Singer could have done a much better job. Many of the scenes looked rather too clean and empty to me. It was World War II after all.
I would have liked the same grit we see when Cruise/von Stauffenberg gets blown up in the beginning, when he plants the bomb. We should smell the chemical fuse eating through, see a bead of perspiration form on Cruise' immaculate forehead.
That said, this is a valuable flick, worth the watch, even if only to realise the sheer futility, the utter waste that war is. Entire fields of good men, bad men - all men - are laid to waste, cut down like wheat, because of the hubris of a few (mad) men. It seems we can never learn this lesson - that war is a bad, dumb, wasteful idea (ALWAYS) - enough. Every few years Presidents forget it anew, and we let them.
For more, read: How did the good Germans elect Hitler?
clipped from movies.nytimes.com
It’s a war that offers moral absolutes (Nazis are evil) and narratives (Nazis are evil and should die) that seem easier to grasp than any current conflict. Truly, World War II has become the moviemaker’s gift that keeps on giving, whether you want it to or not. |
1 comment:
Sadly enough, your above sentiments about war is exactly what the world believed when Hitler came to power, and so did nothing to stop him as he took Austria, and checkzlovakia. If only the world had decided earlier that war could be a answer, it could had stopped, a madman fascist, from sending so many people to slaughterhouses across Europe, instead of following chamberlain's thought process which seems very similar to yours.
In fact WW2 changed the world in very fundamental and in many ways, good ways. Sad people died, Great that a mad dictator was finished.
Post a Comment