wise (“The Desert Rats”, “Run Silent, Run Deep”, “The Sand Pebbles”). It was based on the article in Colliers magazine entitled “Ninety Saddles for Kengtu” by Edmund G. Love. Ernest Borgnine claimed that his character in “McHale’s Navy” was named after Richard Widmark’s character in this movie. It was very loosely based on the Sino-American Cooperative Organization which worked with the OSS (Office of Strategic Services). It set up operations in the Gobi Desert in Inner Mongolia. It provided meteorology reports which were important for the US Navy operating in the Pacific. It also monitored Japanese aircraft and gathered intelligence.

                       The film opens with: “In the Navy records in Washington, there is an obscure entry reading "Saddles for Gobi." This film is based on the story behind that entry, one of the strangest stories of World War II.” It is 1945 and CPO Sam McHale (Widmark) is looking forward to returning to the USS Enterprise. How would he like to do exactly the opposite thing? He does not volunteer to go to a desert, but he is ordered to go to the Gobi Desert. McHale works under Lt. Commander Hobart Wyatt (Russell Collins). They come into contact with local Mongolians led by Kengtu (Murvyn Vye). Wyatt enlists the tribe by giving them saddles for their horses. Training montage! Unfortunately for the Mongols, the friends of our enemy are our enemy, so Japanese planes bomb the Mongol camp. This ends their weather forecasting and their alliance with Kengtu. Or does it? McHale has to lead his crew 800 miles to the coast. They have not seen the last of the Mongols or the Japanese. It’s an odyssey that includes a prison camp that they escape from and a Chinese junk that is chased by a Japanese destroyer. Spoiler alert: they use powder from bullets to fire a cannon to sink the warship.

                       “Destination Gobi” is a trifle that has understandably been forgotten. It tells the story of an operation that did not deserve coverage. I suppose weathermen consider it to be a must-see movie, but for the rest of us, it lacks suspense. And that is after the movie clearly greatly enhances the actual story of the unit. Surprisingly, while the screenwriter tries to add action to an otherwise boring story, he avoids the cliché of unit dysfunction. Only one American complains a lot. There is a bit of a twist involving Kengtu which involves the small world that Hollywood characters live in. This all leads to a battle with a Japanese warship that is one of the most ridiculous naval combats ever to grace the silver screen. On the plus side, Richard Widmark stars in the movie.

GRADE  =  C

INCHON (1981)

 

                       “Inchon” is generally considered the biggest box office bomb of all time and also considered to be the worst war movie ever made. It won Golden Raspberries for Worst Picture, Actor (Laurence Olivier), Director, and Screenplay. It has a 0% on Rotten Tomatoes which makes it the only major war movie to achieve that low score. It has a 2.9 on IMDB.  It was famously financed by Sun Myung Moon, founder of the Unification Church. He’s the guy who would marry thousands at a time. He thought about doing a movie about Elvis or Jesus, but psychic Jeanne Dixon talked with the deceased Douglas MacArthur and he urged a biopic be made about him. Moon liked the idea because MacArthur “loved God and loved people.” He fought against tyranny and communism. Moon demanded three love stories. One with two Americans, one with two Koreans, and one with an American and a Korean. The movie cost $46 million (the original budget was $18 million), which was a huge sum back then. It made less than $2 million.(This would be equivalent to costing $150 million and making $17 million today.) At the time, it was the biggest money-loser in history. It was directed by Terence Young, who made the first four James Bond movies. He also directed some war movies: “The Red Beret” and “Triple Cross”. He filmed in South Korea, California, Italy, Ireland, and Japan. The shoot was difficult with a typhoon destroying the lighthouse that is central to the invasion of Inchon. David Janssen died during the shooting and expensive reshoots had to be done.  Some of the reshoots were done by Sun Myung Moon himself with disastrous results. He was credited as a “special adviser”. Star Laurence Olivier was 72-years-old and he was not in the best of health. Makeup took 2 ½ hours. Olivier deserves credit for watching many recordings of MacArthur to get his accent down pat. Embarrassingly, the movie includes part of MacArthur’s “Old Soldiers” speech in which he sounds very different from Olivier’s attempt. He was candid about why he took the role. He did it to get money for his heirs. He was paid $1 million which came to $50,000 per day. When the shoot overran, he demanded his bonus salary be delivered to the set in a suitcase by a helicopter. I hope his heirs appreciated it because it was a very difficult shoot for him as he suffered from heat stroke and exhaustion. He had to rest between takes. The US Department of Defense provided 1,500 soldiers and Marines as extras. It allowed filming on a US Navy ship. However, the DoD demanded that its cooperation be removed from the credits when it saw the inaccuracy of the movie.

                       The movie starts with a disclaimer: “This is not a documentary. The screenwriters have used historical license.”  Thanks for the honesty and why don’t more war movies do this? A narrator describes the situation in Korea after WWII. (To prove the screenwriter were truthful about disregarding historical facts, WWII is called “the war to end all wars.”) A map is overlaid with combat footage. The background is good and it emphasizes Soviet military support for North Korea. Then we are immediately in a battle with lots of tanks and hordes of commie infantry. Barbara Hallsworth (Jacqueline Bisset) is the wife of a major (Ben Gazzara). She gets caught up in the stream of refugees fleeing invading North Koreans. Along the way, she picks up some orphans who are sooo cute. Frank Hallsworth’s affair with a South Korean is interrupted by the crisis. He heads north to find his wife. He is accompanied by Sergeant Augustus Henderson (Richard Roundtree). Meanwhile, Gen. MacArthur learns of the invasion and realizes he is the only one that can save South Korea. In one scene, he stands next to a bust of Julius Caesar. Subtle. In this small world, David Feld (David Janssen) is a cynical journalist (like he was in “The Green Berets”). (Has there ever been an uncynical journalist in an American war movie?) These characters have a destiny destination called Inchon. That date with history will be the capture of a lighthouse that is crucial to the success of the landing. And a great opportunity to reunite Hallsworth with his Korean girlfriend and her father! It’s hairy, but God is with MacArthur and America. We win and this time they do the running. The End. Don’t worry about the next two years.

                       Let me lead my critique by stating that “Inchon” is not the worst war movie I have ever seen. That does not mean it’s a good movie. It has numerous weaknesses. The plot is choppy with some scenes leading nowhere. The movie jumps several months to get to the invasion and yet, the main characters are still in the same places. There are several cliches. Hallsworth is torn between loyalty to his wife and love of his girlfriend. As usual, the love triangle is solved by killing off one them.  The characters are all stock. The Feld character is only mildly critical of MacArthur and is given little to do. Janssen did not go out in a blaze of glory. The action scenes are poorly done combat porn. Lots of tanks and lots of explosions. This is a loud movie. And several massacres and strafings of civilians because commies are bad. As per war movie rules, no one is just wounded. The deaths are from the somersault school of overdying. Jerry Goldsmith did the soundtrack. The music is pompous, although commended by some and it was released as an album.

                       It is clear the movie was just a money grab for all the stars. Their performances are wooden, especially Olivier who is creepy as MacArthur. (He was 74 at the time of the shooting. MacArthur was 71.) Gregory Peck was much better in “MacArthur”. Richard Roundtree was thrown in just to have an African-American character.

                       The movie is not the propaganda you would expect. The communists are not demonized. There is a villainous North Korean officer, but he is just thrown in because that box needed to be checked. There is not a lot of anti-communism talk. The movie is more pro-Christian tban anti-communism. MacArthur prays and at one point proclaims “God wills it!” Just like Pope Urban II before the Crusades. The moments where religion rises up are ridiculous.

                       I’m not going to go into detail on the historical inaccuracies. After all, the movie admits it’s not accurate. The movie floats along with some minor flubs and it does give a trite feel for the chaos at the beginning of the war. The role of Russian tanks is a theme that is fairly realistic. And it does have a good scene where MacArthur makes his case for the risky Inchon invasion. But the movie limps towards one of the most ludicrous finales in war movie history. I have no idea who thought up the lighthouse idea, but he deserves a special Razzie Award. Spoiler alert: Hallsworth and Henderson go on a commando raid to take the lighthouse. That light is crucial to the success of the invasion. They do this easily with the help of Hallsworth’s Korean girlfriend. A problem arises when it is discovered that there are mines in the harbor. The girlfriend’s father gets in a boat, connects the mines by a wire and then sets them off! Hilarious. Then there is a hip-shooting firefight as the North Koreans try to take back the lighthouse. The light goes out. MacArthur has to call off the invasion. He gives a long speech taking responsibility for the failure. The speech is long enough for God to intervene and turn the light back on. God blessed MacArthur! We get an impressive number of landing craft and amphtracs, and they aren’t cardboard cutouts. Here come our tanks! Tables turned. Look at them run this time. The movie ends before MacArthur tarnishes his reputation with his boneheaded handling of the Chinese intervention. I guess we’ll never get that sequel.

                       In conclusion, “Inchon” is far from being the worst war movie ever made. It is not laugh out loud funny as the dialogue is not atrocious and the stars do not overact. Other than the lighthouse, it is not atrociously inaccurate. It is not in “Braveheart” territory. It was hard to find, but you can now watch it on YouTube. I won’t warn you against doing that. However, I will warn you that you won’t get those 137 minutes back.

GRADE  =  D

Sailor of the King (1953)

 

               “Sailor of the King” is based on the 1929 novel by C.S. Forester.  It is also known as “Single-Handed”.  The director was Roy Boulting who co-directed with Frank Capra the famous documentary “Tunisian Victory”.  Although it has only one American in the cast (Jeffrey Hunter), it was an American production.  It was the first American film to use British ships.  Producer Frank McCarthy used his relationship with Lord Mountbatten to get Royal Navy cooperation.  The HMS Cleopatra played both the Amesbury and the Stratford.  The Cleopatra deserved some screen fame due to its participation in the Battle of Sirte where it and three other light cruisers took on the Italian battleship Littorio and a heavy cruiser.  The minelayer HMS Manxman played the German cruiser Essen.  The movie was dedicated to the Royal Navy, in particular the Mediterranean Fleet.  It starts with a quote from Horatio Nelson:  “I will be a hero -  and confiding in Providence,  I will brave every danger.”

               In 1916, Lt. Richard Saville (Michael Rennie) meets a British girl named Lucinda on a train and it is love at first sight.  They have a fling and he proposes, but she has seen enough war movie to know his career will come first.  Will her refusal to fall for that old trope figure in what happens twenty-four years later?  Stick around.  In 1940, Saville is a cruiser captain on convoy duty in the Pacific along with two other cruisers.  Saville decides to send the other two warships after the German raider Essen.  The HMS Amesbury is sunk, but manages to put a torpedo into the Essen.  The Essen rescues the only two survivors of the Amesbury, one of whom is Signalman “Canada” Brown (Hunter).  The Essen pulls into a secluded bay to do repairs, meanwhile Saville’s ship HMS Cambridge is hot in pursuit.  Someone needs to slow down the repairs so the Cambridge has time to get there.  Is there a sailor of the king available for that job?

               Remember when Jeffrey Hunter was a big star?  Well, he was, mainly because he was quite the hunk.  Ladies, he is shirtless through most of this movie.  Hunter was making only his second lead role in this movie.  He had earlier appeared in a supporting role in “The Frogmen” and over his long career, he made a lot of war movies, including “The Great Locomotive Chase”, “Sgt. Rutledge”, “Hell to Eternity”, “No Man Is an Island”, and “The Longest Day”.  He stands out in this movie, partly because he is the only American.  The acting is good overall by a good cast.  The roles they play, with the exception of Brown, are stereotypes.  The Brits are unflappable and the Germans are worthy adversaries.  The Essen’s commander is one of those “good Germans” you see in movies in the early Cold War.  Good enough to rescue a sailor who eventually leads to the sinking of his ship.  Moral of the story:  don’t rescue opponents. 

               The plot is certainly unusual.  I know of no other naval war movie that features a sniper.  It is unpredictable, other than the obvious come-uppance for the Essen.  A naval war buff certainly would not have predicted that the Amesbury would suicidally take on a superior warship instead of simply maintaining contact until reinforcements arrived.  But plenty of dots have to be connected to get Brown on a hill above the Essen with a Mauser in his hands.  It’s all to the purpose of creating an entertaining film.  It has an intriguing ending involving Lucinda who (depending on what ending you get), is either reunited with Saville to honor her live or her dead son.

               Although clearly fictional, Forester did base his book on two WWI battles.  In the first, British light cruisers took on a German heavy cruiser in the South Pacific and lost and then in a later battle, with reinforcements, got revenge off the Falkland Islands.

               I recommend this movie even if you are not interested in seeing a shirtless, sweaty Jeffrey Hunter.  Call it a date night movie, if you have the confidence to be compared to him.

GRADE  =  B-   

                   

"Spartacus: Film and History" by Martin Winkler

 Today is the anniversary of the release of one of my favorite movies. I have seen it possibly more than any other movie because I showed it in my Western Civ classes for years. 

1.  The Catholic Legion of Decency put pressure on Universal to cut shot of severing of limbs. drowning in soup, blood spurting on Crassus when he kills Draba, and hints of homosexuality (“oysters and snails”)

2.  Scenes that were cut and lost included several scenes of Gracchus and Ceasar.  So much of his performance was cut that the irascible Laughton sued.

3.  Kubrick disavowed the film because he felt he did not have enough control over the story.  However, he did insist on the final battle scene. 

4.  Douglas insisted the theme be “a slave whose vision of freedom almost overthrew the Roman Empire”.  He also bumped up the love story.

5.  The original plan was for an expanded battle with Glabrus, a battle montage of the subsequent battles, and a small version of the final battle.

6.  After Trumbo’s critique of the first rough cut, scenes were added including:  the first meeting with Tigranes, Spartacus’ speech at the gladiator school, Spartacus’ speech on the beach, the duel with Antoninus. 

7.  Universal cut the Battle of Metapontum, leaving only a reference made to the loss at the public bath.

8.  Kubrick wanted the cause of defeat to be moral weakness of the slave class and the Crixus split.  Douglas overruled him, thankfully.

FIVE FINGERS (1952)

 

            “Five Fingers” is a spy noir movie along the lines of “Notorious”. It was directed by the famous screenwriter Joseph Mankiewicz (“The Quiet American” (1958)). The film is based on the book Operation Cicero by Ludwig Moyzisch. The book and movie are the true story of Albanian-born Elyesa Bazna. He was the valet to the British ambassador in Turkey. Bazna would photograph top secret documents from the ambassador’s safe and sell them to the Germans. It was filmed on location in Ankara and other sites.

            The film begins in 1944 in neutral Turkey. Polish Countessa Anna Staviska (Danielle Darrieux) offers her services to German Ambassador Count Van Papen (John Wengraf) as a spy. Surprisingly, he turns her down. And then he turns around and agrees to let Ulysses Diello (James Mason) play amateur spy for money. Diello has access to British secrets and sells them. He may be an amateur, but he has the moxey of a James Bond. Because there has to be a dame in a movie like this, Diello falls in love with the downtrodden countessa and shares some of his payments with her. The British get suspicious and sent a counter-intelligent agent to Ankara. Colin Travers (Michael Rennie) starts snooping around Ulysses and Anna. The couple plan to escape to Argentina or so Diello thinks), but they need one last big score. It involves the plans for Operation Overlord. Don’t ask why those plans are in the British Ambassador to Turkey’s safe.

            “Five Fingers” is better than expected. It is not in a league with “Notorious”, but it is a true story so it has one up on the Hitchcock film. (Both films star the always reliable Mason.) Mason is great as Diello. His character is not a Nazi. He’s just in it for the money. Carrieux is not on the same level of acting as him, but she does well as a femme fatale. Their relationship has some interesting twists.

            Dialogue is crucial in this type of film and “Five Fingers” is strong in this area. Some of it is crackling. The plot rests on the usual cat and mouse format. The movie is unpredictable and that is saying a lot because the subgenre of spy movies is rife with cliches. The score supports the movie well. It is a well-crafted film. It is entertaining, but how educational is it?

            The movie adds a lot of historical license. Banza did get a job as a valet to Sir Hughe Knatchbull-Hugessen. If the name gives you the impression that the ambassador was a daft nobleman without a clue, you would be right. Banza was hired with the flimsiest of background checks. His Lordship made Banza into a glorified butler and dressed him like a guard in a harem. Banza hooked up with his bosses nurse-maid, but she was not his partner in crime. The true story has no one equivalent to the Countessa. Banza was adept at picking locks so he easily got into the safe. Knatchbull-Hugessen was very careless with security. Banza passed on information about the Teheran and Cairo Conferences. Nothing earth-shaking. He was paid a lot, but it was mostly counterfeit money. Ha ha! The money came from Operation Bernhard. (Covered in the film “The Counterfeiters”.)  Banza’s biggest theft was documents about Operation Overlord which ironically, the Germans failed to use. The British did suspect someone in the embassy was passing secrets, so they sent a Cornella Kapp to catch the mole. She was not successful. There are several historians who think Banza was a double agent and there is evidence supporting this. I bet Knatchbull-Hugessen prayed that was true. He didn’t get a lot of party invitations after the war. Banza also had a depressing post-war. The money was discovered to be counterfeit and he spent some time in prison for passing it. He did not go to Rio.

 

GRADE  =  B+

The Cowra Breakout (1984)

               “The Cowra Breakout” is an Australian miniseries about the Japanese breakout from a prisoner of war camp on New South Wales in 1944.  The first episode has the main character, Private Davidson (Alan David Lee) at war on New Guinea. His patrol runs into  a Japanese machine gun nest. Most of the patrol is wiped out, including his best buddy who is mortally wounded and put out of his misery by Davidson. Their leader, Lt. MacDonald (Andrew Lloyde) runs and leaves Davidson behind. Davidson ends up as a guard at Camp Cowra. In a major coincidence, Murphy’s widow and two daughters live near the camp. They strike up a romance. He is surprised to find the surviving Japanese soldier, Hiyashi (Junichi Ishida) is in the camp. At first, Davidson is bitter towards the man who killed his friend and not sympathetic towards the other prisoners. He is very perturbed when Lt. MacDonald is assigned to the camp and he’s wearing a medal for bravery! MacDonald refuses to admit to stolen valor. At first, the Japanese in the camp are docile, but this changes when a bushido believer arrives and roils the barracks with talk of fighting back. He convinces a majority of the men that to return home after being prisoners will be disgraceful. They must rise up and die fighting.

               SPOILER:  “The Cowra Breakout” is based on an actual prison break, although all of the characters are fictional. The breakout is accurately depicted. The prisoners broke out on the night of August 5, 1944. It started with Hajime Toyoshima, the first Japanese prisoner taken by the Australians in WWII, blowing a bugle. A prisoner tried to  warn the guards, but the mob managed to break through the fence. They were armed with knives, bats, and clubs. Two soldiers, Privates Benjamin Hardy and Ralph Jones tried to hold them back with a machine gun, but they were overrun and killed. They received the George Cross. 359 of the 1,104 prisoners escaped. 231 of them ending up dying either from gunfire or suicide. Four Aussie troops died. All of the escaped prisoners were recovered. It was the largest and bloodiest prison escape in WWII.

               The miniseries is small scale, but sincere. Although the characters are fictional they certainly represented typical guards and prisoners. It was interesting to see how the original prisoners were content with serving out the war in a prison camp. The guards grew complacent because these prisoners offered no problems. The commander treated the prisoners well. The miniseries gives no indication that the prisoners were rebelling because of mistreatment. It may be a bit simplistic to blame it all on one fanatical prisoner, but it seems reasonable that the later prisoners would have been more hardcore since they would have been fighting longer. The relationship between Davidson and MacDonald is interesting and not predictable. On the other hand, Davidson’s friendship with Hiyashi is trite. The romance is obviously thrown in for the female audience. The acting is solid from a cast none of whom I recognized. Alan David Lee is fine as a soldier who overcomes his PTSD to find the humanity he lost when his best friend was killed. Junichi Ishida does a good job as a prisoner who feels it is best to live to return to his loved ones. But that philosophy conflicts with Japanese martial culture. He gets caught up in the inevitable banzai charge at the gate.

               Australia has a strong track record for war movies and miniseries. “The Cowra Breakout” is somewhere in the middle. It gets credit for covering a famous event in the war and sticking to the basic facts. It’s a bit melodramatic, but that is to be expected from a television miniseries.

GRADE  =  B-

 

Land of Mine (2015)

 

                “Land of Mine” is a Danish film (“Under Sadet”). It was written and directed by Martin Zandvliet. It was based on the aftermath of WWII in Denmark. The Germans had left millions of mines on Danish beaches to discourage an Allied invasion. After the war, the Danish government used German prisoners to discover and disarm the mines. Some of the prisoners were just teenagers. Of the 2,000 prisoners used, 149 were killed in the five months of work. The movie was filmed on some of the beaches. At one point, a live mine was uncovered during actor training. That took actor boot camp a little too far.

               The movie opens in May, 1945. Five years of German occupation has finally ended. A group of young German prisoners are put to work locating mines. They are overseen by a Danish Sgt. Rasmussen (Roland Moller). He is not the coddling type. Practice diffusing a mine in a bunker begins the winnowing process and now we have eleven. Clearly the movie is going to be a “who will survive?” movie. As though they aren’t already in danger, some of the boys talk about their future. Can you say “dead meat”? The work involves crawling on their bellies on the beach using probes to find the mines. When they are not tempting fate, they are being mistreated by Rasmussen and being ill-fed. Gradually, Rasmussen warms to his charges, but just as he gives up his villain shirt, his evil boss shows up. Capt. Jensen (Mikkel Folsgaard) does not plan on keeping the promise that once they finish one last beach, they can go home.

               The cast is fine, but the characters lack development. We never find out why Rasmussen is so belligerent. Of the Germans, only Sebastian (Louis Hofmann) stands out. In fact, it is hard to tell the boys apart. Jensen is a cartoonish villain. Rasmussen is more interesting and is given a roller-coaster arc. He goes from contempt to tolerance to anger to empathy. The other characters are mainly there to die. And the deaths are pretty predictable. Don’t talk about the future! Not surprising, since this is a movie, 71% of the boys die. Contrast that to the 7% who actually died in the mine disposal.

               The movie uses the mine discovery to create realistic suspense. Although you know some will be killed and it is sometimes forshadowed, you don’t know when the explosions will occur. While the time on the beach is edge of your seat, the time spent in the barracks is tame. There is no dysfunction in the squad partly because the unit is homogeneous.

               The main strength of the film is it brings a little known event to light. It is admirable that Denmark nominated a film for the Academy Awards which does not reflect well on the Danes. In fact, what happened to the German prisoners was a war crime. The Geneva Convention expressly prohibits the use of prisoners to do dangerous jobs. To make Denmark look even worse, none of the characters in the movie deserved their fate. They are not Nazis, they are just boys. Some of the deaths are heart-breaking. It’s a pretty bleak film.

               I have seen “Land of Mine” on several lists of the best war movies. It is entertaining, but overrated. I do recommend it mainly for the history lesson. Now let’s see if we get an American movie about treatment of German prisoners.

GRADE  =  B

Quo Vadis, Aida? (2020)

            “Quo Vadis, Aida?” (“Where Are You Going, Aida?”) is a Bosnian film written, produced, and directed by Jasmila Zbanio. It is a true story about the Srebrenica Massacre which occurred during the Bosnian War. Over 8,000 Bosniak men and boys were killed in act of genocide by Serbian troops.

            Aida (Jasna Duricic) is a schoolteacher who works as a translator for the UN. The Serbian army is on the march in the region of Srebrenica. NATO tells the Bosnians to remain in their homes in the city because they will be safe! Soon, tanks move in and the civilians are rounded up. Many are killed, the rest are sent to a refugee camp run by the UN. Aida is in the camp, but her husband and sons are on the outside. She manages to get them in, but then the war criminal Serbian General Mladic arrives and offers to bus the refugees to another city. Don’t get on that bus!

            “Quo Vadis, Aida?” assumes the audience has basic knowledge of the massacre. That was a big assumption when it comes to American viewers. You don’t have to be well-versed on the Bosnian War to understand that the movie deals with a vicious conflict between ethnic and religious groups. When you throw in the well-meaning but toothlessly naïve United Nations, you get a massacre. You won’t trust the UN and NATO to safeguard you if you are ever in a refugee situation. However, the movie does a good job indicting those two organizations, but it does not do a good job demonizing the Serbians who committed the first legally recognized genocide since WWII. There are plenty of Holocaust movies that bring that genocide to viewers. “Quo Vadis, Aida?” botches its opportunity to enrage viewers. It is not nearly as harsh as movies like “Son of Saul”. It does not hit hard enough. Mladic is serving a life sentence as a war criminal. The movie does not make him a villain. All it depicts him as is a liar. Duricic is outstanding as Aida, but the character is not much of a heroine. She is not tormented that she aided the massacre. And the ending of the movie dilutes the impact of her experience.

            Movies about genocide should leave you drained. You should question humanity. They should not end with kids performing for parents. They should not soften war criminals. “Quo Vadis, Aida?” The movie needed to be “Why, Aida?”

 

GRADE  =  C

The Book Thief (2013)

            “The Book Thief” is based on the critically acclaimed best-seller by Marcus Zusak. The movie was directed by Brian Percival. The original score was by John Williams. He was nominated for a Oscar, a Golden Globe, and a BAFTA. He won a Grammy for Best Instrumental Album. The movie was a big hit. 

            Liesel (Sophie Nelisse) is a young German girl who is being raised by the Hubermanns. Rosa (Emily Watson) is an ass, but Hans (Geoffrey Rush) is doting. Liesel loves reading ever since she acquired The Gravedigger’s Handbook. She and her best friend Rudy are typical elementary school students in Nazi Germany. They are in the Hitler Youth, but participation in a book burning causes her to rethink her patriotism. She finds a kindred spirit in the Burgomeister’s wife. She invites Liesel to borrow books from her husband’s library. Hence the title. When the Hubermanns hide a Jewish boy named Max, she teaches him to read. The war has a deep impact on main characters lives. Have some tissues handy.

            “The Book Thief” is a war movie, but not really a Holocaust movie. The only Jewish character is Max. Liesel is a very appealing young lady and her love of reading hopefully inspires more young girls and boys to read more. I haven’t read the book, but my research indicates it has the expected changes when you adapt a young adult book to the screen. Characters were dropped and obviously scenes were eliminated for time reasons. Subplots were cut. (The book is 550 pages.) In a slap in the face of youngsters who have read the book, the movie is more upbeat. The Devil from the book only appears as a narrator at the front and back of the movie, with a little in between. The relationship between Liesel and Rudy is more of a romance than a big brother – little sister vibe. I did feel upon watching the movie that it did not have enough hardship. It piles all the heart-tugging to the end. There is little suspense along the way. The plot clearly aimed the movie at young adult movie-goers, rather than young adult readers. But it did well, so you can’t fault the studio for encouraging the changes.

            I found the movie to be entertaining, but inconsequential. Considering the fame of the novel, I did not find the movie to be impactful. I have a strong belief that a movie version of a book should be better than the book, unless the book is too fanciful or futuristic for movie technology to replicate. The screenwriter of “The Book Thief” had the template of a beloved book to build his screenplay from. He could have improved upon it, but he didn’t. However, if you are not going to read the book or your child is not going to read it, watching the movie is an acceptable option. The plot is close enough and the actors do a great job bringing the characters to life. I believe most readers found the actors to fit how they envisioned the characters they read. And the book does not have a soundtrack by John Williams, so score one for the movie.

 GRADE  =  C

MACARONI COMBAT #8 - Apocalypse Mercenaries (1987)

              

               I’ll give this much to macaroni combat movies, they usually don’t try to fool you with their titles.  This movie is a good examples of how this subgenre wears its low quality on its sleeve.  I suppose some people might mistake this title for a movie related to “Apocalypse Now”, but those people should be parted from their money.  I mean the $1 they spend at the discount bin at Walmart.

               If you catch this masterpiece while channel surfing after midnight, you won’t need to know the title.  There will be plenty of clues that you have run into a very low budget war movie.  First clue, there is an explosion in the first 40 seconds.  Clue #2 -  the head of the commandos has a really macho name – in this case, Halo.  Clue #3 -  the mission is one behind enemy lines -  in this case, they are going to eliminate Nazi headquarters in Yugoslavia.  Clue #4 – they hook up with a sexy partisan.  Clue #5 -  they blow a lot of shit up -  in this case, a train and an airfield.  Clue #6 -  they shoot from the hip, never reload, never miss.  Clue #7 -  the deaths are silly with the victims throwing their arms into the air.  Wait, you can see this in big budget war movies, too.

               I’ll try not to spoil the plot for you.  You’re welcome.  Halo and a four-man team are sent to wipe out a Nazi headquarters.  His four men include a flier, a doctor, a demolitions nut, and a Rambo-type.  They meet the female partisan who acts as their guide.  When Halo looks through his binoculars, he sees footage from another film.  This is the first of the unintentional laughs.  They take a side mission to destroy a train.  And then an airfield.  They get attacked by Nazi fighters (planes that look nothing like German WWII warplanes) that actually carry bombs that they drop.  Take that, much better films.  There are lots of bombs.  They use poison gas on the headquarters.  That’s at least different.  This all builds to the climactic battle that includes a dogfight and a giant melee on the ground. 

               “Apocalypse Mercenaries” could have been much worse.  It does have a lot of mindless action and the acting is not terrible.  The characters are all cliches, but you don’t expect originality in a macaroni combat movie.  The female partisan is actually not part of the problem.  It’s the males that are bargain basement action heroes.  Everything you expect, you will get.  It’s classic macaroni.  I counted 14 explosions (besides the bombs) and 10 laughs, none of them intentional.  All set to an aggravating score that manages to combine snare drums with synthesizers.  I suggest you watch it muted.  You do know the sound of an explosion, right?

GRADE  =  D

Pride of the Marines (1945)

                   Al Schmid was one of the most famous Marine heroes from WWII.  He was blinded defending a machine gun position against a massive Japanese banzai attack on Guadalcanal.  He was a good choice for a biopic to boost morale during the war.  Warner Brothers took up the task.  The book “Al Schmid Marine” by Roger Butterfield was adapted.  The screenplay was nominated for an Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay.  It was directed by Delmer Davis (“Destination Tokyo” and “Task Force”).  It was a box office success.

                   The movie opens with narration by Schmid.  We get a tour of his home town of Philadelphia, including the Liberty Bell and Betsy Ross’ home.  Patriotism!  Early on we get a “gee willikers!”  It’s that kind of movie.  The first part of the movie establishes Schmid as the confirmed bachelor, but quite the ladies’ man.  He lives with a married couple.  Al:  “I live alone and like it.”  Jim:  “You  live alone and look it.”  Oh, 1940’s snap!  May sets up Al with a feisty woman named Ruth (Eleanor Parker).  She thinks he’s a “drip” and they hate-banter, so you know they are cinematicly destined.  After Pearl Harbor, Al enlists because “shooting Japs will be more fun than shooting bears.”  The second part skips the boot camp montage and plunges Schmid into Guadalcanal where one Marine says:  “I’m gonna dig this hole so deep it will be just short of desertion.”  Some of the slang we get:  dope, scuttlebutt, chow, smokes. The Japanese are called “nips” or “shambos”.  On the fateful night of the Battle of Tenaru, Schmid and two mates are in a fox hole with a M1917 Browning machine gun.  The night starts with “Maline, tonite you die!”  Response:  “Eat dirt, Tojo!”  Or if you want to be more specific:  “I’ll give you blood poisoning, you ring-tails!”  Unfortunately, one of those ring-tails throws a grenade that blinds Al.  The third part has Schmid dealing with his blinding and determined to avoid Ruth.  “Dear Ruth, I’m not coming back.  Good luck”. 

                   “Pride of the Marines” is slightly better than your typical WWII biopic.  The acting is fine from a good cast.  Garfield was a pretty big star back then.  He befriended the Schmids so he took the role seriously.  He really did not have the range for the role, but he’s appealing.  The dialogue has some good cracks in it, but it is fairly standard.  It keeps the patriotism down, except for one cringe-worthy scene among disabled veterans in the hospital which concludes with a terribly schmaltzy speech.  There is a clear theme of accepting wounded veterans back into society.  Give them a job!  Although a war movie, there is only one brief combat scene.  It is done on a sound stage, so don’t expect much.  It is pretty accurate in covering his Navy Cross-worthy effort.  The Japanese attack involved 800 men.  Schmid was wounded several times, but continued to fire for four hours, even after he was blinded.  200 bodies were found in front of their position.  He did go through a rough rehabilitation period, but I could not find out if the melodramatic romantic developments occurred.  I would assume Hollywood had some say on how his relationship with Ruth was portrayed.

                   “Pride of the Marines” is very much a product of its time.  Contrast it with more recent disabled veteran movies like “Born on the 4^th of July” and “Coming Home”.  In “Pride”, the hospital is almost like a frat house.  We’ve come a long way in handling the subject realistically.  But we have also become more cynical in handling our heroes.  Schmid deserved a movie and it does him justice, even though it is simplistic and overly patriotic.

GRADE  =  C