Film Friday: The Boys From Brazil (1978)

Imagine a film starring Gregory Peck, Laurence Olivier, James Mason, Denholm Elliot, a dozen other people you know, and Steve Guttenberg. Imagine I told you it was a thriller with a very original idea that involved Nazis. Boo hiss! Imagine it was made during the same time period when Star Wars, Close Encounters, The Godfather and a dozen other classics were made. Sounds like a heck of a film, doesn’t it? Yeah, no.

Plot

The Boys From Brazil involves a secret plot by escaped Nazi war criminals now living in Brazil. The man coordinating the plot is the infamous Dr. Joseph Mengele (Peck). As the film opens, Mengele’s scheme is uncovered by a young Nazi hunter (Guttenberg). He learns that Mengele and his team are planning to kill 94 men in several different European and North American countries. The reason for this is not clear. Guttenberg calls the famed Erza Lieberman (Olivier) to get his help. Lieberman has become discredited and cynical and refuses to help, however. Then Guttenberg is killed by Mengele.

Lieberman realizes that Mengele is behind the murder and decides he must take action. He begins to investigate the leads Guttenberg gave him before he died. While investigating, Lieberman runs across something strange. Each of the men slated to be killed has a similar profile (middle-age civil servant) and each has an identical, adopted son. Realizing very quickly that this cannot be a coincidence, and that the boys cannot be twins, Lieberman realizes they are clones.

We, of course, know that these boys are clones. What’s more, we know they are clones made from Adolph Hitler’s DNA. And the reason the 94 men have similar profiles and are being killed is that Mengele hopes to recreate Hitler by re-creating him genetically and then making each boy go through a similar childhood to the one Hitler had. He believes this will lead to a reincarnation of Hitler.

Meanwhile, the other Nazis order Mengele to stop his experiment, which is drawing too much heat. They also tell him to avoid Lieberman. Mengele violates his orders, however, and goes to kill Lieberman. This results in an odd showdown in Lancaster, Pennsylvania where one of the clones lets his dogs kill Mengele.

Why This Was A Turdburger

On paper, this film has amazing potential. Seriously, it offers Nazis, a sinister global plot, and tons of potential action. And best of all, the casting was top notch! Is Mengele’s plan a little weak? Sure, but in a well-done film you won’t have time to think about it until well after you’ve left the theater. So what went wrong? The failure of this film is a classic example of what happens when a writer/director thinks the set up is so strong that it sells itself. In fact, that idea permeates this film time and again leaving unsatisfied potential everywhere. Consider this...

The idea of a group of Nazi war criminals hatching a global plot that will ultimately lead to the rebirth of a new Nazi German under a cloned Adolph Hitler is a strong idea... at least on the surface. There are some definite problems with this. For one thing, Hitler took advantage of unique circumstances. So you can make all the clones you want, but unless you find another Germany in the Great Depression, they won’t be able to do anything. Further, history tells us that Hitler made as many ruinous mistakes as he made brilliant decisions. And by the end of the war, he had become such a drug-addicted mental case that he was ordering around phantom armies, shooting loyal subordinates, and abandoning hundreds of thousands of soldiers to fruitless deaths. Why recreate him? Recreate Stalin if anyone.

Anyways, that issue aside, the real problem is that once we know the scheme, there’s no sense of urgency to it. The film never once convinces us that the societies where these Hitler²s live are looking for a Hitler, nor does it suggest that the Nazis have political connections that would let them place these Hitler²s into power. So at best, this film tells the story of a plot that could one day evolve into a genuine scheme for power. That’s weak. Nor does the director substitute action to generate tension. There are a couple murders, but they are quite dull. There are no chases, no lucky escapes, and no fights. In each case, we’re supposed to be shocked by the fact of the murder rather than how it gets carried out. And that’s just the beginning.

Lieberman is meant to be the lone hero who still fights for justice when the rest of the world no longer cares. That’s a great character. But once again, the writer/director seem to think the existence of the character is enough. Indeed, he never really does anything throughout the film. He doesn’t trick the villains or defeat them in any way. All he does it travel to meet people Guttenberg has identified. Even when he finally seems to put together Mengele’s plot, he does nothing with it. He just waits until Mengele comes to kill him, then someone else kills Mengele, and then the film ends.

In fact, throughout this film, both the Mengele character and the Lieberman character underwhelm. Lieberman is meant to come across as noble, tenacious and resolute. But Olivier seems to think that his being a Jew who spends his life hunting Nazis is enough to give the character life, so he just stumbles around meekly as the plot magically plays out for him. Mengele, on the other hand, is a Nazi who did cruel experiments on death camp victims. Just like Olivier, Peck thinks this is enough to make the character. So he swaggers around and barks orders and he shoots people casually, but that’s about all he gives you to feel his evil. There’s never anything to let you into this guy’s mind or to explain his actions. In fact, neither actor does anything to give you any more insight into the character than you would get from knowing their background. It’s like being given a sports car and then letting it sit in the driveway.

The ending is another example. The ending involves a one on one battle of wits between Mengele himself and Lieberman for the soul of one of the Hitler² boys, with the loser to be torn apart by dogs! Sounds exciting doesn’t it? What’s more, when Mengele loses, there is the delicious irony that he is killed because he made these boys evil. Sounds great, right? Well, once again, the writer/director thought the setup was enough. So when the scene occurs, almost nothing happens. Mengele has a gun and wounds Lieberman at the outset. Then they both sit down and say things to the Hitler². Neither one is particularly convincing. There is no discussion of the kid’s destiny. There is no battle of philosophies or moralities. There’s no ticking clock to add urgency to the moment. They both just kind of say, “pick me!” and the boy decides. Yawn.

This problem repeats itself throughout. At every turn, the film relies on the setup itself to hold the audience’s interest and it does nothing to develop interest independently. Even the presence of the Nazis is done lazily. You see one brief moment where you have some people in Nazi uniforms at a ball, but there’s no sense that these people truly have an ideology, a goal, or an organization that is capable of doing anything more than holding a ball in Brazil.

The end result of this is a film filled with potential which never once lives up to that potential. And that makes the film boring. This film failed scene by scene.

Thoughts?

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Twelve OʼClock High (20th Century Fox - 1949)

By Tennessee Jed

Produced by Darryl F. Zanuck, this is one of the most highly regarded films to come out of World War II. Nominated for four academy awards in 1950 including best picture, lead and supporting actor, it was selected for preservation in 1998 by the National Film Institute of the Library of Congress for being culturally or historically significant. The production has relatively little in the way of “action” sequences, and what there is consists of actual battle footage from the Air Force and Luftwaffe, creating something of a “newsreel” flavor. Exterior scenes were mainly filmed at Elgin Air Force base in Florida, or Cairns Airfield in Alabama. Ostensibly part of the military genre, Twelve OʼClock High is clearly an unconventional war film. Letʼs take a look at how that helps make for a fascinating movie.

** spoiler alert **

The Plot chronicles some of the activities of the U.S. Armyʼs 8th Air force Battalion that flew bombing raids into occupied France and Germany during 1942. The screenplay was developed from a novel by Sy Bartlett, aide-de-camp to Major General Carl Spatz during the war. Bartlett was heavily involved in the screenplay, providing an insiderʼs view of people and events that adds to the filmʼs credibility. Most major characters represent composites of actual officers from the Battalion.

In the opening sequence, former officer Major/Lt. Colonel Harvey Stovall (Dean Jagger) is in London post-war when he notices a battered old toby jug (philpot) of Robin Hood in an antique shop. He immediately purchases it and carries it on his bicycle to a fictional abandoned airfield at Archbury where he served with the equally fictional 918th Heavy Bomber Group stationed there during the war. This permits him to “flashback” to the events portrayed in the story.

We witness the crash landing of a B-17 “flying fortress” returning from a mission, and find the 918th has suffered high casualties as a result of a strategic command decision to conduct daylight bombing strikes. While this strategy makes it easier to successfully hit targets, it also greatly increases the risk to the bombers from anti-aircraft fire.

Morale is low and performance poor in the 918th, and Group Commander, Colonel Keith Davenport, (Gary Merrill) may be a contributory cause. Although respected and well liked by his subordinates, he has come to over-identify with the men, losing sight of the mission due to his concern for their safety. He complains about his newest orders to his friend, Brigadier General Frank Savage (Gregory Peck,) a staff aide to Battalion Commander, Major General Pat Pritchard (Millard Mitchell.) Pritchard re-assigns Davenport to his staff, replacing him with Savage as new leader of the 918th. He is tasked with “finding out just how much a man can take” in order to obtain “maximum effort” from the men.

Upon arrival, Savage finds his new command in disarray with discipline virtually nonexistent. Setting out to reverse the situation, he focuses first on Air Executive Officer, Lt. Colonel Ben Gately (Hugh Marlowe.) Gately is not only a West Point graduate, but also son of a famous general. Gately is demoted and given “command” of a plane named The Leper Colony, assigned to those who donʼt meet expectations. He is replaced as Air Executive Officer by Major Joe Cobb (John Kellogg.) The other pilots all request transfers, but Savage convinces Stovall, the Group adjutant, to “delay” the paper work, buying him time to win them over. The unit resumes flying missions and the new discipline begins to pay off in improved performance.

After Savage personally leads them successfully on a dangerous mission without suffering any casualties, the men begin to think differently about their commander. Savage is chewed out by his boss because he claims “radio malfunction” as a flimsy excuse for ignoring a recall order during the attack. Savage convinces Pritchard to award a citation to the group. Lt. Jesse Bishop, (Robert Patten) a medal of honor nominee is enlisted to convince the others to cancel their transfer requests. As longer flights continue to become increasingly dangerous, the likable Bishop is killed, followed by Cobb. Savage reinstates Gately as Air Exec., but then slips into his own stress induced disorder as the airmen leave on their next mission.

The Leadership Theme - At itʼs core, this film is actually an examination of leadership style. It has been used by the military and numerous corporations (including the one for which I worked) as a popular case study during seminars on the topic. Most modern academic theories categorize leadership into three broad styles; authoritative, collaborative, or delegating. No single style is always best, and effective leaders must blend different styles based on a variety of factors including the leaderʼs personality, the experience or skill level of the subordinates, and the source from which the leaderʼs power is derived. That source can be formalized organizationally, informal or both.

For obvious reasons, the military is based upon a strict, formalized, authoritative chain of command. General Savage stresses this authoritative style in order to restore discipline, but it is worth noting he wins respect and support from his people through leading by example, a more informal source of “personal” power. Collaborative is a style best utilized when the need for “buy-in” is paramount between parties where no direct subordinate relationship exists (such as between the President and Congress.) The delegating style is often seen where a leader enjoys an advantage of trusted, experienced subordinates.

Another theme expressed is the debilitating impact of extreme combat stress on individuals. Stress can take both a physical and emotional toll, ultimately changing or limiting the effectiveness of even the strongest leaders. In the book The Killer Angels, General Lee tells General Longstreet of the great trap of military commanders. Paraphrasing, he states {to be a good soldier, you must love your men, but to be a good officer, you must be willing to order the death of the thing you love. No other profession requires it. That is why there are many good soldiers, but so few good officers.} Many individuals who served in the 8th battalion have commented on the authenticity of this film, claiming most of the scenes and events occurred at one time or another, although not all within a single battle group.

Conclusions - For those interested in World War II, or merely the nature of leadership, this movie is highly recommended, perhaps even a “must see.” At times, the pace is a bit slow, but itʼs lessons are applicable well beyond the military, and create an opportunity for viewers to consider any leader in a somewhat different light.

As an aside, Twelve OʼClock High is an actual term used by military aviators who are communicating the position of enemy aircraft during an engagement. The position is described as the face of a clock with twelve oʼclock being directly in front, while six oʼclock would be directly behind. The “high” would indicate the enemy is at higher altitude. The film was converted to a popular television series which ran for four seasons between 1964 and 1967 and utilized the same characters.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

Film Friday: The Guns of Navarone (1961)

The Guns of Navarone is a fascinating movie, and not just because of what’s on the screen. Based on a book by Alistair MacLean, the film was written and produced as anti-Cold War propaganda by Carl Foreman, a member of the communist party, who was blacklisted in the United States. His intent apparently was to suggest to Western audiences that they not fight the Cold War. But like so many other liberal message films, his message backfired, and he ended up creating a rousing film that remains one of the stronger World War II movies.

** spoiler alert **

Navarone ostensibly is the story of a commando team that must infiltrate a fictional Nazi-occupied island in Greece and destroy a large rail gun so the British Navy can pass by the island to save 5,000 trapped British troops. As they do this, they are repeatedly faced with nasty choices, such as whether or not to kill one of their own when he gets wounded or to feed him false information knowing he will reveal the information under torture. They also encounter betrayal, cold-blooded murder, and cowardice.

More importantly, the three main characters struggle with each other. Capt. Mallory (Gregory Peck), an American, is tired of the war, but continues with his duty even though it seems hopeless to him. Andrea Stavros (Anthony Quinn), a former Colonel in the Greek army, fights to free his home. Corporal Miller (David Niven), a British explosives expert, is anti-war and revels in criticizing Mallory’s actions.

I say “ostensibly” because the film is actually a metaphor for the Cold War. If we see this film as Foreman intended, then we would notice the following: the Nazis, who stand in for the Soviets, are ruthless, efficient, and nearly omniscient. It is hopeless to fight them. Mallory, who represents Americans, is a stupid man who is only doing what he’s been told and has no idea why he’s fighting. Miller, who represents America’s allies, is worn out, cynical and ready to make America carry the load. He also manipulates Mallory into doing all the dirty deeds. And Stavros represents the people of third world countries who are dying on these misguided American missions.

But here’s the problem for Foreman. Leftist propaganda doesn’t sell. To make the movie profitable, the characters had to resolve their issues before they could move ahead. And in so doing, Foreman’s anti-war message morphs into a call for everyone to understand the importance of fighting, i.e. the reasons why the West did fight, and to grasp their importance to the fight. In effect, to draw an audience, he turns an anti-war screed into an incredibly strong pro-war film.

Indeed, as the characters reach the make or break moment, Mallory suddenly realizes why he’s fighting -- he needs to make this realization if he is to be able to continue the mission. He realizes that he is not fighting just a different ideology, but an evil ideology, and that he must succeed if he is to save the people who are relying on him. In other words, he learns that he is part of a bigger picture and what he does matters because people are relying on him.

What brings about this epiphany is his observation of the Greeks. Up to this point in the film, Mallory and Miller have been little more than tourists. They see the island as just another battleground and they pay no attention to the locals. But as they are brought into the lives of the locals, they come to realize what the Nazis have wrought upon this community and the lives they’ve destroyed. This particularly strikes Mallory when he realizes this war is a matter of life and death to Stavros, and that Stavros can’t simply quit the war and go back to his old life. He knew this, just as he knew that 5,000 soldiers and sailors would die if he failed, but his experience finally personalizes this for him.

It’s at this point that Mallory has enough of Miller’s constant harping and disclaiming of any responsibility. Miller has disavowed responsibility for everything that happened, and criticized Mallory at every turn, safe in the knowledge that Mallory would do his duty no matter how asinine Miller behaved. But now Mallory has his fill, and he delivers one of the most pro-war speeches you will ever hear in a film. Indeed, he berates Miller for trying to pretend that he is only an observer and he tells Miller “whether you like it or not, you’re in this thing, up to your neck.” He then demands that Miller finally carry his own weight. Shamed, Miller realizes that his cynical pacifism had been disloyalty bordering on sabotage.

Thus, what was meant to present an image of America adrift facing an invincible foe as worn-out, whiny, worthless allies harp at America from the sidelines, suddenly becomes a rousing pro-war statement declaring the importance of everyone working together to win this struggle to set the world free. Basically, Foreman’s anti-war film turned into a crystal clear statement of why everyone needed to do their duty.

This is one of the ironies of leftist propaganda films: they often backfire on their creators because the need to attract an audience requires certain elements that change the message of the film. In this case, had the characters surrendered to their cynicism, then there would be no doubt about the anti-war message of the film. . . but there wouldn’t have been an audience. Instead, the characters overcome the ideological confines placed upon them early in the film so they can try to end the movie successfully. And because of that, the “message” of defeatism actually gets converted from being the thing the audience was meant to take away from the film into the thing that must be beaten for a brighter future. And that's the exact opposite of what Foreman hoped to convey.

Whoops.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...