Tag: WWII

Downfall (AKA that Hitler Meme Movie)

On By Dean BrooksLeave a comment

(By The poster art can or could be obtained from the distributor., Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=56186129)

Nowadays you almost won’t know about a film whatsoever unless it has memeability. I guarantee you that’s why so many went to check out Obsession. All those Gumby-esque facial expressions Indy Navarrette makes–how could you not want to see it. “Think Mark! Think!” is what sucked me into the first season of Invincible.

Entertainment os so cutthroat today nothing works unless it infects you. Memes are the equivalent of the one-liners from the ’80s.

Downfall pulled it off before video internet memes were really a thing, way back in 2004. In fact, it created a pre-meme that only became a meme some ten years or so later. I don’t recall seeing clips of the Mustache Man freaking out with edited subtitles until like the mid-teens or so. It was literally ahead of its time.

But aside from the meme scene, what about the rest of the film? It’s pretty damn good, actually. Very good. Dark. Heavy. Depressing and reflective. I had no idea what kind of hijinks went on down in the bunker in the last days of the Reich. I assumed nothing upbeat. The story is largely told through the POV of a young woman named Traudi who becomes AH’s personal secretary in 1942, later joining him and the remnants of his Nazi cohorts in the Fuhrerbunker in the final 10 days of his life as the Soviets surround Berlin blasting it to kingdom come.

It’s a chilling if intimate portrait of Hitler. Most war films never depict him beyond a stock footage manner. But in the bunker, we get a glimpse past the theatrical mannerisms and famous screaming. Though he does scream. Quite a bit, in some instances. He’s a man in denial about the imminent collapse of his regime. Blasting generals and officers for failures, lambasting those he feels betrayed him, and directing imaginary regiments onto a battlefield in illogical desperation. Downfall is about a country’s literal downfall, yes, but it’s also about the Fuhrer’s mental collapse.

Hitler’s last days in the bunker are bizarre and eerie and unsettling I half expected Rod Serling to suddenly step out from a corner, cigarette in hand, and deliver some opening narration. “As Hitler is about to find out, his downfall will take place not just in this subterranean fortification deep below Berlin…but in the Twilight Zone.” Cue the music.

Hitler’s fall is a remarkable one. Almost unprecedented, save perhaps for Napoleon or Alexander the Great. But neither of those achieved so much–conquering nearly all of Europe–before losing it all so quickly. What does that plummet from power do to a man’s mental state? Especially one who was already teetering on the edge of sanity? It’s like seeing a supervillain suddenly stripped of his powers and forced to make do as an ordinary human. Hitler’s hand twitches behind his back. He prowls the bunker like a lost dog. He snaps at subordinates. Yet he’s also like a father presiding over a house of children he loves. He calmly dictates his will. Then lashes out when he hears of surrender terms. Quietly accepts an officer revealing he had been disobeying orders for weeks. Tenderly says farewell to his female staff. Turns his head away to avoid seeing his own dog put down with a cyanide pill. Then, like a wobbly machine finally winding down, departs to his room, where he Eva Braun take their own lives.

As I’ve mentioned before, WWII films too often become sensationalized, glamorized, and bombastic. Not so with Downfall. Bruno Ganz is superb as Hitler. The rest of the cast is excellent as well. I know this film received some criticism for “humanizing Hitler.” What, what exactly was it supposed to do? Have the Hitler actor wear a neon sign around his neck that says “EVIL” the whole time? I assume the events depicited were largely based in historical truth, with little embellishments or artistic flourishes added. Evil is never cartoonish anyway. It’s as it always has been–a handful of clean-shaven men conspiring in a room together, often whispering and sipping drinks.

Downfall is up there with some of my favorite war films, like Full Metal Jacket, Das Boot, and the brutally mesmerizing All Quiet on the Western Front.

The Great Escape

On By Dean Brooks1 Comment

(By moviegoods.com, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=6629076)

I’ve been thinking on this film for a few days and wondering why it didn’t quite connect with me.

I’m not the world’s biggest fan of WWII films, to be fair. Not because of the time period or the events. But because too often filmmakers use the setting to say something very important about war, life, or whatever, and trip all over themselves doing it. Which I get. We’re talking about a period that shaped the modern world today. It just too often reeks of tryhard. It becomes more of a vanity project for the director than a portrait of a history. Oppenheimer is a good example. So loud and bombastic just to dramatize a handful of guys in a dusty lab drawing on chalkboards. Inglorious Basterds was kind of obnoxious. Saving Private Ryan was decent, overall.

No, I mostly enjoyed The Great Escape. It’s a good film. It could have been great. But for some reason the film felt at odds with itself, and I think the main reason is the inclusion of the Steve McQueen character, Hilts, or “The Cooler King.” Now, I’ve not read the source novel, but apparently Hilts was added for the movie. Likely studios didn’t want to finance the picture unless they could insert an A-List American star like McQueen. But this editorial decision did a disservice to the story, as the Richard Attenborough character, Bartlett, or “Big X,” should have been the primary character. He’s the one driving the plot. He’s the one who concocts the whole tunneling and escape system. He’s wanted by the SS. I wanted to know more about his background and his character. He was like James Bond. Instead, he gets sidelined so we can get glamour shots of McQueen and his antics that get him stuck in the cooler.

Hilts was portrayed rather sterotypically all-American, too. Aloof, cool, daring, and, of course, a huge baseball fan.

This is what I mean when I say too often studios use WWII as a vehicle to show off rather than to tell a good story. A particularly egregious thing to do when it’s based on a true story, such as The Great Escape.

There were some tonal mismatches, too. At times it almost felt like I was watching a sitcom rather than a war drama. I’m a big fan of the TV series M*A*S*H, so I know you can balance hijinks with solemnity. I also love films like Full Metal Jacket, which is rife with dark humor and outrageousness while still sticking to its theme of dehumanization. But then at the end you have a 50-man massacre when the Nazis mow down all of Big X’s guys, including Big himself, after they’ve recaptured them, and then frame them as attempted escapees.

I guess I went into the film expecting a tone more similar to Clint Eastwood’s classic Escape from Alcatraz than something closer to The Andy Griffith Show. Might have just been the audience sensibilities at the time. Escape was released not even 20 years after the war ended. It was still fresh on everyone’s minds, and many viewers were likely veterans themselves.

The tunneling sequences were well done. I’m a huge enjoyer of technical briefing and planning scenes, which are requisite in heist or prison escape films, no matter how “boring” they may be. Such as the one in Rififi when they test out stopping the alarm system.

Overall, The Great Escape was a worthwhile watch. But it’s a good example of how sometimes unnecessarily adding a character can detract from a story, even if it makes good business sense.