The Tiger (2025)

            “Der Tiger” is a new WWII tank movie streaming on Amazon Prime. It was co-written and directed by Dennis Gansel. He directed eleven episodes of the “Das Boot” tv series. A Soviet T-55 chassis was mocked up to resemble a Tiger. It does look like a Tiger and effort was put into the interior to make it look authentic. I checked some diagrams of the interior of a Tiger and the film got it right. The movie begins with a title card reminding us that “Only the dead have seen the end of war.” Not very original and after you see the movie you will wonder if that quote was meant as a deception.

The movie takes place o the Dnieper Front in the fall of 1943. The German army is on the retreat everywhere in Russia. The titular tank is protecting the retreat of one of those retreating units. It is stationed at the Soviet end of a bridge and is literally the last German vehicle that has yet to cross the bridge. In a well-done action scene, the tank holds off Soviet infantry and tanks. The Tiger is a beast that is capable of holding its own against great odds. And it can take a licking. It is apparent why it was the most feared tank in the war. This will be emphasized throughout the movie. 

The crew is led by Lt. Gurkens (David Schutter) who is a typical gritty commander, but he is not a martinet. The crew calls him by his first name. There are four other crewmen. Some are stock tank characters. The radio operator wears glasses, which is mandatory in war movies. The gunner is the commander’s best friend and is wiling to disagree with him. (He reminds of the chief engineer in ‘Das Boot” the movie.  The driver is a veteran who is good at his job. There is a loader and a co-driver. Needless to say, they won’t all survive.

            Gurkens is given a secret mission which is to go behind enemy lines to rescue an officer who has plans that cannot fall into enemy hands. If they fail, the war is lost, of course. The officer happens to be the godfather of Gurkens’ son. A series of flashbacks teases out their relationship. The movie has a mystery to solve. The road trip is a series of vignettes which is normal for these kinds of movies. They encounter a minefield where they are able to treat us to the cliché of one of the crew having to be saved from blowing up. They run into Soviet tanks and one persistent SU-100. This monster of a self-propelled gun is actually a year away from combat in reality, but it had a scarier 100 mm. gun than the SU-85s 85. At one point, the Tiger has to submerge to avoid impossible odds. They encounter a German unit burning a village and killing civilians. The commander is a stereotypical evil Nazi, but he is the only Nazi in the movie. The crew is apolitical. They eventually reach the bunker where their target is located.

            “The Tiger” is an intriguing movie. It has some of the cliches you see in tank movies, like the behind the lines mission and some stereotypical characters. But it avoids others. There is little dysfunction in the crew. All of them are appealing characters and they have the kind of camaraderie you would expect in a seasoned crew. Their banter is unforced. The death of one of the crew is heart-tugging and way above average for a low budget war movie. (I am a critic of the laughable depictions of death in most war movies.) Durkens is well-respected and is a good leader. But we do reach the point in the movie where his crew asks the inevitable question: “Is this mission worth what we are going through?” Durkens’ answer is “duty is duty.”

            I was not expecting much from this movie. The tank subgenre is not noted for its quality. There is no “Das Boot” equivalent and most of the films are below average for war movies. “The Tiger” stands out because although it has some cliches (ex. the mission behind the lines) and stereotyped characters (ex. the evil Nazi), it manages to avoid being predictable and unoriginal. It has a scene that I have never seen in a war movie (the submergence scene) and the tank does things I have never seen from any tank (ex. it launches smoke grenades). It is a well-made film with good acting and outstanding sound effects. But the main thing that sets it apart from other tank movies is a twist that I won’t give away. It’s worth the watch to see what I am talking about. Let me know if you figure it out and if you think it is better than “Fury” or “The Beast”.

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

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

DUELING MOVIES: The Great Escaper (2023) vs. The Last Rifleman (2023)

            “The Great Escaper” is an Oliver Parker (“Dad’s Army”) film. It was based on the story of Bernard Jordan, a 90 year-old Royal Navy veteran who absconded from his nursing home to attend the 70^th anniversary of D-Day ceremonies in Normandy, France. It was the last film for Glenda Jackson (who died nine months after the shoot) and Michael Caine (who announced his retirement after).

            Bernie Jordan (Caine) lives in an assisted living facility with his wife Rene (Jackson). Bernie leaves the home to make his way to Normandy. He meets some interesting people on his adventure, including some German veterans. He visits the grave of a tanker who he had befriended. The guy showed Bernie his girlfriend’s picture. Can you guess if he survived the landing? And why did Bernie promise the tanker that he was not doomed? Hadn’t Bernie seen any war movies? The movie uses flashbacks to remember the courtship of Bernie and Ray and to depict the meeting of Brendan and the tanker. It also intercuts between Bernie and Rene. Rene is in the middle of a media blitz as the press latches on to the story of an old dude on the lam. The title of the movie is what the press called Bernie.

            This is a very British movie. The best word to describe it is charming. Bernie and Rene  have an ideal marriage. Jackson actually does a better job than Caine, but they both are great. They are the only reasons to watch the film. The movie is a trifle, especially if you are not British. Jordan got his fifteen minutes of fame, but that did not cross the pond, as they say. He does not have a Wikipedia page. The plot sticks to the actual story well.  Too well. The film lacks any suspense or tension. For instance, nothing happens when he meets the Germans. That’s because nothing happened when he met the Germans. Bernie did not land on D-Day and he doesn’t stick around for the ceremony 70 years later. Sometimes a screenwriter should take some creative license.

            “The Last Rifleman” was released for streaming a few weeks after “The Great Escaper”. It was directed by Terry Loane. It is a fictionalized story about Bernard Jordan.

            The movie opens with a flashback to D-Day. Artie Crawford (Pierce Brosnan) and his best friend are in a British unit attacking a German position in Normandy. The movie then jumps 75 years to the elderly Artie living in a nursing home with his terminally ill wife. Artie is 89-years-old and has diabetes and heart problems. He’s no spring chicken, so when he asks the nursing home administrator for permission to go to the 75^th anniversary commemoration of D-Day, he is turned down. Although this is a rational refusal, Artie decides to sneak out and go anyway. The movie turns into a road trip movie as Artie interacts with various people on his way to the ceremony. He is befriended by a young man who shares a love of the music of Ennio Marricone, is aided by a woman (Clémence Poésy), meets a German veteran (Jurgen Prochnow), and encounters a black G.I. (John Amos) who was in a barrage balloon unit. He is chased by a newspaper reporter who smells a good story. After overcoming some obstacles, Artie reaches the cemetery where his best friend is buried.

            “The Last Rifleman” is a heartwarming movie that avoids being sappy. The movie is a showcase for Pierce Brosnan who at 70 was made-up to be a 92 year-old Artie. The makeup artist did an excellent job and in case you didn’t notice, there is a scene thrown in with the 70-year-old Brosnan to contrast the two. His Artie is pretty frail and infirm. He is far from feisty, but he is able to evade capture with the help of sympathetic individuals. The rest of the cast is solid. It was John Amos last role. Jurgen Prochnow plays an SS officer who tries to talk to Artie. Artie is not willing to let bygones by bygones. But they end up singing “It’s a Long Way to Tipperary” together. (So that made the second time Prochnow has sung that song in a movie.)

            “The Last Rifleman” is based on the story of Bernard Jordan, but it takes significant liberties with the truth. Screenwriter Kevin Fitzpatrick sticks to the journey template, but he adds an interesting back-story for Artie. He was in a love triangle with his best friend and his future wife. He has PTSD from his best friend’s death and survivor guilt from marrying the woman who was meant for his friend. The trip to the cemetery brings closure for him.

            Which movie is better? They are both charming and sincere. Both treat D-Day veterans with respect and don’t make light of them. Both flashback to the cause of the main character’s

PTSD. The combat scenes in TLR are more compelling. Both take a road trip template. I found the people who Artie meets to be more interesting. The acting honors are hard to assign. Caine and Brosnan are wonderful, but I found that Brosnan stretched more. The casts are equivalent with sadly two cast members dying after their movies were completed (Jackson and Amos). If you are a purist when it comes to history, clearly TGE is the more accurate. But because of  that it is less entertaining than TLR. My recommendation is for you to watch both and make up your mind. You won’t regret either unless you want the elderly veteran to get revenge for his best friend’s death by killing a bunch of German veterans who attend the ceremony.

GRADES:  TGE  =  B-

                    TLR  =  B-

WAR MINISERIES: War and Remembrance (1988-89)

               “War and Remembrance” was the sequel to “Winds of War” (1983).  It continues the saga of the Henry family set in the chaos of WWII.  The mini-series was directed by Dan Curtis who also helped with the screenplay.  Author Herman Wouk was a cowriter as well.  The mini-series was a massive undertaking and at $110 million, the costliest mini-series up till then.  It was shot on location in numerous countries.  There were 2,070 scenes, 757 sets, and 358 speaking parts.  The mini-series ran 1620 minutes and was shown over two one-week spans.  It was a ratings success and got 15 Emmy nominations.  It won for Best Mini-Series.  John Gielgud, Jane Seymour, and Polly Bergen got acting nods.  Gielgud and Seymour did not originate their roles (replacing John Houseman and Ali McGraw).  Another significant acting change was Hart Bochner replacing Jan-Michael Vincent as Byron Henry.

               The mini-series opens the week after Pearl Harbor.  “Pug” Henry (Robert Mitchum) is now captain of the heavy cruiser Indianapolis.  He is still having troubles in his marriage with Rhoda (Bergen) as she is still seeing Palmer and Pug is playing footsie with Pamela (Victoria Tennant).  Natalie (Seymour) and Aaron (Gielgud) are still trying to get out of Europe to avoid the Holocaust.  Byron (Bochner) is a submariner in the Pacific and his brother Warren is a dive bomber pilot.  Let’s look at the three main arcs.

               Byron is the exec on a submarine skippered by the cigar (and scene) chewing Aster (Barry Bostwick).  These scenes are heavy with sub clichés starting with a command conflict as Byron believes in the rules of war and Aster doesn’t.  We get the obligatory depth charging scenes.  There are three set pieces and all have ridiculous aspects. 

               The Pug / Pamela / Rhoda arc continued from “Winds of War”.  It is still a small world with Pug and Pamela meeting in the unlikeliest of places.  Basically, Pug is still globe hopping (ex. Russia) and rubbing elbows  with the big boys (but not Hitler and Mussolini any more since the war has begun).  Pamela is still showing up wherever he goes.  I think she planted a homing device on him.  

               Meanwhile Natalie and Aaron continue their inevitable march to Auschwitz.  They are headed for Palestine when baby Louis develops a cold and Natalie panics (again).  They go from Italy to Elba and then Corsica.  Byron gets transferred to the Atlantic and masquerading as a diplomatic courier is reunited with Natalie.  He wants to go by train to Spain, but Natalie decides it’s too risky.  Would you believe this turns out to be a bad decision?  They both have run-ins with the malevolent unstable German commander, but as of episode 10 still have not made it to their final destination.  This changes with the train ride to Auschwitz.  Finally!  One of them dies there.

               Besides the three main character arcs, the miniseries concentrates on some major historical events.  The Battle of Midway is covered in episode 3.  Warren Henry participates in the dive bombing of a Japanese aircraft carrier.  The use of actual footage is problematical as some of it is from later battles (ex. there is some kamikaze footage) and some is from “Tora! Tora! Tora!”.  Raymond Spruance (J.D. Spradlin) and his decision making gets nice coverage.  He actually gets to defend himself against the historical criticisms of his lack of a killer instinct. 

               There are two threads that deserve mentioning.  The mini-series does an excellent job on the Hitler assassination conspiracy.  We are in from planning through execution to aftermath.  The other thread is the Holocaust.  The mini-series is a great tutorial.  One scene has Himmler visiting Auschwitz for a chilling “Special Action” where the commandant walks him through the process from the Nazi perspective.  Step by step.  Very efficient.  Aaron’s brother Berel (Topol) is in the camp so we get the Jewish perspective as well.    Aaron and Natalie’s train trip is not horrific enough, but you get the idea.  The gas chamber scene is the best I’ve seen and does not cop out like its equivalent in “Schindler’s List”.  For a TV movie, the mini-series is amazingly uncensored.  There is realistic nudity.  This is one of several powerful and emotional Holocaust scenes that take the series to a high level.

               Besides the drama of the fictional characters interwoven in the historical events, the show takes the viewers behind the scenes at the highest government levels.  Churchill (Robert Hardy), FDR (Ralph Bellamy), and Hitler (Steven Berkoff) are recurring characters.  Hitler’s descent into madness is well-chronicled.  In a similar vein, the storyline is bridged with footage and narration keeping us abreast of developments in the war.  The footage matches the transcript which is a great tutorial for the ignorant masses.

               “War and Remembrance” is a commendable accomplishment.  The effort invested is obvious and noteworthy.  You can see why it cost $110 million.  Dan Curtis was serious in making a blockbuster.  It is hard to imagine anyone duplicating the effort in the future.  In fact, W&R has been described as the last miniseries.  It brought a nice close to the heyday of these types of TV spectacles.  The location shooting was especially laudatory.  Curtis was the first to film on site at Auschwitz.  The foreign locales add authenticity to the story and give it a sightseeing aura.

               The cast changes are an upgrade from WoW.  As great as Houseman was as an actor, Gielgud does a better job depicting the naivete evolving into bravery of Aaron Jastrow.  Seymour is simply a better actress than McGraw which is important because Natalie goes through a gut-wrenching roller coaster ride.  Hardy and Berkoff (a Jew, by the way) are improvements over the earlier Churchill and Hitler.  Berkoff deserves recognition as one of the best Hitlers and Hardy has made a career of playing Churchill.

               As far as the acting in general, it is good.  The exceptions unfortunately are some key roles starting with Pug.  Mitchum definitely shows his age and sleep walks through the role.  He was almost seventy when the film was made.  His heart was not in it although he got to play out the fantasy of having a woman (Tennant) who was 33 years younger than him wanting to jump his tired old bones.  Tennant is weak as an actress although at least she manages not to look disgusted when pretending to be infatuated with the lackluster laconic lump of a career sailor.  Barry Bostwick jazzes things up as “Lady” Aster, the unstable sub captain who has an affair with Byron’s sister-in-law (Sharon Stone who appears at one point in a mini-skirt circa 1942).  The fact that Byron also jumps in the sack with Janice while pining for Natalie and his son Louis emphasizes the soap opera nature of the mini-series.  This, of course, pales in comparison to the Pug / Rhoda / Pamela goings on.  Naturally, in mini-series that clocks in at 1620 minutes, this love triangle gets tedious to go along with the creepy aspects of the May-December Pug and Pamela affair.

               The length of the mini-series also means that we have the interminable arc of the Jastrows’ path to the gas chambers.  It’s almost laughable the twists the screenwriters have to go through to prevent this arc from coming to a premature (but realistic end).  Two things have to come into play here.  Aaron has to be played as a hopeless optimist until they are completely trapped.  Although it is implicit, not explicit, Aaron’s behavior could be argued to accurately reflect the naivete that caused many Jews to disregard the omens.  As to Natalie, she has to  consistently wimp out when opportunities arise to save herself and her child.  I did not feel sorry for either one of them.

               A poor decision was made to make Byron Henry the action figure of the series.  The submarine scenes are the biggest whoppers in the series.  The interiors and operations are fine, but the tactics are abysmal.  Twice the sub surfaces for no logical reason.  The surface battle with the destroyer shows a complete ignorance of submarine warfare on the part of the writers.  (I do not know if Wouk staged it this way in the novel.)  That sub would not have survived that encounter in reality,  let alone left the destroyer crippled.

               In conclusion, it’s unfair to harp on some of the obvious weaknesses in W&W.  When you look at it in totality, it is a remarkable achievement.  While I found the romance interludes to be lame and repetitive, if you spend $110 million, you better bring in a female demographic.  The action loses out to the drama, but it is spaced out to keep people like me tuned in.  As a big fan of history, it’s fun to see the behind the scenes stuff like Hitler’s conflicts with his generals.  Most importantly, the Holocaust is covered in great detail through two story lines.  you certainly learn more about the event than you do from watching “Schindler’s List”.

GRADE = B

MINI-SERIES: The Winds of War

 

               “The Winds of War” is a mini-series that appeared on TV in 1983.  It was based on the novel by Herman Wouk and he wrote the teleplay.  Wouk was very hands on in bringing his work to the screen and even had a cameo in the series.  It was directed by Dan Curtis.  The series was very expensive and was filmed at numerous locations around the globe.  It was a big ratings success and got several Emmy nominations.  The story covers the period from March, 1939 through December, 1941.  It basically places career naval officer “Pug” Henry (Robert Mitchum) and his family in the midst of events leading up to the war.  The series mixes them in with historical characters including the major world leaders like Hitler, Mussolini, Roosevelt, and Churchill.

               The series is so sprawling it is impossible to summarize, but here are some of the basics.  Pug is available for globetrotting to wherever the political or military action is.  Meanwhile his family is being personally effected by the war.  Each of them gets a romance.  His wife Rhoda (Polly Bergen) loves high society and rubbing shoulders with world leaders (she certainly married the right man for that!).  Pug is gone a lot, what with being in the Navy plus having to be on the scene for any significant event, so she dallies with Fred Kirby (Peter Graves).  Two can play that game.  Pug has a British bird half his age named Pamela (Victoria Tennant) that has a crush on him.  This is creepy not just because of the age difference, but because Pamela is vivacious and Pug is as uncharismatic as a slug.  There is not enough chemistry here to get an ant high.  Speaking of which.  Their youngest son Byron (Jan Michael-Vincent) marries an older, feisty Jewish girl named Natalie Jastrow (Ali MacGraw) so we get a connection to the Holocaust.  One of the themes of the series is the naivete of most European Jews when it came to reading the omens.  A lot of time is spent on Natalie trying to get herself and her uncle (and her baby) off of the cliff.  They keep backing away and then running up to the edge.  It gets farcical after a while.  Idiots, why not just knock on the concentration camp door and get it over with!

               If you can put up with all the romantic shenanigans, the filler is quite good and informative. The series hits all the major events leading to war in Europe and then shifts toward getting the U.S. involved.  We go behind closed doors to the inner circles to see the politics.  It’s not quite “Game of Thrones”, but as close as the 20^th Century got to it.  The best acting is by the actors who portray the heavy weights like Hitler, Churchill, and Roosevelt (Ralph Bellamy).  There is a lot of verbatim speechifying.  If you don’t know how the world got in such a mess, you will have a pretty good idea after watching this.  The series effectively uses a narrator to lead into the higher level scenes and to bridge to the next event.  There is also effective use of archival footage.

               As unrealistic as it is, the series manages to put Pug in some situations that provide quite a bit of excitement to balance the smoochy stuff.  Besides being the only person in history to chat with Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Churchill, and FDR (sorry Hirohito, you’re not on his friends list), he also gets to see some action.  For instance, he suits up for the first RAF bombing mission to Berlin.  He’s on board an escort destroyer for convoy duty in the North Atlantic.  He witnesses the blitzkrieg in Russia.  He hops on a horse in Poland to join the lancers in a charge against German tanks.  Okay, I made that last one up (although the movie has a reference to that incident).  He is the Zelig of WWII.  All this without using his facial muscles or showing any emotion.

               The most impressive thing about the teleplay is the references to beyond WWII 001.  The series throws in details that bring nods from people who are well-versed on the war.  For instance, there is a scene where Churchill decides not to accede to French pleas of maximum RAF support to avoid conquest.  Churchill consults with the RAF chief and makes the harsh decision to save his squadrons for the next battle.  The infancy of radar is delved into.  It is accurately called RDF by the British.  There is a good scene where Pug visits an Operational Center (where Pamela coincidentally works) to see the vectoring of fighters to meet Luftwaffe bombers.

               The money spent on the series is most apparent in the location shooting.  The globe-trotting is truly impressive.  Curtis takes the time to throw in local color like some running of the horses spectacle in Italy.  Some of that money might have been better spent on the effects.  There is too much reliance on models for the air combat and naval scenes.  This miniseries could have really used CGI.  The use of actual footage helps and the series also makes use of shots from earlier war movies.  For instance, the Pearl Harbor attack inserts footage from
“Tora! Tora! Tora!” and I swear I recognized a carrier landing from the obscure “Dive Bomber” (which may have been borrowed itself).

               Some of the money could also have been put toward higher quality actors.  Robert Mitchum was a big star, but much too old for the role especially if you are going to pair him off with an actress 33 years younger.  Not only that but there must have been some thought that the series would go on to a sequel.  He was around age 70 when “War and Remembrance” was made!  The rest of the cast is B-list and it shows.  Polly Bergen does well as the scene chewing Mrs. Henry and John Houseman brings gravitas as the brilliant, but laughably naïve Aaron Jastrow.  The biggest problems are MacGraw and Michael-Vincent who have virtually no chemistry as the separated lovers.  Ben Murphy is not given enough to do as the other Henry boy.  As already mentioned the acting accolades go to the actors who portray the world leaders.  They are uniformly able.

GRADE =  B-