DVD Review: Valkyrie

The underwhelming adaptation of a thrilling true story arrives on DVD and Blu-Ray tomorrow.

Valkyrie is a movie that tempts you to think more of it than it deserves. Handsomely shot in precise but non-obtrusive period detail, deliberately and intelligently structured with fine performances all around, the entire production seems worthy of its compelling subject matter. So why isn’t it better than just good?

Upon its theatrical release last December Critics commented that Tom Cruise’s outsized screen persona dominates the film, so that the character of Nazi Colonel Claus Von Stauffenberg disappears inside the audience’s expectations of what happens in a typical Tom Cruise movie. To a point, that’s a fair gripe: following the Cruise film formula (explained in greater detail in our Valkyrie preview), Stauffenberg is a star in his chosen profession (in this case killing Allied soldiers) until something happens that sends his life spiraling out of his control. Valkyrie breaks ranks from the Cruise routine in that Von Stauffenberg’s change of heart is only the beginning of his character arc.

At first on campaign in North Africa, Stauffenberg is sent to Berlin to convalesce after a Royal Air Force attack on his tank patrol leaves him wounded and maimed. Once in the Reich capital, he’s recruited into a cabal of Nazi military officers determined to assassinate German prime minister Adolf Hitler. The group, codenamed Operation: Valkyrie, hopes to save lives and ameliorate German shame in the eyes of the world. One of the more surprising twists in the film is the reality of the group’s ambition: killing Hitler in 1944 and suing the Allies for peace seems, in the cast’s capable hands, completely within reach. But, and in staying true to the real-life story, small indecisions and mundane twists of fate, combined with poorly short-sighted decisions, combine to undermine their efforts.

The SBR complaint department always welcomes your feedback.

Director Bryan Singer wisely stages the ill-fated assassination attempt as a set piece that centers the whole film. Stauffenberg manages to place a bomb beneath a table where Hitler meets with his staff to discuss the collapsing Eastern Front. Though the bomb detonates, the Fuhrer escapes the blast with only minor injuries. The cabal’s plan goes on as planned, however, using a civil defense program to briefly overthrow the Nazi regime and corral the SS secret police. Perhaps unwiesely, most of the film’s final third or so details the insurrection’s demise and fall, paced in a way that invites sympathy for the conspirators but whose mounting tension feels oddly winded. Despite the lived-in performances of the ace supporting cast – Kenneth Branagh, Terence Stamp, Bill Nighy, Tom Wilkinson, Eddie Izzard, among others – there is seldom a sense that the events are bearing down upon the characters. Given that they’ve tried to kill freaking Hitler, you’d expect more feeling that doom is imminent.

This lag comes largely from a problem with staging: the scenes in which the coup unravels should be the stuff of nailbiting suspense, but Singer chooses to almost only show Cruise talking on the phone a lot or a somewhat anonymous looking group of Nazi militiamen standing around in a square. Surely, there was more to a Nazi Berlin swallowed by an insurrectionist crisis than what’s displayed here. There are glimmers of promise, as when a militia soldier arrives to arrest Dr. Joseph Goebbels. The mad doctor already has the cyanide capsule in his mouth as the militia officer is told to stand down via a telephone call from no less than Hitler himself. In that case alone, the film stops and lets the situation speak for itself. More such moments would have immensely helped move the film along and draw the audience into its developments.

The Reichstag chapter of the Hair Club for Men show off their membership cards.

Cruise brings exactly the same level of intensity to playing the doomed, honorable Stauffenberg that he’s brought to every one of his films since Jerry Maguire. Like popcorn or Junior Mints from the snack bar, he’s a rigidly dependable theatrical commodity. It’s become somewhat fashionable to lambaste the man, and quite a bit of that ridicule is righteous backlash. But his performance should almost only be ancillary to seeing the accomplished supporting players take on such weighty subject matter. If only that were the case. This being a Tom Cruise Movie, they’re never given free room to work: Branagh especially is noticeably absent for much of the film’s narrative. To be fair, Cruise’s involvement is likely the difference in budget and production scale between the film as it is and a critically-acclaimed and little-watched HBO original movie.

Which perhaps it should have been in the first place, in that its shortcomings of plot and tension would be more readily excused or its dragging pace easier to overlook. Disappointing for its faults and maddening for its potential, Valkyrie emerges at last as neither a great film nor a terrible one. If it disappoints, to see such a fascinating story presented capably at all almost provides compensation enough for its eventual collapse. And of course, there’s Cruise. Come for the movie star, stay for the history.

- Michael Kabel

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

 (Note: An earlier version of this review originally appeared for the film’s theatrical release.)

Review: Valkyrie

Tom Cruise and an awesome supporting cast can’t quite lift Bryan Singer’s suspenser above mediocre.

Valkyrie is a movie that tempts you to think more of it than it deserves. Handsomely shot in precise but non-obtrusive period detail, deliberately and intelligently structured with fine performances all around, the entire production seems worthy of its compelling subject matter. So why isn’t it better than just good?

A few critics have already commented that Tom Cruise’s outsized screen persona dominates the film, so that the character of Nazi Colonel Claus Von Stauffenberg disappears inside the audience’s expectations of what happens in a Tom Cruise movie. To a point, that’s a fair criticism: following the Cruise film formula (explained in greater detail in our Valkyrie preview), Stauffenberg is a star in his chosen profession (in this case killing Allied soldiers) until something happens that sends his life spiraling out of his control. Valkyrie breaks ranks in that his change of heart is only the beginning of his character’s arc.

After getting seriously wounded on the North African front, Stauffenberg is sent to Berlin to convalesce. There, he’s recruited into a cabal of Nazi military officers determined to assassinate German prime minister Adolf Hitler in the hopes of saving lives and ameliorating German shame in the eyes of the world. One of the more surprising twists in the film is the reality of the group’s ambition: killing Hitler in 1944 and suing the Allies for peace seems, in the cast’s capable hands, completely within reach. But, and in staying true to the real-life story, small indecisions and mundane twists of fate such as shifts in local weather and short-sighted decisions combined to undermine their efforts.

They seem nice: the cast

Director Bryan Singer wisely stages the ill-fated assassination attempt as a set piece that centers the whole film. Stauffenberg manages to place a bomb beneath a table where Hitler meets with his staff to discuss the collapsing Eastern Front. Though the bomb detonates, the Fuhrer escapes the blast with only minor injuries. The cabal’s plan goes on as planned, however, using a civil defense program to briefly overthrow the Nazi regime and corral the SS secret police. Perhaps unwiesely, most of the film’s final third or so details the insurrection’s demise and fall, paced in a way that invites sympathy for the conspirators but whose mounting tension feels oddly winded. Despite the lived-in performances of the ace supporting cast – Kenneth Branagh, Terence Stamp, Bill Nighy, Tom Wilkinson, Eddie Izzard, among others – there is seldom a sense that the events are bearing down upon the characters.

This comes largely from a problem with pacing: the scenes in which the coup unravels should be the stuff of nailbiting tension, but Singer chooses to almost only show Cruise talking on the phone a lot and a somewhat anonymous looking group of Nazi militiamen assembled in a square. Surely, there was more to a Nazi Berlin swallowed by an insurrectionist crisis than that. There are glimmers of promise, as when a militia soldier arrives to arrest Dr. Joseph Goebbels. The mad doctor already has the cyanide capsule in his mouth as the militia officer is told to stand down, via a telephone call from no less than Hitler himself. The film stops and lets the suspense speak for itself. More such moments would have immensely helped move the film along.

That lack of focus is symptomatic of the problems that ultimately drag the film down. There’s an indifference to the events, an apathy present both in Singer’s direction and in Christopher McQuarrie’s script, that leaves any lasting sense of meaning absent. As with the similarly underwhelming The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, events and scenes seem put together with no real sense of architecture, so that the whole is considerably less than the sum of its parts in both movies. And for the events depicted here, some sense of import should arrive only as a matter of course. That they’re nonetheless absent can often try the viewer’s patience.

Cruise brings exactly the same level of intensity to the part of the doomed, honorable Stauffenberg that he’s brought to every one of his films since Jerry Maguire. Like popcorn or Junior Mints from the snack bar, he’s a rigidly dependable theatrical commodity. It’s become somewhat fashionable to lambast the man, and quite a bit of that ridicule is righteous backlash. But his performance should really be almost ancillary to the opportunity to witness the broad and accomplished supporting players take on such weighty, potentially epic subject matter. If only that were the case. This being a Tom Cruise Movie, they’re never given free room to work; Branagh especially is noticeably absent for much of the film’s narrative. On the other hand, Cruise’s involvement is likely the difference in budget and production scale between the film as it is and a critically-acclaimed and little-watched HBO original movie.

Which perhaps it should have been in the first place, in that its shortcomings of plot and tension would be more readily excused or its dragging pace easier to overlook. Disappointing for its faults and maddening for its potential, Valkyrie emerges at last as neither a great film nor a terrible one. If it disappoints, to see such a fascinating story presented capably at all is almost compensation enough for its ultimate collapse. And of course, there’s Cruise. Come for the movie star, stay for the history.

- Michael Kabel
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Review: The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian

 Awaiting the coming of a lion in a film that’s gone to the dogma.

Director Andrew Adamson’s 2005 film adaptation of C.S. Lewis’s The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch & The Wardrobe was by no means a great film, but it was nevertheless a thoroughly likable picture thanks to its great ensemble cast. The menace of the White Witch (Tilda Swinton) was nicely balanced by the stunningly lifelike CGI lion Aslan (voiced with regal authority by Liam Neeson). Though the story’s religious subtext was clearly present, it was at least tastefully restrained. Between the harrowing scenes of the Nazi Blitzkrieg and the charming friendship between ten year old Lucy Pevensie (Georgie Henley) and the “faun” Mr. Tumnus (James McAvoy), the film possessed an emotional anchor that generated empathy despite its fantastic setting.  So that film’s relative success makes Adamson’s dreary follow-up all the more baffling and disappointing.

Prince Caspian sees the return of the four Pevensie children to the realm of Narnia thirteen hundred years later (but only one year Earth-time.) The warlike Telmarines have invaded Narnia and all but annihilated its population of centaurs, fauns, minotaurs and other talking creatures. Young Caspian (Ben Barnes), a naive but otherwise decent fellow, is the rightful heir to the Telmarine throne until his villainous uncle Miraz (Sergio Castellitto) attempts to murder him and claim the crown for his own.  Driven into hiding, Caspian inadvertently summons the Pevensie kids from World War II-era England, and they join forces to defend the surviving Narnians while awaiting the return of the magical (and messianic) lion Aslan.     

The film depends in large amount upon the child actors’ performances, but the kids play their parts with so little distinction that they become virtually interchangeable. Admittedly, this is partly the fault of the action-heavy script, but if the directors of the Harry Potter films consistently get well-rounded performances out of their young actors, why can’t Adamson? Only William Moseley’s Peter, the eldest of the Pevensie siblings, receives three whole dimensions to his character, two of which are “shallow” and “vain.” As for the 26-year old Barnes, he woodenly plays the title character as a younger, blander Brandon Routh with a laughably inconsistent accent: picture The Office‘s Michael Scott imitating The Princess Bride’s Inigo Montoya. 

Neeson and Swinton reprise their previous roles in greatly diminished doses, but the first film’s McAvoy, Jim Broadbent and Ray Winstone don’t return for this installment, and that leaves Peter Dinklage as a dwarf named Trumpkins, who unfortunately is relegated to a tertiary supporting role while buried under whole cakes of makeup.  The scene-stealing mouse cavalier Reepicheep (voiced by Eddie Izzard) provides some bright moments of levity, but these are painfully few and far between.

As for the inordinately long chases and epic battle sequences, they all feel reminiscent – if not derivative – of other movies, particularly The Lord of the Rings trilogy and George Lucas’s blatant Rings pastiche Willow. Lewis of course collaborated on the Narnia books with his close friend J.R.R. Tolkein, so some degree of mimicry is understandable. But if you’re going to watch a film with walking trees and rivers come to life, you might as well rent the one with good acting and developed characters. Prince Caspian is also far more mean-spirited than its influences – one particularly distasteful and manipulative sequence features many of the whimsical Narnians slaughtered in captivity.

Adamson ramps the book’s deliberate allegory into overdrive, delivering several moments of outright patronizing morals that promote Christian theology. This would be fine if the filmmakers genuinely engaged the underlying philosophical questions instead of curtly dismissing such thorny details in favor of dogma. (Why exactly did Aslan abandon Narnia to thirteen hundred years of genocide?) An example: at one point Peter wishes for some sign of Aslan’s presence, but is silenced when his little sister Lucy admonishes, “Maybe it’s we who need to prove ourselves to him.” You don’t have to be Jewish or Christian to appreciate the Indiana Jones films and you don’t have to be atheist to enjoy The Golden Compass, but Prince Caspian is a film with one and only one point of view, and shame on anyone who wants otherwise.

Perhaps more troubling is the depiction of the dark-skinned Telmarines as swarthy, barbaric and altogether treacherous. The Narnia books have been frequently castigated for none-too-subtle racist attitudes towards the Middle East, and Adamson’s film does very little to stifle such criticism. In the denouement, Aslan describes the Telmarines as having descended from “brigands” and “pirates.” Note also that Caspian – the rightful, altruistic ruler – is easily the palest Telmarine in the kingdom. I’m not suggesting that the source material be bowdlerized to accommodate a more diverse perspective (ever see Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves or The Sum of All Fears?), but surely it must be possible to remain faithful to the spirit of the text without perpetuating hateful stereotypes. (Admittedly, there’s a heroic black centaur displayed prominently, but that’s about it.)

Bigger, louder and dumber than its predecessor, Prince Caspian exemplifies that hoary pejorative “sequel.” Given its disappointing opening weekend at the box office, hopefully the Walt Disney Corporation will learn from its mistakes before adapting the next five installments of Lewis’s sweeping vision.

 - Steve Kabel
:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::