Universitatea Babeş-Bolyai din Cluj-Napoca Facultatea de Istorie şi

1
Universitatea Babeş-Bolyai din Cluj-Napoca
Facultatea de Istorie şi Filosofie
Doctoral Thesis
PhD. Thesis
The Representations of Germans in American
Cinema during the Cold War: The Attitude of American
Administration
Scientific Coordinator:
Prof.Univ.Dr. Vasile Vese
Doctoral Student:
Hadi Shakeeb Kassem
Cluj-Napoca
2012
2
Table of Contents
Subject
Page
Preface……………………………………………………………………………….6
Keywords…………………………………………………………………………..10
Glossary of terms and abbreviations………………………………………..11
Chapter One : Introduction - Research background, Research
Question and how it was conducted………………………………………...12
1.1
Defining the topic and confining it to time and space…………..12
1.2
The Historical grounding of the study……………………………….13
Inferences of the current study……………………………………….25
1.3
Types of sources and database ……………………………………….26
1.4
Methodology of the study: Data gathering and their
assessment…………………………………………………………………27
Establishing the Inquiry Sample (Sampling)…………................27
1.5
Limitations of the research........................................................30
1.6
Main thematic findings…………………………………………………..31
1.7
Theoretical and applicable conclusions……………..………………32
粸¢
Chapter Two: The attitude of American foreign policy toward
Germany (1933 -1989)……………………..…………………………………..34
2.1 The attitude of American foreign policy toward Germany
in the Separatism Period (1933-1941)…………………...............34
2.2 The attitude of American foreign policy toward Germany:
From Isolationism to Intervention in WW11 (1942 -1945)…….37
2.3 The attitude of American foreign policy toward Germany in
the Cold War (1946 – 1989)……………………………………………45
Chapter Three: The cinematographic text in Historiographical
Research…………………………………………………………………………..67
3.1 Interface between history and cinema ……………………………..67
3.2
The relations between the administration and Hollywood
(1939-1989); Hollywood as a cultural super-power in the
World……………………………………………………………………….83
3
3.3 New assessment and renewed growth in America(1963-1989).101
Chapter Four: Germans in Hollywood: Nazi Germany's
representations in Hollywood and the American intervention in
WWII: The dispute between the isolation approach and the
intervention approach (1939-1941)………………………….……………109
4.1 Historical background and films survey……………………………..109
4.2 The confession of a Nazi spy and the danger of Isolationism….113
4.3 The Mortal Storm, The Beasts of Berlin, and The Great Dictator
good Germans and bad Nazis………………….............................116
4.4 The coldness, insensibility and treachery of the Nazis as
A rationale for America's intervention…………………….............120
4.5 A thematic discussion of the various representations…………..123
Conclusions of chapter Four..……………………………………………….128
Chapter Five: Representations of Germany and the Germans
nature in Hollywood during the War and until the beginning of the
Cold War: From isolationism to intervention in WWII (1942粸¢
1946)……………………………………………………………………………..131
5.1 Historical background and a films survey………………………….131
5.2 Demonization of the Nazi enemy and the terror regime In
Germany and Europe…………………………………………………….132
5.3 Exposing the secret of the charm of fascism and the Nazi
Ideology both in the characters and ideology………................139
5.4 Post-War Germany: Nazism has not passed away
(1945-1946)……………………………………………………………….149
5.5 A thematic discussion of the various representations………....152
Conclusions of chapter Five………………………………………………..160
Chapter Six: Representations of Germany and the Germans
in Hollywood during The first period of the Cold War – postwar Germany (1947-1970) ………………………………………………..163
6.1 Historical background and a films survey ……………………….165
6.2 De-Nazification and Germany as the wanton woman: The
Issue of the American foreign policy and its reflection as
4
An allegory of the relations between American soldiers
And German girls………………………………………………………166
6.3 The Nazi period in historical perspective of the 1950's
And 1960's……………………………………………………………...179
6.4 City with a wall in its center – the attempt to erase the
German Past…………………………………………………………….184
6.5 The Cold War and the mechanization of the German
Image (1964-1970)……………………………………………………193
6.6 A thematic discussion of the various representations.............201
Conclusions of chapter Six..……………………………………………….212
Chapter Seven: Representations of Germany and the Germans
in Hollywood during the Revision period, Period of Détente
and Second Cold War-a sequence of complex representations
or a drastic change (1971-1989).................................................216
7.1 Historical background and a film's survey(1971 -1980)…….216
粸¢
7.2 German Representations - Hollywood underwent a process
of a profound change(1971 -1975)………………………………221
7.3 German Representations :new attitudes in Hollywood(1976 –
1980) A Bridge Too Far(1977)……………………………………..228
* The popularity of the holocaust in films and its impact on
films about neo-Nazis which followed them……………………234
The Boys from Brazil and Holocaust(1978)……………………..235
7.4 The First Cold War dies; the second Cold War begun;
representation of Germans during the renewed escalation
period upon the invasion to Afghanistan: : German types
in many variations in Hollywood (1980 – 1989)……………239
7.5 A thematic discussion and analysis of the various
Representations………………………………………………………275
5
Conclusions of chapter Seven…………………………………………..281
Chapter Eight: Conclusions…………………………………………..286
Filmography and Bibliography………………………………………….301
Types of sources and data
A. Primary Sources
Filmograpy - a significant selection of American films
Presenting German Characters (Nazis, Germans…..)………301
B. Bibliography - Secondary historical sources and a selection of
the research Literature……………………………………………..309
B.1 Cinema – Theories, Language and Methodology............309
B.2 General Literature……………………….............................311
Appendix 1: Films synopses…………………………………………….326
粸¢
6
Preface
Dedication
This doctorate paper is dedicated to my late father and
mother, who have given me all their time, money, warm
attitude and support. Without their support this paper may
have not been materialized. Although they did not live to see
this work, I carry out their dream and follow their path, the
path of honesty and morality, the way of education, values
and love, and above all the path of life and perseverance.
I also dedicate this work with love to my wife Nessren and
my children.
I am very grateful to Professor Vasile Vese for his
enlightening remarks, for the patience and tolerance he has
shown to me, for his warm attitude and the numerous
粸¢
meetings he had with me in order to reach this point in my
research.
My gratitude is give also to Dr. Jacov Sobovitz and the
team of Carmel College headed by Mr. Ronny Hasson, without
whose dedicated and kind assistance I doubt whether I would
have accomplished this mission.
The motives conductive to this research and its goals
I have followed this subject since the historians have started to investigate history,
in the sixties of the 20th century, based upon films and cinema.
The connection between history and cinema is very interesting to me and
I find myself in this field.
In the sixties film-making has started to become another means of investigating
history, and there were established journals investigating and publishing works in this
field.
7
As a new scholar I looked for a fascinating historical field which has not been
investigated a lot, and have found the present field that fascinated me as a subject,
especially the link between cinematic language and the representation of Germans
during the Cold War.
I, as a new MA researcher have discovered the new theme to investigate this
field when I was writing my master's thesis in Haifa University in Israel at the beginning
of 2000, as my thesis dealt with the representation of Germans during WWII and the
beginning of the Cold War. My final grade in this thesis was 91 (very good). The Title
(Reconstructing the Representations of Germany in Hollywood in View of
The Goals of American Foreign Policy 1939-1966).
Once I have obtained the MA degree, I experienced a further need to deepen my
knowledge in this field of predilection by expanding the search to include an historical
overview of the topic. I felt entitled to assume I was the first to start an investigation
on German imagery of war in the American movies, and felt as a result responsible for
the breakthrough and the introduction of a new angle to the line of investigation.
In addition, (1) I lecture about this subject in high schools and colleges in
Israel. (2) There is no research or book on this subject in Israel, and I do not know
粸¢
about a research about this subject in another country, and therefore my research is
considered a pioneer in this regard. (3) This is an interesting subject through which one
can investigate history on the basis of films, which provide additional insights to the
historical research on this subject.
My research analyzed documentaries, fiction and other genres and I did not limit
it to one genre.
Today I am busy writing a book which will be based on my masters thesis. In
addition, I published three articles on this subject: one in
Slil, the journal of
the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, vol. 3, Summer 2009.
Slil – Online Journal for History, Film and Television. The Hebrew
University of Jerusalem.
The second was published in the journal of Babeş-Bolyai Cluj
University, Romania, Vol. 2, October 2010. Romanian Review of
International Studies, II, 2, 2010.
8
The third article was published in the journal of Carmel College, Daliet
El Carmel, Academic Stage. And The fourth article will be published
shortly.
The contribution of the present study to the advancement of
specialized research
The proposed research work seeks to fill up six central voids in current
research:
A. To offer a comprehensive investigation of various aspects of the German
representations in the cinema of the Cold War period, as well as features of the
American administration and the Hollywood climate.
B. Show the complex and often contradictory views held by the Nazis in their state,
as well as the variance of opinion within the American administration.
C. The paper equally proposes to examine representational models of films
pertaining to the study and issued in Hollywood in large number, and thus
complete researches having proceeded examples in reduced numbers.
D. I propose to systematically examine sets of international relations in which the
粸¢
Hollywood industry and the American administration were involved. This, over
the historically significant scale of several decades. In this context the portrayal
of Germans is shown in its chronological and developmental dimension.
E. The role played by Germany in the war was transient: sometimes as enemy of
the United States and at times as a protégé and a friend.
F. A noteworthy feature revealed by this inquiry has been that at the time of the
Second War by far more movies were made about Germans than about any
other nation. I have subsequently discovered here a solid study-case conductive
of insights into the inner grounds common to the US administration and to
Hollywood.
I expect that a profound qualitative analysis of these representations, combined
with relevant contemporary documents and the application of related theories in the
field of history and the cinema, would lead to a full comprehensive analysis of the
relations between the American administration and Hollywood.
9
The rationale is to investigate how, and to what extent, the American film
industry reflected the wide angle of Germany's representations in accordance with the
interests of many opposing factors, both in Hollywood and in the administration.
Why I did not refer to East Germany in my research
1. There were no films made about East Germany in Hollywood, and the few which
have been produced, received my reference. These films cannot serve as a basis for
a historical research, since it is a sensitive political subject and a new field that
should be studied in a separate research.
One may say, in general, that the East German representation was negative
after WWII and the division of Germany, and remained that way throughout the
time until the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, as opposed to the West Germans,
towards whom there have been a drastic change in their representation.
2. In reference to the period of WWII I referred to the Germans as a whole, but after
the war and the division of Germany, and the establishment of the two blocks, my
research focused in the representation of West Germany, investigating the
relationships between the Us and West Germany, which has become a strong ally of
the US during the Cold War, when East Germany was perceived as part of the
粸¢
communist bloc. This is why I did not see fit to integrate East Germany in my
research.
3. There is a need for future researches:
a. Maybe this subject can be investigated in a future research, which would
Combine the representation of communism and the Russians and the East
Germans.
b. A comparative research between the profile of the Russians and the East
Germans versus the profile of the Americans and the West Germans. There is a
need for access to historical sources of both parties, which I did not have, so I
could not investigate the East German representation through the existing
material of my present study. Maybe in 10-15 years from now enough material
will be accumulated, which will enable investigating this issue from a historical
perspective.
c. In addition, one can conclude that Hollywood films of the Cold War, a war
10
which lasted for many years, is a fertile soil for future studies that would
emphasize the multi-faceted complexity of the relationship between popular
movies and political regimes in times of crisis.
Today, more than twenty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the
disintegration of the international order that have been established following the
Cold War and the American policy, investigating the political, social, and cultural
roles of the movies, and undoubtedly the television, in times of crisis seems
important and urgent more than ever.
Why I did not refer to the holocaust in my research
Many films have been produced on the holocaust, including documentaries, fiction,
news reels and television series, and this issue has been studied a lot by scholars from
Israel and abroad. Therefore I preferred not to include this issue in my doctorate thesis,
and this is not the issue of my research. As a scholar I wanted to take an objectiveneutral aspect, and so I referred only to several films due to their importance and
relevance to my research, films like The Diary of Ann Frank, Schindler's List and others.
Keywords: Representations of Germans-(Germans characters: Historical characters,
粸¢
Nazis – Gestapo men, SS officers, German spies, Professional soldiers and officials,
Upper and lower class Germans and Germans Women), Hollywood, Films, American
Administration, WW1, WW2, McCarthyism period, Cold War.
11
Glossary of terms and abbreviations
BAFTA – Home of the British Academy of Film and Television Arts
CIA – Central Intelligence Agency
CIAA – The Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs
COI – Office of the Coordinator of Information
EDC – European Defense Community
FRG – Federal Republic of Germany
GDR – The German Democratic Republic (East Germany)
HICOG – The High Commission for Occupied Germany (The Allied High Commission)
HUAC – House UN – American Activities Committee
ICD – Information Control Division
JCS – Joint Chiefs of Staff Directive 1067
MGM – Metro Goldwyn Mayer
蛐¢
NSC – National Security Council ( of the White House)
OCB – The Operations Coordinating Board
OCD – Office of Civilian Defense (1941-1945)
OEM – Office of Emergency Management
OGR – Office of Government Reports
OMGUS – The Office of Military Government of the United States
OWI – Office of War Information
PCA – Production Code Administration (established by the Motion Picture Producers
and Distributors of America (MPPDA) in 1934)
PDC – Producers Distributing Corporation
UFA – Universum Film AktienGesellschaft
12
WAC – War Activities Committee
Chapter One
1.1 Introduction: Defining the topic and confining it to
time and space
The present doctorate paper aims to integrate a sub-branch of history, the history
of the cinema, to another subdivision, the political history of the US in the period of
WWII and the Cold War and till the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.
In the course of this study I have analyzed the representations of Germans in the
American movie industry between the years 1939-1989 and their makeover as a result
of the relationship between the American administration and the targets of its foreign
policy on one hand, and the position of Hollywood during the Cold War in another hand.
My aim has been to determine if Hollywood served the intentions of the American
administration, and in the positive, to which extent, and to examine how these two
institutions influenced each another.
The starting point in time of this research has been set at 1939 rather than any
other year in order to emphasize the manner in which the German image was presented
粸¢
on the American screen prior to the Cold War among the two super powers, Russian
and American. This way a background has been provided to subsequent changes which
were to affect this imagery in the future.
The research questions
In the course of my present investigation I have proposed to interrogate two large
groups of quandaries:
1. How did the representations of Germans evolve in the American cinema, did they
change in the course of time? And in the affirmative, in which ways?
2. Were these representations influenced by the relationship between the US
government and Hollywood, and if so found, what was the impact of the
administration on this film industry? Moreover: did Hollywood act as an agent of
the American administrative system? To which extent did its movie production
serve the official goals during the severe shift perceived in the American foreign
policy toward Germany in the wake of the Cold War? A necessary corollary of
13
this second cluster of queries is to raise the question: in which way did the
American movie industry influence the streaks of interaction between the US and
Germany at the state strategy level?
1.2 The Historical grounding of the study
From a political point of view, Hollywood of the 1930's was a relatively liberal
community, in which the Anti-Nazi league and the democratic film committee
flourished. However, there was another aspect: at the head of the film studios presided
businessmen who endeavored to maintain good relations with Nazi Germany as much
as possible, motivated by economic considerations, sometimes more than by ideological
decisions. In addition to their overseas marketing interests, in many cases the heads of
the studios were careful not to offend large groups within the American society. There
were also active right wing groups which favored European Fascism and its political
manifestations, and tried to prevent the film industry from being recruited to oppose
this phenomenon. And finally, the studios' owners did not want to confront the
administration, which was in favor of separatism. Yet, many heads of studios
recognized the policy of National-Socialism as dangerous. They enjoyed the support of
粸¢
President Roosevelt, who sought to promote a consistent policy of response to the
aggressiveness revealed by Germany, Italy and Japan against other nations. In his
Quarantine Speech of October 5, 1937, President F.D. Roosevelt described the Fascists
as a plague that should be quarantined in order to be eliminated. Yet, even at that
time, notwithstanding the increasing sympathy in the American public opinion toward
Britain, which following France's surrender remained, actually, fighting alone, he was
still not able to secure a majority for declaring war on the Axis States.
Opposed to Roosevelt's attitude there were the powerful supporters of the
separatist position, and those did not allow the President to translate his concept into
an effective foreign policy. This attitude relied on the atmosphere that the United States
might be swept, as had happened in Wilson's days, into a fight that would shed the
blood of Americans in behalf of the interests of others. The public struggle against the
tendencies of intervention was conducted in those days by a body outside the
establishment (a popular movement) named 'America first', whose members pointed at
the Jews, the British and the Communists as conspirators, who had taken over the
14
Roosevelt Administration and were seeking to drag the United States into a bloodshed
for the sake of foreign interests.1
World War II and the nature of the Nazi government had created a most
unfavorable image of Germany. Yet, at the end of World War II and upon the breakout
of the Cold War, the integration of Germany with NATO has turned it from an enemy
into an ally of the Free World in its struggle against Communism and the Soviet Union.
In this situation, the United State's government and elements in Hollywood did not wish
to portray the Germans as fundamentally evil; efforts were made to create the
impression that the Nazis were not typical Germans, that there were also good
Germans, and that the Nazis had been making life difficult for the German people not
less than for the peoples they conquered.
Throughout the Cold War there were fluctuations in the administration's attitude
toward Germany, which were also reflected in the American mass media, as well as in
the film industry. I will attempt to examine how were Germans portrayed in American
films: had their portrayal changed with the shift in tensions during the Cold War, was
the blame put collectively on the Germans, or was it rather put on the Nazis; and did
Hollywood present good Nazis as well.
粸¢
The film industry constitutes one of the main mass media in Western culture, and a
powerful propaganda instrument. Naturally, there were many political elements that
sought to influence this industry or recruit it for their own purposes. A major element in
these attempts was the American administration.
As a rule, until 1938 the administration had had a very limited control over the
American film industry. The only exception was The Committee on Public Information,
which was better known as Creel Committee, named after its chairman, the progressive
journalist, George Creel, who was active in 1917-1918. This committee was designed to
supervise and coordinate American propaganda during World War I and also the film
industry. The intervention of this committee lasted merely two years. During the 1920's
the entertainment and information industry in the USA attained global hegemony. For
instance, the London Post wrote in 1923: "The cinema represents for America what the
flag represents for the British. Through it Uncle Sam will be able, if not stopped on
1
Among the leaders of this organization was Charles Lindberg, an admired figure as a soldier and a pilot.
Speaking in a mass rally held in New York, in July 1941, he argued that it was too late to fight Hitler.
15
time, to make the world American".2 By 1929 the cinema had become the third
important sector in the USA, after the oil and the metal industries, and continued to
grow during the 1930's. In response to the rise of the Third Reich, Washington decided
in 1939 to launch a propaganda offensive in the media, at home and overseas. For this
end the administration established the Division of Cultural Affairs in the State
Department.
Hollywood's strength was well known to American coordinators and initiators of
propaganda. Joseph Hazen, the general director of Warner Bros., said in 1943: "The
movie is, in fact, an invisible branch of the American administration, and the film
industry has been dedicated to persistent cooperation with the administration."3 Warner
Bros. were very appreciative of the administration, and their studios were actively
supporting American policy. Stalin even told the chief of Fox Twentieth Century board
of directors, Wendell Willkie, in 1942, that all he needed in order to make the world
communist was a control over an industry such as Hollywood.4 When World War II
broke out, the cooperation between Hollywood and the administration reached its peak.
On December 17, 1941, President Roosevelt urged recruiting the film industry to serve
the war, and for this purpose the WAC – War Activities Committee of the film industry
粸¢
was established, which was active until January 7, 1946. Hollywood had representatives
in all government departments. Washington allowed 4,000 Hollywood people: actors,
directors, producers, stage hands and photographers to wear army uniforms. Many
actors were recruited and became part of the military system.
This historic background emphasizes the main research question – to what extent
may we regard movies as a neutral entertainment product, and how much were they a
propaganda product of the administration by transmitting political and other messages?
Two tendencies may be perceived during the Cold War:
1. The peak of the Cold War (1947-1961), when Hollywood obeyed the directives of the
HUAC – House Un-American Activities Committee, established in 1938.
2
Reinhold wagenleitner,(1994). Coca-Colonization and the Cold War:the Cultural Mission of the United
States in Austria After the Second World War, Chapel Hill and London: University of North Carolina press,
p. 230.
3
Ibidem, p. 227.
4
Ibidem, p. 229.
16
2. The revision period from 1962 onward, when the controlling power of this committee
has begun to shaking and the spirit of liberalism has began blowing through the big
studios.
Here I propose to raise two main questions of my research: 1. What was the nature
of the connection between the American Administration and Hollywood at the time
under discussion? 2. How did the representations of Germans develop (and change) at
that time in American cinema, and were these representations influenced by the
relations between the government and Hollywood, and if so, in what way?
1. The current research discussion – Literature Review
a. The relations between the administration and Hollywood as reflected in
the research literature – 1938-1946
I will deal with two main aspects discussed in the literature: the first deals with the
extent and form of the administration's impact on Hollywood's film industry. The second
deals with the question of whether there was a change in German representation, and
if so, when and in what way.
Most researchers think that there was a connection between the government's
policy and the way Germans and Nazis were represented in Hollywood's movies. It is
粸¢
also obvious that throughout the period under discussion – the Cold War – the relations
between the government and Hollywood developed and shifted, but current research is
not unanimous about the nature of these relations and how they developed.
Researches that have examined Hollywood films screened in movie houses since the
1930's until the 1980's, suggest two main approaches in the historical writings on the
subject of German representations in films:
The recruit approach – some film researchers used to present Hollywood, and still
do, as a branch of the administration, spreading American propaganda throughout the
world and serving the goals of American foreign policy. This means that Hollywood
served as an agent of the American establishment, rather than an independent body in
representing Nazis and Germans in the cinema. The researches of this approach were:
Daniel Leab, one of the leading scholars in the research of the Cold War and the
cinema, who deals with this subject in his article: "Screen Images of the 'Other' in
Wilhelmine Germany and the United States, 1890-1918." Leab maintains that the fear
of loosing the German market, a market that had grown with the expansion of Germany
17
during the first years of the war, prevented until 1941 attacks on Germans and Nazis in
American films. Even after 1941, when Hollywood started to contribute its share to antiNazi propaganda, it still refrained from the blunt anti-German style that had dominated
films of the First World War. The Office of War Information – OWI, established in June
1942, demanded that the industry did not attack or denounce all Germans, since
America did not regard the German people as its enemy, only its leaders.5
Allen Rostron described the Administration's successful separatist policy,
manifested in the pressure that was put on the studios to remain neutral when
describing events in Europe.6
Moshe Zimmermann in his article: "Hollywood and the representation of Nazi
concentration camps in real time", claims that during the 1930s, when the Nazis came
into power, were also years of reshuffling in the American film industry.7 In 1934,
aiming to reduce or avert the government's pressure on Hollywood, the union of film
producers and distributors in America made a decision to establish an organization
named PCA – Production Code Administration. This was Hollywood's self-controlling
apparatus, and it was active during the time of the war, as well. It claimed to be
working alongside the official controlling apparatus the OWI.
蛐¢
Koppes and Black maintain, in an article that deals with wartime Hollywood, that
the United States' government made an intense effort to shape the content of
Hollywood's narrative films, believing in their capability to influence public opinion.8
According to them, albeit official intervention at wartime was a new phenomenon,
censorship and pressure on film producers, as well as making use of films as an
instrument of propaganda, had been as old as Hollywood itself. Even during World War
I American films, such as The Emperor – the Beast from Berlin and My four years in
Germany, ignited anti-German riots in several cities. In the course of 1942 there was a
struggle going on between the heads of the OWI and the film industry, and in
December of the same year Mallet, chief of the OWI, sent a letter to the studios, telling
5
6
7
8
Daniel Leab, (1997). "Screen Images of the 'other' in Wilhelmine Germany of the United States 18901918", Film History,Vol. 9, Nr. 1.pp.49-70.
Allen Rostron, (Summer 2002). "No War, No Hate, No Propaganda, Promoting Films about European
War and Fascism during the Period of American Isolationism", Journal of Popular Film and Television
Vol. 30, Nr. 2.pp.85-96.
Moshe Zimmermann,(2004). "Hollywood and the representation of Nazi Concentration Camps in Real
Time", Cinema and Memory – dangerous relations? Life at the beginning, Shlomo zand, Moshe
Zimmermann (eds.), Jerusalem, the Zelman Shazar Ventre for Israel History. pp. 133-151.
Clayton R. Koppes & Gregory D. Black, (1988). Hollywood Goes to War, London, New York.
18
them that "it would serve their interests to regularly submit for inspection to his office
completed scenarios, and even synopses of suggestions for production". According to
this research, "The OWI in Hollywood represents the Administration's most
comprehensive and prolonged endeavor in American history to introduce changes in
contents in the mass media. The censorship during the war instructed the mass media
what they should conceal from public knowledge; The OWI not only told Hollywood
what to omit, in fact it also instructed Hollywood what to include".9
Another article on the same subject, by Jowett, maintains that the American film
industry has always endeavored to remain politically neutral, wishing to keep a distance
from public controversy and blame putting. Moreover, Hollywood refrained from
enraging the Federal authorities. It appears, from this article, that the films were also
being very carefully supervised by the War Office, which supported the glorification of
the armed forces, as well as by the supporters of non-intervention who criticized any
film that may have harmed the vulnerable impression of neutrality.10
David Culbert's article deals with "American film policy and the goals of occupation
policy in Germany in the years 1945-1946", and it relies on variable primary sources,
documents, mainly newsreels. Without referring specifically to the presentation of
粸¢
German images and representations, Culbert examines the American foreign policy and
the changes it has undergone, through several short documentaries showing authentic
passages from the liberated camps. This period, when the Nazi crimes had been
exposed, was characterized by an anti-German atmosphere that did not have to be
moderated, owing to the fact that the Cold War had not yet started.11
The Liberal approach - According to this approach, the United State's government
had little to do with the contents of films. There was, indeed, some censorship, owing
to Hollywood's self-restraint and the application of the 'code of production', but this was
something that Hollywood imposed on itself rather than being imposed by the
government. Politicians did put pressure on Hollywood at the time of McCarthy, a time
of inner tensions arising from the Cold War, yet it is not clear whether there may have
9
Ibidem, p.324.
Garth Jowett,(1976). Hollywood Goes to War: Film, The Democratic Art, Little, Boston-Toronto: Brown
and Company.
11
David Culbert, (1985). "American Film Policy in the Re-education of Germany After 1945", The Political
Re-education of Germany and Her Allies after World War II, Nicholas Pronay and Keith Wilson (eds.),
London. pp. 173-202.
10
19
been a connection between this pressure and the way Germans were represented by
the film industry.
According to a research conducted by Michael Shull and David Wilt, the anti-Nazi
league in Hollywood had been set up largely in response to the breakout of the civil war
in Spain in the summer of 1936, expressing sympathy with the Popular Front in Spain.12
Many in Hollywood took in 1940 an outspoken political stance, and the anti-Nazi films
they produced reflected their position. By 1941 this tendency had developed into an
open demonstration of supporting intervention, which was manifested in the films. But
even though American cinema called for intervention, this research claims that there
was no propaganda agency of the United State government dictating the contents of
narrative films during World War II.13
b. The Relations between the Administration and Hollywood as reflected in
the research literature – 1947-1989
Navasky maintains that during the Cold War, Hollywood obeyed the directive of the
HUAC, which imposed on various bodies and persons, especially in Hollywood, the line
of the United States' foreign policy regarding Germany.14 At the beginning of 1947 the
Committee started its inquiries in Hollywood against those who were suspected of
粸¢
Communism, when Communism was regarded as a direct threat to the security of the
United States and the American way of life.
Concurrently with this view concerning the Soviets, the German image was being
increasingly exonerated.15 Tony Barta thinks so, too, maintaining that starting from
the late 1940s until the 1960s the administration was interested in tackling the issue of
Communism, an interest that had influenced the film industry. Dealing with the Nazis
and their crimes had been set aside, and until the 1980s there had been almost no
direct manifestation of this issue in the cinema.16
Ralph Willett says that in 1947 Hollywood received a threatening sounding
announcement issued by the Committee, saying that American film industry should
12
Michael S.Shull and David E. Wilt,(1996). Hollywood War Films: 1937-1945, Mcfarland, Jefferson, North
Carolina and London. pp. 56-60 and 142.
13
Ibidem.
14
Victor S. Navasky,(1980). Naming Names, New York.
15
Daniel Leab, (1988). "'The Iron Curtain' (1948): Hollywood's First Cold-War Movie", Historical Journal
of Film, Radio and Television, Vol. 8, Nr. 2.p. 155.
16
Tony Barta (ed.), (1998). Screening the Past: Film and the Representation of History, Westport,
Connecticut, Praeger, London. pp. 136-137.
20
demonstrate its patriotism.17 Yet, Willett does not specify whether Hollywood's show of
patriotism was linked with the exoneration of the German image, as Leab and Navesky
suggest, or was rather linked with the attitude to the Soviet image.
Conclusions about the relations between the Administration and Hollywood
Several special authorities/committees have been active since 1934, supervising
the massage of American films:
1. PCA – the Production Code Authority, active since 1934 as an internal supervision
apparatus and self-censorship of the film industry. This apparatus was at times more
conservative than official administration positions.
2. The WAC committee and the OWI (Office of War Information), active since June
1942, in the administration's most comprehensive and prolonged endeavor to bring
about a change in the contents of movies.
3. HUAC, Established in 1938 and active until 1975.
Some research works support the view that Hollywood did comply with the
directives of the OWI and those of other agencies at the time of World War II (19421945), and obeyed the directives of the HUAC during the Cold War (1947-1960/61).
According to those, throughout most of this period, Hollywood was under a very tight
粸¢
supervision, serving as an agent of American foreign policy rather than being an
independent body.
Other research works suggest, that throughout most of that period Hollywood
maintained its independence, did not take dictations from any government propaganda
agency, and should not be regarded as a recruited institution.
2. German representation in Hollywood as reflected in research literature
Many researchers treated German characters only in a generalized way, ignoring
the diversity of German representations; still, some researches have been written
focusing on German representation. Following are the main researches of this kind:
1919-1938 – between the two World Wars
According to Leab, long before the United Stated entered World War I, the
American cinema had shown a clear bias against Germany and the Germans. Any
endeavor to present a different attitude collapsed when the United States joined the
17
Ralph Willett, (1987). "Billy Wilder's 'A Foreign Affair' (1945-1948): Trials and Tribulations of Berlin",
Historical Journal of Film, Radio, and Television, Vol. 7, Nr. 1.pp.3-14.
21
war in 1917, although Wilson and his administration declared that the enemy was not
the German people, but rather Kaiser Wilhelm and his anti-democratic regime. In
movies the Kaiser was portrayed as the stereotypical Hun, and so were the actions of
his people and his army.
Antony Slide, a famous researcher of the cinema, maintains in his article "Prussian
image on the American screen in the years 1917-1933" that the representation of the
Prussian character in those days was that of a cold blooded, cruel, insensitive person,
raping not only women and children, but also whole Nations.18 According to Slide, the
negative cinematic representation of the Prussian character has become a fixed element
in American films, and this attitude is represented also in films that were produced long
after World War I. One example is the film Three faces of the East (1926).
These two researchers suggest clearly a stereotypic picture of the German image, as
reflected in films from the years between the two World Wars. Has this picture
changed, and in what way, in the wake of World War II and subsequent years of the
Cold War?
1939-1945 – World War II
According to research done by Willett and Schull, during the years preceding
粸¢
World War II, since the Nazis accession to power, the Germans had been the object of
Hollywood's indirect attacks of defamation, largely owing to their World War I record of
being spies and saboteurs in the United States. Clichés and prejudice that had been
planted in people's minds by the mass media during World War I, such as ludicrous
external characteristics and the use of draconic measures to subdue civil populations –
were interlaced with the symbols and characters of the Nazi state in order to create the
image of the 'other' – the vicious Nazi. Stereotypic German traits, such as punctuality,
efficiency, and a desire for order, were presented with exaggeration and brought to
extremity.
From the propaganda point of view, Nazi Germany, as a clearly defined and
ideologically polar enemy, was the ideal foe during the war and before it. The image of
the Nazi leaders, defected physically and mentally, is in acute contrast with the
pronounced Arian ideal adopted in their abusive speeches, was utilized time and again
in the American films as a powerful symbol of the contradictions imbued in National18
Anthony Slide, (Dec. 1985). "The Prussian Image on the American Screen", Films in Review, Vol. 36,
and No. 12. Pp.608-618.
22
Socialism. But the German population, with whom most Americans shared western
heritage, was not usually marked by Hollywood's producers as an enemy (a tendency
that had existed during World War I, as well).19
Was there indeed a distinct dichotomy between the leadership and the people, as
claimed in these and other research works, or were there rather other, complex
representations, as well, contradicting one another, and combining together elements
of the leadership and the people? As a matter of fact, other articles, for instance those
of Culbert, speak clearly of blaming collectively the entire German people in American
films.20
Shifting to the Cold War – 1946-1989
Researchers who have made a profound examination of German image and
representation in Hollywood movies of the Nineteenth of Twenteen Century, were
Robert Harris, in the films Foreign Affairs (1948) and One Two Three (1961);21
Frank Stern in the films Foreign Affairs (1948) and One Two Three (1961)22 ;
Thomas G Schmundt, in the films Foreign Affairs (1948), Big Lift (1950) and
Fraulein (1958)23; Tony Barta in the film The Great Escape (1963)24, Niza Er'el in
the films The Stranger (1946), Stalag 17 (1952), The Young Lions and The
粸¢
Nuremberg Trials (1961)25.
Harris maintains that the ex-enemy, the German, was being represented now,
after World War II, as a favorable, or at least, a neutral character. The Germans
appeared to be humane like the Americans, and were represented as Americans'
equals – a revolutionary approach as compared to the German stereotype
dominating the film industry since 1914. Harris maintains, that the director Billy
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Ibidem. p.612.
Above footnotes 20+16.
Robert D. Harris, (May 1990). "Billy Wilder's Germany: Germany in Films, Berlin in Films," Films in
Review Vol. XLI, Nr. 5.pp. 292-297.
Frank Stern, (1991). "The Cinema as School in Post War Germany", Zemanin 39-40.pp. 48-55.
Thomas G. Schmundt, (Winter 1992). "Hollywood's Romance of Foreign Policy: American GI's & the
Conquest of the German Fraulein: Politics in Films, Berlin in Films", Journal of Popular Film and
Television, Vol. XIX, Nr. 4 pp.187-197.
Tony Barta, (1998). "Film Nazis: The Great Escape", Screening the Past: Film and Representation of
History, Westport, Connecticut, Praeger, London. pp. 127-148.
Niza Er'el, (2004). "The representation of Nazism and the Holocaust in Western Cinema: discussing
three cinematographic narratives", Cinema and Memory – dangerous relationship?, Life at the
Beginning. Shlomo zand, Moshe Zimmermann (eds.), Jerusalem: The Zalman Shazar Centre for
Israel's History, pp. 293-316.
23
Wilder, who had been born in Germany and immigrated to America when the Nazis
came into power, broke the image of the "bad" German created by Hollywood's
propaganda for years, and at the same time broke the image of the "good"
American. This transformation was part of an attempt to discredit the anti-German
attitudes prevalent in Hollywood, while creating a more complex expression of the
German image and ambivalence with regard to the American policy. According to
Thomas George Schmundt, the German is no longer portrayed as the threatening
'other'; the Germans underwent a process of assimilation, becoming part of the
American identity, or its ramification.
In the films examined by the researches mentioned above, the relations between
the United States and Germany are represented mostly through romantic ties of
American men (usually soldiers) with young, pretty, seductive German women. In
Foreign Affairs it is Erica (Marlen Dietrich), in The Big Lift The beautiful Frederica
Borkhardt (Cornell Borchers), and Gerti (Bruni Lobel), in Fraulein it is Erica (Dana
Wynter), the beautiful daughter of a German professor, and in One, Two, Three it is
Ingburg (Liselotte Pulvert), and secretary of Coca Cola's sales manager. The image
粸¢
suggested by these films is that of a Cold War Germany as a feminine character who is
conquered by the American male.
Niza Er'el asserts that the negative portrayal of the German as a demon, which
seemed appropriate at the time of the World Wars, was replaced in the Cold War by an
image distinguishing between Nazis and other Germans. This tendency corresponded to
the political cooperation between the United States and Western Germany in the 1950s;
thus German society and army (excluding the SS) were also exonerated in a manner
that corresponded to the goals of American policy.
The writers' conclusions were that at the beginning of the Cold War, after World
War II, German representations and characters have gone through a process of a
significant change for the better. The presence of Nazis and the Nazi phenomenon has
become scarce where Germany was represented in the movies, or, otherwise, a sharper
distinction was made between Nazis and other Germans, in such a way that served the
goals of American foreign policy regarding Germany.
24
Another group of researchers, conducting their researches in the 1980s
(1979-1989), such as Adrian Turner, Neil Sinyard,26, David Culbert
27
and
Ralph Willett28 analyzed in their articles the films Five Graves on the Road to
Cairo (1943), Foreign Affairs (1948), Stalag 17 (1953), Witness for the Prosecution
(1957) and One, Two, Three (1961), Neal R. McCrillis in the films Hotel Terminus
(1987) and Shtetl (1996), Ora Gelley in films The Bunker (1981) and Schindler’s
List (1993), Caroline Joan and David a. Frank in the films The Boys from Brazil
and Holocaust (1978), Partisans of Vilna (1985), The Music Box (1989), and
Triumph of the Spirit (1989).
Based on these films they have concluded that the representation of German
characters in American films have started to undergo changes as early as the time
of World War II.
Research works point out, for instance, that the director Billy Wilder consistently
refrained from painting the Nazis in black and the Allies in white, even in a movie that
was produced in the midst of the war. Both German characters in Five Graves to Cairo –
Rommel (Erich Von Stroheim) and Schwagler (Peter Van Eyck), are not presented as
粸¢
totally evil Nazis, but are rather portrayed in a complex manner as professional soldiers.
The films treated in these research show restraint, not labeling the Germans as
complete villains.
If the conclusion of these research is right, the changed attitude towards the
Germans has not necessarily been the result of changes in foreign policy; there could
have been other reasons as well, such as cultural and political outlooks of the film
makers, a great number of whom were Germans by origin.
Summarizing the question of the German image representation in Hollywood's films, the
research reviewed above, deals with films that were produced between World War I
and the 1980s, and point out two tendencies:
26
Neil Sinyard & Adrian Turner, (1979). "The Films of Billy Wilder", Journey Down Sunset Boulevard,
London. pp. 65-111, 138-146.
27
Culbert, pp. 173-202.
28
Willett, pp. 3-11.
25
All researchers are unanimous that the representation of Germans during World War I
(sometimes even earlier), was of a negative stereotypic nature. According to all of
them, this tendency persisted during the period between the two wars.
According to most research works, starting from the end of World War II, the manner
of presentation has undergone a positive change – regarding the leadership, rather
than the people as the enemy; there were also interests in the Cold War. (some
researchers believe that the change occurred as early as during World War II, following
the arrival in the United States of directors of German origin).
A few research works suggest that the manner of presenting Germans has not changed
since the end of World War II, and that since 1917 until now there has been a
continuous negative representation of the Prussian stereotype.
Inferences of the current study
In my study I have proved that there are other directions and tendencies
than those that have been presented in the existing research.
The my Research Assumption, rationale maintains that there is a reasonable
basis to assume that there was a connection between the film representations of
Germans in Hollywood and the Prussian-Hun stereotype, which influenced the German
粸¢
representations in the film-making medium throughout the twentieth century.
1. For the most part of the period in question, with the exception of the peak of the
war (1942-1944), Hollywood was very independent and should not be regarded as
an enlisted institution, although as a body it usually supported the intervention
tendency of its own accord, acting thus out of independent patriotism.
2.
Representations of Germany and of the Germans during the Cold War do not
constitute an exoneration of the German people, but rather a complex
representation of it.
3. The distinction between Nazis and other Germans remains, but the other Germans
are represented as ambivalent figures rather than entirely favorable ones.
4.
The directors of most films are preoccupied with the question of the Nazi past and
to what extent may the new Germany be trusted. This question is mainly discussed
through analyzing representations of the German women as a metaphor of
Germany.
26
5. The German representation in general reflects a complex relationship rather than a
submission of Hollywood to the American Administration; this is revealed even
during the difficult years of the McCarthy persecutions and the Cold War.
1.3 Types of sources and database
1. Primary sources
a. Filmography: a significant selection of American films, presenting German
Characters (Huns, Prussians, Nazis, Germans) pertaining to the relations between the
administration and Hollywood, from which these relations may be deduced. A selective
examination will be made of films viewed.
b. Film Index International.
c. All Movie Guide – The International Film Guide.
d. Documents of the United States' State Department (FRUS), Vols. 13-15.
2. Archives, Libraries and Documents
a. History archives in the United States, such as the archives of various studios, the
Congress library, etc.
b. Presidents archives: Roosevelt, Trumann, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon.
粸¢
c. The Israeli film archive: Jerusalem cinemateque and Tel Aviv cinemateque.
d. Yad Vashem Institute, Jerusalem.
e. The archive of kibbutz Lohamei HaGetaot.
f. The media library at Haifa University and the media department at the Hebrew
University.
g. Ha'Ozen Ha'shlishit, Tel Aviv.
3. Information and research enterprises pertaining to these relations
a. Periodicals (essays). b. Research literature (books). c. Protocols of meetings and
speeches by presidents and various personalities in key positions. d. Newspapers and
public opinion polls. e. Essays and books on models and theories dealing with the
cinema and communication. f. Internet sites dedicated to USA presidents and their
memoirs.
27
1.4 Methodology of the study: Data gathering and their
assessment
The research proposed below is of a qualitative unobtrusive type. That is, it does
not interfere with the context of the research object. This approach does not disqualify
classical interfering research methods, such as questionnaires, surveys, etc., yet it
acknowledges the limitations of such methods, particularly regarding historical research
of sources whose parameters are not distinctly measurable – such as films. According
to this approach, in order to achieve valid results it is necessary to make a triangulation
of several sources of information, and at least some of the information should be
obtained through unobtrusive methods.
Establishing the Inquiry Sample (Sampling)
For the purposes of this research I have collected and examined about 100
American films that were produced in Hollywood between the years 1939-1989, which
deal with Germany, its various images and an extensive variety of representations of
German men and women.
Between the years 1939-1945 1169 war movies have been produced. Between the
蛐¢
years 1939-1941 27 anti-Nazi movies have been produced, dealing solely with Nazi
Germany29. This fact stems from a number of reasons:
1. The studios' owners were afraid of losing revenues in Nazi Europe.
2. Many of them were Jews, who were afraid of encouraging anti-Semitism in
America, as the American Nazi movement was strengthened.
3. The American administration still supported isolationism and put pressure on the
studios not to deal with this issue.
This situation was changed dramatically upon the US's introduction into the war.
Between the years of 1942-1945 about 500 war movies have been produced out of the
total number of 1700 movies, which is 30% of the productions in these three years.
About a half of the 1300 movies which have been produced in the US during the years
1941-1944 dealt with the war30. There were about 80-90 million spectator per week,
numbers which cannot be reproduced nowadays. During the Cold War there was a
drastic decrease in movies that present Germany in all kinds of representations.
29
30
Shull and Wilt, p.51.
Wagnleitner, p.237
28
Between the years of 1947-1989, more than 1500 movies have been produced in the
US which dealt with the Cold War and its crises. Only a small part of them, about 150200 dealt with Germany, and in about 50% of them the German representation was not
the central theme of the movie.31
Periodization
This present research has examined main types and representations of Germans
in the cinema, which the movies endeavored to create, intensify, change, shatter or
revive during various periods throughout the twentieth century.
First, I have divided the the Cold War duration into several periods, examining in
each period the representation of the German image in American cinema by classifying
it into four basic types of representations:
1. Representations of historical figures.
The gallery of images of the Nazi leadership was described as an ensemble of
caricatures. Hitler's ecstatic speeches and Goebbels' screams presented the
leadership as crazy and hysterical. The hedonism and greed of the Minister of
Aviation, Herman Goering, whose fat appearance represented the beastiality and
barbarism of the Nazi leadership, were repetitive motives of personal
粸¢
representations in films, wich produced Between 1939 – 1989.
2. Representations of German women as a metaphor of Germany.
3. Representations of Nazis and Germans people who believe in the Nazi
ideology/Germans with distinct Nazi characterization (or its equivalents), dividing
the Germans into two groups, the Nazis and other Germans. The first are shown
in a negative light, and the second usually in a positive one. The main question is
what happens to these images and how they become more complicated in the
years of the weakening of the McCarthy's persecutions and in the Cold War.
Films which especially connected to this issue are Judgment at Nuremberg by
Stanley Kramer from 1961, The Quiller Memorandum by Michale Anderson from
1966,The Bunker by George Schaefer from 1981, Schindler’s List by Steven
Spielberg from 1993, The Downfall by oliver Hirschbiegel from 2004.
31
Dan,Caspi, (1993). "Cinema, radio and television". Mass Communication. Vol. a. Unit 4, the Open
University, Tel Aviv, pp. 149-169.
29
4. Representations of non-Nazi Germans, like professional soldiers, officials and
other Germans according to their social class/ Germans with an ambivalent
identity. These images have become very positive as compared to the period of
WWII. One can indicate the genre of heroic war films that prospered at the
beginning of the sixties, like Battle of the Bulge by Ken Annakin from 1965. This
trend increased in the late fifties and reached its peak in the sixties and become
clearer in Sevententh and Eightenth in the Cold War. One can see it in the
ambivalence and complexity of the German characters, like Patton by Franklin J.
Schaffner from 1970, Raid on Rommel by Henry Hathaway from 1971, A Bridge
Too Far by Richard Attenborough from 1977, The Boys from Brazil by Franklin J.
Schaffner from 1978.
Actually, these images are divided between the two groups, i.e., the Nazis and
the other Germans. The thematic discussion in the above categories will show how
Hollywood divided the German representation. I will try to draw conclusions about
Hollywood's relationship with the administration with its goals in foreign policy.
At the first stage I propose to find out the above mentioned types, and examine the
粸¢
significance that may be deduced from these representations within their context in the
movie.
At the second stage I will analyze the films from the aspect of cinematic language, a
language that has its own rules and syntax – the use of shots, camera movements,
sound and editing are part of its grammar and syntax. This analysis will be done against
the film's historical background.
At the third stage I will extract the meaning from the texts regarding aspects of German
representation in American cinema against the background of the Cold War, and with
reference to the following themes:
1. The different interests of the multiple forces within the American administration visa-vis Hollywood.
2. The interests of forces operating within Hollywood (film makers, producers and other
persons involved in the industry.
30
1.5 The Limitations of the research
1. General: to what extent does the chosen model represent the variety of German
images and representations in all Hollywood's films in that period?
2. Choice of model: a considerable number of films relevant to the period have either
been lost, or are hard to be traced; thus we may only learn about them from
general references in articles, which do not attest to their contents or viewpoint.
3. The problems involved in analyzing films: The cinematic medium possesses a wide
range of tools for transmitting messages. The films I have selected are of various
styles, using different cinematic motives, and belong to different genres; it is
therefore difficult to analyze them in the same way and create an uninterrupted
narrative.
4. The origins of film makers: German and other European film makers who arrived to
the United States as immigrants and have had a great impact on Hollywood and
many factors in the film industry. We have to examine to what extent have their
techniques, cinematic approach and political-ideological concepts influenced the
structuring of Germany's representations in Hollywood, and whether their origins,
粸¢
their homeland and cultural background contributed to mollify or exacerbate the
German representation. The film makers include directors, producers, writers and
photographer.
5. The time of producing the film: we should find out to what period the film refers,
and whether it was produced following a significant historical event, or before it.
For instance, the movie Five Graves on the Road to Cairo was produced a short
time after the Germans' defeat at Al-Alamein, and three months before Rommel's
final defeat in North Africa. Is this element relevant to the German representation in
Hollywood, or to the manner in which the film tackles the approaches prevailing at
the time of its production, or the approaches prevailing throughout the period of
the Nazi Reign?
6. Financing and costs: Owing to the great cost of film production, the studios could
not afford risking their money, and therefore it was necessary that the script, the
work program and any other detail be confirmed in advance by a council consisting
of the studios managers, producers and directors. To what extent, then, did the
31
need for financing influence the structuring of the German representation versus
other considerations.
1.6 Main thematic findings
The last five chapters (out of eight) of my thesis stand for the research-proper and
leads to the thematic conclusions of the study.
The fourth chapter (1939-1941) deals with the German representation during the
years 1939 to 1941; that is to say, from the outbreak of World War Two until America
entered the war. The prevailing tendency during that time was one of separatism. Films
that did represent Germans created a split representation of Nazis and other Germans
by several representation categories that I have observed.
In chapter Five I have examined the representations of Germans during the war,
since America entered the war in 1942, until the end of the war and after it in 1946.
The findings show a steady orientation of representations.
In chapter six I described and examined these representations during the Cold
War from 1947 until 1970. I have reduced the representations to three categories, with
the representations of women occupying a greater part of the discussion.
粸¢
In Seven chapter I described and examined these representations during the
Revision period, deal with the events of the Détente, the soviet invasion to Afghanistan
and the beginning of the Second Cold War, Star War, the fall of the USSR, the fall of
the Berlin Wall and the formal termination of the Cold War in 1991. a sequence of
complex representations or a drastic change (1971-1989). I have reduced the
representations to four categories.
The eight and last chapter I bring the conclusions of the research, aiming to show
the German image in the American motion pictures prior to the Cold War as opposed to
the changes it has gone through in later years.
The representations of Germans in films I have examined express the
relationship between Hollywood and the American Administration and the relationship
between US and West Germany. These representations offer a different picture for each
of the four periods under observation, although in all of them we may perceive a split
representation between Nazis and other Germans.
(For expansion, see the conclusions of the research).
32
1.7 Theoretical and applicable conclusions
Hollywood and the US Administration
From the findings of the research it appears that Hollywood maintained a complex
relationship with the American Administration:
1.
Hollywood acted occasionally as an agent for the Administration's system of
propaganda, but it still retained cultural and economic autonomy.
2. Its economic and cultural autonomy gave room for pluralism of positions among
different creating talents in Hollywood. Such positions sometimes expressed the
positions of the Administration, at other times they criticized the administration, and
in some cases this criticism was extremely poignant.
3. Hollywood was occasionally not a monolithic body; it is a cultural, relatively pluralist
system. There are artists with solid outlooks who do not necessarily coincide with
the positions of the Administration. The artistic expression of great directors, such
as Billy Wilder or Stanly Kramer, represents a complex critical narrative about their
subject matters. In certain cases this may even come close to a frontal collision
with administration elements.
粸¢
4. The very need of the administration to establish and operate the House of unAmerican Activities Committee testifies to its having been pressured by its failure to
discipline Hollywood.
5. In a close investigation of Hollywood's effort to take part in the political discourse,
one finds the nuances that express different approaches and pressure groups in the
wide public and among the American policy decision-makers.
Hollywood and the German Representations
The main contribution of this research lies in its almost comprehensive analysis
of German representations detected in Hollywood-signed movies, and its wide
perspective of the attitudes respectively held by the US administration and Hollywood;
and on the other hand, of mind-sets and policies initiated by the American victor toward
Germany. It is a two-facet enquiry, on the national and the international level, which
covers the greater part of the 20th century second half, a large and important era in
modern history.
33
Another contribution lays in the identification of the dichotomous images of
Germany and Germans during the periods of WWII, McCarthyism and the Cold War
until 1989, in order to understand the change that the German representation has gone
through in the different periods. The atmosphere of persecution that prevailed in
Hollywood in certain parts of these periods contributed, undoubtedly, to a certain
rehabilitation of Germany and its representation in Hollywood's movies. But at the same
time, a major part of the German stereotypes, which were shaped after the Nazis came
into power, continued to appear many Hollywood movies in this period. A large number
of these stereotypes were comic or caricaturistic, serving as an evading mechanism
from the dictates of the administration and the need to deal with Nazism seriously.
Towards the end of the McCarthyism period, we see first attempts to deal seriously
with Nazism and the guilt of the German people, like in the movie Judgment at
Nuremberg(1961).
This trend went on in the seventies and the eighties as well, when Hollywood
produced films which discussed the same issues and raised the same questions, like in
the films: The Bunker (1981) and Schindler’s List (1993)…
Geographical framework:USA,Germany(1939-1945) and West Germany(1946-1989).
粸¢
Chronological framework: 1939-1989.
Historical framework: WWII and The Cold War era.
34
Chapter Two
The attitude of American foreign policy toward Germany -1933 -1989
In the chapters Two and Three I'll present a general survey of the American
foreign policy towards Germany in the years 1939-1989 and about the position of
Hollywood in this policy. The main goal of there chapters are methodological as an
infrastructure for the analysis of the movies in the research chapters.
2.1 The attitude of American foreign policy toward Germany in the
Separatism Period - 1933-1941
The Nazis coming into power in Germany, and the impact of events in Europe
on the decision making of the American foreign policy – 1933-1941
In light of the comprehensive events in Europe in 1933-1939: the violation of
demilitarization in the Rhineland (1936), the Anschluss of Austria (1938), the
Sudetenland crisis (1938) and the annexation of Czechoslovakia, the relationship
between Germany and the US were put aside due to the isolation policy that
characterized the American policy. The isolation was an important and steady principle
in the American foreign policy. In the farewell letter the first president, George
Washington, who wrote to the Americans in September 1796 that he recommended to
粸¢
avoided having political and military connections with the European countries32. The
isolation principle received another reinforcement in a declaration given by the
Secretary of State, Monroe, in December 1823. He warned that the US would not allow
the European countries to interfere in American affairs, or as he put it: "America for the
Americans, and Europe for the Europeans", which means that we don't interfere in
European affairs, and we would not let you interfere with our affairs. America continues
with this policy when WWI broke out, and only in 1917, after Wilson declared that one
had to see to it that the world would be a safe place for democracy, the US entered the
war. After the war America returned to its traditional isolation policy.33 The US regarded
32
33
Hans J. Schroder. (1993). Confrontation and Cooperation: Germany and the United States in the era
of World War I: 1900-1924, New York. The first American president, Geoprge Washington,
emphasized commercial and economic relations with other nations, and recommended to maintain as
little political relations as possible, especially with the Europeans. For further reading in this farewell
letter, see the book by Israel Zingrov and Zeev Boim, (1998). The US history duritn the Cold War,
Truman's era: 1945-1952, Vol. I, Ministry of Defense Publishing House, pp. 145-146.
The voters punished the Democratic party for involving their country in the war, and as a result it lost
the presidency for many years to come (1921-1932) as well as the Democratic majority in the
Congress (1919-1932), ibidem, p. 145.
35
itself as a stronghold of democracy and considered it its duty to distribute the principles
of democracy in many locations in the world. The fast industrialization and economic
development in the US made it look for international markets outside of the US, that is
in Europe, and this fact made an opening in the isolation policy. As a result, America
had to protect its economic and political interests by strengthening its nave and its
military. In 02.04.1917 the Congress confirmed Wilson's request for non-interference in
the war for the following reasons:
1. The German invasion into Belgium in spite of its neutrality, and the brutality of this
conquest. The Germans operated snipers and guerilla warfare and their oppression
was brutal. The cruelty of the German conqueror was distributed in the press and
shocked the American public.
2. The drowning of the passenger ship Lusitania by the German navy was an event in
which more than 1,200 American passengers were killed, and it pushed many
people to demand interference against Germany.34
3. Zimmerman's cable (a senior official in the German ministry of foreign affairs) that
exposed an agreement between Germany and Mexico, in which Mexico would
declare war on the US and in return Germany would help Mexico to get back areas
粸¢
that had been taken by the US in 1848 (Arizona, Texas, and New Mexico).
The US regarded this cable as a brutal interference in its domestic affairs, and it
declared war against Germany, and by so doing ceased the isolation policy. Wilson's
personal vision was written in Wilson's principles, including: gain profits and
international influence, having a world with no wars, and organizing the relations
among nations within the League of Nations, (LoN). These principles are the basis for
the interference which was operated in WWII as well.35
Upon the outbreak of WWII, there was a wide objection in the US to participate directly
or indirectly in the European conflict. The embargo of selling American weapons to the
fighting nations was removed after an internal conflict in order to help the
American;industry to get out of the economic depression that had prevailed in the US
since the the economic crisis.
In 1937 Roosevelt warned the Americans that the Japanese aggression towards
China and Hitler's aggressive policy in Europe were a danger for the US as well as for
34
35
This event was the background for the movie in 1918. See Slide, p. 612.
Cyril Falls,(1960). The First World War, London. p. 268.
36
the whole world.36 Roosevelt declared of a new era in the American foreign policy, an
era of active foreign policy. This policy progressed slowly but safely, and it seems that
between Washington and Berlin there developed an unprecedented hostility that
Germany did not have with any other nation, but all the same, the relations remained
reasonable until 1938.
The violence based on racial reasons in Germany was one of the reasons for the
tension between these two nations, but not the central one. America's protests in this
respect remained unanswered. In July 1938 there was an international conference in
Evian, according to an American suggestion, for discussing the persecutions based on
racial background. The American people agreed that strong measures should be taken
to keep democracy.37 The conference suggested to establish a committee which would
deal with cooperation with the Germans. The Germans objected. On November 7th, a
young Jewish man, Hershl Drynszpan, shot the third secretary of the German embassy
in Paris, Ernest Ram von Rath as a protest of the persecutions of Jews in Germany. The
German response was the Kristalnacht. Throughout two days there were pogroms in
which many Jews were murdered, Jewish shops were damaged, and synagogues were
put to fire, and in addition the Jewish community was required to pay a collective fine
粸¢
of millions of marks. The US responded immediately: the American ambassador in
Berlin, Hof Wioson was called back to the US and he did not return to Germany until
the end of WWII.38 This measure caused a certain apprehension in Berlin of additional
economic sanctions on top of those that had been put earlier by the Americans,
following the annexation of Austria, when the Americans stopped the supply of helium
to Germany for aircrafts. This had been the reason for Germany's consent to cooperate
with the Evian conference. The German response of artificial reconciliation in relation to
Americans of a Jewish origin who lived in the German Reich was perceived as
hypocritical and did not improve the relation between the two nations.
On February 2nd, 1939, following Roosevelt's declaration about the American front
in the Rhine, Hitler instructed to increase the propaganda against the US and attack
Roosevelt personally. Washington responded by diplomatic and economic sanctions.
36
37
38
Roosevelt's warning in October 1937 in Chicago, the stronghold of the isolationists. Ibid, p. 280.
William A. Langer and S. Everett Gleason,(1952). The Challenge to Isolation 1937-1940, (New York,
Harper Press), p. 12.
The New York Times, Nov. 15, 1938.
37
The American administration refused to acknowledge the transfer of authorities in
Bohemia and Moravia, and the Czeck foreign minister continued to be invited to
Washington.39
On April 7th, 1939, Italy attacked Albania and at this stage Roosevelt decided to
intervene personally. On April 15th he warned the Axis states of additional violent
measures, saying that another war in Europe would cause heavy casualties and bring
about severe damages. He called Hitler and Mussolini to take part in an international
negotiation in order to reach an agreement. Roosevelt added that the US would not
refrain from interfering in what was going on in Europe in case the situation gets
worse.40 The responses from Berlin and Rome were furious. Goering, who was in Rome
at the time, issued together with Mussolini a common announcement, which referred to
Roosevelt's speech as pointing of a latent mental disease. Hitler responded on April
28th, saying that there was no danger to other states by Germany, and that most
European states that Roosevelt was worries about were actually under the control of
England and France. In November 1940, after Roosevelt was re-elected, he started to
help Britain immediately. After Germany started a war and conquered Poland, Norway,
Denmark and the Benelux, the president warned of the coming danger41, but the
粸¢
isolationists dictated their line. All Roosevelt managed to do was the Lend-Lease
program (1941) of providing economic assistance and weapons delivery to Britain.
2.2 The attitude of American foreign policy toward Germany: From
Isolationism to Intervention in WW11 – 1942-1945
The Japanese bombardment over Pearl Harbor and the fact that straight
afterwards Hitler declared war on the US made the Americans abandon isolationism and
join the war against the Axis states.
When France fell in 1940 it was obvious that for America's liberal-democratic
values, and for its essential interests, the US would have to intervene in a larger scope
than it had done in WWI. Actually the US entered the war after the Japanese attack on
Pearl Harbor, but there had been signs already in 1940 that America was about to
terminate the isolation policy.
39
Saul Friedländer, (1967). Prelude to Downfall: Hitler and the United States: 1939-1941, (London), p. 11
Ibidem, p. 12.
41
About this danger, see Israel Zingrov and Zeev Boim, The US history duritn the Cold War, Truman's
era: 1945-1952, Vol. I p. 147.
40
38
In July 1941, in a meeting between Roosevelt and Churchill in Placentia Bay, they
formulated the Atlantic Charter, which states that they "see fit to announce certain
common principles of their policies, hoping to bring about a better future to the world."
In paragraph 6 it says that "after exterminating the Nazi tyranny they hope to see a
situation of peace that would ensure that all people who live in all countries would be
able to live their lives free of fear and shortage."42
As a matter of fact, the immediate aim of the Atlantic Charter was to encourage
the anti-fascist world to unite against Germany, which had violated the political status
quo in Europe and in the world. The non-specific and universal nature of the Atlantic
Charter was an expression of Roosevelt's suspicion that an open discussion would
seriously endanger the American unity in relation to the war, and may arouse the
objection of the isolationists, which might endanger the American interference.
Basically, the American foreign policy, in the years of 1941-1944, posted a goal of
defeating Germany and bringing it to an unconditional surrender so that its capability of
conducting a war in the future would be cancelled.
In the summer of 1944, the military victory in Europe was almost certain, and
there was the question what would be the attitude towards Germany. In Teheran
粸¢
conference in 1943 already Roosevelt promised the leaders of the USSR that he was in
favor of dividing Germany and making it pay great damages. But there was
disagreement among the decision making people of the foreign policy about Germany.
The real dilemma was connected with two issues during 1942-1944: what should be
done regarding the aversion of the American people of a long-term international
involvement, and what should be done regarding the conflict between the goals of the
West and those of the Soviets.
In order to achieve a military victory at war without interruptions until 1944, they
did not refer to these two issues. But upon the end of the war the answer to these two
questions was in line with the question what would be done about Germany, questions
whose solution has always been perceived as dependent on the materialization of the
American goals.43 The nature of the agreement that would be enforced on Germany
and its scope would bring to a symmetry of the long-term commitments. At this stage,
42
43
For the other paragraphs of the charter, see the book by Otto Butz, (1954). Germany: Dilemma for
American Foreign Policy, Princeton University, (Garden City, N.Y.), pp. 9-10.
Ibidem.
39
America could not go on being isolated, since any decision regarding Germany would
involve a decision of the scope of the American commitment in Europe after the war.
In view of the USSR's concern, it is plausible that any decision about Germany in postwar Europe might have dictated the Soviet position to a large extent.
One can summarize the considerations of the discussion about Germany at the end of
summer 1944 in two points:
1. America had to go about the conquest of Germany and its control in a way that
would deny the possibility of German aggression in the future in a way thay would
require minimal American commitment in Europe and in a limited period of time.
2. The USSR had to get guarantees for its safety which would be sufficient so that its
leaders would give up their territorial demands in East Europe and cooperate in the
post-war world in the spirit of the Atlantic Charter.
There were two different approaches among the decision making people:
One approach was led by the Minister of Finance, Henry Morgenthau Junior and his
supporters, and the other was represented by people from the State Department, like
the Secretary of State Cordell Hull, and Henry L. Stimsom from the Ministry of War.44
The senior officials supported a strategy of punishment and prevention. President
粸¢
Roosevelt rejected the idea that one can change the German people without any drastic
measures. As a youngster he stayed in Germany and experienced the militarism of the
German society. He studied in a German college geography and military topography
and absorbed the radical nationalistic and aggressive interpretation of the German
history, and it left a negative impression on him regarding the German nation.
Therefore Rossevelt adopted easily the opinion of his Minister of Finance, Morgenthau,
and referred to the German issue as a pathological problem. Morgenthau prepared a
master plan for disassembling the German economic and political infrastructure and
leading defeated Germany into being an agricultural society by eliminating its industrial
capability.45 According to his opinion, the Germans bore common moral responsibility
44
45
To read further about the two approaches and the dispute in this matter, see Butz, pp. 19-21.
Ron Robin T. (1995). The Barbed–Wire College: Re-educating German Pows in the United States
during World War II, Princeton university press, Princeton (New Jersey), p. 19.
Also: James P. Warburg,(1953). Germany Key to Peace, (Cambridge), p. 15.and:
Warren F. Kimball, (1976). Swords or Ploughshares? The Morgenthau plan for Defeated Nazi Germany:
1943-1946, (Philadelphia), p. 31.
40
for the crimes executed by Hitler's Third Reich, and therefore they do not deserve a
special consideration.
The president rejected alternative strategic categories, suggested by the
Secretary of State and the Minister of War, who had suggested a policy that would
differentiate between Nazis and other Germans, who have been perceived as victims of
Nazism as well. The president and other critics of the forgiving approach towards
Germany aspired to avoid what they regarded as the main mistake of 1918. Wilson
assumed that disassembling the ruling class in Germany would lead to the
establishment of a democratic basis, which would enable the "new" German population
to get hold of its destiny. Creating the conditions for applying Wilson's vision could have
taken place had the US not have returned to its traditional isolation policy. The fall of
the Weimar Republic proves that when the US did not assist politically and economically
the new growing democracy in Germany, it collapsed and the Nazis came into power.
This lesson was learned only after the end of WWII. At the beginning of the war
there was no policy regarding the rehabilitation of the German people according to
Wilson's guidelines. A variety of scientific researchers conducted by the administration
and others showed that there are violent patterns of behavior in the German mentality
粸¢
and are the basis for the German aggressiveness. They said there was no magic
formula which can change the nature of the German society, and there is a need of a
basic revolution of the German culture before a significant change can take place in it.46
In mid-1944 the president and the Minister of Finance, Morgenthau received
Churchill's support, and it seemed that the plan was entering the stage of execution.47
But the Minister of War, Stimson, the Secretary of State, Hull, and his successor
Stettinius objected to Morgenthau's suggestion and started recruiting support for the
rehabiitational approach of the German problem. Stimson claimed that vindictiveness
towards the German nation would not serve the American interests, and disassembling
the German industry would not help the plan of a new geopolitical organization, based
upon economically independent republics according to the American style.48 The
46
47
48
Butz , p.20.
Robin, p.24.
Ibidem.
41
Minister of War claimed that the best plan was to make the German "American-like",
and in so doing, ensure Germany's support in international future struggles.49
Hull argues that Morgenthau's approach, adopted by the president, has become a
little more than just a vengeance, and a destruction of the German industry would
destroy part of the European economy and lead to negative implications on the future
of Europe,50 and then the interests of the US in the region would be damaged.
In addition to the dangerous economic implications of disassembling the German
nation and making it a rural nation, the ministries of foreign affairs and war were afraid
that an approach of punishing Germany would not be backed by positive
reinforcements or a rehabilitation program.
Up to this point the war effort concentrated in a strategy of destruction,
disassembly and de-Nazification, but one has to pose the Germans an alternative, if one
does not want them to turn to another totalitarian doctrine. Any attempt of building
rehabilitational solutions for Germany should wait, of course, until completing the
victory of the Allies.
In 2.3.44, the two ministries presented a strategy for the "indoctrinization of
German POWs."51 The basic assumption was that instead of condemning the Nazis, one
蛐¢
had to build a positive appreciation for the American alternative among the POWs.
The most problematic part of the program was the chapter that described the German
nation as a nation with a most developed culture, but its political culture was presented
as pathological and inferior.52
Anyway, there may have been a change in Roosevelt's thinking regarding his basic
mistrust about re-education, and his doubtfulness about the rehabilitation of the
German nation, and he hoped that in this way he may appease the war and foreign
ministers, whose efforts in negating Morgenthau's program have failed.53 It is probable
that the change in the president's opinion has to do with increasing concerns regarding
his political reliability, which suffered from severe criticism in the press due to the
management of the prisoners camps.
49
50
51
52
53
Ibidem.
The Memoires of Cordell Hull, (1948). Vol. 2 (New York), 1606.
Robin, p. 25.
Ibidem.
Ibidem. p. 27.
42
The final policy of the US towards Germany did not rely on Morgenthau's
suggestions, nor on those of the State Department and the Ministry of War, but on a
compromise between the two.
The document that combined the compromise served as a guideline for the
intermediate policy which was formulated in October 1944 and was issued in April 1945.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff Directive (JCS) 1067 determined several issues as part of the
final arrangement among the super powers regarding the goals of the conquest, the
political organization and the economic targets.54
The goals of the conquest
Germany would not be conquered in order to liberate it, but as a defeated enemy
state. The main goal of the Allies is to prevent from Germany to be a threat on world
peace in the future. Essential steps for attaining the goal are demolishing Nazism and
militarism in all possible manner, catching immediately all war criminals in order to
bring them to justice, disassembly of Germany's army and industry, keeping supervision
over Germany's capability to conduct war, and preparing for the rehabilitation of the
political life in Germany in due time on a democratic basis. Another goal was creating a
mechanism of payment and compensation and providing assistance to countries which
粸¢
have been destroyed by the Nazi aggression.
The goals of the political re-organization are:
1. Germany will be divided into four occupying areas. A superior supervision will be
operated by the four headquarters commanders who will act in cooperation in a
control council in Germany.
2. Nazism with all its organizations will be uprooted.
3. All military and military-like organizations will be dismantled, including all the
associations that might serve to preserve the military tradition in Germany.
Economic goals:
1. Economic control means will be planned for protecting the security of the
conquering forces and for supplying their needs, avoid famine or diseases and
restlessness of the kind that might endanger the forces, excluding what should be
necessary for these goals. No steps will be taken for the economic rehabilitation of
Germany or aiming to maintain or strengthen the German economy.
54
Butz , pp. 22-23.
43
2. Ownership and control over the German industry: the German industrial companies
will be disassembled as soon as possible, including concerns, corporations, owners'
companies and stock companies.
3. The controlling council will adopt the same guidelines which will be necessary in
order to prevent or restrain inflation of the kind that might endanger achieving the
goals of the conquest. At the same time, prevention or restraint of inflation will not
be a reason for importing products, but not for limiting the removal, destruction or
reduction
of
manufacturing
facilities
while
materializing
the
program
of
compensation, demilitarization and the disassembly of the military industry. While
the JCS 1067 left undecided the nature of the intentions of the US regarding
Germany in the long-run. Yalta conference (12.2.45) and Potsdam Conference
(17.7.45-2.8.45) did the same in the international level.55
Although Yalta conference declared of an agreement among Roosevelt, Churchill
and Stalin about common principles and programs for enforcing a German surrender
with no conditions, the specific nature of this common policy was not processed fully
and was not published until Potsdam Conference, which published the five D:
demilitarization, denazification, deindustrialization, decentralization and democrati蛐¢
zation. The agreement included the following issues56: the borders of Germany,
Germany's political future, its economic future, compensation Germany will pay, and
materialization of the conquest:
1. Berlin will remain as an enclave in the Soviet area and it will be divided into four
sectors.
2. The control council of the Allies received superior ruling authority. It was composed
of the heads of the headquarters of the US, USSR, Britain and France. The
decisions should be made in a unanimous vote.
Today we know that what was missing in the agreements and the arrangements of
the four super powers was neglecting the proportion of goals between the West on the
one hand and the USSR on the other. The arrangements that were determined about
Germany in 1945 were characterized by compromise and they aim was blurred, and
hence the rule of the four super powers was doomed to be incapable. It was not
possible to administer Germany as one economic unit, the hope of the Americans for a
55
56
Ibidem. p. 23.
Ibidem. pp. 23-25.
44
fast ending of their commitments in Europe did not materialize, and solving the
disagreements between the USSR and the West was and remained difficult.
The compromise of JCS 1067 and Potsdam Agreement seemed as the only
possible way of terminating the war and ensuring a European agreement afterwards.
One can conclude that in Potsdam conference there was no decision about practical
measures regarding the main issues, i.e., administering the conquest in Germany and
arranging compensation from it, and the issue of the borders. The trials of the war
criminals and the head of the Nazi rule were supposed to be the last gesture of unity
among the Allies. There was probably an expectation that the conquest of the Allies
over Germany and the international cooperation would be mainly an administrative
issue. The war against Japan was still going on in the east until August 1945 and the
US expected to have a continued cooperation with the USSR, which contributed to a
compromising American policy. Three main factors were involved in these issues:
1. The limitations about the alternative way of action of the American decision-making
people.
2. A mistake in the assumptions of the American decision-making people regarding the
situation they confronted during the war.
粸¢
3. Unwillingness on the side of the American administration to use a tough policy
towards the Russians and risk a confrontation with them in spite of the American
military superiority and the exclusivity of nuclear weapon.
America confronted an important crossroad: to what extent and for how much
time would it have to go on with its intervention in Europe. Would it return to the
isolation policy upon the pressure to bring the soldiers back home. There were even a
few revolts among the soldiers and an expectation to a massive return home, as it had
been in the previous war.57 There was the question what would be the US's global role
in the coming years.
The American decision-making people were interested in dividing Germany in
order to justify the allocation of immense economic resources and overcoming the
objection of the American people for a long-run intervention. The strengthening of the
American economy and the evidence that the USSR was going to be a new and
threatening enemy indicated that what had been in the past was about to change. In
57
Ibidem. p.32.
45
addition, the economic considerations were important as much as the political ones.
The Us has actually abandoned the isolation policy and adopted a quite new policy of
increasing intervention that goes on until out time. During the Nuremberg Trials
(20.11.45-1.10.46) there were significant disagreements among the Allies regarding the
list of names. For example, including Rudolf Hess, Hitler's deputy, who was mentally
unstable and was caught in Britain in 1941 when he was trying to contact the British
leadership on his own accord. The decision were made eventually out of political
consideration.58
Stalin claimed that "one has to mention a few people as an example, and that the
public opinion wants it. They wander why Hess live comfortably in England."59 His
words refer to the Russians' request to bring Hess to justice as a war criminal prior to
the Nazis invasion to Russia in June 22, 1941 - Operation Barbarossa. They feared all
the time from the creation of an Anglo-Nazi agreement against Russia with American
support. As a matter of fact, there was no agreement about any practical issue, except
for a list that included the names of war criminals.60
2.3 The attitude of American foreign policy toward Germany in
the Cold War – 1946 – 1989
粸¢
Historical background of the Cold War on West Germany soil in the American
and the global context, 1946-1989
The military cooperation between the democratic west countries and the USSR
during WWII became worse as the victory over the Axis states came closer, especially
Nazi Germany. In the course of time the cooperation has ceased completely upon the
end of the battles. The differences of interests and aspirations of both parties, which
have been put aside as long as they were unified in their common, will to destroy Nazi
Germany, have become more extreme and have brought about in later years the open
split between the two parties, known as the Cold War. This name was given because
they did not use firearms between the super powers, but mainly through political and
economic procedures and local war events.
58
Yad Vashem Institute, (1962). Nuremberg Trials. The verdict of the international tribunal, Jerusalem,
302-326. See also the important book: Arieh J. Kochavi,(1998). Prelude to Nuremberg; Allied War
Crimes Policy and the question of punishment, Chapel Hill, and London N.C.: University of North
Carolina Press.
59
Harry S. Truman, (1955). Harry S. Truman's memories: a year of decisions, Vol. A.Translated by S.
Gilay, D. Sivan, A.L. Kramer, A.S. Stein, Tel Aviv. pp. 345-346.
60
Ibidem. p. 345.
46
During the forties there were different approaches toward the treatment of
German, Morgenthau versus the Secretary of State and the Minister of War, but the
Cold War changed it all. From that time onwards, the policy towards Germany was
determined according to the struggle between the two blocks. West Germany had a
role in the Western defense layout versus East Germany in the same role on the other
side. The new hostility cancelled the programs of demilitarization and weakening of
Germany.
The collapse of the American-soviet cooperation contributed to a large extent to
the obvious division between east and west. Right after the war, the opinion in the
administration was that one had to leave Germany as one state that would be under
the control of the four super powers, but this concept has gone through a change
between the years 1947-1948. The reports that arrived in Washington pointed that
Russia had a tendency and a will to take over all East Europe, and there was a fear that
they would take over the democratic states as well. The danger for Germany has
become real due to Russian expressions in the different conferences. When the
blockade started, the Americans feared of a Russian taking control, and the American
response was pushing the Russians away from West Germany and not letting the
粸¢
Soviets benefit from the advantages of West Germany.
During the first years after the war, the American media did not deal with the issue of
the rehabilitation of Germany. The American public got the impression that the goal
after the war was to punish the Nazis and change the way of thinking of the German
society.
The Cold War started actually in 1946 upon the collapse of the anti-Nazi pact
among the Allies, and hence it was a key year in world history and the beginning of a
new era. Its signs had been found already in 1942 in disputes and disagreements
between the parties and disputes about the nature of the political arrangement in
Europe after the victory over Germany. The tough hostility between the two blocks
created a bad atmosphere. The two susper powers did not cease examining each other
47
through the sights of the gun.61 The terms east and west, which had been formulated
following the division of Europe among the Allies, received a new meaning that defined
the western politics up to the beginning of the nineties. The world that has been come
out of the destruction of the war created new concepts. Winston Churchill coined the
term the Iron Curtain already in 1946. The nuclear balance of terror that accompanied
this period stemmed mainly from aggressive reasons (economic, military, political and
cultural) much more than from ideological ones. As a matter of fact, the collision
between the goals of the American versus the Soviet policies caused the break of the
Cold War.
The American involvement in Germany since 1945, and much more so since the
beginning of the Cold War and its strengthening in the course time, demonstrated and
defined the global hegemony of US and the American determination to go on
strengthening an intervening foreign policy. The development of this policy, together
with the beginning of the Cold War (Berlin Crisis in 1948-9) show the change of
approach from "farewell to Germany" until establishing West Germany and making it an
important partner in the Cold War and in NATO. Germany was a test case tor America's
new role in the world.
粸¢
The atom program changed the nature of the US role in the world. The Americans
have understood gradually that the world in the atom period is different from the prewar one. In the new world the preparations for peace are not different from the
preparations for war, and atom bombs are considered as a weapon of peace. In this
kind of world one cannot reduce one's alertness and cannot go back to the isolation
culture. Hence America's only defense in the world is human and technological
readiness. The geographical isolation America maintained against the storms of the old
world has been lost forever.
61
Thousands of articles and books have been writtin about the historiographic division and the roots of
the Cold War. One can divide the historiography of the Cold War into three groups: Christof, Klassman,
who discusses thoroughly the different approaches of the research and the condition of Germany after
1945 in his two articles: "conquerors and conquered: common and contradicting issues. pp. 48-68, and
"the Cold War and the division of Germany," pp. 69-83. "The Germans: 1945-1990, (1998) by Oded
Heilbrunner and Moshe Zimmermann, (Eds.), Tel Aviv. There was also the comprehensive book: Fraser J.
Harbutt, (1986). The Iron Curtain: Churchill, America, and the Origins of the Cold-War, (New York,
Oxford: Oxford University Press) pp. 183-285.
48
This was the message Truman tried to pass to the Congress when he
recommended the program for universal military training in 6.9.45.62 Truman argued
that the missiles and the advanced aviation cancelled finally US's security. The
revolutionary change he suggested met with opposition on the part of the Congress,
but the events in the world, with the Soviet subversion and aggression, exposed the
weaknesses of the American response and supported Truman's position. As much as
the Soviets made it difficult for the US to dictate the conditions for peace after the war,
as they distributed communism in the world, Truman's message has become accepted.
In 1947 Truman formulated and defined the change that the nuclear bomb has caused
in the American policy, Truman's doctrine. This doctrine legitimized the use of power
by the US as a result of the atomic monopoly it had. Truman formulated the struggle in
dichotomous terms of good and evil, light and darkness, and determined that US policy
should support the free nations.
Marshall Plan offered West Europe a generous economic assistance in order to
prevent a collapse which might weaken the democratic world. Certain changes have
been introduced to the American administration, changes that expressed the new
perception:
粸¢
The Ministry of War has become the Ministry of Defense, and the fields of its
activity have been enlarged. The National Security Council (NSC) was established, the
General Staff received a larger position and the CIA was founded. The Congress
committee headed by Senator McCArthy, the HUAC63, with Truman's support, started
bothering every American who was suspected of communist tendencies. The
administration received unprecedented large authorities of invading the privacy of
citizens. It demanded loyalty and unity as in war-time, but only few Americans objected
to the new demands. This paranoidic situation was so extreme that in 1953, when
Truman left his position, the Republicans blamed him of neglecting the security of the
US.
Upon the end of the war, the American military intelligence officers acted to help
senior ex-Nazis in order to achieve internal information about the USSR and the Red
Army. Part of the Americans that participated in these operations testified that they had
62
Margot A. Henriksen, (1997). Dr. Strangelove's America: Society and Culture in the Atomic Age,
(University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles). pp. 16-17.
63
House of Un American Committee.
49
felt deep distress due to this activity. This kind of treatment of former war criminals was
against the American morale and past loyalties, but served the present military and
intelligence goals, as they were perceived at the time. Senior Nazi scientists were
transferred to the US and served it.
The Cold War influenced also the severity of punishments in the Nuremberg Trials.
Telford Taylor, the general prosecutor in many trials in Nuremberg, when he returned
to the US after an absence of seven years, confirmed the connection between the Cold
War and the softness of the verdicts. He said he was amazed of what he had
witnessed: "We wanted Germany in our hands."64 He added that "Roosevelt, liberalism,
and social activity – everything was gone. There was the Cold War. I lost my way. I
didn't know what hit me." He condemned Senator McCarthy's cruel methods, and
afterwards was condemned in the congress.65
Prof. Leffler from Virginia University, the author of the book The Superiority of
Power, provides an evidence of the position of the revisionist historians,66 and he
presented documents showing that the decision-making people in Washington
consistently tried to exaggerate the scope of the Soviet war potential in order to "make
the American people to be worried," as Senator Arthur Wanhdenbert put it, trying to
粸¢
gain the support of the voters for additional defense expenses. At the same time the
Truman administration showed secretly "an aware understanding of the Soviet
weaknesses," and chose to go on with the intervention policy.67 Leffler proves that the
US initiated the division of Germany, rather than Stalin, who repeatedly suggested to
enable the unification of the two parts of Germany as long as it would remain a neutral
and
demilitarized
country.
Stalin
requested
guarantees
against
the
renewed
strengthening of Germany, but the people around Truman were afraid that this solution
of the German problem would bring with it a wave of neutrality around the world. The
American conquest policy towards the Germans was cold and pragmatic. Instead of
punishing the war criminals and lead advanced social reforms, the conquest officials
64
Ibidem and Henriksen, pp. 26-27.
Ibidem, p. 75.
66
The people who oppose the claim that officials of the administration were actually afraid, and say they
were interested in escalation in order to encourage anxieties in the American public, anxieties which
would enable removidng budgetary hindrances and taking illegar actions.
67
Kai, Bird and Gar Alperovitz,(1994) "wheter the cold War was necessary?" A critical essay on Melvin P.
Lefelr's book (a researcher who belonged to the radical section of the revisionisr school of thought)
About the superiority of power: National security, Truman's administration and the Cold War. Stanford
University, 1992. In: a collection of socialist thought from the world press, 32, 1994.pp.56-61.
65
50
dedicated great attention to developing connection with local moderate businessmen
and with conservative innovators.
But one should not get carried away with this wave of putting most of the
responsibility on the US for starting of the Cold War. The measures taken by the Soviets
right after the end of the war pointed on operative steps, which might have cause a
threat on the American and the Western interest in Europe, especially in Germany.
Today the research focuses uses a new historiographic approach that claims that one
can attribute the responsibility on both parties for the beginning of the Cold War.
Berlin's status since 1945 up to the end of the Cold War
During almost fifty years Berlin was a living symbol of the Cold War. As a
cosmopolitan city, Berlin provided an option that calls for a renewed assessment. It was
the central stage for the plots of the Cold War. Upon the beginning of the Cold War and
the blockade over Berlin in June 1948, the American administration started examining
the American position regarding the hegemony in Europe. Accodring to famous Lenin's
saying that "whoever holds Germany, will govern Europe", the Americans should not
have leaved the Berlin issue, lest they would lose the hegemony in Europe.
The presence of the American intelligence in Berlin started in 1945, and has
粸¢
remained there throughout the Cold War, and various intelligence authorities operated
on behalf of the US until 1947, when the CIA started operating in Berlin.
At the same time of the CIA's activity, the Russian intelligence started also operating in
Berlin. The soviets, through the Stasi (the East German office of the state security)
focused on the American military presence in Europe.
The level of intelligence activity on both parties was always high. Although the Red
Army conquered Berlin in the spring of 1945, the Russians agreed to the American
entrance to west part of the city after Eisenhower, the superior commander of the Allies
forces, agreed to take the American army out of Czechoslovakia. Berlin was surrounded
by territory under Russian control, and the Allies depended on the access road to the
city. These arrangements were settled in 5.6.45 among the Allies in a meeting in Berlin.
Berlin was divided into three areas. British and American forces controlled the western
city, while the Russians were in the east. But the British and the Americans insisted that
France would also get an area of control in the north-west of the city, and an authority
for a civil administration of the whole city was established, which was composed by
51
representatives of the four super powers, who maintained the position of the head of
the administration in rotation. At this time Berlin became the place of the control
council of the Allies, a council which was responsible for the martial law all over
Germany.68 For reasons of administrative convenience the representatives of the US,
Britain, France and the USSR decided during WWII to arrange a common conquest rule
over Berlin after the fall of the Reich. But with the collapse of the ally of the war, and
the strengthening of the Cold War, Berlin was the focus of conflict between east and
west. The city has become the location for Stalin's efforts to remove the west from
central Europe, and the west determination not to let it happen. The Iron Curtain
divided post-war Europe along the ling that goes from Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in
the Adriatic in the same way as Berlin was divided in 1946.
In September 1943 already there were a few ideas about the management of
Berlin and Germany after the fall of the Reich and the end of the war.69 The negotiation
between the parties did not discuss the right of the western allies to go through the
Soviet area of Germany into West Berlin (Berlin was 160 km inside the Soviet zone).
Upon the surrender of Germany in 8.5.45, the Soviets took measures in Berlin
(appointing the city council, forming a police force under communist administration,
粸¢
banking, trade unions, press). These measures showed the west that Berlin did not lose
its strategic importance and that the Soviets were eager to take over all Berlin and push
the West away. But their attempt did not pass quietly. The Soviets dealt with Berlin as
they did with the other areas under their influence, they planted communist regimes
through "popular governments" in East Europe. On March 5th, 1946, when Winston
Churchill, as the leader of the opposition, appeared with president Truman in Fulton
Missouri, he gave his famous Iron Curtain speech.70 Since then Washington's
reconciliation approach was reduced in its contacts with the Soviets. George Kennan,
the head of the policy planning team in the State Department, published an article in
July 1947 issue of the magazine Foreign Affairs, which would reflect Washington's new
viewpoint about Moscow: "It is obvious that the main element of the American policy
68
Dean Rusk, (1971). US Department of State, Documents on Germany: 1944-1985, (Washington, DC).
Different plans and suggestions were suggested by Britain, US and Russia. Neil, Spitzer,(1988)." Berlin
"Dividing a City", Wilson Quarterly, Summer, 12 (3),pp. 101-122.
70
Ibidem, p. 108.
69
52
towards the USSR should be a long-term, patient but aggressive and alert stopping of
the Soviet tendencies of expansion."
One of the reasons that made the East German authorities lock the passage to
the western part of the city and build the famous wall in 1961 was the high value of
Berlin as an intelligence basis for the US and its allies. This step damaged severely the
activity of the western intelligence, but almost did not disturb the eastern intelligence
activity. Between 1945-1961 there was a reasonable passable between east and West
Berlin, and in this period Berlin was called a spies' den, a name that corresponded to a
certain extent to the romantic image that has been established in literature and the
movies.
The western allies would use the stopping not only in southern Europe71, but also
in the western sections of Berlin. When they found out that they could not go on with
cooperation with the Soviets, representatives of the western countries met in London in
February 23rd, 1948, in order to start planning a future merger of the three western
areas in Germany into the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) and administering a new
coin in it.
In a meeting of the allies' control council in Berlin in March 20th, 1948, the Soviet
粸¢
representative, Sokolovsky demanded to know what was going on in the London
conference. When the allies refused to give him this information, he left the meeting.
This way the Russians left the common administration authorities and actually cancelled
the common administration agreements. But all the same, the agreements remained as
a basis for a common management of the Allies in the west of the city until the end of
the Cold War.
Although the two parts of the city had been administered separately since 1948,
and West Berlin became part of the Federal Republic in 1950, and East Berlin was
declared as the capital of East Germany in 1949, until 1972 there was no formal
agreement that guaranteed the western Allies a terrestrial access to the city. This fact
received more importance after the Russians disconnected the roads and the railroads
from the British and the American areas in the city. Fortunately, in November 1945 the
super powers achieved an agreement about air paths from Berlin to Hamburg, Hanover
and Frankfurt. Although the western allies showed that they were capable of supplying
71
According to Truman's Doctrine, the US provided Greece and Turkey, in 1947, with 440 million dollars
as a military assistance as a counter measure versus the Soviets' pressures in this area.p.109.
53
the needs of Berlin by air, the absence of a terrestrial access remained a weak point in
the conquest of West Berlin.
First Berlin Crisis
In 1948 the three western conquest areas (American, British and French) were
united in an attempt to convince the Russians to integrate in the new trends of the
rehabilitation of Germany, as had been planned during the war in order to ensure
stability in Europe. But the attempt to arrange a common rule in Germany was failed
and the Russian were afraid that this plan would lead Germany to become a Western
state under American protection. The deterioration of the relations between the USSR
and the western countries was expressed at the beginning of summer 1948, when the
Allies started carrying out a monetary reform in Germany. The Reich mark was
substituted by the Deutch Mark (DM), which helped the inflation and increased the
prosperity in West Germany, while the situation in East Germany, under Russian rule
remained very bad. The Russians took advantage of the monetary reform and the fact
that the access to Berlin was not arranged, and closed the passage to Berlin. The result
was a blockade put by Stalin on West Berlin and disconnecting all terrestrial roads to
the city. The Soviets demanded to cancel all the measures of unification of West
粸¢
Germany as a condition for removing the blockade on the city. The Soviets hoped that
the West would waive West Berlin altogether. The US demanded to remove the sieve
on the city under no conditions, and it also considered the military option of breaking
through the blockade. Eventually this measure was prevented as it might have caused a
general war between the Soviets and the Americans in Europe. In stead the West
decided to operate an airlift to West Berlin to bring the supplies of the city and the
military there. The airlift executed about 277 thousand flights during a year. It has
become so efficient, that it made the Russian blockade inefficient. IN this new situation
Stalin looked for new ways of terminating the crisis because he was afraid that if there
would have been a war, the USSR would have lose as it did not have atomic weapons.
The blockade was removed according to an agreement that was signed in May 1949.
This blockade has become a symbol of the vitality of western democracy, and a
moment in which the western super powers had to be uncompromising.
Since the beginning of 1947 the US acted for the integration of the areas under
American, British and French rule into one economic unit as a step in the way of
54
establishing a separate West German state, economically stable. A year later the three
western super powers decided to introduce a new coin in these areas in order to ensure
financial stability and economic recovery. In mid-June 1948 the monetary reform was
executed together with cancelling the supervision of prices of products which had been
under rationing. The reform was proved to be successful very quickly.
The ambassador Smith and General Clay were called in November 1947 to Washington
for consultations, and reported that "the split in Germany is inevitable because after it
there would come an attempt to put a blockade over Berlin and expel the western
super powers."72
In July 23, 1948, General Clay came again to the White House and to the
meeting of the National Security Council which was convened on that day. Clay said
there that "abandoning Berlin would be a disaster for our plans regarding West
Germany. It would also slow down the recovery of Europe, whose success depended on
the increased production especially in West Germany, and in order to find a peaceful
solution we have to stay in Berlin. If we leave Berlin, we would lose everything we had
fought for."73
The failure of the conference of the four foreign ministers in London in February
粸¢
1948, as well as Marshall Sokolovsky, the military soviet governor, leaving the meeting
of the control council of the Allies in Berlin on March 20th, 1948, signaled a public
acknowledgement of the final separation between the Allies regarding the German
issue. Truman said that "In relation to Germany, this action provided a formal seal to
what has been obvious for some time, that is, that the controlling mechanism of the
four super powers didn't work. But in relation to Berlin, it was the beginning of a
serious crisis."74
The Soviets started to remove the super powers from West Berlin. They
disconnected the terrestrial roads and railways between Western Germany and West
Berlin, on June 24th, 1948, in a step that was called by Frank Howley, the commander
of the American area of Berlin called it as "the most barbaric in history since Genghis
72
Lucius D. Clay, (1950). Germany and the Fight for Freedom, (N.Y.), p. 36.
Ibidem, p. 129.
74
Harry S. Truman, (1956). Memoirs: Years of Trial and Hope, 1946-1953, London. Vol. 2, p. 129.
73
55
Khan."75 In this was the Soviet blockade on West Berlin started and it brought about
the first Berlin crisis.76
The Soviets were shocked by the impact of the western prosperity over the
inhabitants of East Germany, who lived in economic poverty and regarded it as a threat
on their control on East Berlin. The condemned the monetary reform and regarded it as
"a violation of Potsdam decisions,"77 paragraph 4, which determined that during the
period of conquest one had to refer to Germany as one economic unit. For this end the
Potsdam conference had determined a common guidelines regarding the mines and the
industrial manufacturing, agriculture and foresting, wages, coin and banking, taxing and
customs duties, compensation and liquidation of the military industrial potential,
transportation and communication.78
General Clay and his political advisor, Robert Murphy, had foreseen the crisis,
and informed their superiors that the Russians might disconnect the terrestrial
connection to Berlin at any time, and requested Washington to reconsider its response
to this event.79 The crisis was perceived by the administration as a threat on the
American interests and on America's reliability to its allies. A withdrawal of the West
from Berlin under Soviet pressure, warned the CIA, "would be a political defeat of the
粸¢
first rate." Therefore, it is clear that maintaining an isolated post there is difficult and
even dangerous, but it is essential due to the psychological and the practical
implications of an island of western security in the heat of the Soviet region, and the
western promise to unite Germany in due time. Abandoning the East, summarized the
CIA's survey, would desert finally East Germany to communism and it would mean that
a unification could be done only by the East.80
75
76
77
78
79
80
Frank Howley, (1950). Berlin Command, New York, Putnam's. p. 197.
There is a rich literature about the Berlin Crisis, in addition to memories and personal interviews with
people who had been involved in these events, documentaries and fiction movies. See for example:
Daniel Harrington, (Feb 1984). "The Berlin Blockade Revisited", International History Review, No. 5.
pp. 88-112. And the:
-Ann and John Tusa,(1978). The Berlin Blockade, London.
-Ann and John Tusa,(1988). The Berlin Airlift, New York.
Hugh Higgins, (1974).The Cold War, London. p. 66.
Ibidem.
Lucius D. Clay, (1950). Decision in Germany, (New York: Doublerday), p. 239
And also: Robert Murphy, (1964). Diplomat Among Warriors, (London: Collins). p.281.
Avi Shlaim, (1983).The United States and the Berlin Blockade, 1948-1949, Berkeley, Los Angeles,
London. p. 12.
56
President Truman defined similarly what was at stake in Berlin: "A struggle over
Germany, and in a wider sense, over Europe."81 Truman's formulation clears that the
American determination to object to this threat of the American values and there was a
danger of deterioration into military hostility actions:
"Our situation in Berlin is sensitive. Had we wanted to stay there, we had to
show force. But there was always the risk that the Russians' response would
lead to a war. We had to acknowledge the option that Russia might decide to
use Berlin as an excuse for a war, but a more immediate risk was the chance
that a Russian pilot with a light finger on the trigger, or a hot-tempered tank
commander, might cause an incident that would put on fire a powder keg."82
In order to maintain their status in Berlin the American decision makers had to
act before they ran out of supplies, which lasted for thirty days.83 Except for the logistic
constraints, the symbolic and psychological importance of Berlin did not leave room for
unlimited lingering.
The Soviet objection to the rehabilitation measures, which were intended to
make Germany independent economically, was an evidence of Moscow's intention to
drive all Germany into the Soviet hemisphere. Unilateral measures taken by the Soviets
粸¢
in their area, and the suggestions they suggested in the discussions of the four super
powers were perceived as part of a master plan to make Germany communist. The
Russians intended to drive the West away from Berlin. At first they claimed that the
West had never had any legal right to be in Berlin. Then they claimed that the West did
have such right, but it lost it.
These developments brought America to change its primary position of referring
to Germany as one economic unit through cooperation among the Allies, to a policy that
was intended to divide Germany and establish a separate state that would be an ally of
the West, although the decision to do so was made only in 1948.
In 1947 the American policy regarding Germany was shown more clearly. When George
Marshall substituted Barns as Secretary of State in January 1947, he received heavy
pressure to strengthen West Germany quickly. In a speech he gave on November 18th,
1947, Marshall specified clearly the American position: "The rehabilitation of Europe is
81
82
83
Truman, (1956). Memoirs. p. 130.
Ibidem, p. 149.
Howley, p. 201.
57
connected with the rehabilitation of Germany. Without the revival of the German
economy the European economy cannot take place."84
Since the cooperation among the four super powers fell apart, each party tried to
take measures to strengthen its grasp of its part of Germany. It was a test of the West
determination. General Clay, the American military governor in Germany, wrote to the
military secretary Kenneth Royall:
"We've lost Czechoslovakia, Norway is threatened an dwe withdraw from
Berlin, and if it falls to the hands of the Russians, all West Germany would
follow. Then whole Europe will become part of the new Soviet empire. If we
intend to hold Europe against communism, we mustn't move from our
positions."
The crisis was perceived as a direct threat on peace and stability in Europe, as a
threat on the American interests in Germany, which might have deteriorated into an
armed confrontation. The memories of WWII were still fresh in the consciousness of
both Europeans and Americans, and the American leaders worried. So after many
discussions the Western Allies decided to deliver by flights the supplies for the 2.25
million inhabitants of West Berlin, an unprecedented logistic operation. This airlift
粸¢
operated during eleven months day and night, with about 200 thousand flings until the
end of the crisis, which delivered almost 1.5 million tons of supplies to the siege city.
At the same time the Western super powers raised this issue in the Security Council of
the UN in September 29th. After almost a year the USSR finally removed its blockade in
May 1949. The Berlin Crisis showed very well to what extent Berlin and Germany were
important for the essential interests of the US and to what extent a return to the
isolation policy was dangerous. The Soviet blockade on Berlin made Berlin from a
problem of the conquest policy into an object of an international crisis. Berlin was the
weakest part of the American armor, and from a Russian viewpoint it was the ideal
arena for such a test of power. The American weakness stemmed, in strategic terms,
from Berlin's situation as an enclave inside the Soviet area, and in legal terms, it
stemmed from the fact that the west had not attained a written confirmation of its right
to a terrestrial access to the city when the agreement about the division of the city was
made in 1945.
84
U.S. Department of State, (1950). Germany 1947-1949: The Story in Documents, Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Government Printing Office. p. 12.
58
If Germany was a microcosmos of the cold War, Berlin was the microcosmos of
the German problem, and the Berlin Crisis served as a symbol and a turning point in
both contexts. The big paradox was that the German problem, which had caused in
1941 the great alliance, broke now what had been left of this alliance. In retrospect, the
Berlin Crisis was significant because it was the first open and direct confrontation
between the super powers. Truman summarizes this issue:
"We wanted an arrangement, but we couldn't agree to an arrangement that
would deliver the Berliners to the hands of the Soviets and their communist
German yesmen. We pushed back the Russian attempt to push us away from
Berlin. As long as the blockade went on, the airlift has become more
efficient, and many Germans looked up to the West to reinforce them in their
decision to remain free. Berlin has become a symbol of America's and the
West dedication to freedom. The Kremlin has started to understand that its
attempt to push us away was doomed to fail. Russia's toughness and its
arrogance about Berlin showed many Europeans the need of close military
connections among the western super powers, and it led to the discussions,
which brought about the NATO organization. The Berlin affair taught all a
粸¢
lesson.85
Historians agree that Berlin Crisis was a turning point in which the war could have
been started again, and it was a turning point in America's policy towards Germany,86
and an important aspect of the American policy at the beginning of the Cold War,
because all the burning issues among the super powers relations after the war, there
was another problem so loaded, and among the complex of issues that were connected
to Germany's future, there was no other one so complicated as that of Berlin.
The outcomes of Berlin Crisis
1. The West, and especially the US, proved that it would not give in to the Russians in
their attempts of expansion towards West Europe, and one of the immediate
actions that were taken was the establishment of NATO in 1949 (as a result the
USSR established the Warsaw Pact).
85
86
Truman, Memories, Vol 2, p. 135.
Richard Crockatt,(1995). The Fifty Years War: The United States and the Soviet Union in World Politics,
1941-1991, (London and New York). p. 80.
59
2. America's determined decision to hold Berlin strengthened the German-American
solidarity and the West European countries against the USSR.
3. Stalin's failure in Berlin Crisis led to the stabilization of the Iron Curtain in Europe
and halt of the Soviet expansion. Stalin based his rule in the USSR by an iron hand
in the popular democracies.
4. The crisis led the US to found an independent German state in the western
conquered areas, and as a result the USSR founded East Germany in the eastern
part.
In 1949 both parts of Germany adopted constitutions and institutionalize, to made
official their rule with the backup of the super powers, which saw to it that the division
would last for a long time. The Cold War emphasized this trend: each party integrated
"its" Germany, NATO and Warsaw Pact. West Berlin has become an isolated island
surrounded by Russian ruled area and given to a special legal status, and it was the
arena for the confrontation between the super powers more than once. The
confrontations in the end of the forties and the beginning of the fifties have put Berlin
in the focus of the international arena and caused the following outcomes:
a. Increased Western prestige and the German hostility towards the USSR.
粸¢
b. Accelerated the armament program and the crystallization of the military coalition
of the West.
c.
Made the Berlin problem from a local one into a global crisis, much beyond the
Russians intentions.
The American viewpoint of West Germany's coping with the Nazi past during
Adenauer's period
In 1945 there arose the question how to overcome the implications of the twelve
destruction years of the Nazis rule in Germany. At the beginning of Adenauer's period
the American people came to know some bothering cases, like the reestablishment of
new nationalistic organizations in Germany and the penetration of former Nazis into the
new administration institutions. The military American governor in Germany, McCloy87
saw fit to protect the German people and improve the American public opinion about
the Germans. At the same time, one could not ignore the opinion polling that the
87
Norbert, Frei. (1993). "The American Perspective on Germany's Confrontation with the Nazi past in the
Early years of the Adenauer Era", America and the Shaping of German Society: 1945-1955, ed.
Michael Ermarth, (Berg, Providence – Oxford). pp. 47-59.
60
Americans conducted in Germany, which showed that there was still sympathy to the
Nazis in Germany along with anti-Semitism and nationalistic approaches.88 For this
reason he encouraged an education program which would shape and encourage the
German people to choose the democratic way. The manager of the office for public
affairs in Germany (HICOG), Sheppard Stone, helped him in this matter. Stone had
studied in Germany before the war and received his PhD from the University of Berlin in
1933. Was married to a German woman, and had a wide knowledge about Germany.
He developed a close relationship between the martial law and the citizens and in his
time the American program of public relations was developed to an unknown extent.
Stone and McCloy met all the time with young leaders and with youth in order to
nurture the connections for the future. They financed teaching programs and
intervened and influenced their contents. McCloy's activity included also allocating
quotas for the manufacturing of weapons, ships and encouraging the steel industry, in
spite of the fear that with Germany's rehabilitation, products and plants would be a
source of a renewed equipment and military reinforcement. McCloy argued that
Germany had to join all the activities and cooperation agreements in Europe. He
mediated between Germany and other European countries, and encouraged them to
粸¢
sign cooperation agreements that included commercial, economic and defense issues.
Germany's renewed armament
During the fifties the US supported the renewed armament of West Germany as
part of the European Defense Community – EDC. IN his speech before NATO council in
Paris in mid-December 1953, the American Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles, that
the armament of West Germany was essential to the defense of Europe and that it is
doubtful whether one can make Europe into a safe place without it, and that the US
would have to make a reassessment of its policy. When the American decision makers
suggested for the first time the armament of West Germany they did it for military
considerations only. At that time the American policy to finance and encourage the
economic recovery of Europe and renew its political stability raised counter measures by
the Soviets. Hence one had to take care of a military defense of East Europe as fast as
possible due to the economic weakness of the NATO super powers.
88
Ibidem.
61
During 1951 French diplomats formulated arrangements which were supposed to
accept the idea that Germany would not be accepted as a member in NATO, but would
be included in the European Defense Community, which included Italy, Belgium,
Holland and Luxembourg as well. According to this arrangement, the European Defense
Community was supposed to include twelve divisions of German soldiers with the forces
of the other members. This was supposed to be done in a way which would prevent the
German government the capability of determining unilaterally where and when these
forces would be used, and ensure that their superior level of command would not be in
the hands of German officers. In order to motivate Bonn's government to agree to this
arrangement, planned by France with an American inspiration, the West Germans were
offered another concrete payment on the way to a full sovereignty, excluding certain
rights which were supposed to remain in the hands of the Allies, and a continued
control over domestic issues in Germany in order to prevent a failure of the
constitutional democracy. Therefore Germany was supposed to be accepted to the
family of the European nations as full equal member. This arrangement was signed by
the three western foreign ministers and Adenauer on May 26th, 1952. The formal
justification to continue the support of the renewed armament of West Germany and
粸¢
the EDC as a central component of the American policy in West Europe was based on a
number of assumptions:
1. One has to deter the USR from upsetting the American achievements' in Europe,
and convincing the Russian leaders to accept them.
2. NATO super powers were economically and militarily too weak to bear responsibility
for this assignment. Therefore it is essential to exploit the German manpower.
3. The arrangement of the EDC provides France and the other countries involved
accepted and sufficient guarantees that West Germany and the German military
forces to be would not let and would not be a threat and would prevent a political
and military German hegemony.
4. The integration of Germany in the EDC arrangement would be accepted by Bonn
and its citizens as a permanent arrangement: that West Germany's participation in
the EDC does not cause failure of the prospects of Germany's renewed unification,
as opposed to the Soviet position. On the contrary, it would actually contribute to
achieving the German goal.
62
The American support policy of the EDC was declared in a letter from President
Eisenhower Chancellor Adenauer on July 23rd, 1953. The main message of the president
is included in the following sentences: "I do not accept, and has never accepted, the
theory that the EDC and the unification of Germany denies one another. On the
contrary, for some time I have been convinced that the strengthening of the Federal
Republic by adopting the agreements with the EDC and the continued progress towards
integration of Western Europe can strengthen the prospects of the unification of
Germany in peaceful ways by enlarging the attractive nests of prosperous West
Germany versus the Soviet region, an attraction that has been proved already by the
incessant flow to refugees in last months and by the demonstrations that started on
July 17th."89
The American decision about the renewed armament of Germany, its integration
in NATO and Eisenhower's rehabilitation speech to the Wehrmacht in his visit to
Germany in 1951 brought about a ratification of making West Germany from a rival and
an enemy into a friend and a preferred ally.
It seems that in the history of the Cold War, the mid-1955 was a time of good will
about the possibility to end the Cold War. But it did not happen. The American leaders
粸¢
put the blame on the Soviets, but the evidence shows that both parties adopted a
policy of hostility, as well as the common fears of a future threat by Germany cause the
failure of the talks.90
The role of the US regarding Germany during Eisenhower's rule, and especially in
the years 1953-1954 justifies a more thorough examination, since the political
documents about Berlin were a consistent continuation for the years to come91. The
Eisenhower administration, which inherited the Berlin problem when it entered into
power in January 1953, hurried to re-confirm the American commitment to West Berlin
and used actively as part of a wider program that was intended to destabilize the Soviet
force in East Europe. The importance of West Berlin for America's Cold War continued
to increase and made the administration consider how it could protect in the best way
the American interests if there is a serious resistance to the access to Berlin. The
89
90
91
The New York Times, July 26, 1953.
Ronald W. Pruessen, (1993). "Beyond the Cold War – Again: 1955 and the 1990s" Political Science
Quarterly, Vol. 108, Number 1, pp.68-84.
David G. Coleman. (Winter, 2000). "Eisenhower and the Berlin Problem, 1953-1954" Journal of Cold
War Studies. Vol 2, No. 1. pp.3-34.
63
outcomes of the progress were summarized in a position paper that for saw a fast and
decisive deterioration in case of a crisis. The paper rejected the option of another airlift.
When Eisenhower signed the position paper in January 1954, the basic decisions
regarding the Berlin problem have already been made. It determined that the US would
remain in West Berlin in any case, and it would serve as a "front position of the free
world" against the Soviet bloc in case of aggression. This was the preparation for the
second Berlin Crisis in 1958-1962.
Since 1949 until November 1958 the Americans tried to examine a few ways of
settling the situation. A short time after Eisenhower entered his position, he was forced
to confront with the state of stagnation in Berlin and make a re-assessment of the
strategic and tactic implications of the American commitment to the city. The new
administration dealt not only with logistic problems, but he also made basic political
decisions.92 Berlin problem was a symptom of a wider issue regarding Germany. The
general circumstances remained unchanged. The efforts made by Eisenhower and his
Secretary of State, Dulles to deal with the problem were not different from the
guidelines of Truman's administration. In spite of the far reaching rhetoric during his
campaign to presidency in 1952, which emphasized the differences between the
粸¢
platforms of the two parties regarding foreign policy, the new administration felt that
the continuation was the best way to prevent the USSR from arousing immediately a
crisis in Berlin.93 Hence the Eisenhower administration renewed its commitment to
Berlin. During a visit to Berlin two weeks after his inauguration, Dulles calmed the
Germans by saying that "we in the US today, like in 1948, have an essential interest in
the wellbeing and security of this city, and we are partners of the Berliners
determination to maintain their freedom."94 Three days later, when James B. conant
entered his role as the superior commander of the USs, he told a German journalist that
Washington was determined as ever to ensure that Berlin would remain "the front post
of the free world."95 A week he specified his words and said that "the new
administration in Washington would not abandon Berlin… we will go on fulfilling our
commitment and keep our rights."
92
93
94
95
Ibidem,
Ibidem,
Ibidem,
Ibidem,
p. 6.
Ibidem.
p. 7.
Ibidem.
64
Eisenhower and Dulles identified a new opportunity in the symbolism of Berlin
as an icon of the Cold War and as a gate of the free world. They tho that Truman's
comprehensive attitude towards the Berlin problem was defensive, as Berlin served as a
value of demonstrating an American determination to stop the USSR.
Eisenhower intended to use the American commitment towards West Berlin as a
main weapon in his efforts to take the initiative from Moscow and bring it back to
America. Eisenhower and Dulles praised incessantly the symbolic role of Berlin. They
declared it as a "presentation of freedom," a "lighthouse of hope," and a "window to
the West" – terms that upon the beginning of John F. Kennedy into power have
become synonyms of West Berlin and provided the rhetoric framework for the
discussion about the Berlin problem, which lasted throughout Kennedy's rule. The
document NSC 5404/1 (National Security Council), which was submitted at the end of
January 1954, determined the "US policy regarding Berlin." This document posed the
basis for the administration policy in the Berlin problem, and contained strong
recommendations that the US would respond vigorously, strongly, and without delay in
any case of a new crisis in Berlin. It declared of taking measures for increasing the
symbolic values of West Berlin; reducing the city's damage of the city from a blockade;
粸¢
and a struggle against the increasing sense of despair that was observed among
Berliners. The controversial item was the recommendation to use "limited military force"
in spite of the problematic nature of it.96
In 1954 the USSR informed that it regarded the Democratic German Republic
(East Germany) as a sovereign state, which made the West respond. First of all, the US
spread over West Berlin a nuclear umbrella by NATO. In this way the US provided
concrete guarantees for its commitment to West Berlin. The second response was
accepting people of the Democratic German Republic as representatives of the USSR.97
One positive development that has taken place in the fifties was the improvement of
the material situation in West Berlin. Between the years 1954-56 unemployment was
reduced by half, the economic security was improved and the demand for industrial
products of West Berlin was increased. But the increased standard of living had its
implications. Some American officials were afraid that this improvement might damage
96
97
Ibidem, pp. 26-27.
As a matter of fact, in the mid-fifties already they understood that the Soviets might transfer all
responsibility to the access of the West to West Berlin to the DDR. Ibidem, p. 32.
65
American interests, if it was to reduce the militant spirit of the West Berliners that
characterized their attitude during the periods of crisis, as assumed the Operations
Coordinating Board (OCB). It was doubtful whether the people in West Berlin, who lived
in a relative prosperity in comparison to the first years after the war, would be ready to
bear the sacrifices they bore in the years of 1948-1949.
The ultimatum Khrushchev posed in November 1958 made the Eisenhower
administration to confront the outcomes of its policy. During the fifties it has been
found out the stagnation about Berlin was quite an accurate barometer of the Cold
War. In spite of tension in East Berlin, a laborers' revolt, and in other locations in the
world, like the Korean war, it seems that the atmosphere of crisis was decreasing.
The Second Berlin Crisis
The next big confrontation in Berlin took place in November 10th, 1958, when
the Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev decided to uproot once and for all what he called "a
bone in the throat of Russia."98 On November 27th, 1958, Khrushchev issued a formal
letter to the Allies, in which he demanded that the western allies evacuate Berlin and
enable the establishment of an "independent political unit", a free city without a state
within six months. He threatened that if the West would not do so, the Soviets would
粸¢
provide the government of East Germany the control over the terrestrial access to
Berlin. In the following months Moscow conducted a war of nerves as the last date of
the ultimatum came closer (May 27th 1959). Eventually, the Soviets retreated of their
intention as a result of the determination of the West. This case confirmed the claims of
the West that "the US, Britain and France have legal rights to stay in Berlin. These
rights stem from the fact that Germany surrendered as a result of our common struggle
against Nazi Germany."99 The Russians have made numerous attempts to change the
status of Berlin. The Berlin Wall was built in 1961, almost without any response on the
part of the West, and through this action the Soviets perpetuated the status quo that
had been since 1948.
On July 25, 1961 Kennedy addressed the Americans on television. "West Berlin,"
he said, "is now, as it never has been, the location of the great test of the West
greatest test of courage and will power." In his visit to Berlin he made a speech on a
98
99
Louis J. Halle. (1967). The Cold War as History, New York . p. 163.
Ibidem, p. 170.
66
stage outside West Berlin's city hall, and supported Berlin all the way, with his famous
statement "I'm a Berliner."
Additional implications and the end of the conflict
Berlin Wall was supposed to have many symbolic and complicated implications on
east-west relationships, but eventually it helpec establishing political stability in
Germany, and Berlin problem was not solved until 1989.
The fall of the Iron Curtain and the USSR were the end of the Cold War and enabled
the unification of Germany with Berlin as its capital. One my say that the American
policy of conquest brought about the democratization and rehabilitation of Germany.100
The Berlin issue and the crises involved in it were most critical in the history of the
American foreign policy during four decades. Four presidents, Roosevelt, Truman,
Eisenhower and Kennedy conducted a complicated foreign policy and tried to maintain
the American interests in Europe, while recruiting the resources of the US for this end.
Now I will try to examine has did Hollywood serve the goals of the administration and
to what extent did it do so.
To sum up, the Cold War was a struggle between two blocks that were led by two
super powers of contradicting ideologies. For every action executed by one super
粸¢
power, the other reacted by a contra-action. Most of the actions had a political,
economic and diplomatic nature, but in certain cases local military measures were
taken.
100
Tomas A. Schwartz. (1993). "Reeducation and Democracy: The Policies of the United States High
Commission in Germany": In Michael, Ermarth, (ed.), America and the Shaping of German Society
1945-1955, Berg, Providence, Oxford. pp. 5-46.
67
Chapter Three
The cinematographic text in Historiographical Research
3.1 Interface between history and cinema
The movie, which has started taking the shape of popular entertainment for the
masses, has developed and has become, through a fascinating and complicated
process, one of the most significant culture agents of popular representations in the
20th century. Thousands of films, both documentaries and fiction, attracted thousands
of admirers and lovers to the movie theatres. They got excited, cried and rejoiced with
their heroes and were influenced by them. The movie entertained, but also documented
and crystallized collective dreams, psychological processes, political myths and even
sensitivities of nation and social class. "The historian who investigates and documents
this period with its many ups and downs, has an additional well of evidence, but he has
to study its rules, secrets and charms."101 The cinema is a living evidence of a period, a
mirror of the feelings, the fears, dreams and disappointments, a look on the people, the
big and small events that have made the human history that determined global destiny
and personal history of big and small people. Only the cinema provides a real
opportunity to pop into the thirties, into the inside of a house in the fifties, or a railway
粸¢
station at the beginning of the century, or having a real chance of observing society,
culture, ideology and politics. Only through the cinema can we try to shape a collective
political consciousness and reflect the zeit geist of a certain society at a certain time.
The cinema, the radio and the television swept western society in a few decades and
reshaped the communication ecology. One has to refer to each one of these media
through its socio-economic contexts and its implication on society and culture. One can
regard the movie as an art, to examine it from an aesthetic point of view and survey
the development of the movie language with is changing conventions, or alternatively
examine it through contents and genres with their roots and changes. On the other
hand, one can investigate it along a period of time and see to what extent did the films
reflect the social, cultural and political atmosphere, and to what extent did the movie
serve as a tool of political propaganda, or rather reflected contradictory states of mind
in the American public.
101
Shlomo zand, (2002). The cinema as history: to imagine and direct the twentieth century, Tel Aviv:
Am Oved.
68
The movie was perceived as a powerful educating tool, which passes hidden
allegorical messages, as well as being a sublimation agent that assimilates new values
and customs, passes propaganda and political, ideological, culture and social messages
and a means of accelerating cultural modernization, for good or bad. Therefore, one of
the axes of the present research will be to what extent does the movie, as a cultural
product, serve as a founding means, shapes and creates a collective consciousness
among the masses, and to what extent it provides a central infrastructure in structuring
the representations of Germany and the Germans in the consciousness of the American
public.
Except for being a commercial product of an industrial organization in the economic
system, the movie is also an art, a "cultural capital", an expressional means, mass
media, and like other arts, it is part of the ideological system. The movie is first an
artistic and aesthetic product which causes us pleasure in experiencing a personal
meaning out of the social atmosphere, and the escapist atmosphere. This refers mainly
to films of the mainstream that usually deal with anti-institutional and anti-social
fantasies, a temporary escapism, a chance of enjoying being free of the system, free to
reject it, free of any obligation of conformity to the rules of the game of the strong
粸¢
elements in society. The movie creates patterns of interaction of aesthetic identification,
like an associative identification, when the individual allocates himself in the role of the
figures, admires the perfect hero, or feels sympathetic identification out of pity for the
imperfect every day hero, a purifying identification, a tragic emotional arousal and an
internal relief regarding the suffering hero, or feeling laughter that expresses
identification out of sympathy, a comic relief regarding the pressured hero, ironic
identification that causes feelings of alienation and provocation in the spectator towards
the anti-hero. As an artistic product, the movie influences the behavior norms of the
spectators in a positive way: enjoying a free existence, imitating competition, using it as
an example to act correctly, solidarity with a defined action, free reflectiveness, free
moral judgment, fine tuning of the perception and judgmental reflectivity. There is also
use of negative norms of behavior: collective magic, imitation, reinforcement of the
need to escape, pleasure of causing pain, selfism and indifference.
The movie is also a cultural capital, and the movie industry is a cultural industry,
and as such the movie creates and distributes meanings about out being in the social
69
system, meanings which are a product of the dialectic interaction between the text (the
film), the film maker and the spectator. In this way the movie becomes a sphere of
meaning and communication. It creates identification through which we internalize the
value system that composes our lives. In this way the move rebuilds our reality for us,
a reality that is an expression of ideology, a set of illusions, principles, ideas and beliefs
about the essence of the social being that every one of us adopts and acts according
to. It reflects the needs and the social, economic, and political aspirations of individuals,
groups and social classes, so that in one social system there are several ideologies,
which compete among themselves on the dominant position, but the ideology of the
dominant group is the dominant ideology. Eulogy tries to interpret, provide meaning
and even suggest ways of changing the social situation.
Louis Althusser sees ideology as relations between people and their world,
relations that are seemingly conscious, but actually are not. According to him ideology
is like a myth: it controls us although we do not acknowledge it, by living it
spontaneously. Ideology, as far as he is concerned, represents the imaginary relations
between individuals and their real conditions, rather than their real conditions neither
their real world.
It means that the social reality in its material existence is not
粸¢
addressed directly by the ideology, but the ideology represents the individual's attitude
to the wider social structure, and the individual has to live obediently by the same
attitude, because not being obedient to one ideology means falling on another one. ,
the conclusion is that all of us are ideological beings, and that every discourse is
ideological. So the movie, as a means of a discourse, is influenced by the dominant
ideology of the dominant social class or group in the social system, or of one of the
(marginal) competing ideologies in it. One may say that every film is political, since it is
determined by the ideology of its makers, and the cinematic narrative is an outcome of
a process of selection and structuring, a process that goes though the ideological filter
of the film makers. We can see it in preferring certain values, beliefs, or approaches
and positions over others. An ideology leads the text of the film consciously or
unconsciously, and the relations between each text and the culture that created it can
be traced in its ideological roots. Ideological considerations enable us start
understanding the relations between texts of films and the cultural context. One may
70
even go farther and say that the creator, or the auteur of the film is not the author,
since actually his culture is the real creator.
The movie is political also due to the interpretation that the ideological spectator
gives the text (the film). The cinematic text, like other texts, is a function of the reader
and its acceptance. So the meaning of the text is comprised of the text and the reader.
Since the reader is ideological, the text is not a fixed entity, as the meaning is
subordinated to the interaction process between the textual structure and the reader's
ideological world. So we see that experiencing the film (the text) and the meaning
given to it change with the circumstances and the ideological setup of the spectator, a
setup that structures his identity and his orientation. The ideology we live influences
unconsciously the ways of processing information, the attention we give to certain
events and images, our interpretation and judgment as spectators about the artistic and
cultural value of the film. Throughout the process of reading (scathing) the reader
(spectator) positions the text versus his reality, and by the analogy he makes he can
enlarge his reality, see the deviation in the text, the innovation, and them react. His
reaction can get one fo the following ways:
•
He can identify with the discourse of the film and feel comfortable with it. This is
粸¢
when there is an ideological adjustment.
•
Identify the discourse of the text and struggle with it, in case of contradicting
ideologies.
•
Think about points of agreement and disagreement, in case of competing
ideologies.
•
Not being able to identify the hidden discourse in the plot, which might be
dangerous to our ideological wellbeing.
So that we, as historians who try to analyze and interpret cinematic texts, or any other
text, unconsciously influenced by our ideology in spite of the attempt of being objective.
The movie is also one of the many mass media within the wide cultural system.
And since it is a mass media, it has the power of arousing a public debate around any
issue. We can take m for example the public debate that was aroused following Mel
Gibson's film The Passion Of Christ, or American films like The Great Dictator, or To Be
or not to Be, The Diary of Anna Frank, Schindler's List, and many others. Storms that
are an outcome of acquaintance of the immense potential of the movie to arouse public
71
awareness in political, social, economic, and national contexts,and be an important
factor in shaping wide public positions and perceptions. In this context, the movie is
perceived as the heir of the social role of the realistic novels of the 19th century in
creating national images according to the theory of Anderson.
The movie has the capability of shaping opinions, positions, tastes, and behaviors,
and it has also an influence on the optimal physical look, creating a model for imitation
the masses aspire to. This potential brought totalitarian countries like the USSR, fascist
Italy and Nazi Germany to take over the movie industry already in the twenties (the
Nazis in the thirties), and recruit it for promoting their goals and use it as a means of
propaganda for distributing their ideologies. Administration agencies and others in the
US have also regarded the movie as a means of promoting social, cultural and political
ideas, and tried to influence the people of this industry and the contents of the films
through various means, like the HUAC or the WAC, in different periods. The taking over
of the movie industry by the state is an indicator for its populistic power.
Movie is also a language, an audio-visual language, and like any language, the movie's
language is a cultural mechanism, through which social meanings are made and remade. Therefore one may say that the film is a text in the language of the movie, a text
粸¢
which cannot be disconnected from the social-cultural context in which it has been
created, while making and remaking social meanings.
Usage of the movie is similar to a verbal language in the basic mental structures:
processing of thoughts, perception, judgment, providing meaning, arrangement
according to analogical relations, cause and effect. The basic phoneme is photography,
which play similar roles to words in a verbal language. In the film, the words and
dialogues are auxiliary tools for photography. This is a language in which the angle of
the camera, the lighting, light and shadow for emphasizing certain effects, the use of
space, the position of the object in the frame, the movements of the camera, the
music, the use of color, processing and editing are part of its grammar and syntax. the
language has its own grammar and syntax, although they are not steady and not
obligatory, and it has the potential of providing cultural meaning and to communicate.
Like other languages, and according to the theories of Ferdinand de Saussure and
Roland Barthes, the movie language is a set of signs, in which each sign is composed of
a signifier and a signified. The aim of using the sign is to create meaning, the
72
denotative verbal meaning of the sign. The relation between photography as signifier
and the object as signified is relatively steady in the movie language. For example, a
photo of an African man who carries the French flag. In its denotative meaning, this is a
representation of a man holding a flag, a meaning that every individual from every
culture may have. But when the photograph and the objects it refers to raise
associations, insinuations and social meanings with a cultural and ideological dimension,
this is the connotative meaning. When the meaning that comes up from this
photograph is one of French imperialism and colonialism in Africa and its social and
cultural implications and/or integration of the different races in the French Empire,
these are two different meanings, and it depended, of course, on the cultural system
and the ideological orientation of the interpreter-spectator.
Hence we conclude that a language, including the movie language, includes all the
cultural systems from which we choose and combine elements in order to communicate
and provide meaning, like the set of preferences of a given culture, a specific value
system and the specific composition of its physical and social world. These
characteristics, one can distinguish between the cinematic "langue" and "parole". N the
langue is the potential of the sign in the cultural system, and the parole is the sign that
粸¢
is composed of a selection out of the langue. The language, the langue, serves as a
mechanism for the production and reproduction of meaning (expressing ideas, opinion,
impressions, feelings, assessments, expectations, suggesting solutions for conflicts, and
so on), and it mediated the reality, if there is one.
The post-structuralism, for instance, does not acknowledge the existence of an
absolute reality or an absolute truth. The moderate among the post-structuralists, like
Michel Foucault, believe in the existence of multi-realities. For example, the Japanese
film "Rashomon" demonstrates this approach. Jean Baudrillard, on the other hand,
claims that there is no real reality, and the man lives in a virtual reality, he calls hyperreal or simulacrum. This is not the case where there is somewhere a truth that is
mediated for the absorber through images, but there are images of images,
representations of representations, which are the reality of the person, and the
investigation of reality is, in fact, an investigation of images. To return to out subject, in
the movie as a source of historical writing there is the question of the relation of the
film to reality.
73
Since the movie stemmed from photography, and photography is the sign of the
cinematic language, the relations between the cinematic text and reality were perceived
as iconic or insinuating relations according to the distinction of Charles Sanders Pierce,
who distinguished between three types of relations between the signifier and the
signified: iconic, insinuating and symbolic. Photography has iconic or insinuating
relations to what it represents, since it is like its object. This was the basic assumption
of the classic perception in the movie, a perception of iconic or insinuating relations to
reality, that is, that the movie reproduces or serves as a mirror of reality, a perception
that is not accepted among many of the theoreticians nowadays, although it used to be
regarded as idealistic and especially regressive, because it ignores the processes of
selection and merger in the composition of the film. In addition, between society and
the mirror, the cinematic text, there is a whole set of cultural, sub-cultural, industrial
and institutional factors, competing and contradicting, so that the film becomes a
refraction, and even a refraction of refraction of reality rather than its reflection. The
position of the classic perception has been taken by a perception that allocates the
relations between the film and reality within a wider category of cultural representations
relations of different types. The film is a re presentation and an achievement of culture,
粸¢
rather than of nature. In other words, it does not reflect, or even records reality, and
like any other means of representation, there is structuring, representation and
reproduction of reality through the codes, conventions, myths and ideologies of the
culture, as well as the signifying customs specific to the medium.
Although the cinematic text, the cinematic narrative, is perceived today as a
representation or a representation of representation, and even a refraction of reality,
the film, like novels, can express what Mikhail Bakhtin calls chronotopes, the
materialization of time in space, a mediation between the historic and the discursive.
Chronotopes provide fictitious environments in which the reproduction of reality takes
place. The representation (text-narrative) within a fictitious environment is an
expression of the whole set of conditions of the social formation that manufactures it
(context), and the relations between them are dialectic and include mutual influence.
An objective analysis of the subjective characteristics of the film, as the film describes
the whole social reality from the perspective of its makers, can illuminate the dark areas
of our society: collective representations, collective imagination, collective excitement,
74
and so on. It also helps discovering cultural codes, ideological orientations and
ideological contradictions that prevail in the social consciousness, perception about life
and the world, myths which are in the basis of common beliefs demonstrate the ways
of thinking and norms of moral judgment, and the social structure and the dynamic in
it. Discovers the ways through which the culture provides meaning for itself. In short,
the movie is seen as a key to structures, movements and transformations within the
social composition of the societies in which the film were produced.
In light of the acknowledgment of the artistic, cultural, and communication value
of the movie, especially that of the director, as we acknowledge him as an intellectual
who has something to say about our social being in his language, the cinematic
language, that is, he is not just a screw in an industrial mechanism, whose goal is just
manufacturing commercial products, escapistic in their nature - the film receives its
historic value as a document in the historic research in the field of the cultural-social
history. The hegemony of writing the political, military, and legal history. All the social
classes and the cultural human activity have become objects of the modern historic
research, which have led to the acknowledgment of the essential role of the social
formation in making history.
粸¢
Up to the mid-sixties the historians refrained from appreciating the value of the
fictitious movie as a document. The acknowledgment of the movie as a cultural and
artistic product that influenced and was influenced by different systems in the social
formation, influenced the perception of the film as a primary source, like painting,
which had been a source for the historians of previous periods. Every film is perceived
today, under the influence of the Cahiers du Cinema, as political, as part of an
ideological system. Even the most apolitical film has political meaning and ideological
roots. To demonstrate this idea, let us take the film Pretty Woman by the director Garry
Marshall (1990), a film that has gone through localization to Egypt by the Egyptian
director Sheriff Shaaban, and was called Alginez (1994). Although the original film and
its Egyptian copy do not try to be more than light entertainment, the narrative of the
film is most political and ideological. It deals with a love story the develops between a
prostitute and a millionaire who hires her services. Pretty Woman expresses masculine
superiority and makes the woman a sexual object who awaits the knight on the white
horse who would save her and make her life meaningful.
75
Attributing the film openly to a specific political position, or to an ideology that is
opposed to the dominant one, might make the film a stage of confrontation, as a
spokesman of a social-ideological group (mainly those who do not have the power),
demonstrating its perception that negates, criticizes and emphasizes the disadvantages
and negative aspects of the social system. An example of films that try to received such
roles are the films made by the neo-realist directors, and others.
After a period of hesitation in the historic value of the movie, historians have
started accepting it as a legitimate source for their researches. Marc Ferro was one of
the first historians who used the film as a document in a historical research. He claims
that the film is a cultural product that is a document and evidence of its makers' world
and lives. The cinematic production, like any other cultural production, always includes
ideological
or
political
components
whose
exposure
contributes
to a better
understanding of the studies historical reality. The ambitions, dreams and beliefs of
many people were expressed in the popular works of the film makers, and ignoring
them would be a renunciation of getting to know an important aspect of the modern
and post-modern culture. William Hughes, following Ferro, thought that the film can
serve as an indicator of popular tendencies and collective tastes, with which one can
粸¢
write a cultural history. Jean Mitry also thought that every film may serve as a
document, since it is a product of expressive intentions that reflect organization,
structuring and communicating ideas. The film is considered valuable regarding the
ways of behavior and thinking in a certain community. It serves as a mirror, or a
representation, of behavior, customs, ambitions, beliefs and values that compose
culture. The film is capable of strengthening or destroying common beliefs, provide
models for inspiration, expose hidden passions, bring together individuals and similar
tastes and opinions. IN this way the movie becomes a social agent.
Maya Turoveskaya, who also accepts the film as a document in the historical
research, claims that unlike written documents, the films are not just cultural-social
documents of their time, but what is more important, they are documents of the
feelings of their time, so that the musical is like a historical political text, a documentary
or a news reel.
Hayden White, who coined the term historiophoty, in his meta-historical approach,
sees the traditional historiography texts that mediated reality. He argues that the
76
historian deals with structuring aspects of the past according to the organizations that
his language structures enable him. So that basically historiography is like writing
stories. White suggests a fictitious dimension, a linguistic decision of our understanding
of the past. He includes all the historiography in a category of the narrative. Therefore
his meta-historic perception sees all histories as an interpreting action, so that literature
as such enables historical thinking. According to him, certain narrative questions shape
our perception of history, a perception that can be applied on the movie as well. The
movie as a story teller, as a narrative, as a mediator of a mediated reality, which
inevitably raises assumptions not only about time and space, but also about the social
and cultural relations – is a document and a legitimate source for writing history.
The cinematic text as reflecting culture, political awareness and a structure
of a collective representation picture
From its beginning, the movie used different narrative structures, which were
taken from literature and mythology, and structure central events in history and
interpret them as a story with a beginning, middle and an ending. Historical films
interpret history for the spectators and by so doing, manufacture and organize a
homogenized public memory. In the 20th century, the movie and the television have
粸¢
become effective tools of creating and shaping a collective historical consciousness.
They have an immense power, more than a lecture, a play or a museum, since they
provide life to history and give the spectator the illusion of an immediate experience in
the event. The cinematic images have established a common repertoire that
increasingly shapes and legitimizes our perception of the past. The image makers have
great influence over creating a collective representation picture. The historic films
shorten historical distances, since they present the past as a present. The historical
films are about the present as well as about the past, and sometimes they intervene in
contemporary confrontations and processes.
Jean Claud Krier, the scriptwriter and film maker, who wrote, among other things,
the script for the film of Andrei Vida Danton (1982), summarizes in his book the
influence of the movie on our historic perception and claims that this perception is
made today mainly through the movie. The cinematic images are assimilated in our
consciousness without us being aware of it: Step by step the substitute the old formal
versions, like pictures of a big battle, formal portraits of kings and the nobilities, and
77
famous events. We are so loaded with the pictures of the past (real, half-real and
faked) that you can't see the forest for the trees. Krier also argues that some of the
technical limitations of the movie influence greatly on the basic perception we have on
history, like the absence of smell in the movie: "Historians tell us that the past stinks, at
least in the cities. Actually its stink was horrible. The film, like a hidden curtain between
us and reality, vetoed it. The movie sweetened history, cleaned it, and all this was
dome due to a simple technical limitation."102
How does one structure world picture and past picture? Every past picture is built
on myths. Claude Levi-Strauss investigated famous myths and legends that culture
repeats and changes them in the course of time as a reaction to social dilemmas and
conflicts. He aspires to identify repetitive elements and the changing relations among
them as a means of learning how society thinks on these problems.103the movie breaks
myths on the one hand, but also reinforces myths and creates new ones on the other,
so it enables a visualization of historic events. The movie creates and reinforces myths
of macro-groups, like nations, and myths of micro-groups, like ethnic minority groups,
homosexuals and so on. There is a connection in the cinematic text between structuring
of reality, structuring of memory and dealing with myths.
粸¢
The research in the field of history and movie has developed especially in England
and the US, as part of the post-modern research. In France, on the other hand, there is
a few researches in this field. The issue of structuring reality is not studied intensely
because post-modernism had not penetrated into it as a historiographic approach. Marc
Ferro is one of the few who deal with the interaction between history and movie in
France, although he does not do it from a post-modernistic perspective.
The research in the field of history and movie is relatively new, as writes Robert
Rosenstone, a historian who investigates the interaction between history and movie, in
1995: "Thirty years ago, the idea that one would refer to a historic film as a medium of
serious representation of the past would seem as unacceptable."104
Nowadays it is unnecessary to prove that the cinema, like other documents
pertaining to cultural and historical research, is a legitimate complex source of
102
Jean Claud Krier. (1994). The hidden language of the cinema, Ofakim Library, Am Oved Publication,
Tel Aviv. p. 48.
103
Claude Levi-Strauss.(1963) ”The Structural Study of Myth” in: Structural Anthropology 1, Pinguin.
104
Robert Rosenstone. (1995). Visions of the Past. Boston: Harvard University Press. p. 2.
78
knowledge that can be analyzed within the research discussion. The discussion of issues
connected to history and cinema moves between a great interest in the subject and a
reservation about the capability of the medium to express historical "truth" in a
profound and factual manner. The first position is represented by the historian, R.S.
Raack, who maintains that the traditional historical writing is linear and incapable of
expressing the complexity and multi-dimensional nature of the historical picture, as
does the cinema. The second position is held, for instance, by the philosopher Ian
Jarvie, suggesting that the film, like any other cultural product, represents
contemporary concepts of the society within which it is produced, as well as those of its
specific creator.
In the course of time, historians have felt the need to build a body of knowledge
concerning historiographic exploration in the field of the cinema, acknowledging its
importance as a legitimate source of historical research. As early as 1970, John E.
O'Connor and Peter C. Rollins had founded the "Quarterly of Cinema and History" and
"The Historians Film Committee"; the following is their written declaration, from
December, 29 1970.
"The Historians Film Committee exists to further the use of film sources in teaching
粸¢
And research, to disseminate information about film and film use to historians and
Other social scientists, to work for an effective system of film preservation".105
Periodicals on historical issues, like Zmanim106 (Times), American Historical Review107
and the Journal of Contemporary History108 dedicated a place to cinematic text in
general, and to the historical movie in particular. Rians like Robert Rosenstone, Robert
Toplin, Marc Ferro, Anton Kaes, R.S. Raac, Shlomo Sand, Ilan Avisar, Uzi Elyada and
movie scholars, like Vivian Sobchack, Marcia Landy and others, publish today
researches the deal with the different components of the connection between history
and movie.
Robert Toplin maintains that in recent decades many historians have turned
eagerly to the analysis of cinematic texts, while treating dramatic films as if they were a
105
A source from the journal's site: http://www.uwosh.edu/filmandhistory/about/index.php.
Zmanim. 30-40 (Winter, 1991).
107
American Historical Review 93 (4-5), October 1988.
108
Journal of Contemporary History 18 (3), 1983.
106
79
mirror reflecting the conscious and sub-conscious values of the film makers, as well as
those of the viewers.109
What kind of historical understanding the historians expect to receive from the
film, asks Robert Rosenstone, a post-modernist and one of the most interesting
scholars in the field of history and the movie. How does the film present us with new
ways of dealing with historical materials. Rosenstone argues that the movie is a text
that reflects a cultural context. One can cope with the issue of movie and history in
three ways: the history of the movie as art and industry; referring to the film as a text
that provides a window to social and cultural problems of the time; coping with the
question how a visual medium, with fictitious and dramatic conventions, can serve as a
tool for thinking about our attitude towards the past.
Anton Kaes writes about the public memory created by cinematic images.
According to him, historical films do not present individual pictures of a random event;
they rather present chosen narrative images, thus giving a shape and a face to the
historical material and "enforcing meaning on meaningless things."110
Vivian Sobchack edited an interesting collection of articles about movie and
history, which examine historic films in the American movie, like Forest Gump and JFK
粸¢
from a post-modernistic perspective that creators de-construction of the picture of the
past and thus creating new meanings and interpretations, both of the cinematic text
and the historical text. Sobchack deals with the change that has taken place in the
historical representation since the beginning of the 20th century upon the appearance of
the movie and the electronic communication, a change that has found its full expression
in post-modernism. The articles in the collection deal with the way in which the movie
and the television react to history and create a contemporary picture of it at the end of
the traditional historiography. As Rosenstone claims in his article in this collection, the
traditional history arrived in the 20th century to the borders of its representation and
there is a need to create a new type of history that would be expressed in the visual
media, rather than in the printed media.
Marcia Landy, in her book Cinenmatic uses of the past deals with the crossroads
between the movie, history and the cultural memory. Landy examines the connection
109
Robert B. Toplin. (2002). Reel History, University Press of Kansas.
Anton Kaes,(1990). "History and Film: Public Memory in the Age of Electronics Dissemination", History
and Memory, Vol. 2, Nr 1.p.112.
110
80
between the movie and the representation of the past through films that have been
made in the US, Europe and Africa, and she is interested in the question what these
films tell the spectator about history and culture through creating images of the past
according the theories of Gamchi and Nitche.
In her book The Historical Film, Landy edited a collection of articles about history
and memory in the media, which focuses on using the past and the roles of history and
memory, and understanding the popular representation of the past. The monumental
history, as it is expressed in the movie, writes Landy in the introduction, had a few
defined characteristics. In the use of narratives, the movie sees the past in moments of
crisis or a heroic conflict, and it shows an attraction to the activity of the heroic figures,
like George Washington, Abraham Lincolm, Patton, or symbols and signs, like the
Statue of Liberty, the Declaration of Independence, Uncle Sam or Liberty Bell111.
Regarding the American movie, Landy indicates that from its beginning it had an
obvious tendency to document the past. The early movie focused on extra ordinary
events, big shows, funerals, weddings, military exercises and the lives of the rich and
the famous. The demand for factual reliability came up especially around staged events
that claimed to be Authentic.112 Upon the appearance of the long fiction films and the
粸¢
genres at the beginning of the twenties, and the distinction between fiction and nonfiction films, the historical films have become more common. Main genres which rely on
past images are the historical films and the costumes films. The tendency to describe
these films as non-historical, escapistic and unrealistic prevailed in the criticism of the
movie and history until the last decades. The film criticism has started to think anew
about the cinematic representation of political events that had taken place throughout
the 20th century, especially the criticism that tried to understand the ideological and
historical dealing with national formation. The academic research in the movie focused
in the relation between the movie and the nation as an attempt to describe and analyze
what does a national movie intends to say.113
Shlomo zand notes that the movie reconstructed events which established what
the spectator had known already from reading, and thus made the imagined world into
111
112
113
Marcia Landy (ed.). (2001). The Historical Film: History and Memory in Media. New Jersey: Rutgers
University Press. p. 3.
Ibidem. p. 7.
Ibidem,Ibidem.
81
a concrete one.
Has become a time machine that brought about a change in the
perception of the traditional relation between past and present. "moreover," says zand,
"the collective super-narratives of the nations were presented in cinematic dramas
almost always through personal stories. The century was born as a significant century
of nations, but at the same time it was characterized, at least in the West, by an
increasing individualization. At the end of the second millennium it seemed that only the
movie and the television were able to clear for young spectators why their personal
lives were connected to general events and processes that have taken place in the
past."114 zand refers to the circumstances of the production of historical films, which
"unlike the professional past scholars, the scriptwriters, directors and producers, these
new historians, were less dependent on the political institutions and more on private
financing and the taste of the public. Therefore, the creators of the moving pictures
developed in the course of time unique strategies for shaping the memory. In the first
half of the 20th century they tried to serve mainly the national discourse. In times of
war, the movie was at the front by nurturing heroic images about the imagined past of
the fighting collectives. In times of peace he presented periodic dramas that
emphasized the uniqueness of each nation, and sometimes its superiority."115
粸¢
Leger Grindon116 indicates that history in the movie is an addressing to the
present, and that one can find part of the keys for the hidden interpretation in the
historic film when examining the movites behind the transformation of the present to
the past.117 Grindon specifies a few motives, like addressing the authority ( awide used
of quotations from historical sources and researches, which give the cinematic text a
dimension of historical reliability. For instance, The Birth of a Nation, which quotes
historiographical researches and indication of the dates in which the events did take
place); making the intentions ambiguous (addressing to the past in order to hide
controversial positions and neutralizing a political censorship and public resistance, like
in MASH, whose plot takes place on the background of the Korean War. But it directs its
arrows towards the Vietnam War which was in its height); an escape to nostalgy
(looking for the Golden Era with a better past, while transferring the criticism of the
114
115
116
117
zand, p. 25.
Ibidem.
Leger Grindon.(1994). Shadows on the Past: Studies in the Historical Fiction Film. Philadelphia:
Temple University Press.
Ibidem. p. 5.
82
present as lacking values, like in the film Gone with the Wind, which was on the eve of
WWII on the background of the economic crisis); and looking for the sources (an
approach that aspires to confirm the forces of the ancestors and conducting an
examination of existing sources of weakness, like the fears connected to colonialism
and the western hegemony in Lawrence of Arabia). Different people in different periods
and in different places and different political tendencies 'read' cinematic texts
differently. And so, for instance, the revolution of the bourgeois differs from that of the
proletariat, and Jeanne d'Arcy passes a different message than that of Mary-Antoinette.
Robin Buss118 indicates that historical films speak about the past, but for the present,
since they speak in the present time, although in three different ways of the present:
the present of the period described on the screen, which can be any moment in the
past; the past of the time in which the film was made, which re-defines the perceptions
of the past; the continuous moments of the present in which the film is seen by the
audience. Buss brings an example from the film Napoleon by Abel Gance, and says that
the audience of 1986' for example, would be more aware of Gance's romanticism and
less to the way in which Napoleon can be read as a kind of a Mussolini, and if the
association goes to Mussolini, it would be Mussolini the ally of Hitler, as he said that "a
粸¢
plate of pasta is different from the representation of the dictator of 1927."119
Three main directions of research and analysis of cinematic text may be
perceived in historiographic research:
1. Research of contents, in which questions are raised about the information that may
be derived from the cinematic text: the connection between the medium and the
massage, how do the visual style and the narrative structure serve the film's viewpoint,
to what extent are the characters, the events and the interpretation based on historical
facts, to what extent would a profound analysis of the cinematic text be able to expose
the position of its makers.
2. Research of the production of the text, raising questions about the context in
which the film was created, in what way had the political, personal, and professional
background of the director and others involved in its making affected their conduct in
the process of making the film, how had interests relating to the institutions supporting
118
119
Robin Buss. (1988). The French Through Their Films. New York: Ungar. p. 64.
Ibidem.
83
the production (studios, banks, political, social, economical and other pressure groups)
influenced the massage of the film.
3.
Research of the reception of the films: what are the massages and the
interpretation that come up from the analysis of the text, what was the impact, if any,
of the text on the direction of events at the time it was created, who watched the film
and how did it affect the viewers.
Hayden White regards historiography as a fertile bed for relating to the nature of
the narrative, "since here our craving for the imaginative, the impossible, competes
with the vitality of the genuine, the real thing".120 Historical films, despite their versatile
style and ideological perspectives, are bound by the attempt to make history the central
axis of the film. Whether history is illustrated by the images of outstanding characters
or by the masses, it is the engine of the narrative, and the historical film deals with the
relations between real and fictional events.
Summary
The above review shows us that the cinema constitutes a cultural narrative
treasure of the culture producing it. It reflects the values of society and "freezes" the
values that existed at the time of its making. Furthermore, the cinema is perceived as a
粸¢
powerful educational instrument containing hidden allegorical massages, and since it is
an agent of socialization, it serves as an instrument to pass on massages of political,
ideological, cultural and social nature. The endeavors of the state to influence the film
industry, in democratic as well as dictatorial regimes are an indication of the populist
strength of the medium.
3.2 The relations between the Administration and Hollywood (1939-1989);
Hollywood as a cultural super-power in the world
During the first six decades of the 20th century, films were the most important mass
medium in the US. The stereotypes that distributed these films, of Russians of Blacks,
of women or extremist, Huns, Nazis and Germans, have influenced on generations of
Americans.
From a political point of view, Hollywood of the thirties is usually remembered as a
relatively liberal community, in which prospered the Hollywoodian anti-Nazi league and
the Democratic Films Committee. But, this period in the history of the American movie
120
Hayden White,(October 1988). "Historiography and Historiophoty", American Historical Review, Vol.93,
and Nr. 4-5. Pp.1193-1199.
84
had an additional aspect. At the head of the movie studios were businessmen who tried
to maintain as good relations as possible with Nazi Germany out of economic
considerations, which sometimes were preferred over ideological ones. IN addition to
marketing interests abroad, in many cases the studios managers were careful not to
hurt openly large groups in the American public. Alongside the attempt not to hurt the
potential of profit, there were also at this time in Hollywood rightist groups, which
sympathized with the European fascism and its political manifestations, and attempted
to prevent the recruitment of the movie industry against this phenomenon. And finally,
very few out of the studios owners wanted a confrontation with the declared policy of
the administration, which stood for isolation. In any case, many of them identifies the
national-socialism policy as dangerous and even expressed an open support in an
American involvement in the war and the cultural struggle against fascism.
This period was marked by the controversy between the supporters of isolation
and those who stood for intervention. The latten joined the support of President
Roosevelt, who wanted to promote a consistent policy of reacting to the aggression
shown by Germany, Italy and Japan towards other nations. In his Quarantine Speech,
in October 5th, 1937, Roosevelt referred to fascism like a plague that has to be
粸¢
quarantined in order to destroy it. Roosevelt presented a similar position in a speech on
the state of the nation in January 6th, 1941, after his third tenure was secured.121 But
even then, in spite of the increasing sympathy in the American public opinion for
Britain, which actually stood all by itself in the war after the surrender of France, he still
did not manage to attain a majority for a declaration of war on the Axis nations.
Opposed to Roosevelt's intervention approach, there were the influential supporters of
the isolation approach, who prevented the president from translating his perception into
an effective foreign policy. This approach was based on the atmosphere that prevailed
in the public and among many politicians, including liberals, who argued that like in
Wilson's time, the US might get carried away into a struggle in which its soldiers would
bleed on behalf of the interests of others. The public struggle against the tendencies of
intervention was conducted in these days by a non-institutional entity, called America
121
The circumstances of the surprising speech and their historical importance are discussed in tens
biographies and researches about the president, like: J.M Burns, (1941). Roosevelt: The lion and the
fox, chap. 16, Secker ET Warburg, London, 1956. pp.318-319. Roosevelt's quarantine speech: public
papers and Addresses of Roosevelt (New York: Macmillan.), Vol.6. pp.407-408, 410-411.
85
First, whose people pointed on the Jews, the British and the communists as
conspirators who took control on Roosevelt's administration, and try to drag the US into
a bloodbath for foreign interests.122
As a whole, the American movie industry was under a most minor supervision on
the part of the administration until 1938. The only exceptional was The Committee on
public Information which operated in 1917-1918, known as Creel Committee after its
chairman, the progressive journalist George Creel. This committee was intended to
supervise and coordinate the American propaganda in the period of WWI, and it
supervised the movie industry as well. The intervention of this committee lasted for two
years only. IN the twenties the entertainment and information system in the US gained
a status of a world hegemony. Thus, for instance, in 1923 the London Post wrote: "The
movie for America is what the Union Jack represents for the British. Through it Uncle
Sam will be able, if not stopped in due time, make the world American."123 IN 1929 the
movie became the third sector in importance in the US, after the metal and the oil
industries, and this industry continued developing in the thirties. In reaction to the
Third Reich coming to power, and the anti-American propaganda this regime promoted,
it was decided in Washington in 1938 to start with a propaganda-communication attack
粸¢
in the local and the international arenas. For this end the administration established the
Division of Cultural Affairs in the State Department, which was supposed to organize all
these activities.
The strength of Hollywood was well known to the coordinators and initiators of the
American propaganda policy, and it seems that many in the movie industry regarded
themselves as an inseparable part of the administration and its goals. The Saturday
Evening Post wrote in November 7th, 1925: "It seems that the sun never sets on the
British Empire and on the American movie."124
Joseph Hazen, the managing director of Warner Brothers, said in 1943: "The
movie is actually an unseen branch of the American administration, and the movie
industry dedicated itself to a continuous cooperation with the administration."125 Warner
122
Among the heads of this organization was Charles Lindberg, an admired figure, a military man and a
pilot. He gave a speech in July 1941 in a public assembly in New York, in which he claimed that it was
too late to fight Hitler.
123
Wagenleitner, p. 230.
124
Ibidem, P. 229.
125
Ibidem, p. 227.
86
Brothers had a great appreciation towards the administration, and their studios
supported actively the American policy. Stalin even said to the head of directors of Fox
Twentieth Century, Wandel Willkie in 1942 that all he needed in order to make the
world communist was the control over an industry like Hollywood.126
When WWII broke out, and right after the attack on Pearl Harbor, the cooperation
between Hollywood and the administration reached its peak.17.12.1941 President
Roosevelt called to recruit the movie to the service of the war, and for this end the
WAC – War Activities Committee was established, which operated until January 7th,
1946. Hollywood was represented in all government departments. Washington allowed
to 4000 Hollywood people, actors, directors, producers, stage workers and
photographers to wear uniform, and many actors were recruited to the army and were
part of the military setup.
The next change that has taken place in the American foreign policy was when
Germany was defeated and the Cold War started. It did not happen right away. Since
1945 and during most of 1946 there was a certain embarrassment about the relations
versus the Soviet block that have started to be more clear.
Cold War set a drastic change in the goals of the American foreign policy about
粸¢
Germany, that is West Germany. Since at that time the enemy was defined as the
Eastern Block, the Americans had two alternatives: the destruction of Germany versus
strengthening it as part of establishing the American hegemony in Western Europe in
order to form a strong ally versus the Soviet block. For this end there was a need of
rehabilitating the Germans, even what has been left of the Wehrmacht, and this policy
received Eisenhower's confirmation127 and it has become a central component in NATO
under the name of the bundeswher.
This period of the Cold War was characterized by establishing more positive
German representations and emphasized the dichotomy between the Nazis and the
other Germans. The question of representation developed together with the different
stages of the Cold War (the first Berlin Crisis, the airlift, the second Berlin crisis, the
Cuba crisis and the Bay of Pigs Invasion, the construction of the Berlin Wall in 1961,
and so on).
126
127
Ibidem, p.229.
Eisenhauer's speech in Berlin, 1951. www.whitehouse.gov.
87
Hollywood's movie as a powerful vehicle for transferring messages
The administration acknowledged Hollywood's power to transfer messages and
distributing them around the world. Hollywood was the highest in the preferences of
the American Department of Interior, and it was also supported by the administration
through financial assistance. In return Hollywood was requested to cooperate and get
harnessed to the American propaganda effort. In the course of the war the
government, which knew that movies had an extra ordinary power in recruiting the
public opinion in favor of the war, made an intensive and unprecedented effort to shape
the contents of the Hollywoodian fiction films. Officials in the Office of War Information
(OWI), the branch of propaganda, issued to the studios guidance booklet that has been
updated all the time, with an explanation how one has to help the war effort. The
originals participated in the production meetings together with the heads of Hollywood's
movie industry. They examined the scripts of the main studios, excluding Paramount,
and pressured on the film makers to change scripts when necessary. The OWI acquired
a large influence in the censorship department, which issued export licenses to the films
and controlled screening American films in the liberated areas. But if we would like to
understand the relations between the administration and Hollywood in a larger scope,
粸¢
and answer the question to what extent was Hollywood recruited to the goals of the
administration, then we have to focus not only on the influence of the administration
and the censorship, but also on the self censorship that was operated by the production
code, a censorship that was enforced by the movie industry itself. production code
existed until 1968. The American administration did not ignore the economic power of
Hollywood and the propaganda possibilities it had. This acknowledgment brought the
congress to define Hollywood as an exporting industry under the supervision of the
Department of Commerce. In this way Hollywood got a kind of a diplomatic status. The
thirties were a period of radical changes in the movie industry in the US.128 There was a
pressure on Hollywood that might have led to a legislation of establishing a
governmental censorship on the movie industry, and this pressure led the organization
of the producers and distributors of films and America to establish in 1934 the
Production Code Administration – PCA, headed by Will Hay, which was known later as
the Hays Code. It was an internal control mechanism of the industry regarding the
128
T. Balio. (1993). Grand Design. Hollywood as a Modern Business Enterprise 1930-1939, Berkeley.
88
moral and political adequacy of its products. The mechanism was headed by the
Catholic Joseph Breen, and quite soon this mechanism intervened in the issue of foreign
relations, including the attitude towards Nazi Germany.
Sometimes the code was so absurd that in 1943 the PCA tried to change a scene
in the anti-Nazi film Watch on the Rhine (1943)129 because of the fear that murdering a
Nazi agent in an American house would pass without punishment. According to the
rules of the PCA, one could not permit a crime film without a punishment, no matter
who executed the crime. In this case, the scriptwriter Lilian Helman responded by
asking: "Doesn't Hays' office know that killing Nazis is now a formal government
policy?" In this case the PCA gave in an extra ordinary way.130 When Warner, who was
Jewish, produced the first fiction film Confessions of a Nazi Spy (the premiere was on
April 1939)131, he was ready to take the risk of losing the European market which was
controlled mostly by Nazi Germany132, he received harsh criticism from the PCA, not
only on the part of Joseph Breen and his authority, who tried to protect the image of
Nazi Germany and regarded communism as the main enemy of America, but al so from
Luigi Lorashi from Paramount, who argued that if the film is distributed, it would have
damaging outcomes for the prosecuted people in Europe, and then the responsibility
粸¢
would be on Warner Brothers. There were also other attempts to make anti-German
films in Hollywood before the war with Europe: The Great Dictator (1940), Fatal Storm
(1940), Hitler – The Beast from Berlin (1940), but they were very few.
Upon the outbreak of the war in Europe, Hays issued an instruction that films would
be for entertainment only, that is, there would not be political nor anti-Nazi films, in
order to maintain neutrality,133 and the movie makers stood by this condition, and in
the two years between the outbreak of the war in Europe and America's interring the
war, there was a large political activity against what was considered as an incitement of
war on the part of the movie. One may say that the PCA adopted a policy of objecting
to films of hatred, both in the stage in which the US has not yet entered the war and
even in the stage it was in it. In 1950, Joseph Breen complained before Father Daniel
Lord, the author of the code, that his role was becoming more and more difficult,
129
130
131
132
133
Ibidem, p. 137.
T. Doherty, (1993). Projections of War, Hollywood, American Culture and World War II, NY P. 56.
Director: A. LItvak, script: J. Wexley.
M.E. Birdwell, (1999). Celluloid Soldiers - Warner Bros' Campaign Against Nazism, NY.
B.F. Dick, (1985). Star Sprangled Cinema: The American World War II Film, Lexington.
89
because many of the new people in Hollywood do not respect the code and are
determined to destroy it. The Supreme court decided in 1952 that films would be
subordinated from that time onward to the first amendment in the constitution, and
finally the significance was that it was the end of the national and the local censorship
committees.
The movie industry had been beaten a few years earlier, when in 1948 the
Supreme Court decided that the control over the studios, in production and distribution
of films, was a violation of the laws against a monopoly. This development gave the
independent producers a greater chance to distribute their films in the movie theaters.
In this way the makers were liberated from the burden of the production code. In 1956
the code became more liberal, and continued to exist until 1968, as it was losing its
power.
Washington used to send its messages traditionally to Europe through Western
Union communication company, but the coming to power of the totalitarian regimes in
the Continent was threatening, and therefore the film makers had to use the potential
of the film in order to pass messages that would support the security of the US. For this
end a committee was established in New York for cooperation and coordination with the
粸¢
movie industry for the sake of the national security. The first meeting was conducted on
the month in which France surrendered to the Nazis (June, 1940). The industry helped
the federal administration to report to the American public about the war and security
efforts. Right after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 7.12.1941, President
Roosevelt called to recruit the movie to the service of the war. He ordered to change
the name oif the committee into the WAC – War Activity Committee.134 The chairman
was George Schaefer from RKO company and the members were representatives of the
other studios in Hollywood, as well as representatives of the administration. Francis
Harmon, from Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America, administered the
regular activities, and was also Hays' assistant.
Sub-committees represented the different parts of the industry, like the movie
theaters, advertising and public relations, news reels, professional press, distributors
and producers. Paramount's chairman, Adolf Zukor, was the head of the Drives Division,
dealing with war loans etc. Frank Freeman, the head of the company in the west coast,
134
K.R.M. Short, (1983). Documents (B), "Washington Information Manual For Hollywood, 1942",
Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, Vol. 3 No. 2. pp. 171-180.
90
was nominated to the head of the Hollywood Division. Other members in the committee
were Paramount's president, Bernie Balaban, and Nicholas Schenck, the president of
Loew's Inc. The activities and authorities of the committee were defined in a letter that
was received from the White House. Roosevelt wrote there: "The movie industry should
remain free, as far as the national security allows it. I am not interested in limitations to
be put on the movie industry, except for the most essential ones, which stem from
security problems."135
The president's instructions were partly valid after the end of the war and the
beginning of the Cold War. The WAC nominated in December, 1941 a coordinator for
governmental films who worked with Roosevelt. The first one was Lowel Mellett, who
headed the Office of Government Reports – OGR at the end of 1939. His job was to
build a sense of security in America's military strength in the public and create an
atmosphere that would strengthen the international policy. Mellet had been the editor
of the Washington Daily News, and was Roosevelt's personal assistant, whom he
admired. Later on Mellet was the manager of the Office of Gevernment Reports, which
in 1942 became also responsible for the movie department in the the government
propaganda office – OWI. Mellet's letter of appointment outlined the the basic
粸¢
guidelines of dealing with the movie industry in wartime, guidelines which have later
been described by the industry as voluntary self-discipline. In April 1942 Mellet opened
an office under the management of Nelson Poynter. Poynter had been the publisher of
the newspaper St. Petersburg times, and a close friend of Mellet, also one of the New
Deal people, who was in favor of an American intervention who started his activity in
January 1942. Mellet and his agency provoked a major controversy. The conservatives
in the Congress were afraid that the agency would be an election tool of the New Deal
and refused to finance it.
One of the things Mellet had to attain in order to secure cooperation between
Hollywood and Washington was an agreement, according to which the Federal
Government, including the armed forces, promised not to compete the movie industry
over screening time, which would have threaten maintaining their profit. For this end,
he sent circulars to all government offices so that they would promise that they did not
plan to produce films that due to their length or subject would have to be distributed
135
Ibidem, p. 171.
91
commercially. In return, the WAC agreed to give the Federal Government 10% of the
commercial screening time with no charge. Every two weeks a film of 10-20 minutes
would be produced, and it would be produced in a studio in Hollywood according to the
government instructions.
In the other weeks, the propaganda films would be screened to the public by
governmental entities. The movie industry would bear the costs of the distribution.
Mellet introduced a reservation to the agreement regarding the need to insert, from
time to time, to the government films real battle photographs or news from the war
that calls for a greater length of the film.136 As America was involved in the war, the
heads of the movie industry were afraid they would not get the human and the material
resources that were required for maintaining America's morale. Therefore they
addressed Mellet to get his support in their request that the movie would be regarded
as an essential war industry. Mellet's first action at the end of January 1942 was to
convinced General Louis Hershey to exempt from recruitment Hollywood's people who
had to be recruited under special circumstances. Is group consisted of the most
important actors, directors, producers, photographers, soundmen and other technical
professions, who were defined by the WAC as the most essential people in the industry.
粸¢
Claim was that without the popularity and the talent of this group, the Hollywood films
would lose their mass of spectators and their essential influence on America's and the
world's morale.
The first document was written in January 39, 1942 by Francis Harmon, the vice
chairman of the WAC, to General Hershey in order to convince the government in the
need to provide Hollywood's annual needs of a stock of negative and positive films.
Harmon hoped that Hershey would accept the WAC's claim regarding the exempt from
recruiting and would use this support in his addressing the War Production Board –
WPB. The second document was an outcome of the WAC's success with general
Hershey in attaining that exempt of recruitment, although many of Hollywood's stars,
like Clarck Gable, Tyron Powers, James Stewart, and David Niven, went out to the war
eventually. some, like John Wayne, the big star of many war films, stayed in Hollywood.
At the end of 1942, there was a heavy apprehension that the exempt policy had a bad
impact in the American public, as the number of recruited people was very big and was
136
A collection of documents that provide a thorough and wide perspective of the relations between the
administration and Hollywood during WWII, and especially in 1941-1943.
92
increasing. The original letter that deals with the public opinion about discrimination in
recruiting, dated Aaapril 22nd, 1943, was written by George Gallup of the Institute of
public opinion surveys in Princeton, New Jersey. One can see in the letter that Gallup
was interested not only with public opinion, but also with influencing it. Finally
Hollywood managed in its plan of protecting the quality of its products. It managed to
maintain the pre-war levels of producing films and distributing them, while providing
propaganda and film services to the armed forces which were deployed all over the
world, free of charge. In this way Hollywood had an effective contribution to the
nation's morale, while keeping Washington away from the movie business through the
10% agreement it did with the government, and by so doing it ensured the
continuation of the profit levels in spite of the increasing costs of the owners and
investors in the movie industry.137
The WAC operated until January 7th, 1946, and published annual reports for 1942,
1943, 1944 and 1945 under the title of movies at war. WAC's activity was divided into
four categories:
1. Production, distribution of propaganda war films.
2. Cooperation with the Ministry of Finance, the war production committee and the
粸¢
armed forces.
3. Issuing, free of charge, copies of films which were intended for free screening in
the battles areas abroad.
4. Conducting contributions in the movie theaters for the Red Cross and the UN's
UNRWA.138
In June 13th, 1942, Roosevelt established the office for war information, OWI, by
merging a number of government agencies, and neither of them had a clear mandate
until the of 1941, like the office of government reports – OGR in 1939, the Office of
Coordinator of inter-American Affairs – CIAA, which was founded in August 1940 out of
a presidential decree. The office was headed by Rockefeller, the grandson of Nelson
Rockefeller, and his job was to prevent Nazi penetration to the southern hemisphere. In
March 1941 Rockefeller established an information division for managing emergency
situations within the Office of Emergency Management – OEM, headed by Robert
137
138
Ibidem, p. 92.
The documents are in the national archive in the National documentation center in Washington,
Maryland.
93
Horton, who had been an aggressive editor in Script Howard. Rockefeller re-established
in May 1941 the Office of Civilian Defense – OCD, headed by Fiorelo La Guardia, the
Mayor of New York. In July 1941 he established the Office of the Coordinator of
Information – COI, and in the of 1941 the confusion in the offices of propaganda and
information reached unbearable dimensions.
The studios wanted to cooperated, but not under any Circumstances, and
especially not in the price of damaging their profits. This struggle reflected the difficulty
to solve the contradicting affairs of politics, profits and propaganda.139
OWI was a special authority on behalf of the state, that had to supervise the message
of the American film. The determining criterion was: what helps winning the war? In
this period was written the document: A governmental information instructor for the
movie industry., which was a key document for understanding the relations between
films and propaganda during the war. The document was distributed to all the studios
and the news agencies all over the US. Following the numerous requests for guidelines
for the movie industry, the administration distributed this guide to all factors in the
industry. The document was formulated in such a way that it would be possible to add
details and paragraphs in the future.
粸¢
The information program of the administration was based on the perception that
assumes that the majority of the American public supported the government and its
war plans. But without sufficient information and understanding about the war plans,
the American public would not follow the administration. Certain reports might damage
the morale of the public as well as certain moves of the war, and might be perceived as
desperate to the public. Therefore, one had to provide the public with information that
would explain the moves and would empower the public's readiness to contribute to the
war effort.
The administration assumed that support of fascism was a result of ignorance,
frustration and poverty, and that the American people would confront with false
propaganda of the enemy, and the administration had to fill in this gap with information
and propaganda of itself.
139
Koopes & Black.p. 58.
94
On June 6th, 1942, the president addressed the Congress in a speech in which he
raised six basic issues that were intended to a better understanding of the war. These
issues were:
1. The issues: what are we fighting for and why.
2. The enemy: who are we fighting, and the character of the enemy.
3. The nations and the world – who are our allies.
4. Labor and manufacture: how can every citizen contribute to the war effort.
5. The home front: what do we have to give up in order to win the war.
6. The fighting forces: the role of the fighters in the front.140
In 1945, another guide was issued under the title The Operative Program for
Germany, which was intended for the public opinion designers in the US and finally in
Germany. The first guide suggested that the war would be described as a democratic
effort adjusted to the Roosevelt's four liberties. The second selected certain films in
order to promote democracy and traditional American principles. Films that seemed as
showing a picture that was not positive enough about the American life were
invalidated in order not to arouse resistance to the conquering forces, since the
American movie companies wanted that the German movie industry would also be
粸¢
under the control of the American economic interests.141
Summary
Two special authorities operated since 1934 and up to 1945 in order to supervise
on the message of the American films: the first was the PCA142, which operated from
1934 and was known as the Hays Code and was the internal supervision mechanism
and the self-censorship of the movie industry. This mechanism was more than once
more conservative than the formal positions of the administration. Joseph Breen, one of
the PCA' heads, said that : "Although we deal with a war. We cannot accept to scenes
in which there is an unbearable cruelty."143 Breen defended the image of Nazi Germany,
and so he did in the film Hitler's Children (1942), which dealt with the Hitler youth and
with an organization of girls of the party, and demanded to delete scenes that showed
cruelty of Germans and Nazis.
140
141
142
143
The specification of the six paragraphs appear broadly in: K.R.M. Short, pp .174-180.
Ralph, Willett, (1989). The Americanization of Germany, 1945-1949, London and New York. p. 32.
Production Code Administration.
Doherty, p. 53.
95
The second authority, the OWI144, which operated from June 1942, was a state
authority that was more attentive to the public and its goals were more defined. Finally,
the power of the PCA was weakened versus the OWI, at least in everything related to
the promotion of the administration's policy.
There was a need in a policy that would determine specifically the attitude towards
Germany: who bears the responsibility of what went in Germany, Hitler, the Nazi party,
or the whole German people? The answer to this question was decisive in choosing the
effective way of representing the German in the films during the war and afterwards.
Nelson Poynter, an assisting coordinator of the government films, answered the
question whether the government objected to films of hatred: "Haters would not be
directed against Hitler, or a small group of fascist leaders as a personification of the
enemy on the one hand, and neither against the whole German people. On the other
hand, one has to promote the hatred towards the militaristic method that prevails in the
Axis countries and to those who are responsible for its cultivation."145
Poynter had a similar opinion to the one that prevailed in WWI, as if militarism,
rather than Nazism was the problem. And indeed, Elmer Davis, the head of the OWI in
Hollywood, who was a radio commentator, writer and journalist, who changed his
粸¢
position from siding with isolationism to siding with intervention, thought that there was
no separation between militarism and Nazism, and there was only one meaning – a
danger to the free world. When he was asked what would be the OWI's strategy, he
answered simply: "tell the truth."146 There is the question to what extent was
Hollywood recruited to the needs of the administration in the war time and afterwards?
The two codes, the internal production code and the OWI's code, maintained an
inconvenient co-existence, since they had different goals. They differed in their political
viewpoints either. Both were conservative, but the OWI demanded open political
stands, while the production camouflage tried to cover them. So the explicit political
nature of the OWI code challenged the deep rooted procedures, which ensured as
controversy. Paradoxically, the governmental code was the less conservative between
the two. Warner Brothers were the most liberal studio, and Poynter told them that he
relied on them to be the pioneers in Hollywood. The scriptwriters and the directors
144
145
146
Office of War Information.
Zimmerman. p.144.
Koopes & Black, P, 59.
96
consisted usually the group of leftist tendencies more than the senior managers of the
studios. But as long as the OWI was powerless, even the most cooperative studios
could object to the propaganda and ignore the OWI's demands.
Mellet claimed that if he would be able to bring about a link with the PCA, he may
double its effectiveness, and if this strategy would work, the OWI would have a similar
influence to that of Hays' office. Mellet and Poynter. Out of their increasing frustration
about Hollywood's behavior, they decided there was a need of drastic measures in
order to align the movie industry according to the propaganda program of the OWI, like
scripts survey and an analysis of the scripts in order to introduce the ideas of the OWI
into the script. But in the middle of 1942 the ideas of the OWI were not accepted
automatically. Hollywood and the OWI continued to examine each other. Although the
scripts survey opened an opening for empowering the OWI, its power was not
determined yet.
In the autumn of 1942 Mellet and Poynter knew already two things:
"If Hollywood would be left to do as it wished, it would go on producing films that
they thought would damage the war effort. On the other hand, an intervention on
the part of the OWI's films department, the BMP - Bureau of Motion Pictures in the
粸¢
stage of writing the script would bring a significant improvement. The people of
BMP, supported by the OWI, decided to go out in an attack. Gilfond, the manager of
the public relations of the Ministry of Justice, urged Mellet to present a
comprehensive program that Hollywood would be requested to adopt, without
considering if it was good for business. Gilfond asked why they had to handle
Hollywood with velvet gloves, as we tell every citizen and every branch of the
industry what to do. The question of freedom of speech in the world of
entertainment was not too valid."147
Poynter suggested that if does not manage to achieve cooperation on the part of
the producer, he would use the censorship in important cases. Meller agreed that the
OWI should operate the censorship, but in a more delicate way. But the situation did
not change largely. Poynter complained that the majority of the producers trick Mellet's
office, as they used to do with the censorship of Hays' office. The producers provoked
147
Ibidem, p. 105.
97
the administration agencies against each other, especially by using military
confirmations against the OWI's objections.
"There is too much confusion in Hollywood's relations with the administration," said
Poynter to Mellet. "It should be solved in Washington in higher levels." Unlike the
management of the production code and the military, whose will were backed up by a
real economic power. Poynter's solution was adding more coercion as the OWI was
nominated to be formal clearing house of Hollywood's relations with the US government
as well as foreign governments. On October 21st he sent his superior a draft of a letter
in which he informs the studios that all connections of this type should be directed
through the OWI, and so centralized the regulation.
In team meetings of Elmer Davis and his assistants after ten days, Mellets got the
green light to deal with the studios. He preferred to make a harsh speech first in an
important forum of the movie industry, the annual meeting of the national control
committee in New York in November 1942. Mellet argued that many films present all
the Germans as "fools who roar Heil Hitler." He came out with a public statement and
attacked the "great industry that it does not fulfill its share in the war effort."
Hollywood's reaction was expected. They argued that they are patriotic, and they know
粸¢
who to make "our product", and they can serve the war in the best way by "doing
things as we wish to do them without intervention from outside, especially on the part
of the officials."148 Although the papers of the industry assumed that Mellet spoke
without Davis' approval, they feared that the OWI is about to do something serious.
Mellet surprised the industry in a letter addressed to all the studios in December 1942.
He threatened the studios that they better submit to inspection finished scripts and
even abstracts of suggestion for production, and that it would serve their interests.
In addition, Mellet requested of the studios to direct all connections with the
armed forces and foreign governments through the OWI. The majority of the industry
reacted with panic. The association of the producers conducted a meeting of a few
hours to discuss the matter. The opinions were contradictory. Some regarded it as a
measure in the direction of a direct censorship. William Goetz, who managed Fox
Twentieth Century when Darryl F. Zanuck, the manager of the studio served in the
army. He claimed that Mellet wanted "a full censorship on the policy and contents of
148
Ibidem, p. 108.
98
our films." Others assumed that this was launching a trial balloon in order to examine to
what extent would the industry go. Within a few days all the movie industry aligned all
together in an aggressive objection to Mellet's demand.
Mellet's letter put the OWI in a status of defense. On December 23rd, Davis
conducted a press conference in which he defended Mellet and insisted that the
agencies had no authority of a censorship. Many producers objected not only to the
possibility of a censorship, but also to the operators of the OWI. There was agreement
among the important producers that Mellet and Poynter were not qualified to advice of
changes in scripts. They would never be able to achieve a healthy cooperation on the
part of the movie industry. Finally, Mellet instructed Poynter that his team had to be
careful of too much exaggeration in the ideological field when it deals with beloved
movie stars."
Mellet a letter at the end of 1942. "A revolt in Hollywood is a too serious matter
than we have admitted even to ourselves," he said. He changed his mind after a long
conversation with Frank Freeman, the manager of Paramount, who argued that he was
not against that the OWI would suggest general issues, but he objected firmly that the
agency would deal directly with his workers, mainly scriptwriters and directors. All
蛐¢
dealing have to go through his office or his representative. He also insisted that the
BMP would avoid suggesting "details of treatment." The control of the industry's
tycoons remained as it had been. Mellet advised his representative to moderate his
actions. Poynter confronted a repeated resistance from people in the movie industry,
but his superior scolded him about the way in which he executed the strategy they both
agreed upon. So Poynter approached the studios more carefully.
At the beginning of 1943 the storm was already over. The studios, excluding
Paramount, returned to submit scripts to the OWI regularly, but Mellet and Poynter
were weakened significantly.
As the end of the war came closer, the Americans found an analogy between their
current situation and the one that prevailed at the end of WWI. Roosevelt tried to
correct what seemed to him as Wilson's mistakes by insisting on an unconditional
surrender. The other part of the analogy involved convincing the Americans not to
return to support isolationism.
99
American Film-makers in the Trap of McCarthyism
The Hollywoodian office of the OWI represented the comprehensive and
continuous attempt of the administration to change the contents of the mass media in
America. Hollywood after WWII twice under the supervision of the HUAC, who were the
witch hunters of the Congress. In 1947, and more so in 1951-52, a heavy pressure was
put on the movie industry.
The HUAC, which was founded in 1938, started its investigations in Hollywood in
1947149 in the search of what has been called "a Communist infiltration into Hollywood's
movie industry"150. It issued an announcement to the American movie industry:
"Hollywood should demonstrate its patriotism.151"
Scriptwriters, directors and actors were called to testify of the extent of their
connections with the American communist party and their relation to the USSR. The
interrogated people were requested to report of their political position, as well as give
names of friends and acquaintances who had been suspected of communism or had
acted in leftist organizations. This campaign was meant to arouse general terror and
make the big studios fire the ones who refused to cooperate and "purify" Hollywood of
radicals or liberals152.
蛐¢
The heads of the industry in Hollywood and in Wall Street tried to cope with this
fermentation raised by the HUAC153. Due to a heavy pressure by the financing banking
circles, and after a serious strike that took place in the studios, the big studios decided
to cooperate with the conservative and nationalistic administration. At the end of 1947
the heads of the movie industry created on their own free will a black list that increased
149
For further reading about the McCarthysim period in Holywood, see the comprehensive book:
Victor S. Navasky, (1980). Naming Names, N.Y., Viking Press.
150
Leab, "Hollywood and the Cold War, 1945-1961", In: R.B. Toplin.(ed.), Hollywood as Mirror, Changing
Views of "outsiders" and "enemies" in American movies, London.(pp.117-137).p.121.
151
Willett,pp.5 and 33.
152
In Hollywood, the directors William Wyler and John Huston, and the screenwriter Philip Dunne
organized a committee for the First Amendment of the constitution, which ensures freedom of speech
and opinion. A big delegation on behalf of the industry, headed by Eric Johnston, the president of the
movie association of America, and its members included celebrities like Lauren Bacall, Humphrey Bogart,
John Huston, Gene Kelly, Danny Kaye and Jane Wyatt, appeared before HUAC in Washington to protest
against its activities. But they were not called in. IN. Jack C. Ellis , (1995). A History of Film, Allyn
and Bacon, Boston. Pp.181-201.(p.188).
153
The heads of the industry in Hollywood and Wall Street tried to cope with the fermentation caused by
HUAC and its associates. At first the industry explained its objection to such investigation by claiming that
it was unnecessary, punishing, and non-American in the sense that it hurt civil rights.Ibidem.p.188.
100
in the course of time. The first names in the list were "unfriendly witnesses" who were
heard in the public hearing of HUAC in October 1947.
They were called "the ten from Hollywood" and included one producer, two directors
and seven writers154.
Later on a black list was prepared of about 300 movie people, who were considered
as leftists, or were marked as unfriendly witnesses to the investigating committee.155
The best scriptwriters, actors and directors of Hollywood objected to McCarthyism
but the black lists managed to ensure the banning. The banned auteurs were victims of
what the historian David Caute called "an obvious deal that was done between the
committee and the industry." But this cooperation was not the most salient factor in the
change of contents of films in the forties and the beginning of the fifties (1947-1954).
Those who were not accused directly were also terrified so that they would not
dare exceed the prevailing political line. The HUAC investigations were very successful
in scaring the auteurs and the result was silencing of most of the critical voices who
expressed objections. The big purification operation was successful, and the movie
world got rid of its best auteurs for years. Edward Dmytryk, the director of the films
Hitler's Children (1942), CrossFire (1947), and Young Lions (1958) and other auteurs
粸¢
were arrested or sent away for their refusal to cooperate. Part of the auteurs used
pseudonym in order to act.
154
The committee called in a number of witnesses, who were known from previous investigations of HUAC
of their connections and sympathy to the Communist party. John Howard Lawson, a screenwriter and a
leader in Hollywood's associations was the first to appear before the committee. He condemned the
committee and refused to answer its questions. After him came nine "hostile" witnesses, who also
refused to answer the committee's questions regarding their beliefs and political connections, and raised
the issue of the First Amendment to the constitution. The Ten Hollywoodians, as they have been
called later on included in addition to Lawson, the screenwriters: Lester Cole, Alva Bessie, Samuel Ornitz,
Albert Maltz, Ring Lardner, Jr.,and Dalton Trumbo:directors Herbert Biberman and Edward Dmytryk,and
the producers Adrian Scott who were all accused of contempt of the congress. And at the end of 1947
the heads of the movie industry set a black list of their own, which increased in the course of time. They
came out with Waldorf Statement after a meeting in the Waldorf Astoria hotel in New York, which said
that "we won't employ knowingly a communist or a member in any party or group that preaches to
overthrow the US administration by force or by illegal and non-constitutional methods".The Ten
Hollywoodians were sent to jail, and the industry work according to black lists, and did not employ people
who were suspected of leftist opinions and activities. The black lists have gone on even after the last
Hollywood hearing of HUAC in 1954.Ibidem.pp.188-189.
155
A partial list of the names can be found in Shlomo zand's book: The movie as history: Imagine and
direct the twentieth century, (2000). Tel Aviv, Am Oved, p. 264, plus footnote no. 2 in Chapter 7,
about the personal testimony of one of the persecuted scriptsriters, in the book: Lester Cole, (1981).
Hollywood Red, Palo Alto, Ramparts Press, 1981.
101
3.3 New assessment and renewed growth in America – 1963-1989
Renewed Growth
Throughout the sixties there were demonstrations, parades and rioting of the
movement for human rights, and moratoriums, demonstrations and students' strikes as
part of their objection to the Vietnam War. Alongside these protest movements there
developed a youth culture. Many young people disconnected themselves from the race
after material achievements of their parents, lack of honesty and decency in dealing
with others, self-satisfaction, indifference and obedience to the big businesses and the
governmental and educations systems, that seemed to them as having a secret
connection between them. They demonstrated their solidarity by growing long hair and
wearing clothes which were considered sexually indefinite or strange, and anyway,
different from those
worn by the grown ups and the "normal" people. Their
dissatisfaction was expressed also through their refusal to fulfill the roles that were
expected of them, i.e., work for a salary, being husbands, wives, or parents. Part of
them dropped from the regular society into drugs, oriental mysticism, and communes.
Others have become active in attacking the political-social structure that dictated being
involved in what they regarded as an immoral war, accepting poverty, injustice and
粸¢
racial discrimination. The zeitgeist reverberated in a group of films which were called
"youth films", or "contemporary films" that gained significant popularity until they and
the protest movements subsided. Their films dealt with young people and new styles of
living as opposed to the old style. These films were made for young audiences, which
consisted the majority of the movie spectators. Sometimes they were made by young
film makers. All of them examined social problems, and part of them dealt with political
issues. Some pronounced their disagreement in a loud voice. They also created new
styles and documentaries, as well as conventional fiction, like films that came from
abroad (Gaddard and McVewiev).
This trend started indirectly in 1967 with three of the most popular productions of
that year: Bonny and Clyde, The Graduate and a gangsters film on the background of
rural America in the thirties, in which were coded themes of the youth's protest at that
time: the individual versus the system; hedonistic and unconventional way of life that
focused on gratifications; and an implied justification of violence directed against nonpersonal institutions of society and against the conscientious, humorless people in their
102
middle age who served them. The Graduate is more explicit, but less daring and
beautiful, and it expressed other manifestations of tension that can be seen as the
youth conflict of that time. It was a marginal film about one opponent, a passive
protestor, who was not willing to give in to the demands of society (in his case – the
prison). Hollywood needed two years of examining these three films before producing
another films which integrated part of the elements which had probably responsible for
their success. In 1969 the films Zabriskie Point, Easy Rider, Medium Cool, and Alice's
Restaurant were made, and they were welcomed positively by the eighteen years old.
The two youngsters, riding their bikes and using hashish and LSD, used popular rock
music, and were adopted as models by the youth. Like Bonny and Clyde, Billy and
Captain America were killed by the squares and the Rednecks. This film yielded plenty
of films with similar themes, part of them were much more direct in their criticism on
the prevailing values in the American society of that time.
1962-1968: a. The Period of the Détente. The days of presidents Kennedy and
Johnson. The days of escalation in the Vietnam conflict, and the shifting of the main
interest from Berlin and Germany to South-East Asia. Gradual decline of the studios and
the emergence of a young cinematic power which succeeded communicating with
粸¢
young people. The revolution of the 'flower children', producing changes of values in
America, which reached its peak in the students' revolt in France in 1968.
This was the time of political assassinations and upsetting ideas that prevailed in
America.
1969-1975: The time of presidents Nixon and Ford was characterized by
ideological extremism and loss of faith in the political system as a result of the Vietnam
muddle and the Watergate affair.
The United States withdrew from Vietnam, a move that deeply hurt the national
ego, producing a sense of a traumatic defeat. Hollywood underwent a process of a
profound change – the studios system collapsed, and the independent individual cinema
became dominant (a process known also as 'the new wave' in American cinema). The
end of the period brought changes in the map of American interests, and the
importance of German representations was once again at the front of the stage.
1976-1980. Election of a new president, Carter, whose policy was quite different
from that of his predecessor, dictated new attitudes in Hollywood. During this period,
103
American society was experiencing a tendency of expanding violence, manifested also
in Hollywood's satellites, such as Italy with its production of spaghetti movies and
"American" war films, including German representations. The industry of exploitation
movies also created a lot of popular images, some of which were going to be relevant
to our discussion.
1980-1989: The renewed escalation regarding the Soviet Union's invasion to
Afghanistan. The years of President Reagan, characterized by tougher ideology and
more extreme economic ideology, manifested by a tendency of introducing privatization
and annulment of the restrictions on free marketing. Gorbachev's coming to power in
the Soviet Union and his endeavors to update the Soviet system by means of a new
cultural discourse, opening up to the West and general pluralism, a process named
'Glasnost'. Economical development accompanied by the formation of a cultural
alienation, leading to the flourishing of the punk phenomenon. This was manifested in a
charged political cinema, on the one hand, and an escapist cinema on the other. During
this period, many movies were made, including updating German types in many
variations. This period ended with the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Berlin
Wall.
粸¢
This period was characterized by a heated tension between the two super powers,
especially in light of the Soviet invasion to Afghanistan. President Reagan increased the
pressure on the USSR by presenting his plan of Star Wars. At the same time, the
administration requested of Hollywood to produce films that would present the
Germans in a positive light. During these unquiet years, full of disagreements in the
country, there grew a number of important film makers who demonstrated great
interest in a critical examination of certain aspects of the American culture, including
the violence that prevailed so much in the American history lately. Part of the five film
makers I will deal with here had established their status in the seventies and continued
into the eighties and nineties as auteurs of an individual uniqueness. These are Arthur
Penn, Sam Peckinpa, Frances Ford Copola, Robert Altman, and Martin Scorsese.
It seems that Arthur Penn was interested more than anything else with the
meaning of America. Each one films as of today, examines very clearly a specific aspect
of the American culture. As a graduate of theater and television, Penn, in his first film,
The Left-Handed Gun (1958), invested anew the legend of Billy the Kid according to
104
speculative Freudian guidelines. The film The Miracle Worker (1962) deals with young
Helen Keller, a blind, deaf and dumb person, and the teacher who helped her overcome
her terrible handicaps and go on with a meaningful life and a career. The film Mickey
One (1965) examines the fear and threat of violence that prevailed in all American cities
through the eyes of a paranoid and desperate comedian in a night club who is
persecuted by the mafia. The film The Rundown (1966) follows this atmosphere of
violence in a small southern township and adds the general erosion of sexual morality.
The film Bonny and Clyde (1967), which undoubtedly belongs to the most influential
American films, poses real bank robbers of the thirties in the light of the myth they
helped creating.
The film Alice's Restaurant (1969), which is also based on a real story, deals with
the bothered American youth of the sixties. The film Little Big Man (1970) goes back to
the responsibility and accusation of the Whites in the massacre that have been done to
the Indians when their areas were conquered. The film Night moves (1975), which is
well aware of the cinematic medium and the expectations of the spectators of it,
belongs to the time after Watergate. In the detective existential story, the hero chases
evasive criminals in a confusing society that seems to have lost its moral balance.
粸¢
Sam Peckinpa is a director who arrived to the movie from the television. He used
to be a scriptwriter-director in a few western series for television and remained loyal to
this genre, even though his films do not look like western, the most American genre. He
used the basic pattern of the western and added his unique approach and concentrated
on loners and losers, with anachronistic reactions and violence.
Frances Ford Copola is the first important American director who got his
education in a film program in the University of UCLA. This academic training and its
emphasis on personal expression, it is interesting that during the first part of his career,
Copola restrained or hid his personality and chose instead a variety of issues and styles.
Dementia 13 (1963) is a horror film done in a low budget, and was financed by
Roger Corman, who has provided other young talents their first chance. Copola's
second film, You're a Big Boy Now (1967), caught the attention of the public. This is a
light, unpretentious comedy that tells about the attempts of a young guy to get loose of
his parents and find love and sex, whatever comes first. Among his attractive traits one
105
can note his location in New York and paying attention to the actors of the small roles,
most eccentric roles.
Like Peckinpa, Robert Altman has also come to the movie from directing series in
the television. What is common of many of his films is the analysis of the traditional
genres of the American movie, while mocking values and slogans that have been
generally accepted, and sometimes he even attacks them. One can conclude from his
works that in his directing he uses improvisation very much. The film M*A*S*H (1970)
had a fast success, which led to a more successful television series that lasted for a
longer period. It came with the wave of youth/now and started Asltman's career. This is
a stingy satire about the army and medicine as professions. In his film he reminds our
memory of the films All Quiet on the Western Front and Dr. Kildare. At that year Bruster
Mclaud started to work on science fiction and private detectives. This is mainly a
Slapstick farce about a young man who tries to develop an instrument and muscles
which would enable him to hover like a bird. Following Bruster Mclaud, the extra
ordinary film from a visual point of view, and bothering from a thematic perspective is
the film McBaine and Mrs. Miller (1971). This is completely different from Altman's
previous work, a kind of an anti-western. Instead of the conventional confidence, the
粸¢
power of the individual and quick drawing with a safe shooting, Altman used
psychological shooting, the need of human companionship and the fact that you cannot
escape your destiny. Inspite of the gloomy content of McBaine and Mrs. Miller about
human nature, Altman's observation of the two heroes remains how, full of affection
and humor. The film The Long Goodbye (1973), a more gentle parody than M*A*S*H
and Bruster Mclaud, does not demand of us to know how it works as contrary to
Raymond chandler's novel. Altman wasn’t to say that the old nobles does not suit any
more for his non-heroic times. Elliott Gould substitutes Humphrey Bogart with a
cumbersome skill that was meant to bury the legend. Thieves Like Us (1974)
disconnects totally from the original parody of the Barro gang that appeared in a
number of other films. The films is a bit ironic and remote, but at the same time it is a
serious and sensitive version, even if totally different of the legendary material. The
generic origins of California Split (1974) belong to a cycle of films that dealt with
relations among men. It started in the great success of the film Butch Cassidy and the
Sundance Kid (1969). There a lot of laughs and a happy end, but throughout the film
106
examines compulsive gambling, the milieu in which it takes place, and meaningful
relations between two opposite types. From the casino in California Altman moved to
Nashvill (1975), the capital of American country and western music, with countless
types who were caught in this industry, and the presidential campaign of a populistic
demagogue. The theme that were the center of the parody and satire were popular
music and populistic politics, how they are done and the manipulation they use, as well
as the audiences that are attracted to both of them. This is a great, ambitious film,
which is regarded by some as Altman's greatest achievement. Altman himself talked
about it as a "his metaphor of America." The film Buffalo Bill and the Indians (1976) is
based on the play Indians by Arthur Copit, and it condemn the legend about William P.
Cody as a wandering actor, who had used this legend for his interests. Three Women
(1977) examines the imperfect personalities and the changing relations between two
apartment mates in California and their landlady, a painter with a mysterious and
grotesque morale. Wedding (1978) is very much like Nashvill in many respects. One can
see them as complementary of one another. Some people claim that these are Altman's
greatest achievements, at least at that time, and there are no other films like them. The
twenty-four types of Nashvill have become fourty-eight in Wedding. In Nashvill all the
蛐¢
types are present at the beginning and the end, taking place in public places; whereas
in Wedding there is the same element, but in private or familial locations. The film is
structures around the separate types, with lines of plot that connect their actions.
Nashvill is some kind of a musical and maybe a tragedy; Wedding is some kind of a
romantic film, and it is certainly a comedy. It starts in a point in time that is close to the
end, i.e., in a classic drama, Greek and Elizabethan, comedies end with weddings and
tragedies end with death. This comedy beginning with a wedding, in which it is
insinuated that the young couple would live happily ever after and there is one case of
death close to the beginning and two cases close to the ending. These death cases
seem to lead to solutions and getting closer, if not to a happy end. The heroes are from
a high social class, not kings and queens but heads of crimes. Their story is told by the
minstrel as a myth or a sage as history, and not by a dramatist. The same thing can be
said about the film The Actor that elevated Altman quickly to a renewed prominence in
the nineties.
107
Among the five film makers of this time who were discussed in this part, Altman
was the most fertile. His average was more than a film a year, following the success of
M*A*S*H. Altman directed and produced his films, and in this way was able to control
what he said and how he said it. His achievement was achieved with the help of a
group of actors who appeared constantly in his works: Shelly Duval, Keith Cardin,
Geraldine Chaplin, and Elliott Gould. Like Ingmar Bergman, Altman produced from his
actors significant and convincing performances. Although it seems that not always there
is success of a full materialization of the potential of each film, Altman achieved the
status from which he could bring to all his films his significant sardonic look on
American society. This is a big achievement in an art that is also an industry.
Martin Scorsese is the young and new director among the five (born in 1942).
Copola was born in 1939, and in some ways Scorsese's career was parallel to that of
Copola. They both come from Italian-American background, and their films come from
this environment; They studied movie in the university, NYU in the case of Scorsese.
But there are differences of course. Copola deals with a wider range of themes and
shapes. He sticks to what has experienced in his childhood in Little Italy in New York.
He directed also a musical, Finian's Rainbow, an Irish legend with an imp a with a jar of
粸¢
gold at the corner of a rainbow. His musical was New York New York, about a tenor and
a saxophone who was centered in himself and addicted to jazz.
Who Knocks on My Door (1968) was a transition film between the short and
brilliant Films Scorsese has done as a student and his full professional career. It shows
the world of Scorsese of young Italian-American punkists that one of them is bothered
by a longing to get loose of the limited life in the ethnic enclave. The time of the plot is
probably late at night. A major part of the activity is comprised of getting into cars,
driving them or getting out of them, doing nothing in abandoned joyless bars, or
seducing young chicks to go with them to a wretched apartment.
Up to 1980, the end of this period, the US has come back to itself and regained its
position among the leading nations in the art of the movies. It reached the same status
like France, Italy and the East European countries by providing a wide space to the film
makers with originality and significance, like Penn, Peckinpa, Copola, Altman and
Scorsese. America remained dominant in the glob al commerce partly due to the fact
108
that it employed film makers and distributors from other countries, and the post-war
Italian Neorealisim has weakened at that time.156
粸¢
156
Jack C. Ellis , (1995). A History of Film, Allyn and Bacon, Boston. Pp.379-392.
109
Chapter Four
Germans in Hollywood
Nazi Germany's Representations in Hollywood
And the American Intervention in WWII
The dispute between the isolation approach and the intervention approach
1939-1941
This chapter analyzes the representations of Germans in the American movie in
the years 1939-1941 as a derivative of the relationship between the administration and
its foreign policy and Hollywood in the first years of WWII. Within this framework I will
examine to what extent, if any, did Hollywood serve the goals of the administration?
This chapter will also analyze the status of the American movie in the discussion about
the intervention policy of the US in the war in the long months that preceded the
Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.
Unlike the prevailing opinion, in pre-war Hollywood there operated many varied
political factors, which tried to attract the movie industry to different directions, for and
against the American intervention. I will demonstrate the activity of these factors
粸¢
through referring to the few films which dealt directly with Nazism and the war at the
end of the thirties and the beginning of the forties.
4.1 Historical background and a films' survey
From a political point of view, Hollywood of the thirties is remember usually as a
liberal community, in which prospered the anti-Nazi league and the democratic films
committee. Marketing films about fascism and the war in Europe to American audiences
was a dilemma in the period under discussion. The situation in Europe provided
fascinating material as subjects for films, and since war has an obvious dramatic
potential, it was obvious to the studios managers that films which deal with it would
attract a great audience. In addition to the economic interest, there were many
producers, directors, and actors who felt a strong impulse to deal with the events in
Europe from political or humanitarian reasons, but at the same time the studios had
strong reasons to be careful:
1. In spite of the possibility to find a big audience in America for war films, the
economic interests of the studios were at risk. Germany and Europe in general were
still a fertile market for American films. For example, the blessing of the German
110
consul in Los Angeles, Dr. Georg Gyssling, was important for the commercial
success of a film more than the approval of the production code (Hays Office).157
2. The raise of anti-Semitism in America and what different personalities, like Henry
Ford and Charles Lindberg said, and the strengthening of the German-American
bond brought about the weakening of Jews in Hollywood. Factors in Hollywood with
extreme rightist tendencies and a pro-Nazi lobby headed by Joseph Breen, the
Catholic-conservative (from the production code in the thirties), wanted to prevent
creating negative images and representations of what went on in the Third Reich,
and preventer making anti-Nazi significant films.158 There were in Hollywood people
who welcomed fascism on the screen and out of it.159
3. The isolationism policy on the part of certain parts in the administration put
pressure on Hollywood in order to avoid going out of neutrality through the movie.
This policy was taken actually until the intervention in the war at the end of
1941.160
In light of this colliding interests, and out of fear of the fluctuations in the public
opinion, the studios hesitated to go out in a front attack against Nazism. In certain films
they accelerated the production, while in others they cancelled projects, as part of
粸¢
repeated attempts to predict future events and their possible expressions in the public
opinion.
Together with the difficulty to decide which films to produce, there was another
internal conflict, that is how to promote them. While the natural period of time between
the beginning of a production and the actual screening of the film was relatively long
(fiction films needed at least six months), dramatic political and military events
happened quickly. Therefore, the public opinion change in many cases much faster than
the time of producing the film. The studios found themselves sometimes with finished
films that did not reflect reality any more, whether the political reality or its reflection in
people's minds, and their assessment about the audience interest and tolerance to view
available or controversial material. Marketing films that the studio has already regretted
producing positioned problems and called for creative solutions.
157
158
159
160
Anthony Slide, (July 1991). "Hollywood's Fascist Follies", Film Comment, 27, 4 .pp. 62-67.
Ibidem, p. 67.
Ibidem, p. 63.
Rostron, pp. 85-96.
111
The materials of sales promotion of films provide a revealing documentation about
the problems of the studios and their different reactions, emphasizing the complicated
nature of the relations between the movie industry and the administration. In 1940 the
distributing studio issued an advertising booklet that contained materials for the
marketing system. These booklet were called Showman's kit or Showman's Manual, and
they were intended to serve the presenters who presented the film in their movie
theaters. While the studios were committed to promote the films in the national media,
the role of each presentor was to maintain a local advertising system based on the
booklet, and act as a mediator between the studio and the local press and radio.
The information booklets were distributed before the screening of the film, and thus
enabled to see how the studios chose to solve difficult issues of distributing and
promoting films dealing with the war and fascism in Europe before America entered the
war.161 Regarding films whose relation to actual events was only allegorical, the solution
for marketing them in America was simple – ignoring the context.
The isolationists would describe it as a continuous process of intervention
propaganda that was came out of Hollywood. The reaction of the studios was strong
denial as if they had such intention.162 Films which referred directly and explicitly to the
粸¢
events that took place in Europe at the time exposed the studios that distributed them
to potential accusations of supporting one of the parties and an incitement of war.
In addition, Hollywood confronted a serious problem of the intervention of Georg
Gyssling, the German consul in Los Angeles, an intervention that reached public
knowledge in June 1937 for the first time. Gyssling supervised closely the Hollywoodian
movie industry in order to ensure that no anti-Nazi message would appear on the
screen. Actors of a German origin were called to his office, he sent threatening letters
to actors who starred in films which hurt the German prestige. The content of the treat
was very clear, the moment an actor would participate in an anti-German production,
the studios would be warned that every future film with that actor would be
excommunicated in the areas under German control. John Emery was so upset about
this letter when he received it, that he addressed the State Department: "Tell me, will I,
as an American citizen, be given to pressure that would be put on me by a foreign
consul in the future." As a result of his protest, the State Department submitted a
161
162
Ibidem, p. 86.
Ibidem, pp. 86-87.
112
formal complaint to the German government, and was answered that no more
threatening letters would be sent to actors and actresses in Hollywood anymore. All the
same Consul Gyssling continued to reprimand the studios which produced anti-Nazi
films. He told Warner Brothers that he could not foresee the outcomes of producing
Confessions of a Nazi Spy by their studio, saying that he hoped they would not do it,163
with an insinuated threat about those who have relatives in Germany. In a secret letter
to Joseph Breen from the production code (dated December 10, 1938), Paramount's
foreign marketing department raised an interesting point against the production of
Confessions of a Nazi Spy:
"I think that Warner's big mistake was that they did not pay attention to
what Chaplin did when he neglected his plan to produce a burlesque about
Hitler (The Great Dictator). Chaplin announced, rightfully to our opinion, that
in producing a film of this kind, he would dedicate his talent in making
money in a film that would necessarily bring about horrible reaction towards
the Jews who are still in Germany. A similar accusation would be thrown by
Germany against Warner in producing this film, and I am confident that if the
film would be produced and it would have something that would present
粸¢
Germany in a negative light, which what would happen if the production is
sincere, then the blood of many Jews in Germany would on Warner's heads.
If they are willing to call it the art of the movie, then they probably know
what they are doing."164
The Production Code Administration, PCA, deliberately postponed issuing
confirmation to the film, trying to appease the Germans. He claims that this film
violates the production code that instructs to have a "decent representation of the
history, institutions, important people and citizens of other countries."165
The mayor of Chicago, Bill Thompson, went one step further. He described Chicago as
the "sixth German city" and refused to give a license to screen in it the film, arguing
that it might cause "demonstrations of German inhabitatns."
The relations between the big studios and Nazi Germany until the end of 1938 were
very much a matter of a compromise.
163
164
165
Slide, "Hollywood's Fascist Follies", Film Comment, p. 66.
Ibidem, p. 66.
Ibidem, p. 67.
113
Upon the Wehrmacht invasion to Poland in 1939, and Britain's and France's joining
the war, Hollywood cancelled the need of allegories of mythic covers, except for the
sensitivities of the movie industry, which continued to be formally neutral for more two
years. The German invasion to Poland in September 1939 brought about another round
of helplessness in Hollywood about the issue how one should react to the situation in
Europe that was more and more threatening. Producers Distributing Corporation, the
PDC, was the first studio that took a stand and did it by emphasizing the Germans'
tough chauvinism.
4.2 Confessions of a nazi spy and the danger of isolationism
Between the years 1939-1941, 27 anti-Nazi films were produced166, 12 out of them
in 1941, and the important of them were: Confessions of a Nazi Spy (1939), Hitler,
Beast from Berlin (1939), The Great Dictator (1940), Four Sons (1940), Escape (1940),
The Man I Married (1940) and The Mortal Storm (1940), which was the film that led to
the excommunication of all MGM's films in the German controlled areas.167
In the last months of 1939, after the declaration of war between Britain and Germany,
the other studios accepted to make films that condemn Nazism and describe the
horrors of live under the Hitler regime,168 and by so doing adopted the approach of
蛐¢
Warner Brothers and PDC.
The first two films which included an explicit condemnation of the Nazis and
illustrated the threat of Nazism were Confessions of a Nazi Spy by Anatole Litvak, which
deals with German spying in the US, and Hitler, Beast from Berlin (known also as The
Beasts from Berlin) by Sherman Scott. Six years after Hitler coming to power, on the
eve of WWII, Warner Brothers issued the first film that was clearly anti-Nazi. Warner
Brothers exceeded from the caution that characterized other producers in relation to
Nazism, and started in an early stage to produce realistic anti-Nazi films, like
Confessions of a Nazi Spy, Espionage Agent and others, as opposed to the formal policy
166
167
168
Shull and Wilt,p.51.
Confessions of a Nazi Spy. Director: Anatole Litvak. USA, 1939.
Hitler – Beast of Berlin (AKA – Beasts of Berlin, Goose Step, Hell’s Devils and Hitler, Beast of Berlin).
Director: Sherman Scott (Sam Newfield). USA, 1939.
The Great Dictator. Director:/producer/screenwriter: Charles Chaplin. USA, 1940.
Four Sons. Director: Archie Mayo. USA, 1940.
Escape. [AKA – When the Door Opened]. Director/producer: Mervyn Leroy. USA, 1940.
The Man I Married. Director: Irving Pichel., USA, 1940 (from the story: I Married a Nazi).
The Mortal Storm. Director/producer: Frank Borzage. USA, 1940.
Shindler Colin, (Boston, 1979). Hollywood Goes to War: Films and American Society 1939-1952. p. 13.
114
of the American administration. The reason for this was, probably, the brutal murder of
the studio's sales agent in Germany by Nazi hooligans.169
Confessions of a Nazi Spy is a half documentary that was based upon an
espionage trial in New York and won great publicity. Warner Brothers decided to start
the production at the end of 1938. The star, Eduard G. Robinson, and the producer,
Harry Warner, belonged to the most vehement anti-fascist people in Hollywood. He
project was controversial from the beginning, and the German consul in Los Angeles, as
well as the foreign marketing department of Paramount in New York tried to convince
the PCA to stop its production. After a long struggle with the Code Office, and as they
managed to achieve finally an approval for the shooting, Warner Bros accelerated the
production and completed the film on time for screening in May 1939, using halfdocumentary techniques.
The film describes a real Nazi espionage network that operated in the US. Paul
Lukas, a dedicated Nazi, arrives at America to conduct assemblies of supporters and
recruit Americans of German origin to Hitler's service. His speeches in front of the mob
arouse a blue-collar laborer (Francis Lederer) to join the Bond, the association of the
Nazi supporting Americans, and then participate in espionage activities. The FBI agent
粸¢
(Eduard G. Robinson) is sent to investigate the case. After he extracted a confession
from the laborer, who is not too smart, robinson arrives to Lukas. The publication of the
capture of the Nazi official and the fact that he is a security risk, makes the German
secret police kidnap Lukas and smuggle him back home, probably in order to liquidate
him. The network is discovered, but robinson understands that this is just the
beginning. The film ends as it had started, with a court scene in which the district
Attorney, Henry O'Neil gives an exciting summarizing speech to the jury about the
importance of fighting this new kind of un-declared war that was going on in America
and about the risks of isolationism. The film describer the German-American bond as a
serious threat and a fifth column. Confessions of a Nazi Spy, which was produced in
1939, aroused big noise, especially in light of the fact that most of the film makers at
that time preferred to ignore the Nazis out of fear of losing the important European
market. The marketing booklet indicated that "One should not refer to Confessions of a
Nazi Spy in the same way you do with an average film," they recommend that each
169
Film Index International, All Movie Guide - The International Film Guide, and also: Bernard dick F.,The
star spangled screen: The American World War 2 Film, Lexington: up of Kentucky, 1985, pp. 55-56.
115
presentor would analyze his situation and consider all the important factors, like to
what extent the local community contain in it those "who sympathies with anti-Nazi
movements and are active in them." Then the studio recommended firmly that the
movie theaters and the sales promoters choose to exploit the sensational nature of the
film. The studio also suggested that the movie theaters present gigantic swastikas in
their lobbies.
One of the advertisement gimmick recommended by the studio was to request of
the movie spectators to sign on tickets with a demand to do whatever can be done to
fight Nazi espionage activities that try to weaken the American democracy. The booklet
encouraged the presenters to use all resources in favor of the advertisement effort, and
raised the option that mayors would agree to declare of an American Week when the
film comes to the screens, and that priests and rabbis may agree to deliver a speech
about the subject of the film in their prayer houses. The studio also suggested that
German-Americans who are interested people to know that they are not Nazis or proNazis, would be a fertile source for public support.170
As far as the studio was concerned, the assignment was to get coverage on the
news pages, and not only in the pages dedicated to the movies in the local press. The
粸¢
studio provided an editorial under the title The Hitlerian Mushroom, which described the
scope of the Nazi espionage penetration in the US,and the efforts of the FBI to stop it.
It praised Warner Bros for their courage to expose this threat in their new film.171
The leader of the German-American bond managed in his demand to prevent the
distribution of the film in the US, and Germany cast a prohibition of screening any film
that in its production any of the actors and other functionaries of this film would
participate. The film made a big noise, especially in light of the fact that the movie
industry followed closely after what was going on as an experiment, and the mixed
reaction led most of the studios to delay and not relate themselves to such
controversial projects. They preferred to ignore the Nazis, as they were afraid to lose
the important European market, that is the main reason was economic rather than
political.
170
John Nicholas Cull (1995). Selling war: The British propaganda campaign against America "Neutrality"
In world war2, oxford up.
171
Rostron, pp. 88-89.
116
4.3 The Mortal Storm, Beast of Berlin, The Great Dictator – Good Germans
and Bad Nazis
MGM released its first indictment of Nazism, The Mortal Storm, in June 1940.
The film with the stars Robert Yang and Jimmy Stewart, described the chaos and
suffering Nazism has brought to the family of a loved professor in a small university
town in Germany. The plot takes place in 1933 in a small German university town near
the Alps. There is the family of a liberal professor, Victor Roth. Roth conducts quiet and
satisfying life with his wife Emily, his son Ruddy, his daughter Peria, and his step sons
Otto and Erich. He is admired by his students. Hitler's coming to power influences their
lives unexpectedly. It is soon found out that the professor's origin is not Arian (Jewish,
of course) leads to his excommunication. Two of the professor's students, Fritz and
Martin both court Peria and want to marry her. But Martin, who is active in resisting the
Nazis, has to run away to Austria, while Peria is bothered by Fritz's membership in a
pro-fascist group. Professor Roth rejects in his lectures Hitller's racial theory and loses
his position. The enthusiasm of the students from the national socialism ideas reach the
two step sons of the professor as well. They leave the house in order to join the service
of the Brown Shirts. His daughter's fiancé, and one of his closest students becomes also
粸¢
an active Nazi, and the split family remains isolated in the hostile town. Eventually the
professor is taken to a concentration camp, and only one courageous student, (Jimmy
Stewart) rebels against the regime and tries to help the daughter who remains all by
herself in Germany. In spite of the blossoming love, the student's attempt fails and the
film ends tragically. While Emily and Ruddy join Peria when she tries to escape to
Martin's new house in Austria, they find themselves persecuted by Otto and Erich, who
are now members in the Hiitler youth.
The film condemned Nazism aggressively, and even stated Hitler's name, although
it kept in line with what was accustomed at that time when describing images of Jews
only as "non-Arians". Victor Sebil directed and produced the film, but decided not to
take the credit because he was not only British, but also a Jew. Sebil feared that his
involvement as a Jew would make things easier for the isolationists to label the film as
an intervention militaristic propaganda, although in 1940 not many Americans were
interested in problems of tyranny or race. On the other hand, the values of the family
were considered as superior and any hurt of these values were perceived as violation of
117
the good order. When a film that was based on a novel titled Goose Steps by Sheppard
Traube was produced, there arose a controversial about it. The gala screening of the
film was supposed to take place in October, under the title Hitler – The Beast from
Berlin, but it was met by resistance on the part of the production code and censorship
committees in New York, New Jersey, Virginia and Chicago. After the title was changed
to The Beast from Berlin, and the insulting remark of a Nazi officer about President
Roosevelt, the film came out to the screens in New York at the end of November. The
film was opened by a title that it does not reflect any prejudice or hatred toward any
person, group or nation. The film was produced by Producers Distributing Corporation,
which were later known as PRC, takes place in Germany and deals with a dedicated
group of anti-Nazis, who distribute propaganda literature. Leaders of the group are
Roland Dru and his wife Stefi Donna. After a horrible period in a concentration camp,
the hero is smuggled to Switzerland in order to continue their work in the free world.
This short film is one of the first American films that described Nazi Germany as the
kingdom of evil, describing explicitly the horrors that were done by the Gestapo and in
the concentration camps. The bundists in the US conducted a struggle for the
excommunication of the film.
粸¢
The Beast from Berlin is better than other films in the same line which were done
later in Hollywood. It ignores the production code, which continued with the isolationist
approach of the big studios and the US government.
Another example was one of the most popular films of that year in the US, Charlie
Chaplin's film The Great Dictator (1940). When Chaplin announced for the first time
in 1939 about his plans to make The Great Dictator, the US government pressed him to
give up the idea, since he would just make Hitler rebel.172 But Chaplin insisted. In 1939,
the US maintained its neutrality, there were negative responses on the film from the
administration, and the production code refused to give a license and an approval for
the production, so Chaplin had to produce the film on his own expense. Hitler's image
bothered Chaplin and he chose to attack it through a comedy. Afterwards, when the
atrocity was found out, Chaplin claimed that had he known how awful were the crimes,
he would have done quite another film, not so comic. But in the course of time it seems
that the way in which Chaplin attacked Nazism was the most effective, since he
172
Robert Cole, (June 2001). "Anglo – American Anti-Fascist Film Propaganda in a Time of Neutrality:
The Great Dictator 1940' ", Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, 21. pp. 137-52.
118
exposed the absurd and the madness of Nazism and fascism. The symbolic
representation he created constructed a very identified parallel world in which Germany
is Tomania, Italy is Bacteria, Hitler is Hinkel and Mussolini is Napolini. He even did not
miss the opportunity to deal with the other figures. Marshal Goering he called Herring,
and Goebbels he made into Garbage.
The film is composed of two parallel stories: Hinkel's story, the leader of the
totalitarian country, and the figure of the Jewish barber, who is identical in his
appearance to Hinkel. Both roles were played by Chaplin.
The film opens on the last day of WWI, November 11, 1918, in the west front in
the state of Tomania in the period between the two world wars. The party of Adenoid
Hinkel, a distortion of Adolf Hitler and the word paranoid, comes into power. The Hinkel
speaks in his first speech about democracy and freedom as stinking things, freedom of
speech is described as corrupting and Jews as monsters that one should beware of. The
film toggles from the mansion of the tyrant to the alleys of the Jewish ghetto and its
persecuted inhabitants. The Jews in Tomania suffer from the heavy hand of the brutal
and cruel SS of Hinkel. The Jewish barber comes home from his barber shop in the
ghetto after years of hospitalization due to a loss of memory in WWI, in which he
粸¢
fought as a tomanian soldier. He was not aware of all the changes that have occurred
in Tomania while he was absent. When he tried to protest that the word "Jew" was
written on his shop window, he found himself about to be hanged in the middle of the
street by the SS groups. He was saved from this matter when Colonel Schultz passed
there by accident, and identified the barber as the one had saved him in the war. He
scolds the soldiers and commands them not to bother the Jews in the ghetto. The quiet
situation is maintained until Hinkel commands to arrest Schultz for saying that Hinkel's
goal would fail because it is based on the persecution of innocent people. The situation
in the ghetto returns to be hard, Schultz escapes to the ghetto, gets caught with the
barber and they both are imprisoned in a concentration camp. Hinkel the tyrant rules
his kingdom with an iron fist. As part of his plan to rule the world, he is about to invade
to pastoral Austerlitz (Austria) that borders with Tomania. Schultz and the barber
manage to run away from prison as they are disguised to Tomanian soldiers, and their
plan is to cross the border to Austerlitz and to freedom (they are not aware of the
invasion). Due to the similarity between Hinkel and the barber, the Tomanian officers
119
think that he is Hinkel, and so Hinkel and the barber, the pacifist Jew, leads the
invasion, while the real Hinkel is imprisoned by mistake in one of the camps he had
built. At the end of the film Chaplin gives a speech in his own name. He condemned the
greediness that fills the world with hatred. He emphasizes the freedom of freedom,
equality and assistance to every person. There is enough room in the world for
everyone to live quietly and peacefully. The hope for good will always prevail. Chaplin
emphasizes the humiliating attitude the Jews received in Germany, and at the same
time, he speaks about a world in which all people of all beliefs will live together. In this
speech Chaplin exposed his harsh criticism of Germany, the Nazi regime and its leader,
Adolf Hitler.
The film ends with a photograph of Hanna, the barber's girlfriend (and Chaplin's
wife at that time, the actress Paulette Goddard) laughing and looking upward to the sky
with a hope to a better world.173
The Great Dictator was screened for the first time before an enthusiastic audience
in New York in October 15, 1940. It was after the surrender of Europe to Hitler, when
England stood all alone in the battle. The US was still "neutral" and the USSR was still
the tyrant's "friend" due to Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact. Chaplin did not give in to the
粸¢
economic and political dictates and created The Great Dictator contrary to the formal
and cultural stand of Hollywood, and his voice was almost single.
He could have done it because he himself was the greatest star in history and the
most known image of the eternal wanderer, and because he was independent,
cosmopolitan and rich enough not to depend on the mechanisms of distribution. His
Jewish image was not real. He identifies with the suffering of the Jews but he was not a
Jew. If he had been a Jew, it is reasonable that he would have withstood the heavy
pressure from the Jewish communities which feared of the strengthening of antiSemitism and from the attacks of Nazis. Chaplin gave a speech on January 1st, 1939, in
which he warned of the extermination of the Jewish race in Europe.174
In certain places in the US the screening of the film was prohibited. Chaplin was
slandered in the press and received threats for his life, and even warnings from the
American intelligence agencies. All this happened, of course, before Pearl harbor, and
173
See Cahplin's testimony about the production the film in his book: Charles Chaplin. (New York ,1966).
My Autobiography, Pocket Books. pp. 424-440.
174
Ibidem.
120
before America joined the war in December 1941. When it did, The Great Dictator has
become the best and most successful film of America.
4.4 The Coldness, the lack of sentiment and treachery of the Nazis as the
rationale for America's intervention
The call for intervention continues in the films All Through the Night and
Casablanca. All Through the Night (1941) deals with American patriotism, which to
neighborhood conflicting gangs to join one another in order to win a Nazi underground.
The film describes the danger of a fifth column and dormant cells of saboteurs in
America.
Humphrey Bogart plays Globes Donahew, a rough New Yorker gambler, but
basically honest. The plot is in Damon Runyon's rough style. Globes tries to find out
what detains the daily delivery of cheese cakes to his favorite restaurant. When he
visits the bakery, he comes across a Nazi espionage network, the brains behind it is the
Jewish-German exile actor, Konrad Veidt. A night club singer, Karen Warn, whose
loyalty is dubious in the first scenes, is involved in this, but it is found out that she is a
real patriot, not less than Globes. Through a combination of resourcefulness and quick
fists Globes and his friends impede the intentions of the Nazis before they manage to
粸¢
escape from the country. In a fascinating scene, Bogart confuses a group of educated
Nazis in a Manhattan quick slang. The film describes the subversive methods of the
Nazis in the US and called for intervention.
Unlike the warm relationships among the Americans, the relationships among the
Germans are characterized by coolness and lack of emotion. The dialog among them
deal only with the job they have to carry out.
In one important scenes, Mr. Ebing, the head of the network, tell Mrs. De
Hamilton in the camouflaged headquarters (an antics shop) the following words: "While
this perfect people gets armed for protection, we will sow a deeper confusion and
dissatisfaction. Have you ever seen these American faces when they read the titles of
the papers? We have divided them into small groups already, and unconsciously they
do the work for us. Within a year, maybe less, they will get orders from us." The scene
goes on when Globes enters the room. In a conversation between Globes and Ebing,
who tries to convince Globes to cooperate:
121
Ebing: "It's a pity, Mr. Donahew that we be hostile to one another. We have a lot in
common.
Globes: "Yes? how come?"
Ebing: "You're a man of action, you take what you want, and so are we. You don't have
any respect for democracy and we neither. Clearly we have to be allies."
German society is represented as a close society without any emotional elements.
According to this representation, what motivates the German society is the will of the
Fuhrer and the application of the race theory all over the world. Therefore the
"German" threatens, and this threat is closer than ever. On the other hand, in the
American society everyman can express his opinion in any way he chooses. The thing
that shows more than any other thing the American solidarity is the recruitment of all
the gangs to work together, unlike regular times, for the benefit of the national goal of
saving America from the German fifth column. The film calls the US to intervene in
what goes on in Europe against the Axis countries.
In Casablanca, which was screened in 1942, but was produced during 1941' prior
to America's entering the war, the central message was encouraging intervention175
that can be seen in additional shootings of changing endings until the known ending in
粸¢
which there is an obvious encouragement to get out of indifference and intervene for
the sake of justice.
The plot describes Rick Bline (Bogart), an American freedom fighter who stayed in
Paris, who has become tired of the world and was hurt by a broken heart to a woman
who had not ran away with him from France, Elsa (Ingrid Bergman). Now he runs a
night club, he is cynical with no illusions in Casablanca of WWII. In spite of the
pressure of the local authorities, mainly Captain Renault, who serves the Nazi
occupation, Rick's café has become a shelter for refugees who want to acquire illegal
passports, which would enable them escape to America. To his surprise, one day there
come to him the famous rebel Victor Laslo and his wife Elsa. It is found out that Elsa
had been married to Laslo before she got to know Rick, and thought he was dead in a
concentration camp, but on the night of the escape he appears from nowhere, and she,
175
The script was written in 1940' when there struggled two trends in the US: whether to intervene in
the war that goes on in Europe or keep isolationism. Howard Coch, the scriptwriter, testifies that he
planted in Bogart's mouth ambiguous sentences in order to picture the political intrigues in the US of
1941. The film was shot during 1941-1942 and came out to the screens in 28.11.1942, almost a year
after the US entered WWII.
122
in spite of her love to Rick, returned to her husband. She still wants that Victor would
run away to America, but now, upon the revival of her love to Rick, she wants to stay
with him in Casablanca. "You have to think for both of us," she tells Rick, and so he
does. Rick decides that Elsa would stay with her husband because "we will always have
Paris." Rick, who has been indifferent, becomes active against the Nazi occupation and
even brings Captain Renault to his side.
The film was made in the period between the restraint and the intervention
policies. It is based on a play that had been written by Murray Barnett and Joan Elison.
Barnett travelled with his wife in 1938 to Brussels in order to help a relative to leave
Belgium. Then they travelled to Vienna, where they witnessed the entrance of Hitler to
the Austrian capital (the Anschluss, the annexation of Austria to Germany). In France he
visited a night club, which gave him the inspiration to describe Rick's night club.176
His hero sacrifices what is dearest for him, Elsa, his love, because of his commitment to
the cause, to ideals. The film starts and ends with the American hymn. America is the
symbol of freedom, hope is there, and this is the dream. Rick's club is a microcosmos of
the American society and of its coalitions, including a Russian, a German refugee and a
black man. There will to show that the Americans accept all people and all races, versus
粸¢
the conquering Germans who divide people according to their race. In a similar way,
the process the hero of Casablanca goes through is parallel to the process America has
gone through. Upon the outburst of WWII, in September 1939, the US stood for
isolationism, and only after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in 7.12.1941 and
Hitler's declaration of war, did it come out of its indifference and joined the battles.
Certain American critics raised an interesting interpretation according to which Rick
is Roosevelt, who swings between isolationism and intervention in the Allies struggle
against the Axis countries. This claim is based on quotations from the film and its title,
Casablanca, which in Spanish means the White House. Rick lives in the White House.177
Rick, or Roosevelt, keeps his fundamental neutrality and repeats his declaration that
"he would not risk his head for anyone." The local police inspector answers him: "this is
an intelligent policy." He argues with the German major, saying that "your business is
my politics – running a saloon." The famous ending sentence of the film testifies more
than anything of the change in the American foreign policy at that time. "I think that
176
177
Howard Koch, (New York, 1942). Casablanca: Script and legend. pp. 17-27.
Renan Shor (1974). Casablanca: The myth and the ritual, Maariv.
123
this is the beginning of a wonderful friendship," between Rick the American and Renault
the Frenchman, that is, friendship between the US and its allies. Hollywood seems here
as an agent of the lobby that supports intervention, but it is careful not to go out
against the administration.
The conquest of France brought about the big change at the end of 1940. Along
years of not taking a stand during 1933-1941, the studios changed the nature of their
marketing systems in order to adjust them to the messages of the films they marketed
in the new era. The marketing promotion materials stopped showing a neutral face, and
did not ask any more to hide the prevailing anti-German tendency that has been
reflected in the films from 1941 onward. Isolationist senators who were shocked by the
dramatic change in the approach of the studios, convened the heads of the studios to
Washington in September 1941 (three months before Pearl Harbor) to have them
testify before the sub-committee for investigating the movies under the accusation that
it served a pro-British, anti-Nazi propaganda which sided with intervention.178 The
studios was determines and came out unharmed from the confrontation.
The sales promotion systems of the anti-fascist films foresaw the criticism and tried
to deviate it by making the explicit denials of being one-sided a decisive part of the
粸¢
advertisement.
4.5 A thematic discussion of the various representations
From the outburst of WWII until America's entering the war, the isolationism
trend prevailed in the administration. The films that presented Germans created a split
representation of Nazis and other Germans according to a few categories:
1. Historical Figures. The representation was done indirectly, like in Chaplin's film The
Great Dictator, as the names of the characters represented a gallery of figures of
the Nazi regime through the use of metonymic names. A direct representation for
historical figures is quite rare, and when it does appear, it takes the nature of a
caricature.
2. Ideological Nazis. This representation is basically negative and strengthens the
existing stereotype of the Hun and the barbaric German. This representation was
created as a result of the anti-German (Prussian) propaganda that was conducted
in the US during WWI by Creel Committee and led to anti-German perceptions all
178
Larry Ceplair and Steven England, (Berkeley, 1979). The Inquisition in Hollywood: Politics in the Film
Community: 1930-1960, pp. 158-161.
124
over the US (in films like Underground (1941), The Man I Married (1940) and The
Kaiser – The Beast from Berlin (1918). 179
3. Representations of professional soldiers and other Germans who are not Nazis.
There is a positive German representation, or at least not negative one in part of
the films, like To Be or Not To Be.180
4. Representations of social classes in Germany. The upper classes and the nobility
are represented as the opponents of the regime, while the lower classes and
images of the masses are represented as supporters of Nazism. In WWII the
representations change: the upper classes and the nobility are represented as
functionaries of the regime, and the laborers are the opponents of the regime.
5. Representations of German women. One may say that the almost total absence of
women is outstanding.
The gallery of images of the Nazi leadership was described as an ensemble of
caricatures. Hitler's ecstatic speeches and Goebbels' screams presented the leadership
as crazy and hysterical. The hedonism and greed of the Minister of Aviation, Herman
Goering, whose fat appearance represented the beastiality and barbarism of the Nazi
leadership, were repetitive motives of personal representations in films like The Great
粸¢
Dictator, Hitler – The Beast from Berlin, and Hitler's Children, although the production
code prohibited it. The film Confession of a Nazi Spy from 1939, which was a hit and a
box-office busting, ignited a polemic beyond all expectations and aroused a counterattack of the German diplomacy that managed to bring about the excommunication of
the film in about twenty countries,181 especially in light of presenting Joseph Goebbels
(with the actor Martin Kosleck), the Minister of Propaganda of the Third Reich as a cruel
Nazi, a despicable person and a hooligan.182 This negative representation irritated many
pro-Nazis in America and Nazis in Germany. The personal representation in the time
prior to the intervention were very rare due to the production code that determined
that no personal damage of a well known personality of any nationality or minority
would be permitted, including the Germans, of course.
179
Underground. Director: Vincent Sherman. USA, 1941.
The Kaiser - the Beast of Berlin. Director: and Produced by Rupert Julian. USA, 1918.
180
To Be or Not to Be. Director/producer/screen story: Ernst Lubitsch. USA, 1942.
181
Robin T. p. 111.
182
One of Kosleck most remembered performances was also his role as Goebbels in the film Hitler's Gang
(1944).
125
In the film Confession of a Nazi Spy, the Nazis overtake the students' association
before they overtake Germany. In one of the central scenes the Nazi students go wild
and hurt severely a defenseless old man who would not join them in singing their
hymn. This is the first significant representation of Nazism as a totalitarian chauvinistic
belief that its fanaticism endangers whoever confronts it.
In The Great Dictator, the emblem of Hinkel's (Hitler) kingdom Tomania
(Germany) is the double cross, which is actually a swastika, that is, treachery. From the
center of the cross the sun beams go out to all directions, like the double cross which
beams on all the world on the one hand, and all the roads lead to it, on the other.
In marketing Hitler – The Beast from Berlin, PDC renounced from any open
intention of propaganda, versus the more sensational approach that was taken in the
marketing of the Confession of a Nazi Spy. The instruction marketing booklet for The
Beast from Berlin contained an outstanding combination of material that called for an
aggressive exploitation of anti-Nazi feelings, and at the same time denied that the film
took a stand for or against Nazism. The posters and advertisement announcements
which have been prepared for the film contained horrible pictures of threatening
Gestapo officers standing above bleeding and beaten prisoners. The booklet also
粸¢
suggested that every movie theater would hire a young strong man with Teutonic
features, dress him with the uniform of the SS and a swastika on his sleeve, and
position him at the front of the movie theater to open the doors of cars and attract
attention.183 Finally, the booklet claimed that no lobby of a movie theater would be
complete without a "torture cell" of a concentration camp, which would be designed by
a local carpenter in accordance with those presented in the film, illustrating the brutality
of Hitler's Gestapo and at the same time would halt the people who look for
entertainment. The critics regarded The Beasts from Berlin as an artistic failure, but a
propagandist success.184 It was not deterred from dealing with an issue that no
American studio dared to touch,185 and therefore was perceived as one of the most
daring films of this decade.
183
184
185
The above mentioned advertising booklets are available in microfilm in the public library for the arts of
the stage and the movie in New York under the number Zan-T8.
Bosley Crowther, New York Times, Nov. 20, 1939: 15.
Rosenzweig Sidney, ,(1982). "Casablanca and other Major Films of Michael Curtiz", Studies in Cinema:
History of Art, The University of Michigan,Nr. 141. pp. 11, 77-108.
126
The film All Through the Night from 1941 deals with American patriotism. In this
case it makes neighborhood gangs which are fighting each other to join together. It
shows also the organization of Nazi Germany in everything that refers to espionage
networks and dormant spies, who are supposed to act upon call. The main figures
present a simple image of character traits that indicate Nazism. For instance, Ebing,
who is in charge of the espionage network, is cool, violent and cruel, totally loyal to the
orders that come from Berlin and hates everything that is not German, and primarily
the US. He does not hesitate to kill the closest people if they did not fulfill his orders.
He is determined to execute the bombing in the American war ship at all costs.
Peppy, Ebing's close assistant, carries out all the liquidations without doubting his
leader, and he kills enemies from without as well as from within. At day time he escorts
de Hamilton at the piano and at night he murders.
In Casablanca the main German figure is Major Strasser, who appears all the
time with pedantic appearance. He always arrives at places with formality with soldiers
and assistants who attend on him all the time. Major Strasser is businesslike and
completely loyal to the Third Reich without deviating an inch. He is practical, witty, selfconfident and a provocateur. He will stop at nothing to reach his goal. Strasser
粸¢
represents the ideological German. He is proud and humorless, but he is represented as
entertaining and comic. In later films, this comic nature will not be attributed to the
Germans. Inspite of his grotesque description, he is determined to win and is convinced
he would win at all costs. This is how Renault presents him: "He is one of the reasons
of the reputation the Third Reich has today."
In Casablanca the Germans are represented as those who would come to the
prestigious entertainment places, sit in the best chairs and order the best food and
drinks (champaign and caviar.) All the German figures in the film remain emotionally
flat. None of them does not experience any emotional moment, and throughout the film
the German conduct is matter of fact like.
According to Corliss, Strasser is a "prosaic war scientist – a German version of
Renault," that is, a professional soldier.186 When STrasser asked Renault: "on whose
side are you?" Renault answers: "I go with the wind, and this moment the wind comes
from Vichy." But at the end of the film Renault is changed, and betrays the German's
186
Ibidem,p.86.
127
confidence, and joins rich the American. That is, the Frenchman can change for the
better, but the German remains German. The thinking dogmatism is one of the
characteristics of the German soldier in his Hollywood representation. There is no
difference between the professional soldiers and the ideological Nazis.
Alongside the Nazi leaders and their loyal soldiers, the films dealt also with Germans of
the relatively low class and their attitude towards Nazism
Hogart in Casablanca is played by Peter Lorre, a Hungarian Jew who succeeded
in the movie industry in Weimarian Germany. Hogart is a small crook, a German and
probably a homosexual. He murdered two German couriers and stole the passports they
carried. His image represents the German as a pervert, at least according to the nonpolitically correct perceptions of that time. He asks Rick, the owner of Café American to
keep the documents until he sells them but Captain Claud Renault the head of police,
arrests him. Hugart is a German refugee who is presented as a dubious character, and
difficult to trust.
The upper class and the educated people consisted another group that was dealt in the
Hollywoodian films
The Beasts from Berlin was the first American film that described life in Germany
粸¢
under the Nazi regime. The plot dealt with a young intellectual couple (Roland Dru and
his wife Stefi Donna) who joined an underground group that distributed anti-Nazi
propaganda literature. The film shows explicitly horror actions that were done on the
underground heroes who were discovered by the Gestapo and were sent to a
concentration camp.
In Casablanca, like in The Mortal Storm, there is an educated Jewish figure. Karl,
the main waiter in the café is a Jewish professor, who had run away from Germany,
and he represents the humanitarian aspect. The conclusion is that without the Jews,
the Germans remain barbaric and inhuman. The German culture is presented as a
Jewish hegemony, without which the German nature is barbaric. The nobility received a
similar attitude. Victor Laslo is the leadler of the Czeck underground. Although he is not
German, it is clear that he represents the image of the other German, the noble
German. He is a Czeck because Hollywood could not bring a complete positive German
representation at that time. Laslo is a man of culture, noble, who represents the good
German. He had been in a concentration camp and escaped from it, and he continues
128
to fight against the Nazis all the time. He is a caring person, very sensitive to his wife,
would always believe and respect her. He players a double role. On the one hand he is
the agent of ambivalence in the erotic aspect, and the agent of clarity in the political
aspect. He is the nobleman versus the Nazi beast, and the culture agent versus
barbarism. The critic Richard Schickel sees Laslo as balanced by the image of Strasser
the German, who unlike the image of the Nazi in many films, eventually is not a sadist,
but an ideologist, but all the same, he is a fanatic man of action.187
As we see the different characterizations of varied groups in the German society, there
is an outstanding absence of a thorough discussion of the image of the German woman
and her roles in the national-socialist regime.
In the years of the Cold War Germany was represented by feminine images, since
it was a conquered and weakened country, in films like The Big Lift (1950), but in the
years of the war itself, before the American intervention and after wares, it was
represented mainly by masculine types. German women are not represented, or they
not completely German, like Hanna (Paulette Goddard) in The Great Dictator, who was
German, but also Jewish. Her identity as Jewish did not enable regarding her as a
regular German. One can say that in this first period, the feminine representation was
粸¢
actually absent, and it returned when America entered the war.
Conclusions of chapter four
The German representation between 1939-1941 and the extent of linkage between
this representation and the power relations between Hollywood and the administration.
The German representation in Hollywood had immediate and far reaching implications
on the political and cultural developments in the US, Britain and other places in the
Western world, which consumed Hollywood's products. As a whole, the German
representation in Hollywood in these years had a negative implication, in spite of the
contrasts of interest and the pressure that was operated by different factors. At the
same time, Hollywood, which was mostly liberal and many of its managers were Jewish,
avoided from giving a constant and large expression to its perceptions against the
Nazis, due to the factors I have indicated:
187
Ibidem, p. 89.
129
1. The rising anti-Semitism in America that led to reducing the Jewish profile and
the anti-Nazi policy in Hollywood.
2. The economic interests that prevented from most of the studios, excluding
Warner and PDC, to attack Germany and risk in losing the European market that
was under German influence.
3. The internal production code that forbidden hurting personalities or Nation,
which was administered by Catholic rightist people (Breen).
When the auteurs could express their opinions, whether in a defying act, like
Chaplin, or with the instruction of the studio (Harry Warner), the German
representation was characterized by two trends of negative representation:
a. Comic representation.
b. Dramatic (threatening) representation.
In both cases Nazism was perceived as chaos and an enemy of democracy.
The American auteurs tended to be liberals and many of them came as immigrants
from Germany as ideological refugees or Jews who were angry about Germany for
making them abandon it.188
The German representations of directors like Lubitch, Lang and Billy Wilder tended
粸¢
to create a complicated profile of the Germans and give them human characteristics in
spite their grotesque nature. Other directors, like Michael Curtiz tended to represent the
Germans in a more one-dimensional way.
So, one can say that until the actual intervention, Hollywood and the
administration through its mechanisms tended to moderate the negative German
representation. We can conclude this conclusion as there were produced only a small
number of anti-German films in this period (27).
When Hollywood did represent Germany, these representations expressed tension
and anger towards Germany that led to most negative representations, and this was
only the peak of the iceberg in comparison with what would come after Pearl Harbor up
to the Cold War. Between the years 1939-1941 27 anti-Nazi films were produced, 12 of
188
The policy of the Nazi propaganda minister, Goebbels, who tried to recruit the artists to the service of
the regime did not fall in line with their opinions, and therefore they had to abandon Germany
unwillingly. A few sources, autobiographies and interviews related to this subject. See: Zeev Rav-Nof,
Big Screen: Great auteurs and their films, Jerusalem, Ketter, 1982; Danny Muga, 100 example films
that we loved so much, Tel Aviv, Mappa, 2003. And:
Axle Madsen, (1983). Billy Wilder, Indiana-University Press, Bloomington and London, 1969 : David
Welch, Propaganda and the German Cinema 1933-1945. Oxford,Oxford university press.
130
them in 1941. In the second period there were produced more than 300 anti-Nazi
films.189
Inconsistency and contradiction characterized the response of the American movie
industry to the war in Europe and fascism until 1941. The power relations of Hollywood
and the administration and its foreign policy were complicated. Hollywood was not a
monolithic entity, and its reactions to pressures were varied, though generally tended to
fall in line with the policy of the administration.
粸¢
189
A number of sources referred to the number of films that were produced in the different periods:
Shull and Wilt, Hollywood War Films, 1937-1945, p. 51, 144. And Garth Jowett, Film: the Democratic
Art, Little, Brown and Company - Boston - Toronto, 1976, p. 318. and Clayton R. Koppes & Gregory D.
Black. Hollywood Goes to War: Patriotism, Movies and Second World War, London, New York, 2000.
p. 290.
131
Chapter Five
Representations of Germany and the Germans Nature In Hollywood During
The War and until the beginning of the Cold War: from isolationism to
intervention in WWII 1942-1946
I this chapter I have analyzed the change of tendency in the representation of
Germans and Nazis in the American films following America's entrance to the war in the
years 1942-1946 as a function of the relationship between Hollywood and the American
administration, and the goals of the American foreign policy in the harsh years of
WWII.
I have examined this representation through a number of films, and will try to see
whether there are nuances, i.e., whether the film makers in Hollywood distinguished
between different types of Germans, whether Hollywood accused all Germans or just
Nazis.
I also examined to what extent, if at all, Hollywood served the goals of the
American administration. I will start with a short historical background, and then survey
part of the main films of the period under discussion, aiming to find out what is the
background in which they were made and how were they accepted by the public and
蛐¢
the critics.
5.1 Historical background and a films' survey
December 7th, 1941 changed many things in America. First and foremost, it hit the
American complacency and its feel of superiority. The nation prepared itself for war,
and so did Hollywood. The number of anti-fascist films increased a lot, and one could
state openly that Hitler was crazy or psychotic (Hitler's Children, 1942).
As America entered the war, upon the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the
restrictions Hollywood put upon itself became loose, and there came a big wave of antiNazi films. In the same way as the Manhattan Project benefited from receiving refugee
scientists, like Albert Einstein, and contributed to the manufacturing of the atomic
bomb, many talented European exiles contributed to the establishment of a qualitative
film industry, which helped in convincing the public opinion in favor of the war, and also
distributed abroad the American point of view regarding the reasons to fight the
Germans. As will be shown, there are many characters in the films who give speeches
132
in this direction (Hitler's Children – an education to death 1942, This land is mine 1943,
and others).
5.2 Demonization of the Nazi enemy and the terror regime in Germany and
Europe
Nazism was presented in many films as a phenomenon taken from the criminal
world. Many characters are described as criminals, like the very title of the film Hitler's
Gang (1944) made by John Farrow. The director Fritz Lang, who was one of the most
important directors in Germany, was the German ultimate director. At the time of the
silent movie he had made films, which referred almost prophetically to the German
longing to a strong leader and the rule of the masses. Land, who was Jewish, was
married to the playwright Thea Von Harbou, who separated from her husband when
the Nazis came into power and became a loyal Nazi herself. Lang was offered to be the
chairman of the German films industry (UFA - Universum Film Aktien Gesellschaft), but
he escaped to France and from there to America. In his early films, Lang dealt with the
fear that the criminal world would take over the public order, like in the series of Sr.
Mabuse from the twenties, and his first talking film, which is considered until today one
of the best films ever made – "M" (the murderer among us) from 1931. The idea of this
粸¢
film, as Lang said in an interview with the director William Friedkin in 1968190 was to
make a film against capital punishment. The crime had to be one that everyone would
agree that it was the worst kind of crime, and there was a murder and serial raping of
little girls. The murderer was played by the Jewish-Hungarian actor Peter Lorre, who
also immigrated to the US in a later stage. "M" describes a parallel world, which also
chases the murderer, and it also has a popular legal system that actually predicts the
Nazi legal system. In his later film, Hangmen also die (1943), Lang used characters who
reminded the criminal world of "M", like the character of the professional investigator
Gruber, who conducted the investigation on behalf of the Gestapo, as a classic figure of
the worst of criminals. Gruber is definitely not an ideological Nazi. He is conscienceless
and cruel, but first of all he is a professional. He conducts the investigation with his
sharp senses and almost traps the villains. Gruber's figure represents the criminal world
and its coalition with the Nazis. The Nazi investigator of the Gestapo, who is a sadist,
and his behavior testifies of a kind of a sexual perversion, cooperates with Gruber.
190
“M” DVD. The Criterion Collection.
133
I would like to examine the background of the film. It was a co-production of
immigrants and Nazi enemies. Bertold Brecht wrote the script, and the main character
was played by the Jewish actor Brian Donlevy. The world of this film is a gloomy and
threatening one. In this film, like in the films This land is mine by Jean Renoir, and even
the Seventh Cross by Fred Zinnemann (in which the conquered population is actually
German, That is to say that Hollywood did not accuse the whole German people, but
the Nazism as a unique phenomenon), there was a suppressed population with an
active underground. How exactly do the films express the attitude of formal America
towards Nazi Germany. Washington's position was that one had to stop the German
people' support of its leadership, and encourage underground movements all over
Europe, including Germany itself. The film Hitler's Children by Edward Dmytrik, 1943,
did not use comedy, but stayed close to the description of the horrors. It described the
Germans' education and oppression methods and their cruelty. The director
demonstrated the Nazi danger through one of the most extreme paranoia, which was
connected with the barbarity of the conqueror – the raping of women. Nothing shocked
the Americans more than the thought of raping of their daughters. This has always
been the way Germans were presented, as killing and raping, and it was a continuation
粸¢
of the descriptions from WWI, when the Germans were referred to as the Huns.
The film Hitler's Children opens with a speech by Dr. Smidt (Arford Gaj) about
Hitler's merits, and it ends with an oath of loyalty to the Fuhrer:
"Our noble leader, should he live forever, we say the battle shout, for Hitler we will live
and for him we will die. Boys, this is the sacred hour of the sun festival… at this hour
the earth is closest to the sun, sanctifying itself to the sun, we have only one thought.
We also have to be close to our sun, to dedicate our lives to it. And the sun that rises
for us is Adolf Hitler. Hitler is the sun of new Europe. [The boys rehearsed the loyalty
oath to Hitler]:
191
•
I devote my life to Hitler.
•
I would give my life to Hitler.
•
I would die for Hitler.
•
My savior, my Fuhrer."191
Taken from the film: I devote my life to Hitler, I would give my life to Hitler, I would die for Hitler. My
Savior My Fuhrer.
134
The film Hitler's Children was an independent production, which became famous
due to the great profit it brought to the investors. Eduard Golden paid $10,000 for the
filming rights of Gregor Zimmer's book, Education to Death, and received $75,000 from
the bank in order to finance the production. Unfortunately, the bank's board of directors
objected to their executive's entrance to the show business, as they put it, and they did
not confirm to invest the sums which have not been invested yet. Then Golden turned
to the RKO, who agreed to complete the missing financing for the film, and within two
months the production reached $5 million.
Edward Golden and the director, Edward Dmytryk found a successful formula of
making a film that yields profits. The contrast between explicit sadist scenes, at least
according to the criteria of 1943, and the moral disgust satisfied both hidden and so
hidden sadomasochistic tendencies of the public on the one hand, and the necessary
condemnation of the censorship. As the film gained more and more success, both
financially and from the critique, the press did not hesitate to praise it. There is a scene
in which Mrs. Bonita Grenville, an American girl who was born in Germany, but grew up
in the US with the democratic values of the American culture, is being beaten, naked
and in public, by Nazi officers because she refuses to submit to their obscene proposals.
粸¢
At the same time the American public started to be aware of horrible reports of
castration methods and other unheard of methods used by the Nazis of training
youngsters who wanted to join the Hitler youth movement. The film exposes the Nazi
racism in every scene, the megalomania, the expansion aspirations and the new demon
that was growing among the brain-washed Hitler youth. Dr. Smidt starts his speech, in
which he explains the students the racist masters' theory. It is important to quote from
this speech, since it presents the Nazi ideology to the American public:
"We have to observe, boys, and remember. We have to let this humiliation
burn deep in our memory. Germany was robbed in Versailles Agreement by its
enemies. It was robbed of land which has always been and will always be
German sacred land. But there will come a day, when our forces will liberate
this sacred land for us, every centimeter of it and even more, much more.
Today we rule over Germany, and tomorrow we will rule the world. We will
rule because our wonderful mission is to rule. We will conquer because no
nation will withstand our justified anger. We have not chosen to rule, we have
135
not voted for it, it is our natural right to rule. It is permanent and
unchangeable, like the fact that the lion in the jungle rules due to its courage,
power, heritage… The Germans are above the riffraff of the inferior races. We
will revenge, revenge, revenge! And if we would we be good soldiers, we will
gains the highest reward. And what is the reward, Karl, one of his a student
asks. And he answers: We will gain the real glory like the knights of the past.
We will die for Germany; we will rest forever on the sacred German land like
the hero conquerors of the Fuhrer. To die for Hitler means to live for the sake
of Germany. Heil Hitler! We are the new Germany and we will bring a new
order to the world, and the new order is growing, and the flames of freedom
are fading. There is fear everywhere, an awful anxiety that froze people to
their place."192
The process of building the new Germany is accompanied by a brain-washed
racism, fear and horror, castration of women, and so on. Can we stop the children of
Hitler before it would be too late, asks the film. Will the light always overcome darkness,
asks Prof. Nicholas, the principal of the American school in Germany (Kenneth Smith,
who is also the narrator), in a conversation between himself and Colonel Heinekel (Otto
蛐¢
Kruger). Colonel Heinekel's response exposes the view that is in the basis of the Nazi
horror:
"The sick women who are unsuitable to bring up children go through castration
in order to build the new, strong Germany. In the new Germany there is no
room for the weak, the sick, and the unstable." Prof. Nicholas answers: "These
are barbaric methods and you are barbaric, even the Oxford graduates of you,
and Hitler, Goering, Goebbels and all the others are wrong. And he finishes in
a statement: there is no one who can stop the crazy."193
The process of constructing new Germany repeats itself in the film Hangmen
also die (1943), where the authors reveal their opinion about the Nazi conquest
through the story of the assassination of Reinhart Heidrich, the head of the SD, the
security service of the SS194. The character of Heidrich shows all the demonic and
grotesque of Nazism. In reality, the response to the assassination was the total
192
Taken from the film Hitler's Children, by Edward Dmytrik from 1943.
Ibidem.
194
Sicherheitsdienst.
193
136
destruction of the Czech village of Lidice. In fact, Lang and Brecht had produced a
reliable description of the draconian method of hostages that was used by the Nazis
before the Nazi response action became known. The Nazis used to kidnap the senior
members of the community, the educated and the leaders, and assassinated them,
either until the people they wanted were handed over, or just for terrorizing the
population. This threatening and depressing description of life under a regime of terror
expressed the American commitment to fight the Nazis.
The film opens with a title describing the situation in conquered Prague, with a
dramatic music, and a close-up of the swastika and Hitler's portrait. Then it goes on
with a series of pastoral archive photographs of Prague and its famous palace, which
was the headquarters of Heidrich at that time. In the next scene Hitler's picture is
shown in a room full of Gestapo officers and cooperative Czech officers. This dramatic
build-up shows the atmosphere that Heidrich's figure represents: the protector of the
Reich, the cruel head of the Gestapo, the protectorate of Bohemia on behalf of the third
Reich, aggressive, provocateur, speaks only German, who brutally demands to be
respected. The opening scene of Heidrich lasts for a few minutes, reflecting the general
German behavior, and this motive motivates the whole plot. He imposes tension and
粸¢
horror even among the Nazis. In the next scene there is declaration of Heidrich's
entrance. A hushed silence came over the hall, and a dandy figure entered in a feminine
and violent gait (a hint to homosexuality or some other perversion). This opening brings
together all the German elements and shows the aggressive behavior of the Nazi
conquest in Prague.
A similar representation of Nazism appears in other films of this period, like
Hitler's Madman (1943) made by the director of melodramas Douglas Sirk195. The title
of the film refers also to Heidrich's figure, since he was known as the hangman
(Hangmen also die), and a crazy person (Hitler's Madman). Heidrich, who was, maybe,
the most extreme, radical and bloodthirsty figure in the SS, was together with Himler,
one of the architects of the final solution and the main coordinator who was in charge of
its execution. Operation Reinhard is called after him, and it was a code name for the six
extermination camps that operated since 1942 (Khelmno, Sobivor, Belzetz, Treblinka,
Meidanek and Birkenau). The punishment for eliminating the murderer was very cruel,
195
Whose German name was Datlav Sierk.
137
and it was described in the film. The Germans destroyed the Czech village of Lidice, kill
all the men, and take all women and children to concentration camps, and burn the
village.
Zinnemann contributed his part to the war effort with the film The Seventh Cross
(1944). This is a special case worth a special reference in the context we are interested
in, that is, the representation of the Germans. One of the great American stars, Spencer
Tracy, plays a German, whose character is one of decency, severity and directness –
values that America loves to identify itself with. But this is a German who escapes a
concentration camp, resists the regime. He goes around within hostile environment, but
there are still other, decent Germans. Tracy finds shelter at a house of a friend and his
family, played by Hume Cronyn and Jessica Tandy, who become slowly to be recruited
for the cause of the underground, due to the principle of decency and friendship. This
film actually gives credit to the German people, and presents it as another victim of
Nazism. Nazism is separated from the German nature altogether as is seen as a political
phenomenon that can come up anywhere (in America too). The time of the plot is
around 1936, although the movie was made in 1944. This is a strong and polished
drama. The melancholy of the film catches to a certain extent the claustrophobic
粸¢
atmosphere in society after the Nazis take power. The people of the regime – soldiers,
officers, Gestapo investigators, are presented as behaving like bloodthirsty cruel beasts.
They are not seen a lot, but their threatening spirit controls everything and everywhere.
The Seventh Cross singles out due to the fact that although it was made in 1944,
when the world started to learn about the Nazis' crimes, it was not a typical propaganda
film. The Germans are presented in it as at least as having a real potential not to be
brain-washed by Hitler's racist theory, and as warm, family-type people, who stands for
values that are very close to the American values. The fact that it was done by a Jewish
director, as an adaptation of a book by a Jewish author, the Jewish-German Anna
Seghers, only sharpened its radical stand. This kind of film could not have been made
without the support of the OWI-(Office of War Information), which was interested in
encouraging a coup in Germany, a coup that almost succeeded in July 20, 1944, in an
attempt to kill Hitler in his Wolf's Den by a group of generals (Kanaris, Weizleben, von
Staufenberg and others, including Rommel, who was later offered a rifle in order not to
damage the symbol he still represented for the German public). The intention of the
138
administration had been to shorten the conflict as much as possible by encouraging a
coup, and by so doing avoid the execution of the invasion to Europe, an operation that
had been in the drawer since 1942, and was executed eventually in June 1944.
The film uses an obvious Christian iconography. It tells the story of seven antifascist Germans who escape from a concentration camp. Only one out of the seven
manages not to be caught (Spencer Tracy), while the camp commander crucifies the
other on crosses which were prepared for this end in the camp. There cannot be a more
direct expression of self sacrifice, and as Jesus had been crucified in order to atone for
the wrongdoings of mankind, maybe the current people were crucified in order to atone
for the wrongdoings of the German people. The film gives the ordinary German people
the credit that perhaps they were not aware of the crimes being committed on behalf of
their name, as Tracy's friend, Cronyn, is not aware of it. Maybe one may understand
from the film the American preparations for the day after the war, when they would
have to work with the Germans to reconstruct Europe, since at that time it seemed that
it was only a matter of time until Germany would surrender, and the Russians were
drawing near from the east, and the invasion to Normandy was in a stage of
preparations. It seemed that the film suited the goals of the US in the war. The
粸¢
American policy wanted to emphasize that there was a nucleus of opponents to the
regime in Germany in order to transmit a message to the Americans towards the time
after the war. There was a sense of deceit. The narrator says that Germany is a nation
of "beasts", but there were still some good Germans, but they are too few. The picture
is that Germany is a sick nation, but not hopeless. A dialogue between George to
Polgrave, two fleeing prisoners, reflects the two approaches towards Germany at this
time:
"Polgrave, you know that all have been caught, except you and me? There are
only two of us. Our pictures appeared in the newspapers this morning. Have
you seen them? Yesterday there were three. This morning only two, and it
means that they have caught the school principal, and the farmer, and the
little Jew, the acrobat and Wallo.
George: Not Wallo. They could not have caught Wallo… you see.
Polgrave: If they are looking for us, it means that the others have been
caught. What interests me is that no one cares what happens to us. We are
139
not criminals, and still, no one cares. The world has changed, Hissler, you are
on your own. Come on, you should come with me. You can't do anything,
except running in circles until they catch you. It is better to give in. I'm giving
myself up to the Gestapo. This is the smartest thing to do.
George: Don't be a fool. They will hang you.
Polgrave: So what? It is not so bad to do away with it and that's it. Do you
love this life? Fight for what? Live for what? It is better to die and rot than see
the inhumanity between one person and the other. This is a world of evil,
Hissler, an awful world, godforsaken.
George: No, it's not true. Even in this despised Germany".196
One may see most of these films as an intensive dealing with the question
whether Western democracies can overcome the parade of the columns of the
hypnotizing and all-devouring Nazi dictatorship. Most of the films focused indeed on the
Nazis behavior. They emphasized their nauseating brutality and their sensual enjoyment
versus pain, misery and humiliation of human beings. Films like Hangmen also die, and
The Seventh Cross and others are full of negative and cruel characters that present the
nature of the evil of the Nazis. Films that dealt with the German occupation of Europe,
粸¢
in addition to articles about life in Germany, became important tools for describing the
nature of the German enemy. Battle films were relatively rare, since the American army
did not fight in Germany before Pearl Harbor, and therefore battle films about the war in
Europe came in a later stage. There was also another reason; the time needed to make
this kind of film takes a year or more.
5.3 Exposing the secret of the charm of fascism and the Nazi ideology both in
the characters and ideology
Five Graves to Cairo (1943). The film opens with a British defeat, while subtitles
explain that in summer 1942 the Corps Africa pushed the British army way into Egypt
and threatened Alexandria and the Suez Canal. The plot is about a corporal in the British
army, Bramble, who comes across the most important military secret of Field Marshal
Rommel. Bramble is the only survivor of a hit American tank. He reaches a hotel,
exhausted, moments before German soldiers arrive there in order to establish a field
headquarters for the Desert Fox. The stunned Englishman hides in a closet, while the
196
The seventh cross.(1944). (AKA - The Seven Crosses), Fred Zinnemann.
140
headquarter officer Schwagler (Peter Van Eyck) talks to the hotel owner and the maid
Mosh (Ann Baxter) about adjusting the rooms for the conquering officers. Schwagler is
described as a boastful winner, who laughingly predicts how they would soon kill the
flies of Egypt as they killed the English, as he enjoys the English soap he founds in the
hotel rooms. In his efforts not to be caught, Bramble puts on a jacket of a dead waiter
and his shoes. This waiter, Doves, an Alsatian, was probably a German spy, as
Schwagler takes him to meet His Highness the Field Marshal, and Bramble understands
from the conversation between Rommel and Schwagler that Doves was a "pioneer
before the forces, who operated in Warsaw and Amsterdam," or as Bramble puts it
when he is introduced to Rommel, "a vulture that flied before the Stuka aircrafts,
limping a little". This access to Rommel makes Bramble think about killing him when he
invites him to breakfast, but the idea falls as Mosh hurries into the Field Marshal's room
with a plan of her own. Mosh has an injured brother in the hands of the Germans, and
she pleads to Rommel to do something for him. Rommel does not hide his aversion from
"women in such an early hour in the morning", commanding her to take a distant of a
few steps before he instructs her to write to the appropriate authorities in Germany in
three copies, "since we are in need of paper in Germany, a lot of paper." At first he
粸¢
dictates in German, and for the benefit of the intelligence of the enemy he does so in
English too. In fact he dictates a telegram to the Fuhrer, telling about the expected
conquest of the Suez Canal. In a later scene, Rommel eats with several British prisoner
officers, making ironic comments about his English adversaries, as well as about his
Italian assistant. When he is asked how many soldiers does he have, he says smilingly
the truth "not as many as you have", and when he is asked about the Italians, he says
scornfully what many thought and did not say: "No one takes the Italians into
consideration and does not count on them". What interested his guests was the issue of
supplies, especially one officer, whose amazing similarity to Montgomery was one of the
many jokes of the film. Without fuel and water even the Africa Corps would have been
stopped. Rommel's vague answer, which the supplies do not reach him, but he is the
one who reaches the supplies, is the riddle Bramble would have to solve. The only hints
Bramble had were Rommel's bragging that the Germans had prepared themselves for
the war years ahead, and Schwagler's reference of some mysterious professor
Kronsteter. The answer about Kronsteter was discovered accidentally by the hotel
141
owner, who found a yellowish article about Kronsteter on a newspaper that was lying on
a food tray. Kronsteter's photograph showed Rommel, as if he had hid weapon, fuel and
water in the Egyptian desert before the war, which had nothing to do with reality, since
German soldiers had been sent to North Africa in a sudden decision, with no prior
planning. But this was an intelligent means of the plot, and it also used for quieting the
hurt ego of the Allies. Bramble had a few hours to discover the location of the tomb of
Kronsteter.
A British air raid gives Bramble a chance to copy the Field Marshal's map, and it
also shows a real battle. The Allies almost miss and partly expose the body of the real
Doves, a sight that Schwagler sees. Bramble survives the battle together with
Schwagler, but he is almost turned over by Mosh, who relies on the young officer to
help her brother. Schwagler tells her that for certain favors a lieutenant is as good as a
Field Marshal. Mosh is called to Rommel, who is furious for his aide's absence. When he
tells her contemptuously that all the telegrams regarding her brother had been forged
by Schwagler, she strongly and proudly claims that she had killed the lieutenant. When
the guards find the body at last, Bramble can get a formal motorcycle escort to cross
the British lines.
粸¢
Rommel tells Mosh that her trial would not be conducted according to German law,
"but according to your law, the Napoleon codes, in order to show you that we are not as
barbaric as you think we are." Bramble's success in his improvised espionage mission
was demonstrated through maps, animation and excerpts from news reels about the
British victory in El-Alamein. Although Wilder's film was an imaginary propaganda
regarding the secret of the five tombs, he also dealt with some of the serious issues of
the war. It had a detailed characterization of the two Germans. The double meaning of
the Italians participation in the war, as was illustrated by a human Italian general, and
the possibility of French cooperation, as has been presented by Mosh (would she have
saved Bramble if Schwagler would not have been such a villain). He joked with Mosh,
saying that he was not a valiant German officer, exchanging anti-German remarks with
the despised Italian general.
Wilder's film was, of course, a wartime production, and the producer, who
watched it years later, said it had an "awful smell of propaganda". It shows Germany
and the German army as an oiled, hard working war machine, conducted by strategies
142
and a long-run thinking about time and place. The Germans put the army, the war, and
domination as the main and only thing that mattered. On the other hand of a full
German system of military strength, pre-planning and bright strategies, there is one
English corporal, who with courage and resourcefulness sabotages a plan that several
years and hundreds of people worked on. This is the victory of humaneness and the
little person over the big, oiled machine.
Towards the end of the film, one of the British protagonists makes one of the best
speeches that have ever been heard in American wartime movies. He addresses Mosh,
the French protagonist, whose only concern was to liberate her brother, who had been
kept in a German concentration camp: "In Tobruk I've seen them in hundreds, in
Sevastopol they had been deep sunk, in Athens they starved, four hundreds every day.
What for, Mosh? So that somebody like you would be able to reach out a tin box to a
victorious offices, in a plea of compassion worth a penny? What matters is not your
brother, but million brothers. Not just one gate of one prison that could be opened for
you secretly, but all the gates that has to be destroyed"197. In this film the propaganda
is more explicit, although it is interlaced with Wilder's significant wit, which is refreshing
as it comes from a refugee Jewish director in this point in history. The film was shot in
粸¢
January and February 1943, a year after America declared war on Japan and Germany,
and it deals mainly with repressing the personal feelings of agony and vengeance in
favor of the wider commitment to America's Allies in a time of distress. The opening title
of the film emphasizes the immediateness of its drama: "In June 1942 the British 8th
Army was in a very bad condition. It was beaten, scattered and in a state of escape.
Tobruk has fallen. Victorious Rommel and his African Corpus beat the British and pushed
them towards Cairo and Suez Canal."198 Five Graves is different from most of
Hollywood's entertainment shows of the time – America's declaration of war was a
declaration of war on the part of Hollywood as well. Paramount wanted to be recruited
to the efforts of the administration and to the fight against fascism, and see Wilder as
its tool of communication: "There is no doubt that Wilder, like any other director in
Hollywood, wanted to contribute an effective contribution to the war effort.
197
198
Billy Wilder,(1943). Five Graves to Cairo, Hollywood, Paramount, New York.
Ibidem, in the film.
143
But the film avoids painting its Nazis in black, and the Allies in white."199 As a matter of
fact, it seems that Wilder is interested in examining his own opinions about national
identity and role playing. The characters are interesting for him as representatives of
different cultures and social classes, not as belonging to adversaries armies, which are
about to shed the blood of each other. There is death and murder in the film, which
provides a strong peak of moral encouragement. "Schwagler us not a stereotype Nazi,
he is by no means a typical Nazi villain, and neither is Rommel."200 If history was more
generous towards Rommel that most of Hitler's people, maybe it is due to his
involvement in the conspiracy against Hitler and his forced suicide. Historians emphasize
his being a brilliant commander and an uncompromising adversary, and they do not
condemn him for the ideology he represented. In the movie he seems as an eccentric,
proud, and braggart, full of Prussian arrogance and sophistication. He was defeated in El
Alamein before the film was produced, and it seems that Wilder shows a forgiving
attitude towards his flamboyance, giving full liberty to the pompous boasting of the
character, but never makes a one-dimensional caricature of Nazi megalomania out of
him. Wilder reduces Rommel to his real dimensions. When Rommel commands wildly his
people to look for Schwagler, this is the only moment in the film in which Rommel
粸¢
seems as capable of anything.
Schwagler's betrayal of Mosh, regarding the letters to Berlin, when it is found out
that all the telegrams were forged reminds the Munich case, just like Bramble's leaving
against his will, when he is helpless, in order to save Mosh of her fate, reminds of
Dunkirk. Bramble leaves Cidi Halafia on a motorbike, as we see the map of North Africa
in which parts of it explode. Montgomery's counter-attack is presented in a series of
explanatory subtitles, maps, animation, and documentaries.
Farid shows Bramble Mosh's tomb, one of many near the hotel, and he gives a final
speech: "Don't worry, Mosh, we are after them now. When you feel the earth trembles,
it would be our tanks, canons and trucks, thousands of thousands of them. British,
Frenchmen and Americans, we chase them now, close upon them of all sides. We are
going to raise them to heaven in a storm."201 Bramble's speech is moving in a patriotic
way, as it presents the national unity the film aimed at, emphasizing numbers. In 1959
199
200
201
Sinyard & Turner, p. 75.
Ibidem, p. 76.
Billy Wilder,(1943). Five Graves to Cairo, Hollywood, Paramount, New York.
144
the producer described the film as "a melodrama of the first degree that an awful smell
of propaganda hovers above it. When showing it alongside the human parts of the
story, the film is propaganda in its lack of enthusiasm, and maybe Five Graves to Cairo
is the only anti-war statement that came out of Hollywood during these stormy
years."202
There were also comic responses to the description of Nazism and the fight
against it. The Hollywood Screwball Comedy, a genre that specialized in making
comedies based on fast and witty dialogues and absurd situations (like the sitcom on
television in our time) was most problematic, since the Nazis and the horrors they were
responsible for were anything but comic.
The French director Jean Renoir, when he was in the USs, made the film This land
is mine 1943, which examined the nature of fascism and the Nazi ideology. This is the
story about betrayal and resistance in conquered France. It tells about a teacher who is
presented at the beginning as a coward, played by the witty Charles Laughton, who was
identified as an eccentric figure, among other things, due to his role as Quasimodo in
the Hunchback of Notredame by William Dieterle, in 1939. Laughton goes through a
radical transformation in the film, as he redefines the concept of heroism not as
粸¢
something physical, but as a readiness for self-sacrifice on behalf of the public. The
question that repeats itself in a number of films (like Hangmen also die and others) is
whether one has to turn in an underground member, and by so doing save many
others, or one has to be prepared to pay a dear price, sometimes the lives of the
community members and fight the occupation in whatever price. Like in other films,
there is a speech, and here it is a quotation from the declaration of human rights. The
quotation allocates the struggle against the Nazis in the ideological context of the
administration, that is, the propagandist definition that Americas struggle is on behalf of
the free world and democracy.
This land is mine (1943) made by the French director Jean Renoir, was one of the
outstanding films in the ideological struggle against Nazism. Renoir, the grandson of the
painter August Renoir, had done several films in France, films that were considered as
master pieces, like The big illusion (1937), which was done when the Jewish socialist
Leon Blum was France's Prime Minister. This film presented a situation of WWI, where
202
Sinyard & Turner, p. 76.
145
French officers were prisoners of war under the Germans, and the film transmits the
hope that aggressiveness can be stopped, as there are two officers of both nations, who
belong to the nobility and respect each other. The film This land is mine describes how
France was trampled under the Nazis' boots, how the cooperation between the Nazis
and the Vichy government on the one hand and the French underground, the
Resistance, on the other. At that time the Americans, who were not in the front, knew
very little about life in conquered Europe, and the film was intended to illustrate simply
and clearly the social and the mental condition of the average Frenchman. It was a
propaganda film in the midst of WWII, which was recruited to the massive anti-Nazi
machine of propaganda, but unlike most of the American propaganda films, which were
done at the time and were full of embarrassing American patriotism, Renoir's film was a
stronghold of pacifism, democracy and an example of the free spirit of man. It was
indeed sentimental and a little too simplistic for our time, but the message remained.
We have no good or bad people, no heroes or cowards. All these features are mixed, as
it is in life. The Nazi officer is not a caricature of wickedness, and he' too, has human
aspects. But it was done out of a clear goal: to show how fascism can charm many
people when it is presented in a human cover, how evil and monstrosity can be nice
粸¢
when they wear human masks. It is a protest film against the occupation, against not
taking a stand, and in favor of sabotage as a way of resisting the conqueror. In a great
speech in court, the teacher Albert Lorry calls his countrymen fight for their dignity and
freedom.
The last scene of the film, in which the teacher Louise reads to the pupils the
rights of the free person, shows the obvious victory of the spirit over power. Throughout
the film freedom is the most important thing, and if necessary, one has to die for this
cause. The Jewish-German director Ernst Lubitsch directed the film To be or not to be
(1942) with Carol Lombard and Jack Benny, who play the couple Torra, a couple of
actors who lead a theatre group in occupied Warsaw, and are busy in a rehearsal of an
anti-Nazi play when the Germans invade into Poland. The group becomes an active
underground, and through their costumes they manage to deceive the Nazis and their
cooperators, and even compete amongst themselves on the heart of the feminine hero.
The German representation in the film is interesting, because the Nazis manage to
be nice actually. Their stammered language and pathetic situation is touching, since
146
they did not know what the actual situation in the occupied territories was. Anyway, the
film contributed to recruit the public opinion to support the war, as it made the
underground more popular through the stars Benny and Lombard. The encouragement
of the underground provided approval to the goals of the war, and indeed one of the
characters is of a Polish pilot, who is in love with Lombard. He serves in the British RAF
and becomes an agent of the underground who recruits theater people to their cause.
At the time Hollywood's stars were involved in recruiting bonds for the war effort
through the films and performances they conducted both at home (in America) and
abroad in front of the soldiers. The film To be or not to be encouraged the public to
become more involved. The historian Fredrick Drumant wrote about this film thirteen
years after it was produced, that the best way to express what was going on in Europe
was through a grotesque comedy. The way Lubitsch chose to express his thoughts
about the Nazis is provocative but interesting, i.e., he offers salvation through art. Art is
the glue that unites the theater group.
Many critiques were written on the film: "The press criticized Lubitsch and his
audacity to mock the situation in Poland". It was the best and most humiliating satire
ever done about Nazism, but they could not understand what he had done.203
粸¢
After the film came out, Lubitsch responded to the hostile comments said about him.
In an interview to the Times Lubitsch responded he admitted that he had not used the
regular methods of film making in order to indicate the Nazi horror: "I agree, he wrote,
"that I haven't used the accepted methods… in describing the horror of the Nazis. There
is no shot of a torture cell, no shots of beaten people, and no close-ups of Nazis who
use their whips with murderous eyes. My Nazis are different: they have past this stage
this stage. Brutality, whipping and tortures have become routine, they speak about it as
salesmen speak about selling a wallet. Their humor is about concentration camps, about
the suffering of their victims"204.
The Nazis in this film are indeed regular people, but they are also monsters (like
the Nazis in the film This land is mine). The film To be or not to be raised many
debates. Although it was a farce, it provided a more real picture of Nazism than what
most novellas, stories and pictures have done. Lubitsch attacks the criticism aimed at
him, saying: ".. In those stories the Germans were described as a people who have
203
204
Wille Gingrich, It's All on the Diners Club, p. 301.
Ibidem. p. 302.
147
been caught up by the Nazis and tried to fight this threat through underground means
wherever it was possible. I have never believed it, and now it was proved beyond all
doubts that this alleged underground spirit has never existed in the German people."205
The attack on Pearl Harbor and America's entrance to the war took place in the
midst of shooting the film, so what has begun as a look of a by-stander on a distant
conflict has reached the screens in an atmosphere of a strong support of the US's
commitment. The fact that America has entered the war changed a change of the final
version of the script, and to the story of the Polish underground there was added a
bombastic summary: "hatred, hatred, and more hatred was the answer to the Nazi
terror."206
Chaplin and Lubitsch did not know the scope of the Nazi horrors that were to
come still. But what has happened already (the Kristalnacht in 1938; the Anschluss; the
persecutions of Jews and the news that infiltrated to the West) made them contribute to
the trend of hostility between the US and Germany, as the German invasion to Warsaw,
before America joined the war got a full negative cover in the American press. And as
long as the conflict in Europe got harsher, the negative representations became more
extreme: the Nazi became more tough, cruel, brutal and monstrous than in 1939-1941,
粸¢
until the American involvement.
If the films in the years 1939-1941 presented the Nazis in a comic way, without
grasping their full threat, in the next period, 1942-1946, upon America's joining the war,
and as the horrendous deeds of the Nazis became known, the Nazi representation has
become sharp in its cruelty.
The negative attitudes to the film To be or not to be stemmed mainly from the fact
that it dealt with the Nazi threat in a too light manner, and by so doing it endangered
the war effort. Walter Reisch, one of the screenplay writers of Ninochka, and a personal
friend of Lubitsch, claimed that the main source of the negative response was a line
given to Ruman as a Nazi colonel, in which he describes his response to the mediocre
performance of Hamlet by Josef Torra (Jack Benny): "What he has done to Shakespeare
we do now to Poland." Reisch says that after the first early screening of the film, some
of Lubitsch's friends, including his wife, asked him to cut this line, as it made use of
205
206
Eyman Scott,(1993). Ernst Lubitsch, Laughter in Paradise, Baltimore and London.p. 225.
This line does not exist in the final script that is kept in the academic library of the arts and the movie
science, Los Angeles, p. 226.
148
mass murder as the basis for a joke.207 According to Reisch, Lubitsch was determined in
his refusal to cut this line, claiming that it was needed to show the rudeness of the Nazi
humor. While the Nazis in To be or not to be see themselves as superior people, the
dramatic atmosphere of the film puts the group of actors, even though they look
ridiculous as individuals, in a high position as a group. Lubitsch defends his strategy of
humor as a propaganda tool, saying that comedy and politics are intertwined in one
another. He is quoted in the Sunday Times:
"… The American spectators laugh of these Nazis, not because they belittle
their threat, but because they are glad to see this new order and its ideology
put to ridicule. They don't feel sympathy towards people who jump from
aircrafts without parachutes because a man with a small moustache had told
them to do so. They feel contempt towards a people who enjoys death and
slavery. I am sure that this scene would not have caused a great laugh in the
US. Let us be grateful for this, and hope it will always be like that".208
Lubitsch established a personal school in Hollywood. In the midst of the war against
the Germans he directed some kind of an anti-thesis of the heroic "morale" films, which
swept the screen at that time.
粸¢
In 1942, when the anti-fascist front in Europe did not have the upper hand yet, and
the victory over the fascist axis was still far away, Lubitsch's anti-fascist comedy had a
special fragrance that came from the feeling that "we shall put Hitler down," and this
was an immense moral encouragement at that time.
Fred Zinnemann, a former Viennese, immigrated to the US in 1929, that is, long
before the Nazi threat and the Anschluss have taken place, but his stand as an
opponent of this regime was obvious – he was a Jew. As a young boy in Austria he had
wanted to be a violinist, but eventually he studied law. He was attracted to the world of
cinema when he studied in Vienna University, and eventually became a movie
photographer, and later has started directing.
207
208
Ibidem. p. 230.
Ibidem. p. 243.
149
5.4 Post-War Germany: Nazism has not passed away (1945-1946)
Two films Notorious of the director Alfred Hitchcock and The stranger by Orson
Wells, which have been produced in 1946, show that there has not been a change yet in
the German ideological thinking, and they continue to go on in spite of their defeat in
the war. A large number of films emphasized the policy of collective accusation,
although this policy was abandoned already in 1946 without the American public
knowing about it.209
The film Notorious opens with the conviction of John Huberman, who is accused
of cooperation with the Nazis. He gets twenty years. The CIA recruits his wanton
daughter, Alicia, to an espionage mission in Rio de Janeiro, where rich Nazi criminals live
under fictitious identity. These people were in touch with her father and they plan the
Nazi return to power. Elicia's mission is to get in touch with them and extract from them
information about their plans. The relationships among the German figures are cold and
distant. There is an atmosphere of suspicion and fear, but everything is very smiling and
polite. One of the key figures of the film is that of Madam Konstantin, who presents a
secret Nazi ritual aimed at promoting evil in the world, even after the victory of the
Allies over the Axis countries.210 Madam Konstantin protects by all means the attempt to
蛐¢
develop an atomic bomb in her son's house, and the film implicitly criticizes the use of
the atom bomb by the US.
The Stranger, which was produced after the war, during the Nuremberg trials,
describes a chase conducted by an American detective, a man of the Unit for the
Investigation of War Criminals, after a Nazi criminal, who is presented in the film as a
209
Notorious. Director/producer: Alfred Hitchcock. Produced by RKO Radio Pictures. 101 min. B/W. USA,
1946.
The Stranger. Director/screenwriter: Orson Wells. Produced by International Pictures. 95 min. B/W.
Available in colorized version. USA, 1946.
Here is Germany (Documentary). Director: Ernst Lubitsch. Produced by ColumbiaTristar. 52 min. B/W.
USA, 1944.
Know Your Enemy – Germany (Documentary). Director: Ernst Lubitsch. B/W. USA, 1944 (on behalf of
Frank Capra’s team).
You're Job in Germany (Documentary). Director: Frank Capra. Producer: Theodor Geisel. Screenwriter:
Theodor Geisel. 15 min. B/W. USA, 1945 (was completed by Frank Capra’s team).
Death Mills (Documentary). Director: Hanus Burger. 47 min. Color. USA, 1945, 1988. (Was distributed in
25/07/1946.
David Culbert,(1985). “American Film Policy in the Re-education of Germany After 1945”, The Political
Re-education of Germany and Her Allies after World War II, Nicholas Pronay and Keith Wilson (eds.),
London.pp. 173-202.
210
John Beebe, M.D.(Spring 1990). "The Notorious- Post War Psyche", Journal of popular Film and
Television, 18, 1.p.31.
150
charming Satan: an intellectual, a person of conversation, who manages to charm an
American girl coming from a liberal home, and integrate in the social life of a calm
American township. In one scene he presents to the naive Americans a historicalpsychological analysis of the megalomaniac, murderous German soul, which will never
change. The film focuses on defending the American values of the family and the rule of
the law, which the Nazi tries, from the height of the church's clock tower, to rule over
time and the universe. Thematically, The Stranger deals with one of the most important
issues of the time: the attempt to preserve fascism after the defeat of the Axis
countries. The central figure is that of a former Nazi officer, who lives after the war
anonymously in a small American township, where he works as a teacher in a boys'
school, while preparing secretly to the revival of fascism. Franz Kindler, who appears
also under the name of Charles Rankin, is one of the young geniuses of the Nazy party.
Kindler developed the theory of exterminating the occupied peoples in order to ensure
Germany's status after the war. Unlike Goebbels, Himler and the others, Kindler tended
to stay anonymous. His picture is not made public. Before he disappeared he managed
to destroy all the evidence that is connected to his past. There is not hint about Franz
Kindler's previous identity, except for one thing. He had a hobby which was almost a
粸¢
mania about watches. In the meal scene at the house of the Judge (Philip Mervill) he
presents his racial-political ideology. In the course of the scene the American
investigator, Wilson, tracks him down. The dialogue between Wilson and Rankin is an
attempt to show the German society in a cynical and critical way:
Wilson: "Do you know Germany, Mr. Rankin?"
Rankin: "I' sorry… in this issue my opinions are not highly acceptable."
Wilson: "We sill refer to our opinions as the opinions of a historian."
Rankin: "Historian? A psychiatrist would explain it better. The German sees himself as
an innocent victim of the world conspiracy, plotted by persons and peoples inferior to
him."
He does not admit any mistake, certainly not the crimes.
Rankin: "We ignore Ethiopia and Spain, but the list of victims teaches us that the people
of truth have learned to whom the bells toll… but not the German, he sticks to his
fighting god. He walks to the sounds of Wagner, dreaming of Siegfried's sword, and in
the cellars you don't believe to exist, a German dream is taking place about a German
151
who would take his place inside a shining knights' armor. Mankind awaits a messiah.
The German messiah is not a peace prince; he is the new Barbarossa or Hitler."
Wilson: "Don't you believe the change Germany is going through?"
Rankin: "I don't believe, Mr. Wilson, that you can change people. The principles of
equality and freedom will never be accepted in Germany. The aspiration for freedom has
found its way in all languages in the world. All human beings were born equal, free…".
Wilson: "So?"
Rankin: "extermination to the last baby"211.
Ironically, the latent Nazi recommends destroying Germany, that is, he recommends the
Allies a Nazi-like solution. Rankin is an opportunist, who is willing to have the Germans
become victims, and in this way he exposes his Nazi identity.
Orson Wells obviously perceived The Stranger as a film with a political message of
the danger of the revival of fascism after the war, and hoped that a blunt style would
pass this message in the best way.212 If we look on the film in this light, The Stranger
was a Nazi murderous monster, one who had previously planned, on behalf of the Nazi
ideology, the gas chambers for murdering Jews, and now uses this idea for
exterminating the Germans.
粸¢
Right after the war Wells worked as a writer of the editorials for the New York
Post. His editorials dealt with various problems of the post-Roosevelt time, including, he
said, the fact "that the imaginary fear of communism was a smoke curtain that hid the
real threat of the revival of fascism." In light of the witch hunt that had shaken
Hollywood a short time earlier, and has made the fifties into a period that excelled in
clear fascist trends, including oppressing disagreements, supporting following the line of
the administration, and a renewed appearance of moral conservatism.
The film points of the difficulty of exposing the latent Nazism/fascism. Kindler is not
just a hidden Nazi; he has an American appearance while making an enormous effort of
hiding his problematic past. In addition, the township of Harper, where he lives,
represents a dangerous ignorance, a place that can easily be a refuge for a mass
murderer or a crazy war criminal. This connection between political ideas (the aspiration
to gain peace, bring America the faith in itself) and the negative Nazi representations is
common in films of the post-war and the Cold War period.
211
212
Orson Wells.(1946). the stranger.
Barbara Leaming,(New York 1979). Orson Wells. p.380.
152
5.5 A thematic discussion of the various representations
The change in the German representation has to do with the developing trends. In
the course of war the information about Nazism and its crimes became known gradually,
and the progress of the war in Europe influences the morale of the Allies, and through
them, on Hollywood. There was a feedback between the events and the processes and
Hollywood, and vice versa, and these relationships become more and more complicated
as the economic and cultural system refers to factors of opposite, or at least not
identical, interests. These interests can be divided into three factors:
1. The administration through its control land propaganda mechanisms, the OWI, and
a series of propaganda films, called Why do we fight, that the director Frank Capra
was one of their initiators and producers.
2. The film makers and their opinions as long as these opinions did not clash with the
administration. That is, they produced anti-fascist films while expressing their
opinions in different ways, not always acceptable.
3. Economic interests that always remain relevant, and there is indeed a connection
between public opinion and economic success.
These interests mix with each other, and we witness in Hollywood trends of
粸¢
particularization about who the enemy is and what are the reason for fighting him. This
process makes a fine tuning of what Nazism is. We have to examine how a film that was
done Hollywood served the goals of the administration. We will do it through the various
German images, which can be divided into two main groups of representation:
Germans
Ideological Nazis
other Germans
These two representation groups can be seen in the various categories that have
been described in the previous chapter. I will refer to the different German images in a
transverse section:
1. Historical figures – Hitler, Goebbels, and Rommel and so on.
2. Nazis – Gestapo people, SS officers, German spies, war criminals, and so on.
3. Professional soldiers, policemen and officials.
153
4. Women.
All these images are divided between the two groups of Nazis and other Germans.
Let us see how the Germans are divided into categories, and what is their
representation in films. The thematic discussion in the above categories will show how
Hollywood divided the German representation, and in this way we will try to conclude
about Hollywood's relationships with the administration and with its foreign policy's
goals.
Historical figures
The most fascinating figure is, of course, that of Hitler himself, but his
representation is highly problematic, since Hitler, who was designed as an icon of
Nazism, was accepted in American films as a symbol, and hence he was represented
only in comedies like The Great dictator, or in To be or not to be. All the same, he
is represented everywhere at least in a picture on the wall, and serves as a Nazi symbol
just like the swastika. Therefore, we have to examine the representation of the historical
figures, which serve the goals of representation and were symbols. The historical figures
are divided between the most identified and scary, like Heidrich, and those who are
perceived as relatively moderate, like Rommel. That is to say the Nazis towards whom
粸¢
no compromise can be made, and the other Germans, who could be an alternative
leadership at the end of the conflict. The latter, like Rommel, are those that the West
had to fight with, as can be seen in Wilder's film Five Graves to Cairo, but eventually
one can make peace with.
We will start with the negative Nazi representations of different historical figures in
films.
Heidrich – His personality was actually more monstrous than was known at the
time, and it was in the focus of two films, Hitler's Madman and Hangmen also die.
Heidrich was the governor of Czechoslovakia and these films deal with the affair of the
assassination attempt against him and its horrendous implications of the destruction of
the village of Lidice and the additional collective punishment put on the population. In
Hangmen also die (1943), there is a short description of Heidrich in first minutes of the
film, but this description makes its implication of the whole film. The film opens with a
title that describes the situation in occupied Prague. It goes on in a series of pastoral
archive shots of Prague and its well known palace, which is now Heidrich's headquarter.
154
In the next scene we see Hitler's picture in a room full of generals, Gestapo people, and
cooperating Check officers. This is a dramatic build-up that shows the atmosphere of
Heidrich's image as one of tension and horror, even among the Nazis themselves. Then
Heidrich's arrival is announced. A hush silence came over the room, and a dandy figure
in a both feminine and violent gait (a hint of a homosexual or other perverse
characteristic). Heidrich stops next to a Check general wearing an eye-patch, and
throws his whip to the floor. He waits to see whether the general would pick up the
whip. After a moment under Heidrich's threatening gaze, the general does pick up the
whip, and Heidrich moves on to the front, pleased by the humiliation he caused. Then
he stops at a heavy table and starts barking in German about the need to execute a
group of laborers in the Skoda plant. When he reaches an ecstasy of hatred and
preaching to murder, he goes out of the room. Here is a quotation of Heidrich's speech
in front of the Reich and the Check officers about the underground activity of Skoda
plants:
"The reports about the Skoda plants are plain swinishness. The filthy pigs
just refuse working! There are 37,000 laborers in Skoda, and for this
stinking sabotage only 50 are executed? Why not 500? 50 is nothing, and
粸¢
the Check ammunition industry will be under the supervision of the Gestapo.
I demand that German will be spoken in Czechoslovakia, is it understood?
German! German! I'll teach the Check garbage and Skoda laborers how to
obey, until they will not be able to hear and see any more!"213
Heidrich speaks German to the officers – a symbol of cultural superiority, and when one
of the attendants, a Check officer, addresses him in English, which symbolizes the Check
language in the film, he answers: "This man has become crazy? He addresses me in
such a wretched language? I demand the German will be spoken."214
Heidrich is murdered in the next scene, and even this occurrence is not
photographed, by reported. The plot is actually based on this act, and therefore we
have to examine what have we learned about Heidrich's image in the above described
scene. Heidrich is a personification of the Nazi essence. According to the makers of the
film (Lang, Brecht and Don-Levy), his characteristics are those of Nazism:
213
214
Fritz Lang .(1943).Hangmen Also Die USA.
Ibidem.
155
1. Heidrich is a sadist and a pervert and conducts a sadomasochistic aggressive
relationship with his "subjects", that is his subordinates, and his image represents a
kind of sexual perversion, and it refers to the Nazi politics of power.
2. Heidrich is presented as a person who does not see any importance in human life.
He orders nonchalantly of a mass execution, which is also the blood thirsty identity
of the Nazi ideology.
3. Heidrich also represents the figure of Hitler himself. The scene opens with Hitler's
picture, and goes on to Heidrich. His tempestuous speech reminds of Hitler's
speeches, and this leads to an identity of Hitler's personality as a model for all Nazis
and establishes an identity between Nazism and the personal characteristics of its
leader.
4. Heidrich is a dandy, and this trait emphasizes the Nazi fetish215 for uniforms and
external accessories as defining power positions.
5. The reference to the German language shows the complex of superiority of the
Nazis.
In the film Hitler's Madman (1943), Heidrich's figure is presented within the title:
Heidrich = a madman, whereas the massacre in Lidice is presented in a more graphic
粸¢
manner. In this way the terror of Heidrich's figure becomes more concrete. Unlike
Heidrich, who represents Nazism with which one should not compromise, there is also a
representation of the other Germans.
Erwin Rommel is represented in Billy Wilder's film Five Graves to Cairo by the actor
who played the Prussian officer in the great illusion from 1937 by Jean Renoir, Erich von
Stroheim. Stroheim was a Jewish immigrant who specialized in playing German villains.
He was a director himself who made decadent films, describing a sick European society
whose life dealt with sexual intrigues. Although Stroheim played villains, he was a big
star in Hollywood, and one could not watch him out of repugnance. Although he was
one of the bad guys, casting him was a gesture of respect towards Rommel. The
aristocratic manners of this figure matched the characters Stroheim used to play, and in
spite of Rommel's dandyism and hedonism, as he is presented in the film, he is not a
devout Nazi, but just an excellent commander and a professional soldier, i.e., he is an
adversary indeed that has to be beaten, but one can appreciate him.
215
Fetishism – a tendency for obsession regarding personal features of objects. Such an object is defined
as a fetish.
156
Nazis
The film This land is mine (1943) refers mainly to the psychological work the Germans
have done in convincing the population that the Germans' view and the things they do
would lead to a better world to live in. Major Erich von Keller, the military governor of
the town, is full of confidence, charismatic, witty, smart, intelligent, an intellectual who
totally believes in the Reich's regime and is loyal to it. He is interested in a "quiet
occupation", and in order to achieve it, he provides all sorts of benefits to the mayor
and rich key people in it, so that they would influence the population not to object to
the occupation. Von Keller shows pleasantness, smiles and good manners throughout
the film. In his dialogues with the town's people he speaks about cooperation until the
war is over, and then everyone would live together in a better world under the German
leadership.
We can examine the subtext of the film by looking in Major von Keller's image.
Renoir very intelligently shows his image as an example of how attractive and good
fascism could be for the masses. Von Keller is played by Walter Zelcek, who plays this
character as an attractive, urban, and even smart person. Von Keller is the typical bad
guy of the film. Almost all the bad guys in Renoir's films are not characterized by evil,
粸¢
although we them in this way as a result of their deeds in the film.
Von Keller belongs to extinct generation; he is full of respect, has good manners,
relaxed and has a style. The music box he plays with adds to his image the love for
beautiful antiques. Von Keller offers the Frenchmen a new order, and he does it in a
relaxed way, which leads to cooperation. He is convinced in his views and is ready to
preach them at any time. We know that the new order he suggests for Europe would
bring about moral corruption, but von Keller knows that less smart people than he is
would not see this option. Politically speaking, the new order would include hegemony,
economic imperialism, racism and violence. Von Keller knows this, and as far as he is
concerned, the military power that has to be operated in order to achieve this new order
is justified. The film does not show explicitly the bad guys, but in the subtext one may
see evil and a lack of humanity, and this is the most dangerous thing, since fascism that
is covered by humanity can become more attractive for the masses, and therefore we
would not be able to fight fascism if we do not face this truth. The cruelty and
oppression of the Nazism that von Keller represents are seen in his ideology. Von Keller
157
makes fascism attractive as he covers it with humane attitude. Von Keller seems decent,
honest, tolerant, as if he is always ready to support a human value, and this is why he is
perceived as an educated man who is capable of quoting Latin texts, Plato, Voltaire and
Shakespeare. He is arrogant in saying about Shakespeare: "We love him in Germany,
the English don't understand him." His figure transmits reliability, but at the same time it
bothers the spectator, and the historic truth is that educated people fell to the charms of
fascism. In his speech, von Keller refers to a number of issues: human rights,
cooperation, hostages – covering all these items with nice words and by so doing he
managed to deceive his listeners and explain evil to them. He uses noble values which
address the Western mind. Some critics did not understand his figure.
The critic James Agate216 thought that the film makers had an unconscious
sympathy towards him: "I will repeat it again and say that I don't believe this
description that presents the Nazi as a nice person." Agate hints that Renoir
unknowingly supports Satan, and so supports the Nazi ideology. Maybe Renoir hints to
the crisis of democracy in France in the thirties, when people were attracted to the Nazi
ideology, but in fact he warns the public of it.
These critics were mistaken as they thought that Renoir was in favor of the Nazis,
粸¢
showing them as nice people. They did not understand why von Keller was presented as
a noble and enlightened person. But this was not Renoir's intention. He wanted make us
understand why fascism can be charming to certain people, and to what extent von
Keller presented the Nazi fascism. His figure has a distortion that is supposed to shake
the audience. The man was educated, with good manners, respected and so cruel.
Major von Keller is not the psychotic arrogant with the boots, of many literary and movie
images. In this way the film showed the racism and violence of Nazism under its
ideological cover rather than its military aggression. This is the source of the film's
effectiveness – the misleading cunning of evil.
Soldiers, Policemen and professional officials
In This land is mine, the behavior of the soldiers in their encounters with the
population is mostly tolerant, and we hardly see them behave violently. Moreover, we
even see scenes where there is a friendly relationship between soldiers and citizens,
when they offer the citizens cigarettes, or drink and sing together. On the one hand, the
216
Christopher Faulkner.(1986). The Social Cinema of Jean Renoir, Princeton University Press, N.Y.p.135.
158
Germans speak about quiet and cooperation, and on the other, they slowly and
gradually intervene in the citizens' lives by food allotments, confiscating printing
machines, imprisonment of writers and operators, and at last they also execute people.
In Hangmen also die we see the figure of investigator Gruber, who is actually a
rough person (prefers beer than wine), but he is very intelligent. He is an excellent
investigator, his senses are sharp and he is suspicious. He is a mean and cruel person,
who does not hesitate to endanger and kill people, but the most important thing for him
is to investigate the truth. So we can ask whether we wouldn't want such an
investigator in our police. Gruber is the counterpart of the investigator Hercule Poirot,
but instead of seeking his success we want him to fail, because if he succeeds in
exposing the plot, the Nazis would succeed, and the same ideological sadists above
Gruber would go on oppressing the people.
Women
The house on 92nd street, like many other films which have been done
throughout the war, was a traditional espionage film, and also a landmark in the history
of the movie. It was produced by Louis de Rochemont and directed by Henry Hathaway
in 1945. IT told a true story of a German espionage in America, and determined the
粸¢
tone and the style of other espionage films, which dealt with the issues of the war and
the period after it. The plot is about a young German-American, Bill Dietrich (William
Eythe), who was drafted as a spy by German agents when he was a college student. He
was sent to Germany before the war in order to be trained, but beforehand he had
informed the FBI about his mission, and then he worked as a double agent when he
started working. The FBI gave him instructions as if they had arrived from his German
superiors, and he managed to meet all the spies who had worked under the supervision
of the lady who lived in 92nd street, Elsa Gebardt (Sean Hasso).Among these spies there
were hooligans like Max (Harry Bellaver) and Konrad (Harro Meller), as well as the
experienced professional Colonel Hemerzon (Leo G. Carroll). The film shows many tragic
episodes of espionage. The house on 92nd street came out in 1945. It was in
cooperation with Edgar Hoover, the head of the FBI, who even appeared once in the
film, playing himself. It could be that Hoover supported the idea as a way of having a
positive advertising for his agency, as well a warning for potential spies and terrorists. It
emphasized the logic that the administration's needs were more important than
159
emotions, and sometimes even more than the lives of the agents. This film deserves a
special discussion due to two reasons:
1. It was done in the junction between WWII and the Cold War.
2. It hints of the secrets of nuclear weapons and marks the struggle that is to
develop around it.
The question of the German representation is especially fascinating here, since the
main figure of the film is Elsa, who was, as it was found out, a sexual androgynous. She
is the head of the espionage cell, and uses a double identity, either as a man or as a
woman. It was quite a shock to find out that the anonymous head of the espionage cell
was a woman! One of the images we would present in Chapter Three is that of a
Germany as a woman conquered by the American man. And here we see metamorphose
of a masculine German woman, who retreats to a Femme Fatal hiding her sharp nails in
silk gloves. In Hitchcock's film the Notorious, from 1946, there is an interesting
representation of German women of two types:
1. Decent Germans – Alicia (Ingrid Bergman).
2. Nazis – Alex's mother – Madam Konstantin.
Bergman plays a woman motivated by love, but her American patriotism leads her to
粸¢
serve as an agent against Nazism. That is to say that a good German is an American.
Madam Konstantin is a snake-mother. She initiates the gradual poisoning of Alicia in
order to protect her son from the other Nazis.
The relationships among the German figures are cold and distant. There is an
atmosphere of suspicion and fear, everything is allegedly nice. In the background there
is all the time the German group, which plans the return of the Nazis to power. The film
deals with American patriotism, and the human justice that wants to put the Nazi
criminals to justice, but they do it in the same ways like the Nazis.
This is a romantic thriller about an international show girl, Alicia Huberman (Ingrid
Bergman), an American secret agent, Stephen Dublin (Carry Grant), and the trap they
put to a Nazi scientist, Alex Sebastian (Claude Reins) who lived in Rio de Janeiro in
order to preserve the Nazis' goals in Brazil – manufacturing atomic weapons. At the time
atom was not an issue yet, but it is represented by wine bottles that include uranium
ore. Hitchcock said that he used it knowing that no one would understand it. The
uranium was the excuse for telling the love story.
160
Madam Konstantin represents Nazism, as she continues to promote its evil (in the
image of her son), even after the victory of the Allies over the Axis countries.217
The film Notorious insinuates through the mother figure that the West should assume
that the Nazi threat in the atomic era still exists, while Germany is represented by the
son, Alex, whose mother serves as his ideological roots.
Conclusions of chapter five
The German representation between1942-1946
The film noir, which has grown in the forties in the US, received a lot from the dark
styles of the expressionist cinema, and was characterized by pessimism and gloominess.
The world after WWI was cynical and cruel, and therefore it was influenced by
melancholic representation in the cinema. The period after WWII is characterized by an
increased pessimism and the "noir" (black) movement. One of the features of the film
noir was the use of tempting women, who bring destruction on the man they tempt.
German femininity was threatening and suited this style, and the administration
infiltrated messages to the cinema, to which the film noir movement responded with
representations of good and evil.218 The films that have been produced in 1942-1946 did
not deal any more with the issues and the debates of whether we had to intervene or
粸¢
not, or whether Germans and Nazis were cruel and barbaric or not. The films of the first
period took a decisive stand against Nazism and reflected relevant political issues of the
time. Their messages were clear and do not have to be misleading by the approach that
claims that the directors and the studios took a stand of a simplistic description of
Nazism. The messages intended to ridicule and have a positive influence on the public's
morale. A too threatening representation could lead to an unnecessary intimidation, and
Hollywood wanted to avoid it, especially in light of the military events in the different
fronts. Other studios preferred to stun the public by strong tactics of shock, like in the
films Nazi agent (1942), Hitler's children (1942), Hangmen also die (1943), Hitler's
madman (1943), Hitler's Gang (1944), The Seventh cross (1944), The Stranger (1946)
and others. Still other studios chose another way of presenting fascism through an antithesis of it, as humane and attractive, and through this misleading presentation pass the
message and the dangers it involves. These films were like To be or not to be (1942 and
217
218
Beebe, M.D, 18, 1 p. 31.
Ibidem. p. 12.
161
This land is mine (1943). The German representation is divided, then, in this period into
two types:
Germans
Ideological Nazis
other Germans
This trend is expressed by the fact that throughout the war an effort has been
made, not always successfully, to blame just the Nazi leadership but not the whole
German people. The reality of the death camps changed things. It made people see all
Germans as guilty of these atrocities. The celebrations on the victory day in 1945 were
accompanied by a formal incitement against Germans, and the film makers joined it
enthusiastically.
Nazis were perceived as criminals, and this explains why the Americans were
supposed to hate all Germans. But all the same, the separation between the regular
Germans and Nazis was about to go on into the Cold War.
The OWI, the special authority of the administration was established in June 1942
粸¢
in order to supervise, among other things, over the messages of American movie
industry. The determining criterion was very practical: what helps us win the war? This
new reality did not disturb Joseph Brin and the more old supervising authority, the PCA
(Production Code Administration), from keeping their conservative rules. In the course
of time the PCA was weakened versus the leading criterion of the OWI: what serves the
interest of winning the war, since the administration supported the OWI. From the
moment America joined the war, Hollywood recruited itself to draw the figure of the
German-Nazi as the enemy. The films tended to make generalizations and stereotyping
as part of the anti-German propaganda campaign, presenting a dichotomy between two
worlds: the West for its enlightenment and naiveté versus the German monstrosity and
cunning that was hiding under a façade of technological and cultural efficiency.
Outstanding examples of this model are the films: To be or not to be (1942), Five
graves to Cairo (1943) and others.
As victory was approaching, there was raised the question: who is to be blamed for
what happens in Germany? Hitler, the Nazi party, the whole German people? The
162
assistant of the government films, Nelson Poynter, answered the question whether the
government objects to films of hatred about the enemy. He said that we should not aim
hatred towards a small group of fascist leaders as a personification of the enemy on the
one hand, and not against all the German people, on the other. We have to enhance
hatred towards the militaristic system in the Axis countries. Elmer Davis, the head of
OWI, thinks that the two, militarism and Nazism, are the same. This is why the
Americans produced films that allegedly presented positive German representations in
the midst of WWII, like Five tombs on the way to Cairo, The Seventh cross, Hitler's
gang, and others. The administration wanted to establish an atmosphere of cooperation
with the democratic powers within Germany before the war was over. It was a
repetition of the American policy that was administered since the end of WWI. In 1944
America knew it was going to win, and its policy was intended to yield achievements in
Europe. The film Hitler's gang from 1944 put the blame on a small group, not on the
whole German people. Whereas the film To be or not to be claims that there has never
been an underground in Germany that acted against the Nazis. On the contrary, it
claims that the Germans cooperated with the Nazis.
As a whole, the images of the Germans in Hollywood were divided into images of
粸¢
Nazis and those of regular Germans. The representations in Hollywood tended to make
a distinction between the two types throughout the time of the war, and this actually
served the goals of the American foreign policy at the time of the war, mainly due to
two reasons:
1. Encouraging the establishment of underground movements in Europe, as well as
encouraging the option of a coup in Germany.
2. A political thinking about the new European order that was to come after the
war.
If we take into consideration that Hollywood acted in a time of war, the extent of
control of the administration over Hollywood was surprisingly weak. The reason for this
is that Hollywood was even more militant that the administration, a trend that we have
seen already in a previous chapter, i.e., pushing America to intervene.
163
Chapter Six
Representations of Germany and the Germans in Hollywood
During The first period of the Cold War – Post-war Germany 1947-1970
The Impact of McCarthyism in American Cinema
The chapter is structured as follows: first I will bring a short historical survey of
the events that have to do with the Cold War, and especially in connection with the
European context. I will examine what happened in America as far as the administration
and Hollywood relations are concerned. How these relationships have become
complicated upon the introduction of the persecutions and the black lists of
McCarthysim period. The committee for anti-American activities, headed by Senator
McCarthy started played havoc in Hollywood. The persecutions started at the end of the
forties and continued until the sixties, as the power of the committee started declining.
Many auteurs were accused of "red" tendencies and communist. Hollywood was
requested to be "more patriotic"219 feel into line with the administration and was careful
not to come out against it. Many auteurs deviated to a certain extent from this formal
line by creating complicated German images, less one-dimensional of good and evil, as
粸¢
I will shoe in analyzing these representations. Will also show what were the different
historical stations in the stages of the Cold War in the European arena (the first Berlin
Crisis, the airlift, the second Berlin crisis, constructing the Berlin Wall and the Bay of
Pigs Crisis).
After historical survey I will conduct an analysis of the films I investigated, as a
basis for the thematic discussion in this part of the research. Within the survey and the
filmographical analysis there will be given a survey about the background for the
production of each film and how it was accepted by the critic and in the public opinion,
when these data will be relevant. I will also present the relations between Hollywood
and the administration.
In the third part of the chapter I will conduct a thematic discussion based on the
discussions in previous chapters regarding the issue of the German representation in
this period. I will disassemble the various representations that have been discussed and
examine how these representations develop, if at all, go against the previous
219
Willett, p. 5.
164
representations, or create new rules of representation in the films that have been done
in Hollywood between the years 1947 until 1970. I will use the set of categories of
representation that I have structured in my previous paper about McCarthyism in the
first (methodological), third and fourth chapters:a general division of representations of
German images according to the dichotomy between the Nazis and other Germans. The
analysis will be done for the following groups:
1. Representation of German women. How these representations constitute a
metaphor of Germany.
2. Representation of Nazis and carriers of Nazi ideology. What happened to these
images and how they have become complicated in the years of the decline of the
McCarthyist persecution. I will indicate especially the films: Trial in Nuremberg by
Stanley Kramer from 1961, The Quiller Memorandum by Michael Anderson from
1966.
3. Professional soldiers and officials – these images have become highly positive in
comparison with the war period. The genre of heroic war films that blossomed in
the early sixties, like the Battle of the Bulge, by Ken Annakin from 1965 and other
examples.
粸¢
Eventually, after examining the different representations, I will refer to
conclusions of these representations as expressing Hollywood with connection to the
American foreign policy with reference to the existing tendencies in representations.
During the Cold War one can point of two trends in the films:
1. Films which present a unified image, negative or positive, of Germans:
a. Films that present an image of "bad" Germans. There was an attempt to accuse
only the Nazi leadership, but this effort was doomed to fail.220
b. Films that show representations of "good" Germans.
2. Films that create a distinction between Nazis and other Germans.
These representations express Hollywood's affiliation to the American foreign policy.
I will try to cope with the question of the meaning of this affinity. That is, to what
extent does Hollywood served indeed as an agent of propaganda of the administration,
if at all. Many researches support the view that Hollywood did cooperate during WWII
and afterwards for helping the administration and the American foreign policy towards
220
Culbert, p. 185.
165
Germany and was an agent rather than an independent factor, which obeyed the
instructions of the administration. I will examine whether this assumption can be
supported, or if one may support the claim that these relations were complicated and
not dictated by the administration, as it comes out from claims of other scholars.
The question of split between Nazi representations and German ones is in the focus of
the debate. My claim will be, then, that the split existed before the Cold War (as I have
shown in chapters three and four of this paper) and the change was expressed not only
in the split, but also in the representation of regular Germans, who are positive images
basically. I will present this difference as the main expression for shifting the status of
the Germans from a foe to an ally.
6.1 Historical background and a films' survey
The term and the conceptualization of the Cold War started in 1946 with
Churchill's speech of the Iron Curtain in the US221, but the Cold War actually started
with the first Berlin crisis in 1948. The steps taken in 1948 in the western regions of
Germany toward a forming a union and establishing a common German government in
these regions raised objection on the part of the USSR and its satellite states. The
foreign ministers of Poland, Czechoslovakia, and even Tito's Yugoslavia submitted a
蛐¢
formal protest to the western super-powers. The cooperation among the conquering
super-powers, which had been limited to begin with, has decreased. Marshal
Sokolovsky from the USSR demanded that he receives information about the
discussions of the conference of the western countries in London, in which the USSR
did not participate, but his demand was rejected and he protested by leaving the
meeting of the Council in March 20, 1948, and this was the end of the cooperation
between the two super-powers.222
The controversy regarding the revision of the German coin was a catalyst of a
conflict
The economic crisis in Germany following the destruction of the war continued the
trend of devaluation of the German coin. After failing to reach an agreement with the
USSR, the US and its allies carried out a correction of the coin in the western conquered
221
222
Fraser J. Harbutt, (1986).The Iron Curtain: Churchill, America, and the Origins of the Cold-War, (New
York, Oxford: Oxford University Press). pp. 183-285.
Michael Ziv and Yaacov Landau, (1979). The history of the nations in our time: 1945-1970, Yavne
Publication,Tel Aviv. pp. 37-42, 122-144.
166
areas in June 20, 1948. Since Berlin was deep in the Russian area, there came the
question whether the reform would be carried out in West-Berlin as well. The Soviets
demanded a reform of their own and intended to enforce the eastern coin on West
Berlin. On June 24, 1948, following the establishment of the western Deutschmark in
West-Berlin, the Soviets closed the terrestrial roads to West-Berlin and put a blockade
on the city. The situation was explosive since the terrestrial blockade was in the gray
area of the agreements of the division of the western conquered areas, in which no
ground corridor to Berlin was defined.
The airlift was West-Berlin's oxygen pipe, and in the following 11 months, the
Soviets expected an American retreat and giving up of the reform as well as the control
over Berlin. But it was obvious to the American administration that it must not move
even a small step back in the issue of Berlin, as whoever would control Berlin, as Lenin
had said, would control Europe. At last the USSR blinked first and removed the
blockade, and the tension in Berlin was traumatic in the sense that a war was about to
burst out again in Europe.
Eisenhower's coming to power in the US and Stalin's death in the early fifties were
the basis for a renewed crisis in the Cold War around Berlin and Germany, as the
粸¢
nuclear balance of terror has changed with the USSR joined the club of countries which
hold nuclear weapons. Khrushchev's appearance on the global arena and his
acknowledgment of the state of East Germany pushed Eisenhower's administration to
define the status of Germany and Berlin as a symbol of the American hegemony in
Western Europe. The National Security council (NSC) determined that Berlin's symbolic
status as a frontal post of the West versus the Soviet block will be backed by a nuclear
umbrella and a mission force which will be ready to intervene at any case in which the
Soviets would try to undermine Berlin's status.
6.2
De-Nazification and Germany as a wanton woman: The question of
American foreign policy and its reflection by allegory of the
Relationships between American soldiers and German girls
Bad Nazis and good German allies: A collective guilt or the guilt of the
leadership
Many films dealt with contrasting attitudes in the internal American public
regarding the foreign policy, reflecting the political relationship between the US and
167
Germany through varied representations of Germany and being German. Although one
cannot point of a homogenous representation of Germans at that time, one can
pinpoint a few outstanding characteristics: an obsessive dealing with the Cold War and
Berlin as the arena of this war; a process of de-Nazification of German images, together
with a repetitive attempt to go back to Germany's past and taking the Nazi devil from
the bottle; a great number of films about the war time, in which there starts to appear
a distinction between Nazis and German soldiers; a satiric scornful and sometimes witty
representation of the Nazis, and finally a critical attempt to examine Germany's past as
the Germans see it. We may conclude that the most outstanding characteristic is
continuity versus change, that is, some German representations that are kept as a
stereotype, and new representations that distinguish between Nazis and German
soldiers.
After 1945, the debate about isolationism versus intervention started all over
again in the US. At first the common opinion was that the damage of the German
industry would solve the German problem and would enable the American army
withdraw forever from the continent. When the evacuation was postponed, the
supporters of isolationism claimed that one had to restrict the American foreign policy
粸¢
due to its increasing involvement in Europe's affairs. For this reason Germany was
regarded as a case study of the new role of America in the world. The films Berlin
Express and Foreign Affairs demonstrate the problematic nature of what would happen
if America would go on being involved in the moral and political twilight in Germany.
These films reflect the debate in the American society and administration. The Atom Era
and the Cold War provided the conditions for a new different policy, where yesterday's
enemies have become friends, and former allies have become enemies. In the first
years the Hollywood used the metaphor of America as the conqueror versus Germany
as the wanton woman, who threatens to corrupt America, and America is presented as
the conquering man, who sometimes is innocent and sometimes wanton.
The American self-confidence and military superiority helped adopting the new
concept that the USSR became the enemy in the Cold War, and the Americans did not
consider the moral implications of using nuclear weapon against the Russians. The
Americans attributed the Russians all the mean characteristics, which had been
attributed to the Nazis.
168
The movie industry was perceived as a means for the entertainment of the
masses, as it operated in a democratic atmosphere. Hollywood enabled its artist's great
freedom because it was profitable, and because Hollywood shaped the American values
to a large extent. At the same time it is clear that the American authorities were aware
of the power of propaganda embedded in movies, and preferred to control as much as
possible the contents and the ideas they presented in the films which were exported to
Germany223. The American films were meant to support indoctrinization and deNazification in Germany, the bad communication and poor cooperation between the
movie industry and the military administration made it difficult to use the films to this
end224.
The Cold War pushed both the western and the communist blocks to rehabilitate
their conquered area as sovereign states. American films right after the war described
Neo-Nazis as a stubborn remnant of Hitler's brutal men who plotted to sabotage the
plans of the Allies for democratization of Germany.
Films like Berlin Express (1948), Foreign Affairs (1948), Big Lift (1950), The Devil
Makes Three (1952), Fraulein (1958) One, Two, Three (1961), A Sentence in
Nuremberg (1961) and others described allegorically the relationship between the US
粸¢
and Germany and the relationship between Hollywood and the administration regarding
issues of foreign policy. The American involvement in Germany deepened the American
determination to strengthen the policy of intervention. This policy and the Cold War
reflect the change of attitude and making Germany an ally and a member in NATO.
In the film Berlin Express that came out in 1948, the director Jacques Tourneur raised
the idea that cooperation among the Allies may continue if they focus on the unification
of free Germany, free of fascist elements. American, British, French, and Russian
passengers ride in a running train through a landscape of destruction to the Berlin
summit, and come together to save a progressive German politician who was kidnapped
by a group of loyal Nazis. The film touches indirectly the holocaust by describing the
total destruction of Berlin as a justified punishment for the war crimes that the Third
Reich has executed.
223
224
See Roosevelt's letter from 1942 sent to the WAC, as well as periodic instructions for Hollywood:
1942, 1943, 1944, 1945, and also K.R.M Short, (1983). "Documents (B) – Washington's Information
Manual for Hollywood, 1942" Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, Vol. 3, No. 2, 171-180.
Culbert, p. 173.
169
The film Berlin Express (1948) still holds the attitude of cooperation between the
super-powers. The film follows people of different nationalities who embark a certain
wagon on the train from Paris to Berlin. Each one of them goes to the region in Berlin
under the control of his country, US, Britain, France and Russia. The passengers are
Robert Lindly, an agricultural expert on behalf of the American government; Heinrich
Bernhardt, a German who had fought for the cause of peace and travels incognito;
Lucienne Milbo, Bernhardt's French secretary; James Sterling, an English teacher;
Lieutenant Maxim Kiroshilov, a Russian soldier; Hans Schmidt, a German who has been
sent secretly on behalf of the American government to escort Bernhardt and keep an
eye on him, and Henry Parrot, allegedly a French merchant, who is found out to be a
member of the Nazi underground that tries to murder Bernhardt. The train arrives at
Frankfurt, where Bernhardt is kidnapped by the Nazi underground, which wants to
prevent his arrival to a peace conference of the Allies in Berlin. When the people in the
train find out that the kidnapped is Heinrich Bernhardt, they decide to cooperate in
order to find him. After many hardships in devastated Frankfurt they manage to find
and rescue him safely and bring him to Berlin. In Berlin everyone goes his way and
there is an optimistic atmosphere of understanding among nations. The film deals with
粸¢
post-war Germany, fear and mistrust towards the Germans, as well as the relations
between the Americans and the Russians.
The film Foreign Affairs (1948) is a sophisticated comedy which refers to the issue
of involvement, trying to show what will happen if America will be over involved in
corrupted Germany. The films deals with isolationism, and it claims that America would
not manage to understand Germany, and it raises the question what can be the best
attitude America can show towards the German issue. It asks what should be done in
Germany. The supporters of isolationism were afraid, like the commander of the hero,
captain Pringle (John Lund), of a complication and damage to America's freedom of
action. Pringle is a captain in the American army, who has an affair with a Berlin singer,
Erika (Marlene Dietrich), who has a Nazi record. She was the spouse of a famous Nazi,
and Hitler himself is seen kissing her hand in a news reel. Erika is willing to participate
in Pringles wooing as long as the deal includes smuggled cigarettes and nylon socks. A
Republican congresswoman from Iowa, Phoebe Frost, Gene Arthur, is sent to Berlin as
a member of and American delegation of finding evidence regarding the condition of
170
the army who is located in devastated Berlin. Pringle is caught between the two
women. He has to be ok by the standards of conservative Phoebe, at least pretend to
be ok. That is, he has to show a conservative façade and help the congresswoman, who
falls in love with him, to handle an investigation against the singer and some officer
who helps her (he himself). In spite of the first shock of the pedantic congresswoman
in light of the corruption around her, she gets carried away in the atmosphere of
freedom and promiscuity, and even purchases a night gown in the black market. At the
end of the film Pringle falls in love with the congresswoman, but is forced by his
commander to continue the affair with the singer in order to catch a senior Nazi who
wants to kill her. Phoebe finds out about the affair and withdraws, but then she hears
from the colonel that Pringle did it as a military assignment, and she returns to him,
while Erika is left alone.
The supporters of isolationism were afraid of a catastrophe that might come upon
the US as a result of its heavy and continuous involvement. Phoebe Frost the
congresswoman demonstrates this dilemma. On the one hand she cannot behave
according to her beliefs any more, as like Pringle, she had lost her innocence and with it
the sense of superiority versus Erika. The focus of this film is the Nazi past and the de粸¢
Nazification. The director, Wilder, talked to the inhabitants of Berlin, "the crazy city that
suffers from poverty and hunger", and he referred to them, both educated people and
taxi drivers and hookers, in a mixture of admiration and repugnance. Wilder aspired to
reach authenticity, and strolled in the black market and photographed in the real
locations of devastated Berlin225. He wanted that his film would have as much
documentary quality as possible, and he created a historical document that reflects
reality in Germany right after the war, and the immediate problems of the inhabitants
of the city and of the American conquerors alike.
The unit of controlling information (ICD) of the American army in Germany was
interested in a film that would explain the Europeans and the Americans why America
remains on German soil three years after the war. They wanted that the public would
support the intervention policy rather than returning to isolationism, as some circles in
225
Billy Wilder came back to shoot in Germany in two dramatic moments in its history after the war: the
common conquest prior to the first Berlin crisis and the airlift that followed, and the second time in
the time of the increasing tension during the second crisis of Berlin, which ended with the construction
of the wall, Ibidem, p. 292.
171
the administration and the American public expected. The Americans wanted to
combine propaganda and entertainment. They wanted to tell the Americans that they
should not hate the Germans, and the Germans should not hate the Americans. The
administration was not satisfied with Wilder's film. On the contrary, it threw mud on the
American soldiers as cynics and promiscuous, but on the other hand it did not support
the conservatives, and pointed on the golden path. Some scholars think that the film is
for isolationism, but Wilder's film is more sophisticated and his position has many
meanings.
Foreign Affairs is interesting also in the issue of the relations between Hollywood
and the administration. The film was "ordered" by the ICD, but it is very free and shows
the corruption in Germany as it really was. It was accepted with much anger by the
Defense Department, but it was not censored nor put out of use, which shows that
Hollywood did not function as a Yes-man of the administration, and its artists had
freedom of expression. The film exposes my claim that the relationships between
America and Germany were complicated, and it does it both directly and through
allegorical representations. The allegorical aspect can be seen as every image
symbolizes a certain thing. I will try to refer in this issue to the four main figures:
粸¢
a. Captain John Pringle symbolizes America.
b. Phoebe Frost the congresswoman symbolizes the American Puritanism (she is a
Republican, righteous and lonely) and the oppositional congress. Her Puritanism
is shown in her support of isolationism and lack of interference of the soldiers
with the locals, mainly the feminine ones, and finally she changes her attitudes,
which shows an option of moderation and compromise between the different
attitudes.
c. Colonel Plummer (Millard Michel) symbolizes Truman's administration, the
American real-politick. He is kind of a responsible adult in this world of
adolescents. He maintains the right balance between involvement and
isolationism (he is married and about to become an honest and serious
grandfather).
d. Erika von Scholotov, and ex-Nazi and a present cabaret singer, who symbolizes
Germany. I will expand about this issue in when I deal with German women.
172
The attitude towards the Soviet in the film is also interesting. At that time the
Cold War was just a vague threat, so we see Russian and American soldiers have good
time together with German girls, dancing Russian and western dances. Wilder's film
does not align with the instructions issued by the administration in 1942 and 1945. The
conquering soldiers are shown as opportunists, who aspire for easy profits in the black
market, while the re-education process is put aside in favor of the exploitation of the
inhabitants of Berlin, and their connection with the cabaret singer, who maintains her
connections with Nazis makes it more severe226. Wilder criticizes the American foreign
policy by changing its attitude towards Germany and denying its negative past. Wilder
understood that the American soldier was not a hero who waves a flag or aspires to
bring democracy to Germany.
The Defense Department hurried to issue an announcement in which it determines
that the film Foreign Affairs presents "a false and distorted picture of the respectable
and honest conquering army."
Foreign Affairs was provocative in several ways: Mike, an American soldier, calls
the congress "a bunch of salesmen who got a foot in the right door." The tone of the
film is skeptic about the intentions of the congress convention. The reaction of the
粸¢
congress was that the film damaged the respectable behavior of the conquering army.
With the background of the committee for anti-American activities, the HUAC issued an
interesting announcement to Hollywood, saying that "Hollywood has to demonstrate its
patriotism.227" At first Paramount prevented from Foreign Affairs from coming out to the
screens because of the harsh criticism from various directions, but finally enabled its
projection. It is obvious that the movie industry serves sometimes as a means of
propaganda, and the authorities and the politicians understood its power, but
acknowledged its autonomy at this stage, before McCarthy. We can see that Hollywood
does not operate as a tool in the hands of the administration, and its relationship with it
are complicated.
Although part of the critics claimed that the film was too negative, it gained great
success in the US. Stuart Schulberg, a member of the documentary department of the
226
Ralph Willett, (1987). "Billy Wilder's 'A Foreign Affair' (1945-1948): Trials and Tribulations of Berlin",
Historical Journal of film, Radio and Television, Vol 7. No. 1, 3-14, and p.5.
And: Ralph Willett, (London, New York, 1989). The Americanization of Germany, 1945-1949, pp. 2844.
227
Ibidem.
173
American prosecution attacked Wilder directly saying that "Wilder is rude, superficial
and insensitive to a certain responsibility.228" Herbert Loft, the Loft from Dachau, was
furious because Wilder criticized the US, and symbol of freedom. He made a connection
between Wilder' satire and a Nazi philosophy and determined that the director is
detached from the American way of life, and that the film was "superficial, tasteless and
cynical."
America's role in the war and in the post-war world became dimmed. The concerns
of the new world order continued to bother generations of Americans, as America
entered a new, different and vague world, and it had to reformulate its role in this
world, and it has learned to ignore doubts, it there were any. Part of the soldiers
missed home and the American way of life so much that they did not want to see any
other country. Others were indifferent to the suffering of the Germans and presented
"hollow materialism and spiritual poverty, according to George Kennan, a diplomat229.
In a wider prospective, one can say that the film reflects a limited period in which
Hollywood was relatively released of the McCarthy's prosecution and the demand for
American patriotism which characterized the war time.
The film Big Lift (1950) raised the issue whether all Germans should be blamed.
粸¢
In a dialogue between Daniel McClaf (Clift) and Peter Kowalski at the end of the film
they say there should not be any extreme opinion to either extreme. One should not be
naïve, but not angry either about this issue.
A few more issues come to mind in relation to the above issue: should the
perceptions about the Germans as monsters can fall on the head of one woman (even if
her husband was an SS man), an old man or a few children, or rather the blame is cast
on all Germans. Can one love a German woman? Make love to her and get married with
her? Hollywood still held the perception of collective accusation.
Big Lift tries to redefine the attitude towards Germany during the Cold War. The
previous attitude would damage American interests in the world (the attitude of the
State Department and the War Department), which shows the two approaches in
America towards Germany between rehabilitation and destroying the industrial
potential. War Minister, Hall and Foreign Minister Smithson, in 1944 had a plan that
claimed that Germany has to be rehabilitated in light of the new conflict they predicted,
228
229
Willett, pp. 33-34.
Ibidem. p. 33.
174
and their approach was finally accepted. On the other end there was the plan of the
Minister of Finance, Morgenthau, who was Jewish, and his plan aimed at making
Germany into an agricultural and weak country which would not be able to threaten the
peace of the world any more. Although Morgenthau's plan was rejected, approaches
which supported punishing Germany were still common in America, and therefore there
were objections in certain circles in the studios, objections that were against the drastic
change in the German representation up to a total rehabilitation (Daniel Leab's
approach)230,
rehabilitation
versus
punishment,
positive
versus
negative
representations, which testifies of the debate between the administration and
Hollywood and the complexity of the relationships between them. Hollywood
transmitted ambiguous messages, anti-German and pro-German in the films sub-text,
at the same time. Hence the picture is not so clear, as some studies claim of a
homogenous show of patriotism, full collective rehabilitation of Germany together with
aligning with the foreign policy231.
The blockade over Berlin and the air lift (1948) made the Red Threat real,
arousing apprehensions of a Communist takeover over Europe led to the production of
a number of films which represented these tensions. The film Airlift (1950) described
粸¢
the airlift to West Berlin at the time of the Soviet blockade in 1948. It was the first big
crisis of the Cold War, a crisis which caused an irreversible damage to the unity of the
allies in Germany in particular and in Europe in general, a crisis that generated new
political conditions that brought about a new world order and a new American
commitment of defending West Germany. As a result, the American involvement in
Germany increased. Airlift shows that the attempt to disconnect America from Germany
was complicated if not impossible. The film raises the issue how can America avoid
being damaged due to its involvement in world affairs, and tries to find a formula to
deal with these fears. The plot distinguishes between two types of Americans: moral
and idealistic versus immoral and cynical. The two American figures Danny McClaf
(Montgomery Clift), a young innocent American, an airborne technician in the supply
aircrafts that come from the US to Berlin, and Kowalski (Paul Douglas), who had been a
230
231
Moshe, Zimerman, (2004). "Hollywood and presenting the Nazi concentration camps in real Time",
Cinema and Memory – Dangerous Relationships? Zalman Shazar Center of The history of Israel,
Jerusalem: 133-151,136.
George Saton, Air Lift, Fox Twentieth Century, Hollywood, 1950.
175
POW of the Germans, who experienced severe maltreatment by the German guards.
Kowalski serves as a ground team man, who works in the control tower of Templehoff
airport in Berlin, and deals with landing the airplanes. Both of them are brought to
Berlin during the crisis of 1948-9, and they reflect the two opposing approaches
regarding Germany, isolationism versus involvement. During the film they conduct
conversations about the nature of the Germans. Kowalski, the tough guy, tells his
moderate friend: "They don't remember, of course, Warsaw, Rotterdam, Coventry,
Lidice, Belsen, Dachau, and Buchenwald, as if it all happened a thousand years ago."
When McClaf lands in Berlin, he meets Frederika Burkhardt, and they exchange
addresses, and when he is off duty they meet again232.
Kowalski does not want to come to Berlin at first and shrinks from anything
German. But when he does come at last, he is furious towards every German he comes
across. As far as he is concerned, all Germans are Nazis and he hates them, including
taxi drivers. He does not appreciate them very much, hates them, and wants to make
them feel that they had been defeated at war. Kowalski gets to know a local woman,
called Gerti, and McClaf is surprised about it, but Kowalski explains him that this is part
of his enjoyment of the war looting, rather than a significant change in his approach.
粸¢
McClaf arrives at Berlin with a will to turn over a new leaf with the German people. He
is willing to accept them as human beings rather than judging all of them as Nazi
criminals. His trust in Frederika is full until he finds out the truth about her. McClaf falls
in love with Frederika in spite of Kowalski's warnings that he should treat the Germans
and he does, that is exploiting them. Kowalski exploits Gerti and hurts her. McClaf
remains innocent and believes that one can really change the Germans. When a
German worker spills on him a bucket of glue by mistake, he gives his clothes for
cleaning, and so has to depart from the symbol of his identity. Kowalski gets the point
and tells him sharply: "you have become a native very quickly." McClaf goes through a
process of de-Americanization, since his deep and uncritical feelings towards Germany
motivate him to marry Frederika, which is against the position of Hollywood and the
American public. Kowalski starts developing sympathy towards the Germans, and thus
232
Zimmerman. P. 133.
176
becomes more open to thinking about the Germans, while Kowalski changes from a
non-fo9rgiving person to an ambassador of good will233.
The relationship between Kowalski and Gerti, whose father was an Ss man, goes
through a change after a period in which he behaves towards her with disdain and
aggression, and after the change he encourages her not to accept every word of his
and not to be passive. He indoctrinates her through a series of questions and answers.
It is obvious that many scenes are cumbersome transparent propaganda of the Cold
War, and a demonstration of Germany's role as a partner in the global American
scenario of defense against the Red Danger. The process Gerti goes through by
Kowalski is opposite to the one McClaf goes through, as he gets distant from his
Americanism in his relationship with Frederika. The films reaches its inevitable peak
when Kowalski proves to McClaf that Frederika lied to him about herself and the
background of her family, since her father and husband were Nazis, and Frederika
actually exploited him in order to arrive at America and join her husband who was
already there, and by so doing detached him from his American origins. Anyway,
Frederika's confession helps McClaf see only the German suffering, and not Frederika's
deceit. He fails in his mission, and instead of planting democracy in Germany, he is
粸¢
contaminated by her moral deterioration. The emotional suffering and the loss of his
innocence are the price he pays because of his non-critical involvement in Germany.
The bottom line is that Airlift does not preach for unrestricted isolationism. It supports
an involvement that does not rely on the political immunity of American citizens
overseas.
McClaf represents the fears against exploitation and the loss of innocence of
Americans abroad. He intends to return to the US after he finds out that Frederika
exploited him, and thinks that Kowalski is probably right in his reservations and
warnings of Frederika. But Kowalski says that they were both mistaken. In their
dialogue at the end of the film the say that there should not be any extreme opinion of
either end, and eventually one cannot blame the whole German people.
The severity of the situation in international policy led Hollywood to make a dramatic
revision of late history.
233
Thomas Schmundt, G., (winter, 1992). "Hollywood's romance of foreign policy, American G.I.S and
the conquest of the German Fraulein, Politics in films: Berlin in Films", Journal Of popular Film and
Television, Vol. 19 Nr. 4: 187-197, 192.
177
The film Operation Secret, by Warner Brothers from 1952, is a melodrama
whose background was WWII period, when the enemy was not a personal enemy. The
main villain is a French Communist who cheats on his underground comrades, and even
murders his closest partner, when he prevents him from delivering essential information
to the USSR. According to this film, which simplifies the complicated political situation,
such Frenchmen served the Allies only when it promoted the goals of the USSR. When
it was not the case, like in 1940, when the pact between the Nazis and the Soviets in
1939 was still valid, such actions of subversion enhanced France's surrender. The
commitment of these people was always to the dictates of their Soviet masters. This
view of the Soviet deviousness was accompanied by the German image, the former
enemy.
In another film, Desert Fox by Fox Twentieth Century from 1951/2, the main
figure, the German Field marshal Erwin Rommel, was presented as an "Aristocrat who
despises the Nazi deeds, and fought for his country and not for an ideology, and
planned secretly to throw down the Nazi hooligans." In line with the dramatic changes
that have taken place in the American policy, which led to joining the Germans, the
movie industry has used again some of its figures of villains. For example, Carl Stepank,
粸¢
who like Edmond had played figures of Nazis during WWII, played red villains, like the
main Soviet agent in Walk East of Beacon, as the critic Pauline Kael put it in 1954: "The
movie spectator who had seen the anti-Nazi films ten years ago will not have any
problem identifying the figures," and the actors who used to play constantly as SS Nazi
guards felt comfortably in their new Soviet environment234.
The film Fraulein (1958) expresses the approach of the supporters of the
involvement of the US as it was finalized at the end of the fifties. The film confirms the
American foreign policy regarding Germany, i.e., being pro-German, and supports the
consensus about the Cold War.
The plot is about an American pilot, McLain, whose aircraft is downed over
Germany. He escapes a prisoners' camp and finds refuge in the house of a German
professor. The professor has a beautiful daughter called Erika (Dana Wynter), and she
and her father save McLain from the Nazi jailors. Symbolically, this is the same line of
plot like in the earlier film The Devil Makes Three from 1952. The plot is an allegory and
234
Pauline Kael, I Lost It at the Movies (Boston, 1965), p. 318.
178
a justification of the renewal of relations between the US and Germany. The new
approach towards the Germans is that the Nazi ideology is not relevant for them any
more. Erika has a fiancé, an SS soldier, but he hides McLain from him. In a later stage
the professor is killed during an air raid of the Allies, again like in the film The Devil
Makes Three, Erika goes moves with her uncle to Berlin, and there she witnesses rapes
and looting by the Russians. Her uncle gets killed and she is almost raped by a drunken
Russian soldier. This is a very important point, as it deviates from the propagandist
presentation of the war in the West prior to the Cold War. The new approach
symbolizes the victimization of the Germans and shows the Soviets as war criminals,
and by so doing deviates the debate about the Germans' war crimes. After that Erika
escapes to West Berlin, and there McLain, who has returned to Germany as an officer in
the conquering force, tries to find Erika and her father to thank them for saving his life.
He finds her in a night club, and they plan to settle in the US, but there are two
difficulties to overcome. The Nazi fiancé is still around, and besides, Erika has been
listed as a hooker, which prevents her from accepting a visa to the US. The German
fiancé represents the Nazi past, and America has to make a renewed assessment of its
tough attitude towards the conquered state.
蛐¢
The film Fraulein is clean of political-ideological anxieties, which had been an
outstanding factor in Foreign Affairs and Big lift. McLain, as the representative of the
paternalistic image of America, is its worst representation. The fear of being
contaminated by a moral disease is gone together with the fear of internationalism,
which the American conservatives showed with during a decade. The only anxiety
shown in Fraulein is the woman's anxiety of men, but this anxiety is decreased and
becomes the inevitable way of cultural marriages.
While Foreign Affairs and Big lift attempt to formulate a possible and tolerable
approach to the American involvement in the post-war world, Fraulein just establishes a
set of codes in the debate about foreign affairs, expressing the agreement between the
states. The film says: Look, there are Germans, who helped us during WWII, an
utterance that is heard in other American films in this period.
Half a decade after the end of WWII, Germany is conquered both militarily and
ideologically. The Cold War, which had been quite invisible, burst into the open
awareness in the Berlin crisis and the airlift between June 1948 and May 1949. The
179
supporters of the tough policy in the Cold War in Washington used the situation of the
Russian blockade on Berlin to dramatize the Soviet expansion aspirations. The
dramatization of the events of the Cold War insinuated that something bad happens in
the USSR and in the regions under its control, something that good people try to avoid,
and indeed escape is the motivating force in some of the films of this genre.
The Germans stopped being the enemy, and have become the allies against the
common enemy – the Soviets. Therefore a more positive image of the Germans has
become possible. This new stand about the Germans has made them deserve being
free and live like good democrats.
6.3 The Nazi period in historical perspective of the 1950's and1960's
The distinction between the German and the Nazi was sharpened in the fifties
and the sixties, upon the decline of McCarthyism and Anti-American Activities
Committee – the HUAC. There was a wave of films that transmitted this distinction: The
Devil Makes Three (1952), Stalag 17 (1953), Witness for the Prosecution (1957),
Fraulein (1958), The Young Lions (1958) and others. These films presented the
Gestapo and the SS men as criminals, while the Wehrmacht and other Germans were
cleaned of guilty. This tendency fell in line with the political cooperation between the US
粸¢
and West Germany in the fifties. For this end it was necessary to clear of guilt the
Germans in general and throw it on Hitler and his people235. Another approach which
was common in Hollywood was the continuation of cool non-positive representations of
Germans in spite of the close supervision on Hollywood in the time of McCarthyism and
the HUAC.
The film The Devil Makes Three (1952) describes a neo-Nazi underground that
smuggles the gold of the third Reich in order to establish it again. The underground
catches a naïve American officer, Captain Geoff Elliot (Gene Kelly). The leader of the
underground, Heisman (Klaus Klausen), is a singer in a night club called The Shadow.
Willy works there. She is a daughter of an anti-Nazi family who had helped Elliot escape
from a camp. As of the time of the film, her parents were killed by an American
bombardment, and she works in the club and helps the underground in smuggling the
gold. Elliot arrives in Munich to look after Willy and her family, and when he meets her
he falls in love with her. Pier Angeli, the Italian actress with the delicate face acted as
235
Zimmerman, p. 296.
180
Willy, and again, like in other films, she uses the naïve American in order to go on with
the underground activities, but the thing is that she also falls in love with him and
finally turns against the Nazis.
The film presents Germany after the war. This is a renewed experience of the
German culture brought by the Americans with an authentic atmosphere of the dark
world of fishy night clubs after the war. "The film was done in full cooperation with the
American army and the German federal republic of Bavaria." This saying proves that the
film was done with the consent of the people of the government and that it represents
the formal American position. This film is not against the Soviets but against the option
of a renewed Nazi revival. This is interesting since the representation of the non-Nazi
Germans is positive and so it seems as a preparation of making the Germans their
allies, and there is no dealing with the new enemy (Communism), but with the enemy
of yesterday – the Nazis.
Stalag 17 (1953). Billy Wilder's film describes a camp of American POWs in
Germany. The camp is surrounded by a wire, towers with machine guns and
searchlights. The camp provides a physical framework of time and place, and the plot
provides the action.
粸¢
The film describes the lives of 14 American POWs who are imprisoned in one
barrack in a notorious German prisoners' camp. The soldiers spend most of their time in
searching ways to help each other to escape. They are detained in a camp that is
conducted with typical German toughness. All the escape plans the prisoners plan fail,
and one night two of them are killed in an attempt to escape. After checking what
happened during their discussions, it comes out that there is an informer. This piece of
news makes the relationship in the barrack complicated, and especially makes the life
of Septon (William Holden), a cynical American nice looking soldier, who spends his
time by planning deals with Germans for special privileges. He gambled that the escape
plan would fail, and therefore he is suspected to be the informer. From that moment
onward Septon is busy proving his innocence until the real informer, a GermanAmerican who had been planted in the barracks, is found out. The prisoners throw him
out and his Nazi friends kill him by mistake. The Americans use this distraction to a
successful escape of part of the prisoners.
181
The camp commander, Colonel von Scherbach, played by the director Otto
Preminger, warns the prisoners (American pilots who were downed over Germany),
"Nobody will ever escape from this camp," he says to the 630 prisoners who were
concentrated around him in a feigned friendly attitude, "please, let me remind you,
gentlemen that every prisoner who would be found outside the barrack after lights out,
will be shot with no further warning." When he was talking to them, the bodies of the
two prisoners who had been shot to death that night were still lying in the mud.
Colonel von Scherbach is concerned for the safety in the camp not because Stalag 17
could contribute to the German war effort, but because a perfect record would promote
his own career. As a matter of fact, von Scherbach has a malicious enjoyment from the
fact that he bases his power by torturing the prisoners under his command. For
example, he delivers a long monologue full of self-satisfaction with his hands on his
hips, talking sarcastically about the weather, "I hoped we could give you a white
Christmas, like the ones you had in the past,236" when he came to inform them about
the capture and execution of Manfredi and Johnson, the two prisoners who had tried to
escape. He speaks joyfully a moment before he orders a guard to uncover the bodies so
that the prisoners could see them. "They were smart enough to come back to us so
粸¢
that my record would remain clean.237"
The prisoners' willingness to mark Septon as a scape goat without evidence puts
them in the same line with Price and von Scherbach. In this way Wilder attacks
McCarthyism, which looked for scape goats and tended to suppress those who dared
not to follow the crowd. The American POW are usually described as moral people, and
Septon, the hero of the film, takes a skeptic stand when he refuses to keep in line with
his comrades' behavior.
The critics Joseph McBride and Michael Wilmington argue that Stalag 17 was an
immense hit both commercially and in the eyes of the critics (it was Wilder's most
successful comedy until that time) and that this success is due to the attack on the
American values, as the camp was some kind of microcosmos of the capitalist
society.238 Casting Otto Preminger as von Scherbach reminds the use Wilder did of the
director Erich von Stroheim as Rommel in Five tombs on the way to Cairo. He did it as
236
237
238
Billy Wilder, the film Stalag 17 / Prisoners camp, Paramount, Hollywood, 1953.
Ibidem.
Sinyard & Turner,p.140.
182
homage to these great directors together with a description of the German aristocracy.
Wilder's attitude amazed the Europeans, and most of all the Jews, as he was Jewish
himself. In Stalag 17 the Nazi victims suffered a severe regime, but enjoyed a relative
freedom and were in danger of death only if they tried to escape, and only during the
attempt of the escape. It certainly was not a holiday, but in light of what the
inhabitants of Eastern Europe experienced, especially the Jews, this was almost luxury.
Fourteen American POWs watched the premiere in Hollywood in 1953, and Florable
Major of the Los Angeles Mirror wrote about their reactions: "They didn't pay attention
to this point. Some of them indicated that there was no dancing in the camp of men
with men, as seen in the film. Someone said that the German officer didn't wear the
right uniform. Another claimed that he couldn't enjoy this comedy as his memories from
the captivity were still fresh."239
The film reflects the steady spirit of the prisoners and their high morale. But one
aspect remained faked and irritating in it – the representation of Nazis. They are just fat
fools. They are not realistic and reflect the distinction between the Nazis and the other
Germans who do not appear in the film.
In the film Witness for the Prosecution (1957), Christine (Marlene Dietrich)
粸¢
works in a night club where the soldiers spend their time at the end of the war, before
she married Leonard Wohl (Tyrone Power) and moved to live with him in London. The
first impression is of innocence, personified by Marlene Dietrich heretical figure. This is
the impression the lawyer, the jury and the audience get. When Dietrich sings in the
dubious night club, it rings a bell not only of Foreign Affairs, but other films, where she
played as a cabaret singer. Eventually, Wilder turns her unshakable image as Femme
Fatal, upside down.
Christine sings to the restless soldiers the touching song "I may never come home
again." Then Leonard offers her to provide her food products from the Black Market.
The sequence ends as Christine kisses him when he lies in the bed. We have no reason
to doubt that Christine, like the stereotype of the German woman, takes advantage of
Leonard in order to escape her miserable situation and to provide her luxury products.
This impression of Christine as an opportunist is reinforced in the scene of her visit to
239
Zeev Rav-Nof, Catch the Traitor, Yediot Aharonot, Literary supplement, 15.8.1991.
183
Sir Wilfred's office (Charles Laughton), where she gives a negative impression as it
seems she doesn't care that her husband was arrested for a murder accusation.
When Christine appears as the main witness of the prosecution and testifies against her
husband as Christine Helm, it is suddenly discovered that her previous marriage is still
valid, and this information is used against her. One can easily conclude that Leonard is
the victim and Christine is the villain. But this is a mistaken impression, as finally we
find out that it all was a trick to save her husband Leonard, who is found to be a villain
and a murderer. At the end of the film our previous opinions about good and evil are
undermined. The conclusion of the film is that the stigma of German-Nazi=villain is
misleading, and our assumption that the foreign soldier (in this case an Englishman and
not an American) is always innocent and kind is also not true.
Hence, the analysis of the film and its historical context, as it was produced in
1957; we may say that it expressed the situation in which the West had to give up the
stereotype attributed to the Germans and accept them as human beings.
The Young Lions (1958) by Edward Dmytryk was one of the most important films
that dealt with Germany. This is an epic that encompasses a number of years before
WWII and ends after it. If focuses on the story of four people, two Germans and two
粸¢
Americans. Christian Distell is played by Marlon Brando, whose accent goes up and
down from one scene to another. He plays a German idealist who works first as a ski
instructor, where he meets a young beautiful American girl, Margaret (Barbara Rash)
and the two of them fall in love. Christian is charmed by Nazism and only later on starts
doubting and getting sober. Captain Hardenberg (Maximilian Schell) is Christian's best
friend. Hardenberg is a dedicated Nazi who stays loyal to his goals to the end. In a
scene between the two officers we see that Christian is a better soldier, while the Nazi
is too fanatic and cruel to be a good enough soldier and commander. The American
entertainer Dean Martin plays Michael Whitaker, a singer who is about to make a
breakthrough in his career. Michael does whatever he can to evade being recruited to
the army, but eventually finds himself in uniform and even gives up his career for
fighting. There is also the American Jew, Noah Ackerman (Montgomery Clift), who is
sensitive up to a point of breaking down, but he copes with anti-Semitism not only from
the Germans, but from his comrades as well, and comes out a real tough guy with a
strong character. Hope Lange plays his non-Jewish girlfriend, and Margaret, who has
184
gone to America, is Michael's girlfriend, who pushes him to recruit because of being
ashamed.
The script writer, Edward Enhalt is forced to insert a sequence of a camp of
recruits. There is a scene from which it is found out that the officers didn't like the
racial behavior of Ackerman's commander, Sergeant Ricket (Lee Van Cleef), as if racism
was just a slight deviation from the norm in the forties.
Christian finds out the Nazi atrocities, and he is lost in a forest until he comes
across the Jewish soldier, and gets killed by his bullets when he gets entangled in a
wire. The wire serves as a kind of crown of thorns and together with the symbolism of
the name Christian and his tragic ending he is a martyr like Jesus. Brando as Christian
dies out symbolically for Hitler's sins. The film came out to the screens in 1958 and was
one of the most important films of this time who raised doubts regarding the
conventional positions towards war.
6.4
The sixties in Berlin and in Hollywood: City with a wall in its center–
the attempt to erase the German Past
Berlin was the location in which most of the intelligence operations in Europe have
粸¢
taken place in the first twenty years of the conquest and the Cold War. In November
27, 1958, Khrushchev issued a formal letter to the Allies, demanding that the western
Allies evacuate Berlin and enable the establishment of an independent political unit, a
free city. He threatened that if the West would not comply with this, the soviets would
hand over to the East Germany's government the control over the roads to Berlin. In
the coming months Moscow conducted a war of nerves as the last date of the end of
the ultimatum, May 27, 1959, came close. Finally the Soviets retreated as a result of
the determination of the West. This event reconfirmed the claims of the West that "the
US, Britain and France have legal rights to stay in Berlin." According to Halle: "These
rights derive from the fact that Germany surrendered as a result of our common
struggle against Nazi Germany."240 The Russians have done many attempts to change
Berlin's status. In 1961 Berlin Wall was constructed, almost without response on the
part of the West, and by so doing, the Soviets perpetuated the status quo that had
been since 1948. In July 25, 1961 Kennedy addressed the Americans on television,
240
Louis J. Halle, (New York, 1967).The Cold War as History, p. 170.
185
saying that "West Berlin is not as it had ever been, the location of the biggest test of
the courage and the will power of the West."241 On June 26, 1963, Kennedy went out to
Berlin, which was divided by the wall, torn between east and west, in order to
announce his message. In his speech outside the city council of West Berlin, Kennedy
won the hearts of the Berliners as well as those of the world when he said: "Ich bin
ein Berliner", I'm a Berliner.
The sixties were years of heating of the conflict with the Soviet Block. In 1961 the
Berlin Wall was constructed. Then Kennedy came into power, there was the movement
for human rights and the political tension between whites and blacks in America. The
conflict increase as the Korean War started, and afterwards when America intervened in
Vietnam. There was also the crisis in the Bay of Pigs in Cuba, which almost pushed the
whole world into a nuclear war and catastrophe. During the 28 years of the Berlin Wall,
13.8.61-9.11.89, this was notorious as an example of a political border that marked the
seclusion and freezing more than freedom of movement, communication and change.
At the same time there was the most obvious sign of the division of Germany after
WWII and the division of Europe to East and West by the Iron Curtain. The wall was
the background of stories by writers from east and west. The writers of espionage
粸¢
thrillers were fascinated by the global conflict between east and west and the Cold War
with Berlin as the setting of the divided city. Berlin presented a permanent conflict that
was perceived as endless, or as Mews defined it: "Berlin is perfect, a romantic past,
tragic present, secluded in the heart of East Germany."242 The city presented the
writers with a situation that demanded a reassessment of the genres and the
ideological and aesthetic perceptions of this type of writing. This was the reason that
the genre of espionage books blossomed in the sixties, mainly those with the wall. The
wall was not just a symbol of a political failure, as East Germany could not stop the flow
of people escaping from it. The city was ugly, dirty, and full of wires and lit by a yellow
light, like a concentration camp. A West German policeman says: "If the Allies were not
here, there would not have been a wall. He expressed the acknowledgment that the
Western powers had also an interest in the wall as a tool for preventing the unification
241
Kennedy's speech in Berlin: www.whitehouse.gov/history/ presidents/jk35.html
Siegfried, Mews, (1996). "The Spies are coming in from the Cold War: The Berlin Wall in the
Espionage Novel", The Berlin Wall: Representations and Perspectives, eds.Ernst Schürer, Manfred
Keune and Philip Jenkins, (Peter-Lang, New York,): 50-51.
242
186
of Germany. But his colleague answers: If they were not here, the wall would not have
been, but the same applies for Berlin.243 Berlin was the world capital of the Cold War.
The wall threatened and created risks and was known as one of the big justifications for
the mentality of the Cold War. The construction of the wall in August 1961
strengthened Berlin's status as the frontline of the Cold War and as a political
microcosmos, which reflected topographical as well as the ideological global struggle
between east and west. It made Berlin a focus of interest, and this focus in turn caused
an incentive for the espionage literature with the rise of neorealism with the anti-hero,
as it also ended the era of romanticism.244 The works of le Carré and Deighton are the
best examples of this change in literature. Both of them use the wall as the arena of
events and a symbol in their works. Only at the end of the fifties, upon the final
withdrawal of McCarthyism and the relative weakening of the Cold War, there started
have to appear films with new images about the position and nature of the Germans
and the representations of Nazism in the new history.
The films of the Cold War presented the communists as enemies or saboteurs.
Together with this view about the Soviets, developed the rehabilitation of the German
image. Each part of the German society was rehabilitated and become a victim instead
粸¢
of an assistant of the Nazis. The critic Dwight MacDodnald was impressed by the way in
which the German population "has changed from a fearful assistant of one totalitarian
regime to the hero opponent of another totalitarian regime".245 This approach has to be
examined, and how it influenced the development of the German representation, since
many films I have investigated demonstrate a different approach ofo the German
representation.
The films testify of the different approaches and the existing trends in the
administration and in Hollywood regarding Germany and the Germans, and the
approach that would serve the American foreign policy and the US's global interests.
Films like One, Two, Three, Judgment in Nuremberg, Town without Pity, The Longest
Day, The Great Escape, Dr. Strangelove, The Spy Who Came in from the Cold, Funeral
in Berlin, Torn Curtain, and others brought a more realistic German representations,
which emphasized the complexity of the German representation in Hollywood. The new
243
244
245
Ibidem, p. 53.
Ibidem, pp. 62-63.
Leab, "The Iron Curtain", p.155 .
187
developments of the weakening of McCarthy persecutions and the PCA generated a
convenient cultural atmosphere for accepting exceptional script writers. The most
outstanding and pioneers in their theoretical complexity were One, Two, Three by Billy
Wilder and especially Judgment at Nuremberg by Stanley Kramer. One could say that
these two films constituted the turning point of the German representation in
Hollywood's movie industry.
In 1961, a short time before the wall was constructed, Billy Wilder returned to
Berlin and to the issue of Germans after Hitler's time. He shot there the comedy One,
Two, Three. The film deals with Berlin and Berliners, the conquering forces, the
wonders of the economic prosperity in West Germany and the failing socialism in East
Germany, and also Brandenburg Gate, which was still open at the time. Through the
obedient laborers who beat their heels and behave like soldiers in a Coca Cola factory,
Wilder leads the German spectator back to his military past that seems so distant.
The film One, Two, Three is a satiric comedy. McNamara (James Cagney), a
manager in Coca Cola, is sent to Berlin in order to distribute this drink to the new ally of
the US, West Germany. But as a good capitalist, he aspires for a better position. He
wants to be the manager of Europe and have an office in London, and for this end he
粸¢
would do anything. After many attempts, including an attempt to distribute the drink in
the Communist block, the idea is rejected due to his boss; fear and hatred toward
Communism and the Russians, the boss representing the America paranoia. Wilder
chose comedy because only through a comic strategy one could create stereotypical
images, which go through an extreme non-realistic process. Through exaggeration and
caricature of the images one can show stereotypic characteristics and reach absurd
situations of the ex-Nazi who stamps with his feet and stands to attention when he
identifies an authoritative figure around. There are also three Russian friends who
consult with each other, trying to reach an agreement, and the head of the department
is a spy. The director chose to start the plot from the end, that is, he starts the story
from the day in which East Berlin closes its gates to the West. This is also the day when
the hero comes back home to America, but a moment before that he reconstructs his
last months in the city. Although these are his personal experiences, there is also a
harsh criticism of the political and social reality of the conquering forces.
188
The film presents a satire on the Cold War under a cover of a romantic comedy.
Wilder did not have any empathy toward the regime in East Germany or communism,
nor did he praise the American culture of the masses. He wanted to show that greed
and corruption characterize both regimes. But more severe, according to Wilder, are the
suspiciousness, the fears and misunderstandings between both parties. No party has a
monopoly over stupidity and ignorance, and a political mentality that is based on lack of
knowledge and paranoid blindness implies dangers for the stability and safety in the
world. The borderlines between good and bad and between stupid and smart people
are not national, but human. Hence, the image of the German, both Western and
Eastern, is more grotesque due to his will to integrate in either communist or capitalist
societies. The people do not believe in the ideologies, but rather adopt the rules of the
game of the rulers.
In the film Judgment at Nuremberg (1961), Kramer describes a legal drama
about the trial of the judges, one of the least familiar trials of the Nazi regime. Kramer
presents the tragedy of Germany, in which normative people, like the respected judge
Ernst Janing, played by Burt Lancaster, makes legal the crimes of the regime. The US
sends to Nuremberg judge Dan Howard, played by Spencer Tracy, to judge the judges
粸¢
of the third Reich. The defendants are Emil Han, Frederic Hofstetter, and Werner Lempi
and Janing, who was the Minister of Justice. They are accused of murder, brutality,
tortures and an inclusive responsibility for everything that have been done in the labor
and extermination camps of the Nazi regime, as they were signed on the orders of
arresting and imprisonment. There are emotional outbursts of the defense and the
prosecution throughout the trial. When Judge Dan Howard is not in court, he tries to
understand the dynamics in Hitler's Germany through locations in Nuremberg, talks with
his house keepers, Mr. and Mrs. Hulberstadt and others. The testimonies in court are
shocking and all the defendants get a life sentence.
Who is responsible for all the atrocities that have been occurred in the
concentration camps, Hitler? Goebbels? The judges of the Third Reich? The jailers? The
German citizens who lived a few kilometers from the camps? Or all of them. And maybe
the responsibility lies on the world countries as well for not intervening in time to
prevent the murdering of millions of people?
189
The main hero of the film is the Minister of Justice of Nazi Germany, Ernst Janing,
an intellectual, played by Burt Lancaster, and the peak of the film is his admission of
guilt of his service of the Nazi regime. The German defense attorney, played by
Maximilian Schell, tries to acquit the German judge in order to save Germany's
reputation, and for this end he is willing to abuse again the victims of the Nazi regime,
who stand on the witness stand. The fact that the film dealt with the trial enabled a
confrontation of the moral, political and legal perceptions of the defendants, the
defeated Germans with those of the winning American judges.
The relationships of east and west overshadowed the court and influenced the
military commanders, who did not avoid trying to influence the judge's decision in favor
of the defendants, so that they would win the sympathy of the German people, the
people who was meant to be the buffer against the east. Judge Howard is torn between
making justice and the considerations and pressures of the political system. The same
dilemma was in Hollywood in those years, whether to purge Germany of guilt out of
political needs, or regard Germany and the Germans as guilty in spite of the change
that came about in the Cold War.
This film is mainly a bill of indictment and condemnation against the indifference of
粸¢
the Western countries, which did not stop the Nazi danger at the beginning and their
forgiving attitude to Nazis and Germany after the war, more than against Nazism itself.
Janing wants to get Howards's appreciation and wants to explain by saying that he had
not known where the situation was going to and when it went wrong. Howard answers
him: "Everything went wrong at the first time you sentenced to death an innocent
person." Janing remained speechless with an expression of pain and horror, horror of
his own deeds, horror of the years to come in his cell in jail, where he would be alone
with his guilt and pangs of conscience. When the trial was over, Janing wanted to get a
small private acquittal from the man who convicted him, but he did not get it. This is
the last scene of the film and this is the impression we are left with: Germany and the
Germans are guilty and there is no atonement.
Kramer challenged the rules against the movie industry and the HUAC. The judge
addresses his fellow countrymen and says: "In the life of every nation, when an enemy
grasps its throat and strangles it, there will be people who would say that the only way
to stay alive is by imitating the enemy's deeds/ But if we deny truth, justice, and human
190
dignity – what will be left for us to live for?" The film is a bill of indictment against
Nazism, but also against the western countries and their forgiving attitude toward the
Nazis and Germany after the war, and especially the US.
Niza Ariel says that "In his film, Judgment at Nuremberg (1961), the American
director Stanley Kramer managed to crack the common movie pattern of the
representation of Germans and Nazis. The film integrated in the liberal wave of western
movie at the end of the fifties and the beginning of the sixties, at the time of the
weakening of the Cold War and the end of McCarthy's era in the US."246
The film was screened in 1961 with the Berlin crisis in the background. Throughout
the film political pressures were put on the American judge saying that one should not
blame all the Germans as they might neglect the West and support the Soviets. Avi
Man, the scriptwriter, and Kramer blame the German nation, and especially its social
elites, as well as the Americans who sacrifice values in return for political gain.247 This
film is to a large extent a release of the chains which had been put on Hollywood in the
time of McCarthy, and it expresses the decrease of the Witch Hunt in Hollywood.
The film The Longest Day (1962) describes both the German and the Allies
perspectives of the day of invasion, D-Day, to Normandy in 6.6.1944. The critics praised
粸¢
this film and regarded it as one of the big epic films of WWII. It reproduces in its
intensity and scope the greatest amphibic invasion in history, and it was a big success.
It cost almost 10 million dollars until the premiere in October 1st, 1962, and it was a
great attraction. There were so many stars, dynamic stunts, integrating many scenes of
the real invasion, and made it a great box office success. It gained 17.5 million dollars,
almost two times of its cost. Throughout the production Zanuck declared time and
again his belief that the film was not just a historical description. He thought that it was
important to pass the message through the film about the state the world was and the
treat on our way of life. It was intended to be a reminder to the people that the Allies
fought together and defeated the evil because they were together.
The Longest Day is considered to be one of the most loved, preferred and famous
films. It is based on the book by Cornelius Ryan that has an unprecedented distribution,
246
247
Nitza, Ariel, (2004)." Presentation of Nazism and the Holocaust in Western movies: A Discussion in
three film narratives", Cinema and Memory – Dangerous Relationships? Zalman Shazar Center of the
history of Israel, Jerusalem, pp. 316-293.296-298.
zand p.209-210.
191
and was sold in the first year in 800,000 copies.248 Ryan wrote about the invasion to
Normandy for the Daily Telegraph of London. Ten years after the war he interviewed
more than 1,000 soldiers who participated in the invasion, and later on wrote the
book.249 It would have been interesting to examine the German point of view and
interview German soldiers at that time during and after the war. The makers of the film
had problem translating all the testimonies into a visual medium. Hollywood described
the massive invasion of 175,000 soldiers of the Allies from the US, Canada, Britain and
other countries. There were more than 13,000 aircrafts and 6,500 ships of different
types.250
The film reinforces a patriotic issue, the victory of democracy over dictatorship.
The American, English and Canadian soldiers were strong and willing to initiate, they
trusted their commanders and their goal, whereas the German soldiers are presented
as confused, fearful and without any initiative. When the film was done, 1962, it was
almost 20 years after the end of the war; West Germany was re-armed and joined
NATO in order to block a possible invasion from the USSR. The wider goal of the film
was to present reconciliation towards the Germans, like the thesis that was raised at
the beginning of this research, i.e., the change in the American foreign policy by a more
粸¢
positive representation of Germans in Hollywood's films. For instance, General Erwin
Rommel is shown in a sympathizing way due to his attempt to murder Hitler in July
1944.
The genre of war films, which flourished in Hollywood in the sixties, did not focus
on the moral significance of the crimes of Nazi Germany and focused on heroism in the
battlefield. This emphasis on heroism made vague the significance of war. The
description of American soldiers arriving to a concentration camp is fulfilling one's
obligation. This issue comes up also in relation to The Great Escape and the Battle of
the Bulge, which will be discussed later on.
In the Great Escape, 1963, the image of the German in the first part of the film is
innocent and ridiculous, it is easy to convince the Germans with simple explanations
and the German is embarrassed and tends to believe what he is told. For example, the
248
249
250
Stephen E. Ambrose (1996). "'The Longest Day' (U.S., 1962):' Blockbuster' History", World War II,
Film and History, Eds. John Whiteclay Chambers II, and David Culbert, (New York, Oxford: Oxford
University Press,): p. 97.
Ibidem, p. 97.
Ibidem, p. 98.
192
American soldier tells him: "The baseball flew so I went to fetch it," and they believe
him. The prisoners' attitude to their capturers is degrading, making fun of them. For
instance, in the scene of the attempt escape, Steven McQueen who plays Hits, he tries
to check the dead area from the guards' angle. After he is caught, he retrieves a cutter
for cutting iron from his pocket and volunteers to "admit" that he had tried to escape.
His behavior is cynical and sarcastic. The picture changes in the second half of the film,
when it goes out of the camp and presents another German, more sophisticated, more
violent, and monstrous, who does not hesitate to act aggressively and pull the trigger.
After the aircraft of the pilot Handley falls down, and manages to escape, the soldiers
shoot with no real reason and kill Blithe the blind.
The reality outside the camp shows the outside world in a most ugly and cruel
way, including different political movements, like the French underground, and this
reality penetrated eventually into the camp. We see the more aristocratic part of the
German army as it is dismissed and punished by the monstrous part that have taken
over. That is to say Nazism versus being German. The difference between the
professional soldiers and the ideological Nazis is emphasized by the fact that even the
camp commander fall in the hands of the Nazis although he is part of the German
粸¢
army. The Nazis execute without hesitation by a machine gun 50 prisoners. The game
has gone out of control. The rules have been violated, or have never been valid for
these soldiers.
There are two main characters in the film: the German camp commander and the
SS officer that represent two approaches to the nature of Germans. The camp
commander, General von Luger, played by Hans Mesmer, represents the one who
knows the rules of the game and is willing to abide by them. He is a pilot and an
officer, and knows the rights of the prisoners, and the rules and the moral codes. He is
the highest authority versus the heroes, the prisoners. His figure is shaped cautiously.
On the one hand he keeps a tough expression, his body is very erect (like all the
German soldiers), his speech is in staccato and confident, he has a high forehead,
which testifies of wisdom and determination and his behavior is very formal. On the
other hand, he believes that conflicts of interests can be settled through peaceful ways.
The film The Great Escape (1963), presents the German soldiers and generals during
WWII in as way that let us understand the German military mechanism. The film
193
emphasized that the German army, in spite of its impeccable order, accuracy and
determination is divided internally. The film is divided into two parts, not a onedimensional evil and threatening enemy, but rather a mechanism that is split between
the "good" and the "bad".
The first part is told from a light point of view, and does not present the enemy as
a monster or beastly senseless people. The German is presented as tough, but sensitive
at the same time, but sometimes ridiculous, and even with a sense of humor. In one of
the opening scenes, when the German officer catches the two soldiers who disguise
themselves as Russian peasants, he calls them by their names, makes jokes with them
and brings them back to their place. He is pleasant and smiling. The choice of the genre
of entertaining adventure films enabled the director to pass the hidden message that
one can see the German as a potential partner in spite of the war. Furthermore, the
potential German partner is presented as unsophisticated and not really threatening. It
testifies about the debate of the German representation. It shows how difficult it was to
convince the American public of the change of attitude toward Germany and justifying
their attitude towards Germany, as it was the national interest to do it at that time. This
is why the presentation is dual.
粸¢
There is a clear division between the German soldiers, the pilots and the air force
people and the SS and the Gestapo. This fact is most significant in analyzing the image
of the German as it is reflected in this film.
6.5 The Cold War and the mechanization of the German image
The brilliant film of the genius director Stanley Kubrick, Dr. Strangelove or
How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964) describes in a fearful
way the intolerable easiness in which a nuclear war can happen. The film combines an
accurate realism (description of the battle scenes and the inside of the aircraft B-52)
with a grotesque satire. The army wanted to censor the scene, but Kubrick had
constructed the aircraft according to a photograph in Time magazine.
The plot is about an American general who goes crazy and orders to attack the
USSR. All the squadron of the strategic bombers is launched to its targets deep in
Russia. But the Russians invented a doomsday mechanism that is operated
automatically in case of a nuclear attack and destroys the whole world. The crisis gets
194
worse when the president manages to cancel the attack but one aircraft does not
receive the cancellation and continues to its target and to the end of the world.
Dr. Strangelove, who is actually Dr. Macordic Liebe (in German: strange love) is a
German scientist who is employed in the Pentagon. His figure is based on a number of
ex-Nazi experts, who had been recruited to the American defense system, like the
engineer of the American space program, Werner von Brown, who was in charge of the
V2 rocket program that intimidated London in the forties. He is a disabled person on a
wheel chair and limited in his right hand. He suffers from non-volitional movements, like
the Nazi Heil salute and addressing the president as Mr. Fuhrer, and he seems crazy in
his movements and speech.
The destruction of the world reminds Dr. Strangelove of the time he served Adolf
Hitler, and his threats represent some kind of Nazi craziness which derives enjoyment
out of the idea of the end of the world. This respected doctor on a wheelchair with an
iron arm gets excited to say words like: exterminate, slaughter, sex, and his artificial
arm pops up with a distinctive Heil Hitler salute. The danger he represents is also in his
influence on aggressive American generals. The film criticizes America of adopting the
Nazi militarism that might damage America and peace in the world.
粸¢
The film was a direct reaction to the Bay of Pigs crisis in Cuba, when the world was
on the verge of a nuclear catastrophe. The critics praised Dr. Strangelove together with
severe claims. Most of the critics regarded it as a brilliant, merciless treatment of the
nuclear crisis.
Dr. Strangelove is the dominant figure in the war room. He suggests a survival of
few, ten women per man. The consultants love the idea. In the deep piers life and love
would be more mechanical. Dr. Strangelove would certainly bring about more denial of
human traits. This is a hint for Germans and Americans who become more similar to
one another. Dr. Strangelove is very ironical. "Peace is our profession," he says. The
criticism in this film could not be expressed when McCarthyism was in its prime.
The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (1965) is a more significant expression of
the change in Hollywood. This is an espionage film based on a successful novel by
John le Carré. It brings a pessimistic, cynical point of view, which disregard all the
ideologies of the cold War. The story transmits the clear message that in the Cold War
there are no enemies and friends, bad and good, but only bad and worse. The director
195
Martin Ritt, who had been one of the people in Hollywood's Black List at the beginning
of the fifties, and was accused of sympathizing with the communists and he could not
work in the US at the time, tries to get even with Hollywood, as well as with the
American policy during the Cold War and its human price.
There are two German figures which illuminate the view of the film and its hero:
Limas, the hero, is a British spy who is a plaything in the hands of intelligence factors
on both sides of the Iron Curtain, and two German figures in the film, Fiddler and Mont.
These two Germans represent two archetypes within the ideological chaos: Fiddler, the
German Jew, who is a human exception in the alienated atmosphere. Mont is an exNazi, restrained, arrogant, who is eventually found out to be one of the worse
characters. The film presents the German as nationless, who still carries the rooted
stereotypes of WWII. They all wear masks and you can never know the real face of a
person and whose side he is. The images of Fiddler and Mont are situated on the two
ends of the archetypal German image.
Fiddler, a German Jew, played by Oskar Werner is a typical casting of a Jew:
short, dark, gentle with good eyes, wearing a casquette and having an energetic body
language. Fiddler is the most human figure in the film after the hero. He is supposed to
粸¢
be a pawn in the hands of the British agency, and try to catch Mont the Horrible. But in
the course of the film we learn that Mont is on the British side, whereas Fiddler, the
communist, fights for his ideals.
Mont's figure is played by Peter Van Eyck, and he has a smaller volume than
Fiddler. He does not exceed the German-Nazi stereotype. Van Eyck played Nazis in
many Hollywood films, and was identified with such characters. He has Arian nice face,
tough cruel look, and a small mean smile from time to time. Mont is the ultimate Nazi –
cold, keeps being clean at work, even in the trial against him he does not say a word,
as if it has nothing to do with him, and his spokesman has to do the job.
The film shows history in the present. The man who murdered Jews in the
Holocaust remained a monster, but now he works for Britain. The German Jew is a
positive figure with moral principles. Ritt criticizes the West and its way of fighting the
East, a way with no moral principles and not less cruel than the way of the enemies.
The film leaves the spectator with deep distress and paranoia since in the world of
196
espionage a person looses his human quality.251 There is also a significant expression of
getting loose of the horror of McCarthyism.
The Battle of the Bulge (1965) presented complicated and ambivalent German
figures.
Colonel Hessler is the commander of the forces in the field and he leads a brigade
of tanks. His priorities are the army, the uniform, his name and his honor. He is
interested that the war would go on and on. When General Kulas, his commander,
sends him a girl to be with before the battle, after he has not been with a woman for a
long time, he sends her away. Hessler has a strong will to fight, although he knows
from 1941 that Germany would not be able to defeat the Americans. Hessler (Robert
Shaw) is very high. He cries "Victory!" as his Tiger tanks attack and defeat the
American forces in the Ardennes forest in Belgium in December 1944.
"Well, have we won the war?" asks enthusiastically the colonel's assistant (Hans
Christian Blach).
"No, we haven't," answers the colonel. "Well, have we been defeated?" concludes
the assistant. "No. we haven't been defeated," answers the colonel. The assistant
admits that he, an uneducated person, cannot understand it. "It means victory,
粸¢
because the war will go on," explains the colonel, "and the world won't get rid of us."
"But what will be with my sons?" asks the assistant. "They'll wear uniform and fight for
their German country." "They will die for their country," he responds. "If necessary,
they'll die," agrees the colonel. In this way one can define the essence of life of a
German soldier. "You're crazy and a criminal!" cries the assistant. Hessler is a
professional soldier. His ideology is to fight until death, but he is not a regular Nazi. The
dichotomy between the assistant and Hessler exists also between Hessler and his Nazi
commander, General SS Kohler (Werner Peters). When Hessler understands the
assignment he has got, he goes for it just because as a soldier obedience overcomes
his ideological position. This is a complicated image with positive aspects, while the
main criticism about him is his blind obedience, also when his identification with the
Nazi ideology is not full.
The ordinary Germans, whom we are supposed to accept as potential allies are
represented by Konrad, colonel Hessler's personal driver. All Konrad wants is to go back
251
Leonard Rubenstein, (1979). The Great Spy Films, (Secaucus, N.J.), pp. 31-68.
197
to his home and to his sons he longs to see. Konrad understands that the Germans
have lost the war, and when he sees that his commander, Hessler, is willing to go on
fighting, he requests to go to another position. At the end of the film we see Konrad
throws his weapon and his military equipment and goes home smiling by foot to
Germany. That is, Germany's future is by choosing life, not nurturing warfare. Germany
has to throw militarism away, and if it does so, one can even like it, as insinuates
Konrad's kind smile.
The relationships among the Germans are strictly military, but there is a
comradeship, which can be seen in their warm relations of Hessler and his personal
aide Konrad. The German soldiers seem like tools who are shifted from one place to
another. This is an attempt to show how the Nazi leadership exposed the guys who
have been left, after most of the men were killed or wounded, as cannon fodder. There
is no dialogue of any kind between the soldiers and their superiors. The connection
between Colonel Hessler and General Kulas, his commander, is also cold and military.
The Nazis seem clean all the time, their uniform are well kept and they aspire for
absolute accuracy in times. When the Germans catch a grop of prisoners they execute
them in the field. The event is based on the execution of 150 Americans. There is a
粸¢
definite difference between the SS and professional soldiers who would not have do so,
and Hessler expresses his protest before his commanders about this barbaric conduct.
The film The Quiller Memorandum (1966) emphasizes that there still are
German people and organizations in Germany who believe in the way of life of Hitler's
Germany. These organizations and groups want to spread their belief in society by
being active in various positions, and so influence the way of thinking of people until
Germany would return to be what it used to be. They are scattered all over the country
and the British secret service is aware of their activity except in Berlin. The film tells the
story of a neo-Nazi organization. The members in Berlin are intelligent and cruel people
the British do not know about, and they, these Berliners, kill the two British agents,
Metzler and Johns. The agent Quiller gets the assignment to find out where is the base
of the organization in Berlin. In the course of his search he meets Inga, a teacher, and
falls in love with her. Quiller is caught, interrogated and released by the neo-Nazi
organization just to be a target for surveillance. Later on Quiller is caught again and
arrives at the house of the organization with Inga's help. The Western agents follow
198
Quiller and manage to catch all the organization's members in the house. At the end it
is found out that Inga is also a member in the organization.
The film deals with an attempt to revive the Nazi period. October (Max von Sidov)
is the head of the organization in Berlin. The leader is wise, charismatic and cruel. The
people around him obey his orders quickly and efficiently. He uses cruel investigation
methods: injections and psychological work. "We want to know the location of your
headquarters in Berlin, your coding system and how much you know about us, as well
as what kind of information your predecessor forwarded to the headquarters. What is
your exact aim in Berlin? You don't have any other choice but to give us the
information." Finally, October's patience runs out, and he orders to give Quiller more
injections and even kill him after he would lose consciousness.
Quiller is sent to Berlin to substitute the agent who had been killed. In an
encounter in the giant stadium of West Berlin (110,000 seats, where Nazi Germany
hosted the Olympic games in 1936) with Paul (Alec Guinness), the contact person in
Berlin on behalf of the British intelligence, he warns Quiller of the neo-Nazis:
"A lot of new blood, youngsters, who seriously believe, is very dangerous. One
should not under estimate them, it is all quite complicated. It is hard to identify
粸¢
them; nobody wears a brown shirt, very difficult to identify them. They look
exactly like any other German, dealing with various things, but they are cautious
and very wise. Now they look like everybody else.
It is curious, don’t you think so? It is all politics.
I tell you what is our task. Our task is to get into the heart and find the extremists
among them. The Nazi-Germans you will be able to identify if you can get close
and look at them. Their basis must be found, urgently."252
The Quiller Memorandum differs from other espionage films in two aspects: the first is
that it is not an inter-bloc war, but a war between the regime, which is not defined
beyond the fact that its interests are influenced by the Western interference, and the
neo-Nazi elements in Berlin, who try to take Germany over. They even have a new
Fuhrer. The second is that the film is made with completely new methods. The two
parties are exposed to the enemy. This is a psychological warfare, and there is the
question whether every German is a Nazi.
252
Ibidem, in the film.
199
The film was issued to the screens in November 1966 and received varied
criticisms. In England it received good criticism. The London times defined it "most
refreshing, a thriller in the best classic tradition."253 In the US it got negative criticism.
Crowther called it in the New York Times "a distorted and banal espionage film."254
Pauline Kael wrote in the New Republican that "there is nothing reasonable," whereas
Reed called it "an exercise in abstract thinking."255 Newsweek's critic was almost the
only one who recommended it as a good espionage film. This criticism stemmed,
probably, from the film's criticism of the secret services during the Cold War. The
interests of the intelligence organizations are above all, even if it involves human lives.
Colonel Stock of the KGB mocks the British secret service in order to kill Kroizman, who
stands in his way. The British secret service recruited an ex-Nazi, and after he finished
his task, he was executed.
The film shows an encounter of a number of ideologies and political views:
communism, fascism, dictatorship and democracy. The film stimulates thought about
the Nazi underground forces that operate in Berlin, and the fact that the Nazis are
knowingly exploited by the secret services of the big powers.
The film Where Eagles Dare (1969) is a war action movie, in which two men go
粸¢
out to save another man from other Nazi men. The two heroes are Richard Burton and
young Clint Eastwood. This film was a box office great success, made according the
novel by Alistair MacLean, the author of action books (Navarone Canons).
The film was very expensive but very profitable. Where Eagles Dare focuses on a
daring action of rescue and a more daring escape. Disguised as Nazi officers, the
commando people, Major John Smith and Lieutenant Morris Shefer (Clint Eastwood)
and other six courageous soldiers parachute beyond the enemy lines. Their assignment
is to save an American General who has been taken prisoner in an Alpine mansion
allegedly unpentratble. They receive help and encouragement from the covered agents
Mary and Heidi. A British officer who had planned the operation is also in the
background. Somehow somebody in the Allied forces would be discovered as a traitor.
There is a shift in the plot manage to arrive to the American General, and then there is
253
Anez Nicholas, (1992)."The Quiller Memorandum", Films in Review, Vol. 43, and Nr. 7/8, (Jul / Aug),
pp.237-245.
254
Ibidem, p. 238.
255
Ibidem., Ibidem.
200
another shift. The amazing peak made the Where Eagles Dare as one of the most
admired films of Clint Eastwood. The script was written directly for the screen by the
espionage writer, Alistair MacLean. In this thriller the soldiers of the Allies penetrate
into the mansion on a mountain in the Bavarian Alps in order to save an imprisoned
general who knows the plans of the D-Day. The film shows parachutes, shootings and
explosions, splendid landscape and frozen hands trying to survive on the rocks. There is
also the escape operations, in which the heroes evade gun fire in the corridors of the
mansion, drive a bus in the mountains passes, and take off in an aircraft as they believe
that everything is alright. But it is not. In short, Where Eagles Dare is an admired film
from beginning to end. It has an arousing soundtrack and a lively script, it was
processed according to the novel by Alistair MacLean. The excellent performance of
Richard Burton and Clint Eastwood certainly contributed to its success. There is an
excellent performance of Mishai Hordern as the British deputy Admiral Roland, and
Dern Nesbit as the Nazi major von Harfen, support the performance of Burton and
Eastwood. But the real stars are the rhythm and the action, a dangerous ride in a cable
car, catching people from the windows, and mingling with the enemy, as new danger
appears around every corner. The surprises run as they find out that not everyone is
粸¢
what he is supposed to be. In the meantime, the audience is in suspense as the music
builds up the tension towards the surprising ending.
Patton (1970)
Geroge Patton (George S. Scott) receives the command in 1943 in North Africa
on the American forces there and put some discipline in them. He confronts the German
Fieldmarshal Rommel (Karl Micahel Polger). Patton withdraws with the Desert Fox,
using the tactics of the Germans. He is promoted to a Lieutenant General and is sent to
Sicily, where he enters a personal war with the British Fieldmarshal Montgomery
(Michael Bates). His activity in Italy is extra ordinary, and he endangers his future
because of a single hurt of his ego. When he visits a military hospital, he meets a GI
soldier (Tim Cosidin) who suffers from nervous fatigue. He gets angry of what he
considers as negligence and slaps the poor soldier on his face and orders him to get
well quickly. This case lead to the outcome that he loses the command, and later on, he
misses D-Day. Patton leads the Thirds American army through Europe. Patton remains
a valuable source, but eventually he seems as a losing canon in comparison to the
201
sophisticated tactics of his olds friend, Omar Bradly (Carl Malden). Patton won seven
Oscars, including the best movie, and the best actor for Scott, a prize he refused to
receive. Patton is considered as one of the greatest biographical epos that have ever
been put on screen, and George S. Scott in the leading role is sometimes considered as
one of the greatest appearances in the history of the movie. Scott and the film in
general gained from an intelligent script written by Francis Copola and Edmond H.
North, a strange and lucky couple of styles of writing, which are seemingly not similar.
After almost 45 minutes the film focuses just on a small part of Patton's career, starting
from his North African journey until the end of the war. There were only a few
compromises with history. For instance, Patton wears the uniform of a four-stars
general, a higher rank than he had, with the exciting speech to his forces at the
beginning of the film. This scene was taken, almost word for word from a speech
Patton gave on June 4th, 1944. This is just one example of the reliability that gives the
film its excellent texture. Patton profits also from the extra ordinary technology,
especially the cinematography by Fred Concamp and the role of the band of Gerry
Goldsmidt. Generally speaking, the film won seven Oscars, including the best actor.
6.6 A thematic discussion and analysis of the various Representations.
粸¢
A critical examination of the German representations in the films
and their analysis
Women's representation as a metaphor of Germany
In most films the feminine representation is sophisticated and ambivalent,
showing that women maintain a metaphoric relationship with Germany, while men who
have an affair with them symbolize America and its conquering forces. The power
relations expressed in this way present the feminine advantages that Germany has
versus the disadvantages the decent American men have, mainly their innocence.
German women are cunning and do not hesitate to use their sexuality in order to
promote themselves. They have three goals: a. survival and adjustment to the situation
by exploiting the American soldiers, which symbolizes German opportunism and inability
to trust this people. b. Love to an American soldier, which symbolizes the post-war
American-German alliance. c. Loyalty to the Nazi regime and a danger of the revival of
this ideology, as can be seen in the ambivalence at the end of the film The Quiller
Memorandum from 1966.
202
In the film Foreign Affairs (1948) by Billy Wilder, Marlene Dietrich plays Erika
von Schlotov, a singer in a night club with a Nazi record. The officer John Pringle brings
to Erika, with whom he has an affair, a mattress he purchased in the Black Market. As
he drives in the destroyed streets, we hear the tune "Isn't it romantic?" That reflects
the irony in front of the destruction around. Berlin after the war is not the right place to
nurture romantic illusions as Erika sings later in the night club. Erika256, who personifies
the German people, looks for a supporter. She would turn to the one who would
support her better. That is, she gives in to the higher bidder, and it if is the USSR, so be
it. When Pringle investigates Erika about her past, she evades him. "Women adopt
everything that is fashionable," she says, and Pringle teases her" Yes, once it is a hat,
another time it is a swastika, and now it is the colors of red, white, blue, and then
maybe the hammer and the sickle?" Pringle insinuates allegorically to the American fear
of Germany which might betray it.
The German cunning is represented in Erika's complicated image with her skill of
survival. She is cynical and not romantic any more. She used to be the mistress of a
senior Nazi, was in the environment of Hitler, suffered from the war, but her
determination and seducing sexuality secured her survival during the conquest. This
粸¢
history is described in the songs: "The destructions of Berlin," which refers to the
ghosts of the past, "All your sufferings," which refers to the shortage after the war, and
"Your sweet tomorrow." These words expressed a hope and even a prophecy of the
possible recovery that have occurred indeed with the economic boom in Germany in the
fifties.
In the film The Devil Makes Three from 1952 the feminine representation in the
figure of Willy expresses the theme of the German that would betray and exploit the
West if the Nazis come to power again.
German femininity maintains a cover of fog in the films of the sixties as well.
Inga, a school teacher in the film The Quiller Memorandum (1966), is feminine,
pretty and smart. She speaks quietly and she helps Quiller find the people who would
help him, and so a romantic relation is generated between them. But eventually it is
found out that she may belong to the organization too, which remains unsold to the
end. A number of questions remain in the air at the end of the film. Although October
256
At the beginning Dietrich objected to this offer, as she was afraid that her anti-Nazi image might be
damaged by showing the enemy as glamorous through her performance. In: Harris, p. 294.
203
keeps holding Inga as a hostage, she is released finally and the underground is caught.
So does the teacher help these neo-Nazis and does she continue in their way. The
ambivalence in the answer to this question is the allegory that Inga represents for
Germany as a whole. That is to say that Germany's loyalty and its potential to return to
its dark past still exists under the surface, although it is controlled by American or
British virility. One can say that Hollywood align itself to a certain extent to the dictates
of the American policy toward Germany, but at the same time it cannot leave
Germany's Nazi past undealt with.
Representation of Nazis or people who believe in the Nazi ideology
In the time of the Cold War the Nazis are represented in two ways, one comic
and the other threatening.
In the film foreign Affairs (1948) by Billy wilder there is an interesting
representation of Nazis and followers of the past regime. Captain Pringle sits in his
office which deals with de-Nazification. Father and son come to him. The father has a
small moustache (like that of Hitler) and he wants to apologize for his son who drew
swastikas with a chalk on walls. The father suggests punishing the child severely, while
he stamps obediently with his heels. Pringle tells him jokingly that he may put his son in
粸¢
a gas chamber. As Herr Mayer says he would obey, Pringle explains to him that they,
the Americans, cancelled the gas chambers, and they can go home. Herr Mayer stamps
with his feet, and when Pringle says people do not do it any more, he bows and turns
around, and we see a swastika on his back. Like in the story of the where the child
shouts that the king is naked, here too the child exposes the real spirit of the Germans
who have not yet left Nazism.
In the film Berlin Express (1948), the Nazi underground believes that a state of
war is the ideal state for Germany. As far as they are concerned, every means is
possible to achieve this goal. They use German citizens to get information and then kill
them. For the same goal the underground members even kill each other. There is no
sense of solidarity. All the scenes of the underground are conducted in full darkness,
and the faces of the members are vague and everything is seen dark and gloomy. The
underground is located in callers under the city of Frankfurt, a symbol that Nazism still
lies in ambush in the dark and waits for the right time.
204
In Stalag 17 the Nazis are presented as caricatures. Colonel von Scherbach tells
jokes about the author of White Christmas and how he stole the name from the
German capital. He even puts on his boots when he speaks on the phone with his
superiors so that his stamp with his heels will be heard in Berlin. The film presents
Nazism as an extreme absurdity. The cultural contempt is strengthened in the
characterization of the fanatic guard (Zig Roman), Johan Sebastian Schultz (Roman
played Erhardt concentration camp in Lubitsch's film from 1942 To Be or Not to Be). As
a matter of fact, Schultz is the only Nazi who shows some kind of compassion toward
the prisoners, but the Americans take advantage of this weakness. The prisoners call
him Schwinhund – a pig son of a bitch, which is very dissociable. Price (Peter Graves)
the security officer of the barracks, the chosen leader of the escape committee is to be
found as the real traitor, as he acts from a real commitment to Nazism. Price used the
queen of the Chess game as a letter box and the cable of the electric bulb in order to
pass messages to the Nazis.
Price was a Nazi, whose name was probably Preissiger or Preishopper. He lived in
Cleveland in the US, but when the war burst out, he returned to his homeland as a
good Nazi. He spoke English and therefore has become a spy. He was the informer of
粸¢
barracks 4.
The first film that confronted directly the Cold War is the satire One, Two, Three
by Billy Wilder (1961). There is a German who tries very hard to erase his former
identity as a Nazi. But there is one common characteristic to all the images, both
Western and Eastern Germans, and this is their inability to erase their Nazi character,
the Nazi essence that presents loyalty and a blind devotion to the ideal, tough discipline
and obsessive rationalism, and longing to the heroic past of Germany, which
reverberate in each of the German figures. There are three figures of ex-Nazis and
Western Germans: Fritz Leipin (Karl Lieffen), the driver of Mr. McNamara (James
Cagney), Schlemmer (Hans Lothar), the main assistant of Mr. McNamara, and Fraulein
Ingeburg (Liselotte Pulver), Mr. McNamara's personal secretary. All three have extrovert
stereotypical characteristics which make them grotesque caricatures.
Each one them would do anything to erase his/her identity, from hating everyone
who is not western and does not want to be a western, through flattery to the boss up
to a point of absurd, and total denial of the past. There are also sub-characters,
205
representing sub-groups, like the workers of Coca Cola, the West German policemen,
and the West German journalist, who strengthen the impression that there is a general
moral corruption in West Germany in all walks of life. Schlemer is the West German
figure through which we understand the process of erasing past identity in order to
integrate in the new free capitalist society. He would do anything to be considered
Western-American even if it involves going through a metamorphosis in his personality.
He starts by trying to run away from his past as a soldier in the Nazi army, and erases
any memory that has to do with his past. We see in the film that there is a conspiracy
of sequence among all Germans regarding their past and involvement in the war. For
instance, in the first scene when we meet Schlemer, McNamara loses his patience
about his stampings and says:
McNamara: This is from the Gestapo time, ha?
Schlemer: Please sir, it is not true.
McNamara: Between us, Schlemer, what have you done in the war?
Schlemer: I was in the underground.
McNamara: In the underground?
Schlemer: No, a mechanic in the underground train.
粸¢
McNamara: And did you object to the Nazis and didn't love Adolf?
Schlemer: Which Adolf? Where I was I didn't know anything, they didn't tell me.
This example represents the subterranean flow that went on in Germany. But this
distorted and caricaturist Nazism is presented as not threatening and not dangerous.
In the film The Great Escape from 1963, the presentation of the Nazis in the film
is greater than that of the ordinary Germans. The Nazi German is more sophisticated.
Unlike the ordinary soldiers in the camp, the Nazis are more cunning, suspicious and
tacticians. When two of the prisoners pretend to be Frenchmen, the Nazi soldier checks
their passes and says "Good luck" in English, and the pretender answers in an American
accent, and so his identity is discovered.
The Nazis wear black coats and drive luxury black vehicles. They are hedonists,
like the mafia gangsters. In the scene in the café, the Nazis sit there confidently and
order wine. They are amused. Until that point we haven't seen soldiers out of duty,
which shows the gap between the fighters in the front and the soldiers in the
hinterland.
206
The figure of the SS officer, Mr. Cohn, played by Hans Reisser, is complicated and
mysterious. He does not introduce himself, or welcomes the camp commander. He sits
on a chair without being invited to do so and waits until the presentation is completed
before he speaks. He does not wear uniform but a long leather coat. We get to know
his name from von Luger addressing his secretary. Mr. Kohn, the SS man threatens the
camp commander, von Luger and emphasizes the human aspect of von Luger. He does
not join the threats on the prisoner Bartlet and indicates that Bartlet's sentence is not
under the SS men authority. Mr. Kohn emphasized the change in attitude and calls von
Luger's attitude to the prisoners as understanding, unlike his own attitude. Mr. Kohn
belongs to the people who work in the "field", as he works among civilians. Therefore
his work is accurate and he remembers his "targets" personally. He and Bartlet have a
fatal fight in the rail station, in this scene Bartlet noticed Kohn first due to his black
coat. This black coat can be seen as a declaration of the arrogance of the SS men that
brought them down at the end of the war. Bartlet's quick response determined the
result of the fight, and Mr. Kohn dies in it. Tony Barta257 argues that the movie loved to
hate the Nazis, mocking them in a variety of images. The Nazi figures are violent,
wearing black, and show a despising attitude toward human lives. They are presented
粸¢
with their fast walk, stamping their heels, and their arrogant appearance, which makes
the Nazi representation caricaturist.
The film Dr. Strangelove by Stanly Kubrick from 1964 describes Dr. Strangelove,
manager of the R&D of the atomic weapon in the US. He is not interested in preventing
the doomsday that he helps to come about, on the contrary. He sits relaxed in his
wheelchair and his artificial arm and is not able to love anything except for fatal
technological instruments. The human failure that Dr. Strangelove represents leads to
the technological doomsday. There is not good Nazi and bad Nazi, they are all bad.
In the scene where Dr. Strangelove explains the President of the US how the
doomsday machine of the Russians works, the president asks: can't it be dismantled?
and Strangelove answers: This is the way it was made, and it was made this way only
to deter, to frighten, and as such it is easy to understand and convincing." It explains
part of the Berman/Nazi nature, everything is simple, even extermination. Dr.
Strangelove understands the meaning of the technological catastrophe. He thinks that
257
Tony Barta, (London, 1998). "Film Nazis: The Great Escape " ,Screening the Past: Film and the
Representation of History, ed. Tony Barta, pp. 127-148.
207
only those who will be in deep mines in the US would survive. The computers will
decide who of the Americans would survive so that the President would not have to
make this decision. Strangelove tells him that the senior people in the army and the
administration have to be among the chosen ones. So Strangelove represents the selfdestruction and de-humanization that Nazism represents.
The film The Quiller Memorandum deals with a number of important issues:
Who are the neo-Nazis nowadays? How do they achieve their goals? What are their
goals? The Nazis nowadays do not wear brown shirts, of something like that," explains
Paul (Alec Guinness), the head of the British secret service in Berlin, to his agent Quiller
(George Segal). Neo-Nazism lives and kicking under the surface and this threat seems
more interesting to the West than dealing with the conflict with the Soviets, and the
film tries to answer these questions.
Representation of non-Nazi Germans – professional soldiers, officials and
other Germans, a representation of social classes.
In the Cold War these representations change in the course of time. At the
beginning the representation of ordinary Germans tends to acquit them of the crimes of
the former regime and make them allies of the West, but usually with their negative
粸¢
representations. During McCarthy's period the ordinary Germans were shown in a
positive light, trying to make them clean of past crimes. This trend went on later and
repeated itself in war films, like the Battle of the Bulge. At the end of the fifties, and
during the sixties, the criticism of ordinary Germans returned in films like Judgment at
Nuremberg by Stanley Kramer from 1961.
In the film The Young Lions from 1958, the story starts on Christmas Eve of
1938 in Bavaria, Germany. The attendants, including Christian, express support of all
Germans in Hitler, which bothers Margaret, the American ski student of the blond
German. They start a debate between Christian and Margaret about the nature of the
Nazis and their meaning:
Christian: do you think that being a Nazi is such an awful thing?
Margaret: Christian, are you a Nazi?
Christian: No, I'm not a political person, but I think they symbolize a promise for
Germany.
Margaret: You don't believe in it?
208
Christian: Yes, I do.
Margaret: Why? Why? How can you justify Hitler?
Christian: I think that Hitler will bring us better life.
Margaret: Is your life so bad now?
Christian: No, it is not bad, but I don't want to spend the rest of my life wearing nice
sweaters and teaching children how to ski and be nice.
Their dialogue expresses the attitude of the Americans in this time of
reconciliation to toward the Germans. This is some kind of pardon for the German
people as Christian's explanation sounds reasonable, and he is an admired movie star
who calls for sympathy to his image, which makes this representation more
problematic. The two representations of Germans, Christian versus the Nazi
Hardenburg, emphasize the Nazi representation:
Hardenburg: "The German army is unbeaten because it obeys orders, every
order, even if it is disgusting. There is no room for sentiments, moralists and
individualists. If you don't understand it, your future is not in the army. If you resist,
maybe you will not have any future." Later on Christian arrives to his surprise to a
concentration camp and meets a war criminal who complains of his hard work:
粸¢
It is not easy to run a concentration camp. I had to manage all the gas chambers,
the shooting ranges, the physicians and their experiments. I had to exterminate
1500 people a day. Jews, Poles, Russians, Frenchmen, political prisoners, and I
had only 260 people at my disposal. And all the same, I did my job, and then
there were memoranda from Berlin, saying that "In Auschwitz they exterminate 20
thousand people a day." Here it comes from Berlin again, the fourth time today. I
was left with 10 people. How can I exterminate all the people who were left in the
camp? The equipment doesn't work, I don't care what they did in Buchenwald, I
alone here! Berlin wants me to exterminate everyone who was left in the camp
before the Americans arrive. There are 6000 men, women, and children. This man
who asked me to do it strolls in the streets. The Americans and the Russians will
come to him, and he would tell them: "I have never heard of concentration
camps," "there was never a policy of exterminating 12 million people." "This is an
invention of the SS, but no one in the government has heard about it." And I'll be
here, trying to explain to the Americans. They might not understand what they'll
209
see here. Maybe a German officer obeys orders. The courage to stand in front of
the enemy and honor and say: "I fulfilled my duty to my homeland."258
The speech of the camp commander is a paraphrase of Himmler's Posen speech.
This is another component of the problematic representation, since the speech creates
an impossible division between Christian and the crimes of the regime. There is a
feeling that the film makes a demagogic use of these crimes. Killing Christian, who is
full of guilt feelings, becomes a kind of atonement for the Germans. One may feel this
was what one had to do, that is, yes, there were crimes, but most of the Germans were
not involved in them. We are left with the message that the Germans were the victims
of the Nazis because, among other things they were ignorant and did not know about
these crimes. Today it seems an absurdity. It is known today and was known then that
the majority of the Germans were aware of the crimes of the regime, and certainly the
Wehrmacht soldiers that part of them participated actively in these crimes.
In the last scene in Judgment at Nuremberg, 1961, judge Howard (Spencer
Tracy) criticizes the Minister of Justice of Nazi Germany, Ernst Janing (Burt Lancaster).
The scene begins as Howard enters Janing's cell. Janing tries to start a conversation,
but Howard remains loyal to the goal of the visit, which was requested by Janing
粸¢
through his advocate, Rolf. Janing expresses his appreciation to the judge of the way in
which he conducted the trial, and asks him to keep for him the records of all the trials
he conducted as a judge. A moment before the visit ends, Janing tries to address
Howard in an intimate tone. He asks him to believe him that he did not know of the
"things" that happened (the atrocities and the extermination). This was not what we
wanted, he says. Howard answers him, and this is also the bottom line of the film: "It
came to this the moment you sentenced death to an innocent person." Then he turns
to go out of the cell and does not give Janing a private moral acquittal, he had asked
for.
In this case the ordinary Germans are convicted, which is contrary to their
representation in Hollywood. This case emphasizes the problematic nature of the
limitations Hollywood put upon itself due to the needs of the administration, needs that
have been answered during the fifties and the early sixties, which released Hollywood
from the threatening grip of McCarthyism.
258
Ibidem, from the speech in the Film.
210
The film The Longest Day (1962) describes the German and the Allies
perspective on the D-Day, the invasion to Normandy on 6.6.1944. The German soldiers
seem neat in their uniform and conduct. They do not believe that the Allies will attack
although they catch a coded message that the invasion is going to be carried out. The
German generals and other high officers shift between loyalty to Hitler and hatred
towards him, and the basic feeling of fear of him. Even when the Fuhrer's opinion is
needed, they do not call him because he has taken a sleeping pill and he rests at the
moment.
The Germans seem quite complacent and with self-confidence. Rommel, the
general commander, receives the announcement about the invasion at home, as he
went home to celebrate his wife's birthday. The relationships amongst the Germans are
cold with no emotional expressions, and their speech is sharp, clear cut and violent.
In the Great Escape, 1963, the image of the German in the first part of the film is
innocent and ridiculous, it is easy to convince the Germans with simple explanations
and the German is embarrassed and tends to believe what he is told. For example, the
American soldier tells him: "The baseball flew so I went to fetch it," and they believe
him. The prisoners' attitude to their capturers is degrading, making fun of them. For
粸¢
instance, in the scene of the attempt escape, Steven McQueen who plays Hits, he tries
to check the dead area from the guards' angle. After he is caught, he retrieves a cutter
for cutting iron from his pocket and volunteers to "admit" that he had tried to escape.
His behavior is cynical and sarcastic. The picture changes in the second half of the film,
when it goes out of the camp and presents another German, more sophisticated, more
violent, and monstrous, who does not hesitate to act aggressively and pull the trigger.
After the aircraft of the pilot Handley falls down, and manages to escape, the soldiers
shoot with no real reason and kill Blithe the blind.
The reality outside the camp shows the outside world in a most ugly and cruel
way, including different political movements, like the French underground, and this
reality penetrated eventually into the camp. We see the more aristocratic part of the
German army as it is dismissed and punished by the monstrous part that have taken
over. That is to say Nazism versus being German. The difference between the
professional soldiers and the ideological Nazis is emphasized by the fact that even the
camp commander fall in the hands of the Nazis although he is part of the German
211
army. The Nazis execute without hesitation by a machine gun 50 prisoners. The game
has gone out of control. The rules have been violated, or have never been valid for
these soldiers.
There are two main characters in the film: the German camp commander and the
SS officer that represent two approaches to the nature of Germans. The camp
commander, General von Luger, played by Hans Mesmer, represents the one who
knows the rules of the game and is willing to abide by them. He is a pilot and an
officer, and knows the rights of the prisoners, and the rules and the moral codes. He is
the highest authority versus the heroes, the prisoners. His figure is shaped cautiously.
On the one hand he keeps a tough expression, his body is very erect (like all the
German soldiers), his speech is in staccato and confident, he has a high forehead,
which testifies of wisdom and determination and his behavior is very formal. On the
other hand, he believes that conflicts of interests can be settled through peaceful ways.
The Battle of the Bulge (1965) presented complicated and ambivalent German
figures.
Colonel Hessler is the commander of the forces in the field and he leads a brigade
of tanks. His priorities are the army, the uniform, his name and his honor. He is
蛐¢
interested that the war would go on and on. When General Kulas, his commander,
sends him a girl to be with before the battle, after he has not been with a woman for a
long time, he sends her away. Hessler has a strong will to fight, although he knows
from 1941 that Germany would not be able to defeat the Americans. Hessler (Robert
Shaw) is very high. He cries "Victory!" as his Tiger tanks attack and defeat the
American forces in the Ardennes forest in Belgium in December 1944.
"Well, have we won the war?" asks enthusiastically the colonel's assistant (Hans
Christian Blach).
"No, we haven't," answers the colonel. "Well, have we been defeated?" concludes
the assistant. "No. we haven't been defeated," answers the colonel. The assistant
admits that he, an uneducated person, cannot understand it. "It means victory,
because the war will go on," explains the colonel, "and the world won't get rid of us."
"But what will be with my sons?" asks the assistant. "They'll wear uniform and fight for
their German country." "They will die for their country," he responds. "If necessary,
they'll die," agrees the colonel. In this way one can define the essence of life of a
212
German soldier. "You're crazy and a criminal!" cries the assistant. Hessler is a
professional soldier. His ideology is to fight until death, but he is not a regular Nazi. The
dichotomy between the assistant and Hessler exists also between Hessler and his Nazi
commander, General SS Kohler (Werner Peters). When Hessler understands the
assignment he has got, he goes for it just because as a soldier obedience overcomes
his ideological position. This is a complicated image with positive aspects, while the
main criticism about him is his blind obedience, also when his identification with the
Nazi ideology is not full.
The ordinary Germans, whom we are supposed to accept as potential allies are
represented by Konrad, colonel Hessler's personal driver. All Konrad wants is to go back
to his home and to his sons he longs to see. Konrad understands that the Germans
have lost the war, and when he sees that his commander, Hessler, is willing to go on
fighting, he requests to go to another position. At the end of the film we see Konrad
throws his weapon and his military equipment and goes home smiling by foot to
Germany. That is, Germany's future is by choosing life, not nurturing warfare. Germany
has to throw militarism away, and if it does so, one can even like it, as insinuates
Konrad's kind smile.
蛐¢
Conclusions of chapter six
In this chapter I have discussed the way in which the American policy was
expressed in the films under discussion. During these years there have been changes in
the American policy towards Germany, changes that included a shift from a tough policy
that called for punishing the Germans in order to prevent them from developing a
military force and a future threat, to a policy that called to rehabilitate Germany as part
of coping with the Soviet threat. These changes were expressed in the films I dealt with
from various points of view.
For example The films Foreign Affairs, Airlift, The Devil Makes Three and Fraulein
refer to the issue of foreign policy at the time by using an allegory: foreign affairs
appear as relations between American soldiers and German girls, and by expressing the
political drama through a romantic melodrama or a comedy. The most outstanding
element is presenting Germany in the image of the treacherous woman. Germany is not
presented as extremely negative or extremely positive. De-Nazification is not expressed
explicitly, but there are positive German figures, mainly in Desert Fox, Fraulein, and
213
others, alongside a negative representation of Nazi figures. These representations
provided the ground for the new approach which claimed that the Germans stopped
being the enemy and have become Allies against the common enemy – the Soviets.
This new position made the German worthy of living in freedom in a democratic
country. Regarding the foreign policy, it is shown in the films in different ways:
Foreign Affairs clarified the position of the isolationists; Airlift tended to calculated
intervention, but remained stuck between the two approaches and did not provide a
sophisticated reason for the need to intervene. (The Soviets in the film have a marginal
presence, like in other films, Express Berlin, Foreign Affairs, One, Two, Three and
others. They are shown as cumbersome in the political power game. The films do not
go into the familiar demonization of the Soviets, and do not say that a future
democratic regime is a sufficient reason for an American intervention in the world. From
the perspective of our time the film was maybe too optimistic, and definitely more naïve
than later films, which dealt with the Cold War from an ideological point of view. This
film does not fall into line with the McCarthy period and the Witch Hunt of the fifties).
Fraulein represents the position of the supporters of intervention and shows explicitly
the perfect intervention in the time of the Cold War.
蛐¢
In this period we see that Many films which were produced in the fifties and the
sixties in Hollywood reflect the struggle between rehabilitating Germany of all guilt, out
of political needs and the formal policy of the US in the cold War on the one hand, and
trends which have been preserved or aroused again in Hollywood, which refused to
purge Germany and the Germans from guilt.
In a historical perspective, the films of this period were a severe accusation
against the German elite. The films which have been produced in the fifties and the
sixties questioned Germany's withdrawal from its past, as the Nazi past comes up time
and again as a bothering reminder, like the films One, Two, Three and Dr. Strangelove
and others films.
Hence one may say that there was an objection inside Hollywood's studios to the
drastic change in the German representation up to a real purification.
The films raise the question whether all the German people is guilty, or just part of
it, and whether one has to differentiate between the Nazi leadership and the people. As
we have seen, this issue provided the content for many films in the fifties and the
214
sixties, and the answer to the above question confirms the main argument of the
present research: in spite of certain changes in the representation of Germany and the
Germans in the Cold War, generally speaking, there was no real change from the
representation before the Cold War time. In addition, the films confirms another claim
of this research: Although in certain times Hollywood was recruited to serve the
American policy towards Germany, it cannot be regarded as an extension of the
administration, nor a recruited institution. As a matter of fact, in many aspects,
Hollywood raised a voice against the American policy toward Germany, and more than
once it even expressed open and hidden criticism of this policy.
When trying to examine the question of representation in the period under
discussion, we were three trends:
1. Representations of German women as a metaphor for Germany.
2. Dividing the Germans into two groups: Nazis and other Germans. The first group is
represented negatively and the second is usually represented positively.
3. A tendency of ambivalence and complexity in the equivocal meaning of the
representation, a tendency that increases in the late fifties and gets more extreme
in the sixties.
粸¢
As a whole, we can learn about the interaction between Hollywood and the
administration from the question of the German representation. One can say that this
period, 1947-1970, was divided into three sub-periods:
a. Between 1946-1952 Hollywood was relatively free to describe the situation and
criticize it and even the American administration.
b. Between 1953-1958, the height of the McCarthyist persecution, Hollywood was very
modest and adjusted itself to the winds that came from the administration. In this
period many films are done as if according to order.
c.
Between 1958-1970
the grip of McCarthyist persecution is loosened and the
American interests in Europe stabilize and Hollywood has a more pluralistic
atmosphere.
As the debate about the question of intervention has ended, and the German problem
was solved, Germany's weight decreased.
215
When the Korean War burst out, the political-cultural attention was directed to other
parts of the world, and the drama of formulating the foreign policy adjusted itself to
other historical and regional circumstances.
Anyway, Germany was in the focus of the ideological-political interest for a
period of time, and by describing life under the occupation, Hollywood usually
expressed the prevailing opinion in the American public. This stand was generally
similar to the stand of the administration, but when there was a contradiction, the
relation between Hollywood and the administration was complicated and ambivalent.
We have seen this in a number of films, as well as among a number of auteurs who
criticized harshly the administration. Auteurs like Billy Wilder and Stanley Kubrick, and
Stanley Kramer. In Hollywood there are different people and different opinions, and
they got their expression in varied positions.
粸¢
216
Chapter Seven
representations of Germany and the Germans in Hollywood During the
Revision period, Period of Détente and Second Cold War-a sequence of
complex representations or a drastic change 1971-1989
7.1 Historical background and a film's survey(1971-1980)
Détente, from French, is a process of ceasing tension among states. In modern history
Détente is the process of relaxation of the relationship between the Western Block and
the Eastern Block and the weakening of the Cold War, a process which has taken place
since the end of the sixties up to the beginning of the eighties. Later there came a time
that was called the Second Cold War.
Confrontation through détente (1962–79)
粸¢
The United States reached the moon in 1969—a symbolic milestone in the space race.
United States Navy F-4 Phantom II intercepts a Soviet Tupolev Tu-95 D aircraft in the
early 1970s
In the course of the 1960s and '70s, Cold War participants struggled to adjust to
a new, more complicated pattern of international relations in which the world was no
longer divided into two clearly opposed blocs. From the beginning of the post-war
period, Western Europe and Japan rapidly recovered from the destruction of World War
II and sustained strong economic growth through the 1950s and '60s, with per capita
GDPs approaching those of the United States, while Eastern Bloc economies stagnated.
217
As a result of the 1973 oil crisis, combined with the growing influence of Third
World alignments such as the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC)
and the Non-Aligned Movement, less-powerful countries had more room to assert their
independence and often showed themselves resistant to pressure from either
superpower. Moscow, meanwhile, was forced to turn its attention inward to deal with
the Soviet Union's deep-seated domestic economic problems. During this period, Soviet
leaders such as Alexey Kosygin and Leonid Brezhnev embraced the notion of détente.
Dominican Republic and French NATO withdrawal
President Lyndon B. Johnson landed 22,000 troops in the Dominican Republic in
Operation Power Pack, citing the threat of the emergence of a Cuban-style revolution in
Latin America. NATO countries remained primarily dependent on the US military for its
defense against any potential Soviet invasion, a status most vociferously contested by
France's Charles de Gaulle, who in 1966 withdrew from NATO's military structures and
expelled NATO troops from French soil.
Czechoslovakia invasion
Prague Spring and Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia In 1968, a period of
political liberalization in Czechoslovakia called the Prague Spring took place that
粸¢
included "Action Program" of liberalizations, which described increasing freedom of the
press, freedom of speech and freedom of movement, along with an economic emphasis
on consumer goods, the possibility of a multiparty government, limiting the power of
the secret police and potentially withdrawing from the Warsaw Pact.
The Soviet Red Army, together with most of their Warsaw Pact allies, invaded
Czechoslovakia. The invasion was followed by a wave of emigration, including an
estimated 70,000 Czechs initially fleeing, with the total eventually reaching 300,000.
The invasion sparked intense protests from Yugoslavia, Romania and China, and from
Western European communist parties.
Brezhnev Doctrine
Brezhnev and Nixon during Brezhnev's June 1973 visit to Washington; this was a
high-water mark in détente between the United States and the Soviet Union.
In September 1968, during a speech at the Fifth Congress of the Polish United Workers'
Party one month after the invasion of Czechoslovakia, Brezhnev outlined the Brezhnev
Doctrine, in which he claimed the right to violate the sovereignty of any country
218
attempting to replace Marxism-Leninism with capitalism. During the speech, Brezhnev
stated:
When forces that are hostile to socialism try to turn the development of some
socialist country towards capitalism, it becomes not only a problem of the country
concerned, but a common problem and concern of all socialist countries.
The doctrine found its origins in the failures of Marxism-Leninism in states like Poland,
Hungary and East Germany, which were facing a declining standard of living contrasting
with the prosperity of West Germany and the rest of Western Europe.
Third World escalations
Vietnam War, Operation Condor, and Yom Kippur War.
The US continued to spend heavily on supporting friendly Third World regimes in Asia.
Conflicts in peripheral regions and client states—most prominently in Vietnam—
continued. Johnson stationed 575,000 troops in Southeast Asia to defeat the National
Front for the Liberation of South Vietnam (NLF) and their North Vietnamese allies in the
Vietnam War, but his costly policy weakened the US economy and, by 1975, ultimately
culminated in what most of the world saw as a humiliating defeat of the world's most
powerful superpower at the hands of one of the world's poorest nations.
蛐¢
Additionally, Operation Condor, employed by South American dictators to suppress
leftist dissent, was backed by the US, which (sometimes accurately) perceived Soviet or
Cuban support behind these opposition movements. Brezhnev, meanwhile, attempted
to revive the Soviet economy, which was declining in part because of heavy military
expenditures.
Moreover, the Middle East continued to be a source of contention. Egypt, which
received the bulk of its arms and economic assistance from the USSR, was a
troublesome client, with a reluctant Soviet Union feeling obliged to assist in both the
1967 Six-Day War (with advisers and technicians) and the War of Attrition (with pilots
and aircraft) against US ally Israel; Syria and Iraq later received increased assistance as
well as (indirectly) the PLO.
During the 1973 Yom Kippur War, rumors of imminent Soviet intervention on the
Egyptians' behalf brought about a massive US mobilization that threatened to wreck
détente; this escalation, the USSR's first in a regional conflict central to US interests,
219
inaugurated a new and more turbulent stage of Third World military activism in which
the Soviets made use of their new strategic parity.
Sino-American relations
As a result of the Sino-Soviet split, tensions along the Chinese-Soviet border
reached their peak in 1969, and US President Richard Nixon decided to use the conflict
to shift the balance of power towards the West in the Cold War. The Chinese had
sought improved relations with the US in order to gain advantage over the Soviets as
well.
In February 1972, Nixon announced a stunning rapprochement with Mao's China
by traveling to Beijing and meeting with Mao Zedong and Zhou Enlai. At this time, the
USSR achieved rough nuclear parity with the US while the Vietnam War weakened US
influence in the Third World and cooled relations with Western Europe). Although
indirect conflict between Cold War powers continued through the late 1960s and early
1970s, tensions were beginning to ease.
Nixon, Brezhnev, and détente
粸¢
Leonid Brezhnev and Jimmy Carter sign SALT II treaty, June 18, 1979, in Vienna.
Strategic Arms Limitation Talks, Helsinki Accords, and Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.
Following his China visit, Nixon met with Soviet leaders, including Brezhnev in
Moscow. These Strategic Arms Limitation Talks resulted in two landmark arms control
treaties: SALT I, the first comprehensive limitation pact signed by the two superpowers,
and the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which banned the development of systems
designed to intercept incoming missiles. These aimed to limit the development of costly
anti-ballistic missiles and nuclear missiles.
Nixon and Brezhnev proclaimed a new era of "peaceful coexistence" and
established the groundbreaking new policy of détente (or cooperation) between the two
superpowers. Between 1972 and 1974, the two sides also agreed to strengthen their
economic ties, including agreements for increased trade. As a result of their meetings,
220
détente would replace the hostility of the Cold War and the two countries would live
mutually.
Meanwhile, these developments coincided with the "Ostpolitik" of West German
Chancellor Willy Brandt. Other agreements were concluded to stabilize the situation in
Europe, culminating in the Helsinki Accords signed at the Conference on Security and
Co-operation in Europe in 1975.
Late 1970s deterioration of relations
In the 1970s, the KGB, led by Yuri Andropov, continued to persecute
distinguished Soviet personalities such as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Andrei Sakharov,
who were criticizing the Soviet leadership in harsh terms. Indirect conflict between the
superpowers continued through this period of détente in the Third World, particularly
during political crises in the Middle East, Chile, Ethiopia and Angola.
Although President Jimmy Carter tried to place another limit on the arms race
with a SALT II agreement in 1979, his efforts were undermined by the other events
that year, including the Iranian Revolution and the Nicaraguan Revolution, which both
ousted pro-US regimes, and his retaliation against Soviet intervention in Afghanistan in
December.
蛐¢
Summary :
1962-1968: a. The Period of the Détente. The days of presidents Kennedy and
Johnson. The days of escalation in the Vietnam conflict, and the shifting of the main
interest from Berlin and Germany to South-East Asia. Gradual decline of the studios and
the emergence of a young cinematic power which succeeded communicating with
young people. The revolution of the 'flower children', producing changes of values in
America, which reached its peak in the students' revolt in France In 1968 .
This was the time of political assassinations and upsetting ideas that prevailed in
America.
In 1969 – 1975: The time of presidents Nixon and Ford was characterized by
ideological extremism and loss of faith in the political system as a result of the Vietnam
muddle and the Watergate affair. In 1975 the United States withdrew from Vietnam, a
move that deeply hurt the national ego, producing a sense of a traumatic defeat.
Hollywood underwent a process of a profound change – the studios system collapsed,
and the independent individual cinema became dominant (a process known also as 'the
221
new wave' in American cinema). The end of the period brought changes in the map of
American interests, and the importance of German representations was once again at
the front of the stage.
1976-1980: Election of a new president, Carter, whose policy was quite different from
that of his predecessor, dictated new attitudes in Hollywood. During this period,
American society was experiencing a tendency of expanding violence, manifested also
in Hollywood's satellites, such as Italy with its production of spaghetti movies and
"American" war films, including German representations. The industry of exploitation
movies also created a lot of popular images, some of which were going to be relevant
to our discussion.
film's survey
7.2 German Representations - Hollywood underwent a process of a profound
Change(1971-1975)
Raid on Rommel (1971)
This film is considered one of the ostentatious and best war films ever made, with
蛐¢
Richard Burton in an unforgettable epos. He plays a British officer who impersonates a
Nazi officer, who is sent to liberate the port of Tobruk from the hands of the Nazis in
World War II.
Libya, 1943. Rommel gets armed and organized in the harbor of Tobruk towards
his next attack. The British intelligence sends Captain Alex Forester, under a fictitious
name, to get in touch with prisoners of war. Forester comes also from the intelligence,
and together they are supposed to get control over the Germans' formation of artillery
on the shore line, in order to enable the British Navy to get close to the shore line and
Bomb the armament of the Germans.
Instead of reaching the commando unit, Captain Forester finds himself with a
captive medical unit. This does not stop him and he creates a new plan of action, which
seems at the beginning as impossible and totally irrational. Forester and the war
prisoners take control over a convoy of German vehicles, pretend to be Germans and
penetrate German bases, meet Rommel himself, bomb the fuel reservoirs, which are
intended to serve the tanks, and even manage to enter into Tobruk harbor. After they
222
get into the harbor, they manage to destroy the artillery layout on the shore line, and in
this way the British Nave is capable of completing the job and bomb the harbor, and by
so doing stop the German organization towards their desired takeover over North
Africa.
Genre and general information
War – drama.
"Libya, 1943. After almost three years of bitter fighting in the desert, Field Marshal
Rommel's bright use of his division of tanks, he brought the British to a state of despair.
The destiny of the Middle East is at stake."
The film opens with the above subtitle on the background of a shot of the Libyan
Desert, which tells us about the genre of the film and promises drama, and of course
getting out of the drama.
Throughout the film it maintains the war film genre, and it is quite dramatic. One
can see it in the plot and its development along the film, especially through the
protagonist, Captain Forester, who never takes a rest and is concentrated all the time in
his goal, without deviating even for a moment. The film is full of the genre. The war
situation gets a very large part in war scenes with a lot of bombing and weapons of all
粸¢
kinds: tanks, canons, military field cars, warships, and so on. The viewer gets the
feeling of the war situation and the desert situation. At a certain point Hauptman
Schroeder, the German Captain, also reminds this situation. The drama is strengthened
throughout the film in scenes and through music. There are many activities that take
place in the dark, and actions beyond the border. We want to know if he would make it
or not, but at the end it is obvious that the action would succeed and the British have
the upper hand.
Throughout the film we hear the British communication network, as well as the
German one, and even Hitler's voice, as he encourages his people and fills them with an
Aryan spirit. The Geneva Convention that is supposed to keep the rights of war
prisoners is mentioned once or twice, and there is a feeling that the makers of the film
wanted to pass a certain message about it.
In this masculine, warlike world, we see also a feminine character in signorina
Vivian, the mistress of an Italian general, who is with the German unit in the war zone,
waiting to return to her general.
223
Significant scenes and the turning point
•
The Germans in the desert. This scene is significant in a few levels. First of all, this
is moment in which the captors become captives, and the operation of hindering
Rommel's plan starts. This is made even more stronger as a few moment
beforehand the Germans were the masters, so the masters become the underdog.
There is another dimension as we see a frame shot from the air of the German
soldiers headed by Schroeder, left in the desert without their clothes and any
identification document.
•
The meeting with Rommel. The physician and Forester meet General Rommel on
the balcony of his tent and talk with him about stamps, while drinking an alcoholic
and use self-humor. In this scene we see people with feelings more than soldiers
who follow orders, even if it is Rommel, Hitler's bright general. The scene seems
absolutely surrealistic, and for a moment one can forget that it is during war time.
•
Bombing the fuel reservoir. The fuel reservoirs were supposed to serve tens of
tanks, which had been supposed to wash all North Africa under Rommel's
leadership, and take it over. One person, determined and courageous, managed to
bomb these reservoirs with one tank, and actually stopped all these tanks. This is
粸¢
more powerful since we have seen a frame with all these tanks, which would
actually stay put.
•
The ending scene. The ending scene brings together all the elements that make
people unique and actions of heroism. Captain Forester and the physician prefer to
remain be taken prisons again, in order that the other soldiers would be saved.
There is a picture in which we see Forester on the background of the shore line,
smiling at the sight of the bombing of the German artillery positions. He smiles
while he knows that he is going to be taken prison. The belief and the mission are
above anything else.
Summary
Raid on Rommel is a dramatic war film in every respect. The plot, the main
protagonist, the effects, the photography and the music – all serve this genre in all
levels. The acting is not the best, the characters do not develop, and the plot is
complicated, but most war films re like that. There is an emphasis on the war between
the parties rather than the cruelty of the Nazi war machine. One can still see the well
224
oiled German machine, but the focus is on the war itself. The Geneva Convention is
mentioned in several instances, another thing that testifies of the common war codes.
If Rommel, the bright general of Germany, sits with an English physician and talks to
him about his stamps collection and makes jokes on his own account, then we have
forgotten what Germany stands for and what it does at these very moments in the
concentration camps.
A la guerre come a la guerre. Things get all sorts of shapes and the picture is
surrealistic. Rulers become ruled in one moment; a nice and quiet desert becomes a
noisy battlefield, and so is the sea. There is a beautiful Italian woman with sun glasses
in a military camp full of men, and so on. It seems that the makers of the film wanted
to show what one man can do, Captain Alex Forester, against a huge war machine. Like
David and Goliath. And again, the choice is to focus on war, not cruelty, but the human
attitude still belongs to the party which is not Germany.
The film ends up with the perfect dramatic warlike combination: Forester sacrifices
himself for his soldiers, his mission and his country. He smiles a big smile with the
background of the beach. The physician also stays to help him. The feeling is positive
although it is clear that the Germans are going to capture Forester and the physician.
粸¢
The mission and the country are more important than the people.
Ilsa, She-Wolf of the SS (1974/5)
theatrical release poster
225
Ilsa, a Nazi woman jailor and a commander of Medical Camp 9, conducts sadistic
experiments on women in order to show that women can contain and endure pain more
than men, and the conclusion is that women can serve in the front line at war together
with men. There are additional things these women are supposed to do, like being
castrated and sent to the front line, be carriers of microbes and infect the soldiers of
the enemy armies, and so on. In addition, Ilsa is a nymphomaniac, and every night she
takes another prisoner to her room to have sex with him, and if he does not do so,
which happens all the time, she castrates and kills him. One day Wolf arrives at the
camp, Wolf is an American prisoner who has special capabilities and he manages to do
it with Ilsa, and she does not kill him. The moment she trusts him he manages to tie
her to her bed and together with the women prisoners and another prisoner, called
Mario, they manage to get control over the camp and kill the jailors, the physician who
works with Ilsa and her sadistic assistants.
Ilsa is killed by the assistant of General Wolfgang Rohm, who had visited the camp
the previous night and had seen the experiments. We understand that the Allies are
close, and there came an order to exterminate the whole place and conceal all evidence
of what had been done there. Wolf with another woman prisoner succeeds to escape
粸¢
the place and all the others are killed by the Nazis while fighting them.
Genre and general information
Horror – a thriller – war
"The film you are about to see is based on documents and facts. The atrocities you
will see were defined as "medical experiments" in special concentration camps during
the rule of Hitler's third Reich. These crimes against humanity are historically accurate,
the characters are a combination of the notorious Nazi personality, and the presented
events have been brought to one location for dramatic purposes. Due to the shocking
story and the way it is presented, the film is intended to adults only. We hope that such
cruel crimes would never happen again."
This information, written of a red background, like the color of the blood that is
seen very much during the film, describes the nature of the events and ensures their
authenticity, like every film that is based on real events.
The place where the events take from, that is the camp, is located in nature among
trees. The number of prisoners and jailors is small, and they consist mainly on women
226
prisoners who wear minimal rags. In another context, not at war time, one could have
thought it is a pastoral agricultural farm, but this is not the case.
It seems that the experiments on women and the unsatisfied sexual energy of the
camp commander created some kind of a secluded place of passion, lust, sexual
abnormalities and wild festivities that all the camp crew participated in, and we see this
madness on the faces and bodies of the women prisoners. Everything that has to do
with warlike genre is lacking in this film. The scene of the women prisoners taking
control over the camp does not seem real, and the whole business of the women
prisoners using weapons seems also artificial.
There are numerous sex scenes, usually very detailed including the sounds. The
feeling of the war does not comes through, and one can see Ilsa talking with her
commander as the buttons of her shirt are unbuttoned, and in this situation she says
her "Heil Hitler". Ilsa created a secluded place where everything is permitted and there
is no law except for the way she thinks and acts.
Significant scenes and turning points
•
Torturing scenes. The torturing scenes in the film are very difficult to watch,
although in the cinematic level they are not dealt properly. There are many such
粸¢
scenes, and I have chosen to refer to all of them together, since they represent the
madness of the German behavior. They are very detailed, shot in close-ups and go
on for a long time in cinematic criteria. It seems that there is no limit to what man
can invent when he wants to prove something, and even the sky is not the limit.
The makers of the film do not spare the spectator any detail in the process of
torture, including the use of various tools.
•
Sexual scenes. Sex and sexual scenes are highly significant in the film. The film
begins with a private sex scene between a man and a woman and develops into an
orgy of many participants. The atmosphere of madness brought by Ilsa spread over
all the soldiers in the camp and created an atmosphere of lawlessness where
everything is permitted. The sex scenes, like the torturing scenes, are detailed,
long, and with the sounds that go with it. They are meant to show the madness of
things rather than an act of love between man and woman.
•
The festive dinner for the general. This scene shows the German madness in
action. Ilsa prepares a great dinner for the general with guests, food, and drinks,
227
and the surprise is a naked prisoner woman who is positioned above the center of
the table standing of an ice cube, as her neck is in a hanging rope. The moment
the ice cube would melt, she would die. During the time the ice cube melts, the
guests eat, drink, and sing around the table. It seems that nobody is bothered by
this fact. As they are still eating, the girl dies, and there is expression of emotion
about it. This scene is the peak of showing inhumanity.
Anna comes to Ilsa's room wounded and bleeding, as Ilsa is tied to her bed.
Ilsa was waiting for Anna's screams as she tortured her, and she cries when Anna
collapses and falls upon Ilsa and dies with the knife in her hand. The scene gets
more intense when Richter, the general's personal aide, centers the room and
shoots Ilsa with a smile.
•
Final scene. At the end of the film we see that Richter reports to the general that all
the camp's people died and the Allies would not find any evidence of what
happened in Camp 9. While he is reporting, we see Wolf and another prisoner
woman, who escaped, looking from a distance of what happens in the camp. It
seems that the makers of the film want to show us that this kind of things will
always be discovered, as if laughing of the Germans and their confidence that
粸¢
everything is under their control.
Summary
If there was a genre called atrocity, it should have been added to the name
of the film: Ilsa, the she wolf of the SS. The film is very difficult to watch even
more so as we know that it is based on real events. The films begins with a text,
goes on to a love scene between a man and a woman, and then continues to
the castration and killing of that man by the woman. With this opening we get
straight to a crazy world where everything can happen. Every aspect of human
moral is violated in this film. There is no limit to the atrocity. The Germans are
portrayed as beasts with no constraint. The interest of the Reich is above all,
and people do whatever they are asked to do in order to serve it. The Nazi
ideology has taken any sense of individuality from the people who served it, and
in this way there were created monsters, who have not been aware of their
monstrosity. The passion in uncontrollable, and they have a feeling of total
control.
228
In spite of the tortures and the horrible deeds Isla executes on the women
prisoners, she does not succeed to destroy their spirit, and the message is that
although the physical pain in incredible, the spirit is more important, and this is
the message of the film. It is difficult to watch, but its aim is to show what have
been done so that it would not repeat itself in the future. The very passion with
which Ilsa killed so many people brought her fall caused by the people who
suffered from her. That is, passion can work in both directions. We see very
clearly the inhumanity of the Germans. As a film which is based on real
documents, the truth becomes a heavy burden, but it is still the truth. This is
the most important message of the film.
7.3 German Representations - new attitudes in Hollywood(1976-1980)
A Bridge Too Far (1977)
Richard Attenborough (Gandi, Land of Shadows) directed a war drama, based
on a novel by the historian Cornelius Ryan, who also wrote The Longest Day. The
forces of Allies are deployed all over the Netherlands aiming to invade Nazi Germany in
order to defeat the Germans and return home for Christmas.
蛐¢
Cornelius Ryan
The tycoon Joseph Levine exposed in 1975 his plan to produce an ambitious film, a
war film which would be better than any other one. With a budget that was unheard of
until that time of 23 million dollars, an winning casting, including Sean Connery, Robert
229
Redford, Michael Kane, Laurence Olivier, Gene Hackman and Anthony Perkins, who was
not so famous at the time.259
A Bridge Too Far documents the military battle of the Allies in Arnhem in the
Netherlands when it was conquered by the Nazis. Under the code name of Market
Garden we witness Montgomery's daring gamble of terminating the war in a
coordinated crushing attack which managed just to contaminate Netherland's fields with
the bodies of courageous soldiers.
Levine surprised everybody when he chose Richard Attenborough as the director.
Two Attenborough's previous films, Oh! What a Lovely War and Young Winston, were
failures. Attenborough, who was glad for being chosen for the task, did not want at first
to accept the project since he was deterred by the massive story. "There were the
Americans, the British, the Dutch, the Germans and the Poles. It was awfully
complicated." He wandered how all these could be in one film. Then he met William
Goldman, who wrote the script of Butch Cassidy, and was so enthusiastic of the project
that he convinced Attenborough that what looked impossible could actually be done.
"Jo (Levine) believed that to finance this massive operation there was a need of
big stars," recalls Attenborough. So Levine gambled. By taking big names with
粸¢
international appeal he hoped to sell the rights in advance, and by so doing ensure the
production of the film. His plan was so successful that A Bridge Too Far reached a profit
of four million dollars before it reached the screens!
"Jo accepted the claim that since the film was so complicated, and one had to
remember so many names from its beginning, maybe one would not remember which
role Sean Connery played, only that he played a certain role," adds Attenborough. "In
this way you take the story further and make it clearer. Some critics commented
foolishly that it was a show of voyeurism of actors. I guess it was to a certain extent,
but it was not the aim. No actor was there just because he had a big name. They were
also very good actors"260.
Strengthened by adding Dirk Bogarde, Edward Fox, Denholm Elliott and some
Europeans, like Ingmar Bergman's constant actress Liv Ullmann (in a role which had
been rejected by Audrey Hepburn), Attenborough went to Hollywood to look for talents.
259
Robert. Sellers. (May 2005). “Call Sheet: ‘A Bridge Too Far’”, Film Review, n. 646, July 2004,pp. 74-82
and v. spec. n. 57.pp. 100-102, 104, 106, 108-111.
260
Ibidem. p.76.
230
Within a few days he brought James Caan for a role that had been intended for Robert
De Niro in the first place, Ryan O'Neal and Elliott Gould. "I played a character called
Stout," said Gould, "who was the only character in the film who was not real. Maybe it
was Bill Goldman's will to write a character that would represent a certain type of
American." It was Goldman's idea that Gould would play the role with a cigar's butt
stuck in his mouth all the time!261
Due to the great number of actors, Levine was incapable of paying them the
usual part of the profits, so he compensated them by high salaries. The most
controversial amount of money was the cheque of two million dollars he paid Redford.
All the actors agreed to have a military short haircut, except Redford…
Olivier played an ordinary village physician, Dr. Jan Spander, using an awful pair of
shoes for almost three weeks, as he was standing, walking and even feeling differently.
The filming was a logistic nightmare. Uniforms were collected from all over Europe.
Guns and tanks were collected from museums and private collections. Even
governmental offices in Britain, the US, the Netherlands and Belgium got organized to
collect the needed equipment to illustrate the main battles. When Attenborough was
busy with his "private" army, he looked more like a general than a director. "If the
粸¢
actors become robots, it is like being a general," claims Attenborough. "You send
soldiers to the battle and that's it. But what I'm interested in is the performance, and all
the logistics is the background for the performance that takes place in the front of the
screen. Except for wonderful actions sections, what do you remember from A Bridge
Too Far? You remember Sean, Tony Hopkins, Larry Olivier, Mike Cane. My focus on the
background was done. We've made sketches, we know exactly how we're going to do
it. You bring the actor into all this and there is the center."
In order to achieve a sense of realism in the battle sections, the amount of
explosives was immense. John Richardson was in charge of the special effects. Today is
known as the best in this field, his last work was the Harry Potter movies. "We burnt
about 10 tons of liquid gas of propene. We used two tons of explosives, and between
16-20 tons of low explosives. We burnt 10,000 old cars tires in order to get black
smoke. For the escape of the 30th Corpus, with Michal Cane heading the tanks, I think
we laid 20 miles of barbed-wire fences. At the time it was the biggest explosion that
261
Ibidem. p.77.
231
had even been shot, and it freezes the blood to this day to watch it."262 Attenborough
saw to it that all the preparations of hundreds of people and tanks would not go down
the drain because of a sensitive actor.
"I asked the director's assistant, David Tomblin, how we were going to do it, and
he said We'll train them,' and this is what we've done. The actors went over to the
Netherlands before all the others, lived in a military camp and trained. The sergeant
conducted foot drills with them. Attenborough wanted realism and did everything real".
"You can't do the action sections today, today they do it by computer imaging. But
thirty years ago they did it for real. Crossing the river in Nijmegen (the Netherlands)
was real. Bob Redford crossed the river, not one shot was through imaging there".263
The most astonishing section was the mass parachuting. 22 cameras, 11 in the air
and 11 on the ground, but the weather was cloudy and Attenborough was not satisfied
with the outcome. He needed one more shooting day, and it meant more money.
Levine was recovering after an operation and was furious about Attenborough's
request, but Attenborough was determined. "Will we have sun tomorrow?" asked
Levine. The forecast was not good. "How much will it cost?" was the next question.
"About $75,000." There was silence, and then he said "The hell with it, do it," said
粸¢
Levine before slamming the phone. The next day the sky smiled and almost all the
section of the finished film was from that extra day.
The city of Arnhem has become more modern in order to reconstruct the attack on
the bridge. The team examined the close township of Deventer. Fortunately, there was
a similar bridge to the one of Arnhem, with an immense car parking lot under it, which
meant that they could reconstruct buildings of the 1940s and then blow them up. "One
of the was burned," recalls Richardson. "There were several bushes fires, and one of
them was accidentally too close to a house, as they were wooden houses. Nobody was
aware of it until a fire broke out in half a second. The main panic was to get inside and
take out all the gas bottles before the fire would reach them. There were only a few
seconds to do it."
The hero of Arnhem was undoubtedly Colonel Prust. He led a British force against
stronger German forces. Attenborough had hard time hiring the unknown Anthony
Hopkins. "Jo Levine has never heard of Tony," Attenborough said plainly. "I knew he
262
263
Ibidem.p.78.
Ibidem,Ibidem.
232
would be just wonderful. I still thing that Tony is the most charming actors of his time.
The camera admires him. He can't err, and of course, he is a cunning bastard: He
knows it! He knows how to use the camera."
In the shot there is a simple picture in which Prust crosses the street as he tried to
evade the fire of the German snipers, a military person approaches Hopkins and tells
him, "you run too Fest." Hopkins was shocked. "Too Fest?" "Yes, you should show the
Germans and your people that you despise danger." There were Old Dutch curious
people watching the scene. Vic Armstrong, then a stunts' coordinator, and today one of
the best directors of action sections, recalls a breakFast in a bar with his team of stunts.
"I've seen a short old man looking at us angrily," he recalls, "I thought that since we
were wearing SS officers' uniforms, it aroused harsh memories in his mind. We got up
and returned to work. It illustrated for everyone the realism the Dutch have gone
through." Armstrong worked with about a hundred stunts in the film, but the main
actors wanted to participate as well. The issue of security was most important of
course. Operating explosives near untrained actors was out of the question. "We blew
up a truck near Sean Connery," said Richardson, "and Redford was actually in one of
the small boats that sailed in the river until all the explosives were operated. They were
粸¢
in a safe distance from him, but what goes up has to come down. He was great. All the
actors wanted to help. Tony Hopkins was in the action all the time. When we blow up
explosives, I always go to the actor and explain what is going to happen, how close the
explosion will be, and if they have to turn their heads from there they might get hurt
from blocks of cork or be covered by dust, or feel the heat of the fire ball. It is
important to explain all this to the actor beforehand rather than apologize later on."
Elliott Gould was closest to the Saône bridge when it exploded at his face. "I was
pretty close and it was a bit scary. That is, we actually blew up the bridge! And I said to
the photographer "what happens if it doesn't work?" and he said "Well, we'll have to do
it again."
It is amazing that Attenborough didn't collapsed under the load of the work. "The
most important thing in a film with such complexity is to be absolutely sure about your
research work. Don't go on if you're not sure about the story you have to tell in a
certain section. You have to know the script very well. I don't think I look at the script
on the shooting floor – I know it. The second thing is to be in a good and strong
233
condition. This is a matter of energy, as all the great directors will tell you. I've talked
to Anthony Mingele lately and he said' "you don't have to have talent, you just have to
have power."
Although the film was shot in time and within the budget, when the cameras stopped
shooting, Attenborough went to bed and was so exhausted that he slept for four days!
A Bridge Too Far came out in summer 1977 with mixed critics, but with a good
cash. It gathered 21 milion dollars just in the US. In Britain it was the fifth in profit at
that year. Today there is a sense of pride and humor among the actors and the crew
who were involved in this story of heroism and tragedy. "There was also modesty," says
Armstrong. "I've met the real soldiers who came to us as technical advisors for the
battle sections during shooting, which were a reconstruction of the deeds they had
done in reality. I remember two guys in the battle who shot the machine gun and were
hit by a direct hit. One lost his two hands and the other became blind. The one with no
hands carried his buddy while sighing from pain, and the blind said "stop moaning, I'm
hurt more severely than you!" Both of them were there when we shot this section and
they shed tears with no control."
Gould brought his son over to the Netherlands with him. "I have pictures of him
粸¢
looking at the bridge, holding his teddy bear when the bridge exploded. After that I
went to London and bought a watch and had a dedication engraved on it for my son,
'There is no one bridge too far. Love, Daddy.' You see, I haven't appreciated the film
properly until recently when I studied it and understood that it was very authentic. I
was lucky and I'm proud that I was part of A Bridge Too Far. When BAFTA gave Lord
Attenborough a life work prize, I was asked to come and represent the Bridge in the
ceremony, and when I stepped on the stage they played John Edison's song. It was
simply wonderful, I felt as if I was walking on air."
Attenborough's work and beliefs are well known, and this is why it is not
surprising that A Bridge Too Far carries with it a very strong anti-war message.
Together with Saving Private Ryan, it is one of the movies with the most graphic
descriptions of warfare. But this is an issue Attenborough approaches with mixed
feelings. "It is banal to say 'I'm against war'. It is not that simple, especially regarding
WWII, a war against tyranny, racism, and genocide. One had to stop this hooligan,
Hitler. This is why people agreed to go to war, in spite of their feelings, no matter how
234
much they objected to the concept of war. They agreed that something had to be done.
I wanted to make a film that would be anti-war due to the mistakes done by the
supreme command, which was responsible to a large extent to the killing of young
people. I also wanted to show that they were young people with courage, bravery and
comradeship. You couldn't ignore it. It was too easy."264
The holocaust begins to be popular and its impact on genres about neo-Nazis
that have been done afterwards
The holocaust in American movies and television: the history of the holocaust
and its memorial
Two schools of thought dominate the discourse of the investigation of the
holocaust. The first interprets the holocaust clearly as a Jewish tragedy, the logical peak
of two thousands years of anti-Semitism. For Jews and for every conscientious person,
the great fire divides history into two parts: before and after Auschwitz. The human
experience has been changed at that dividing line. The most eloquent messenger is Eli
Vizel, whose life work bears the unquestionable uniqueness of the atrocity the Nazis
brought upon the Jews, and the intellectual challenge that faces humanity after it. For
some historians the holocaust is one event, though the most merciless and impressive
蛐¢
event by its efficiency, in a series of genocide wars which have been conducted by the
burocratic state. This was the outcome not of a hot-blooded racism, but rather a coldblooded calculated administrative operation, a final solution conducted by a civil
authority for dealing with a demographic problem of surplus population." In his article
The Cunning of History, Richard L. Rubinstein presents the issue in a convincing way,
claiming that the best way to understand the holocaust is to see it as "a modern
exercise in total control that could be carried out only through an advanced political
community with a well-trained and most disciplined police and a burocracy of a civil
service. Any view which would isolate Nazism and its supreme expression of a
burocratic mass murder and a totalitarian society administered burocratically from the
main stream of western culture would be totally mistaken." Jews as such are accidental.
264
Ibidem. p.82.
235
Representation of the holocaust
The Boys from Brazil and Holocaust(1978)
Dr. Mengele tries to produce and copy 94 small Hitlers through genetic leftovers of
the Third Reich. A few moments before he was murdered, Barry Koller manages to
transfer the information to the famous Nazis hunter, Ezra Lieberman. Lieberman goes
out in a crusade intended to stop the development of the little Hitlers.
Barry Koller, a young Jew who tracks down Nazis in Paraguay, feels that
something goes on. He finds out that a meeting a several people is to take place in the
estate of Ralf Gunther. He manages to find out, through a wire-tapping equipment he
had installed there, that a few German generals from the war convened there together
with a few youngsters from the Neo-Nazi movement, and the guest of honor is Dr.
Mengele. It is discovered that Mengele has a plan to kill 94 people aged 65 years old,
who used to work as clerks, and live in Europe, the US and Canada. The plan is to
execute the plan within two and a half years. Koller is shaken by this piece of news,
and contacts Ezra Lieberman, the famous Nazi hunter who lives in Austria. But Ezra
does not believe him. Mengele and his people allocate Barry Koller and kill him. When
粸¢
Lieberman finds pictures that Barry has sent him, he starts checking into it and finds
out that there is something there. As the plot develops, Mengele's monstrous plan is
discovered. At the time he took from Adolf Hitler samples of blood and skin and
constructed a cell, which he transplanted into the ova of 94 women and had them
marry certain men. In fact, he planned to clone Hitler and by so doing bring about a
continuity of the Aryan race. In order that the child would grow up like Hitler, he has to
have the same social environment, and as Hitler's father died in the age of 65, these
men have to also at the same age so that the experiment would succeed. Lieberman
manages to allocate these people and indeed sees some children who look the same
and behave in the same way. All of them have the same character. When the
organization which stood behind Mengele stopped financing him, because Lieberman
discovered the plan, Mengele decides to continue the experiment by himself. So
Lieberman and Mengele arrive to the same family. There is a confrontation, and
Mengele dies from dogs bites, the dogs of the deceased. A Jewish organization wants
the list of children from Lieberman in order to kill them, but do not get it.
236
Genre and general information
A thriller – drama – science fiction.
Although the film is defined as a science fiction, one can believe that such a thing could
happen, that is, cloning Adolf Hitler by Dr. Mengele. The information of the film reveals
itself step by step, and it becomes a thriller. The dramatic effect is present throughout
the film until the end. One of the most dramatic moments is when lieberman meets
Mengele towards the end of the film, and what makes it more dramatic is that we see
one of the children that Mengele "created".
Significant scenes and turning points
•
Mengele's experiment farm. The farm is situated on the bank of a big river in Brazil.
It seems that he had fled there after the war and from their continued to act in
order to carry out the cloning plan. The farm can be reached only by air. One can
see there people and children with defects, Mengele dressed in white, riding a
horse and accepts the people who come to see him, and local women, who work in
cleaning the place, as they are topless. Through a flashback we see the process of
粸¢
inserting the sperms into the women's ova, as well as Mengele's vision.
•
The moment of revealing Mengele's full plan. When Lieberman understands all the
parts of the plan, there comes the moment when he finds out that Mengele wants
to make more and more children in the image of Hitler. He is amazed at this finding
and from that moment onward the plot moves to a higher general.
•
The Nazi party. As we see the setting, the people and the way they are dressed, we
understand there is going to be a party, which takes place in Germany in 1938, not
in Paraguay forty years later. Pictures of Hitler, swastikas, and everything that goes
with it. The seems unreal, especially when Mengele attacks one of the generals.
•
The meeting between Lieberman and Mengele. Towards the end of the film we
witness the meeting between Lieberman and Mengele and the house of the Wilok
family. We can see the hatred between these two people. Lieberman attacks
237
Mengele impulsively without any premeditated thought, and they fight like two
animals.
Summary
The film is well made as far as the development of the plot about Mengele's plan
is concerned. As has been said already, it is easy to think that a situation of cloning
Hitler would have been possible. The idea of the film is good and promising, and indeed
it is so in most of the film. The casting of Lieberman and Mengele is accurate and gives
the film what it needs. There is movement all the time, and the photography is good.
And so is the theme. The idea of making a film with this theme thirty years after the
war is interesting. You get the feeling that the producers do it out of personal reasons,
otherwise, why would they do it? The answer is probably to remind the world that
horrible things have been done and one should be aware of various organizations with
bad intentions. There is an emphasis on Jews, as the ones who would not let go of any
war criminal who is free, and all of them are motivated to capture these criminals.
The Germans are still presented as a machine which plans and executes horrible
粸¢
things. in front of this machine, which is heavily financed, there is one old man with no
financing, but with a very great motivation. Lieberman manages to destroy a plan that
has been in progress for many years, and he does it with very little help.
In the ending scene we see Bobby, the child who caused Mengele's death, in a
dark room, staring at the pictures Mengele had shot after the dogs killed him with their
bites. He took a chain of teeth from Mengele and hung it in the dark room. There must
be a reason for doing it, but it remains to the imagination of each spectator to think
what it refers to.
At the year the film The Boys from Brazil came out, the mini-series Shoah was
transmitted in NBC, a series that 120 miliion Americans watched. Not only it made the
holocaust popular, but it also influenced the genres of films about Neo-Nazis which
have been made afterwards. Three television networks started, in 1966, to produce
films of their own in order to answer the demand for a new kind of programs, together
with the raise of payments the studios charged for screening important films on
238
television after they have been screened in the movie theaters. In the years 1971-72
there were already more films that have been produced for the television than
theatrical plays, and they gained great success from both the critics and financially. Film
critics criticized the television films that they make complicated problems to trivial and
non-political ones, and tend to dramatize controversial themes and daily events which
used to be relatively ignored in theatrical shows. They deal with "hot" issues.
At the time of the above development, many Americans from the extreme right
wing adopted the ideology and symbols of German Nazism in order to attract publicity
and prove the sincerity of their racial beliefs. They believed that the white Christians
supremacy in the US is endangered by abortions, civil rights legislation, the banking
system, feminism, globalization of the economy, legislation for controlling hot weapons,
Jewish influence in the administration and the media, immigration of non-white people
from Africa, Asia and Latin America, or waiving the national sovereignty in diplomatic,
financial and military issues for international institutions, such as the UN and the World
Bank. The roots of Nazism with Christianity, isolation, nativism or racism of part of the
extreme right people stem in the American Bond of the thirties. George Lincoln
粸¢
Rockwell updated this integration of Nazi ideology and American rightist aims in the
fifties and the sixties, and the first tool for strengthening the connection between the
holocaust
and
contemporary
Neo-Nazi
movement
in
the
collective
American
consciousness were doco-dramas that have been made for commercial television and
cables networks.
Neo-Nazi films of the eighties
The outbursts of Neo-Nazi violence during the eighties were reflected in action movies
about confrontations between the police and the militant white supremists, which
replaced the court dramas as the most common genre of action movies about the
extreme rightists. In 1987 HBO network transmitted the first cable film about a paramilitary Neo-Nazi group in the US. The shift from previous cinematic descriptions of
Neo-Nazis as external enemies to the new characterization of an inner threat signaled a
films called Into the Homeland and others.
239
7.4 The First Cold War dies; the second Cold War begun; renewed Escalation
(1980-1989): German types in many variations
Historical background and a film's survey
Second Cold War (1979–89)
The renewed escalation regarding the Soviet Union's invasion to Afghanistan.
The years of President Reagan, characterized by tougher ideology and more extreme
economic ideology, manifested by a tendency of introducing privatization and
annulment of the restrictions on free marketing. Gorbachev's coming to power in the
Soviet Union and his endeavors to update the Soviet system by means of a new cultural
discourse, opening up to the West and general pluralism, a process named 'Glasnost'.
Economical development accompanied by the formation of a cultural alienation, leading
to the flourishing of the punk phenomenon. This was manifested in a charged political
cinema, on the one hand, and an escapist cinema on the other. During this period,
many movies were made, including updating German types in many variations. This
period ended with the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Berlin Wall.
粸¢
This period was characterized by a heated tension between the two super powers,
especially in light of the Soviet invasion to Afghanistan. President Reagan increased the
pressure on the USSR by presenting his plan of Star Wars. At the same time, the
administration requested of Hollywood to produce films that would present the
Germans in a positive light. During these unquiet years, full of disagreements in the
country, there grew a number of important film makers who demonstrated great
interest in a critical examination of certain aspects of the American culture, including
the violence that prevailed so much in the American history lately.
The term second Cold War has been used by some historians to refer to the period
of intensive reawakening of Cold War tensions and conflicts in the late 1970s and early
1980s. Tensions greatly increased between the major powers with both sides becoming
more militaristic.
Afghanistan war
During December 1979, approximately 75,000 Soviet troops invaded Afghanistan in
order to support the Marxist government formed by ex-Prime-minister Nur Muhammad
Taraki, assassinated that September by one of his party rivals. As a result, US President
240
Jimmy Carter withdrew the SALT II treaty from the Senate, imposed embargoes on
grain and technology shipments to the USSR, demanded a significant increase in
military spending, and further announced that the United States would boycott the
1980 Moscow Summer Olympics. He described the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan as
"the most serious threat to the peace since the Second World War".
Reagan and Thatcher
In 1980, Ronald Reagan defeated Jimmy Carter in the US presidential election,
vowing to increase military spending and confront the Soviets everywhere. Both Reagan
and new British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher denounced the Soviet Union and its
ideology. Reagan labeled the Soviet Union an "evil empire" and predicted that
Communism would be left on the "ash heap of history".
Polish Solidarity movement
Pope John Paul II provided a moral focus for anti-communism; a visit to his native
Poland in 1979 stimulated a religious and nationalist resurgence centered on the
Solidarity movement that galvanized opposition and may have led to his attempted
assassination two years later Reagan also imposed economic sanctions on Poland to
protest the suppression of Solidarity. In response, Mikhail Suslov, the Kremlin's top
粸¢
ideologist, advised Soviet leaders not to intervene if Poland fell under the control of
Solidarity, for fear it might lead to heavy economic sanctions, representing a
catastrophe for the Soviet economy.
Soviet and US military and economic issues
US and USSR/Russian nuclear weapons stockpiles, 1945–2006.
Further information: Brezhnev stagnation, Strategic Defense Initiative, RSD-10
Pioneer, and MGM-31 Pershing
Moscow had built up a military that consumed as much as 25 percent of the Soviet
Union's gross national product at the expense of consumer goods and investment in
civilian sectors. Soviet spending on the arms race and other Cold War commitments
both caused and exacerbated deep-seated structural problems in the Soviet system,
which saw at least a decade of economic stagnation during the late Brezhnev years.
Soviet investment in the defense sector was not driven by military necessity, but in
large part by the interests of massive party and state bureaucracies dependent on the
sector for their own power and privileges. The Soviet Armed Forces became the largest
241
in the world in terms of the numbers and types of weapons they possessed, in the
number of troops in their ranks, and in the sheer size of their military–industrial base.
However, the quantitative advantages held by the Soviet military often concealed areas
where the Eastern Bloc dramatically lagged behind the West.
After ten year old American Samantha Smith wrote a letter to Yuri Andropov
expressing her fear of nuclear war, Andropov invited Smith to the Soviet Union.
By the early 1980s, the USSR had built up a military arsenal and army surpassing that
of the United States. Previously, the US had relied on the qualitative superiority of its
weapons, but the gap had been narrowed. Ronald Reagan began massively building up
the United States military not long after taking office. This led to the largest peacetime
defense buildup in United States history.
粸¢
Tensions continued intensifying in the early 1980s when Reagan revived the B-1
Lancer program that was canceled by the Carter administration, produced LGM-118
Peacekeepers, installed US cruise missiles in Europe, and announced his experimental
Strategic Defense Initiative, dubbed "Star Wars" by the media, a defense program to
shoot down missiles in mid-flight. With the background of a buildup in tensions
between the Soviet Union and the United States, and the deployment of Soviet RSD-10
Pioneer ballistic missiles targeting Western Europe, NATO decided, under the impetus of
the Carter presidency, to deploy MGM-31 Pershing and cruise missiles in Europe,
primarily West Germany. This deployment would have placed missiles just 10 minutes'
striking distance from Moscow.
After Reagan's military buildup, the Soviet Union did not respond by further
building its military because the enormous military expenses, along with inefficient
planned manufacturing and collectivized agriculture, were already a heavy burden for
the Soviet economy. At the same time, Reagan persuaded Saudi Arabia to increase oil
production, even as other non-OPEC nations were increasing production. These
242
developments contributed to the 1980s oil glut, which affected the Soviet Union, as oil
was the main source of Soviet export revenues. Issues with command economics, oil
prices decreases and large military expenditures gradually brought the Soviet economy
to stagnation.
On September 1, 1983, the Soviet Union shot down Korean Air Lines Flight 007, a
Boeing 747 with 269 people aboard, including sitting Congressman Larry McDonald,
when it violated Soviet airspace just past the west coast of Sakhalin Island—an act
which Reagan characterized as a "massacre". This act increased support for military
deployment, overseen by Reagan, which stood in place until the later accords between
Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev. The Able Archer 83 exercise in November 1983, a
realistic simulation of a coordinated NATO nuclear release, has been called most
dangerous moment since the Cuban Missile Crisis, as the Soviet leadership keeping a
close watch on it considered a nuclear attack to be imminent.
US domestic public concerns about intervening in foreign conflicts persisted from
the end of the Vietnam War. The Reagan administration emphasized the use of quick,
low-cost counter-insurgency tactics to intervene in foreign conflicts. In 1983, the
Reagan administration intervened in the multisided Lebanese Civil War, invaded
粸¢
Grenada, bombed Libya and backed the Central American Contras, anti-communist
paramilitaries seeking to overthrow the Soviet-aligned Sandinista government in
Nicaragua. While Reagan's interventions against Grenada and Libya were popular in the
US, his backing of the Contra rebels was mired in controversy.
Meanwhile, the Soviets incurred high costs for their own foreign interventions. Although
Brezhnev was convinced in 1979 that the Soviet war in Afghanistan would be brief,
Muslim guerrillas, aided by the US and other countries, waged a fierce resistance
against the invasion. The Kremlin sent nearly 100,000 troops to support its puppet
regime in Afghanistan, leading many outside observers to dub the war "the Soviets'
Vietnam". However, Moscow's quagmire in Afghanistan was far more disastrous for the
Soviets than Vietnam had been for the Americans because the conflict coincided with a
period of internal decay and domestic crisis in the Soviet system.
A senior US State Department official predicted such an outcome as early as 1980,
positing that the invasion resulted in part from a "domestic crisis within the Soviet
system. ... It may be that the thermodynamic law of entropy has ... caught up with the
243
Soviet system, which now seems to expend more energy on simply maintaining its
equilibrium than on improving itself. We could be seeing a period of foreign movement
at a time of internal decay". The Soviets were not helped by their aged and sclerotic
leadership either: Brezhnev, virtually incapacitated in his last years, was succeeded by
Andropov and Chernenko, neither of whom lasted long. After Chernenko's death,
Reagan was asked why he had not negotiated with Soviet leaders. Reagan quipped,
"They keep dying on me".
End of the Cold War (1985–91)
Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan sign the INF Treaty at the White House, 1987
Gorbachev reforms
By the time the comparatively youthful Mikhail Gorbachev became General
Secretary in 1985; the Soviet economy was stagnant and faced a sharp fall in foreign
粸¢
currency earnings as a result of the downward slide in oil prices in the 1980s. These
issues prompted Gorbachev to investigate measures to revive the ailing state.
An ineffectual start led to the conclusion that deeper structural changes were
necessary and in June 1987 Gorbachev announced an agenda of economic reform
called perestroika, or restructuring. Perestroika relaxed the production quota system,
allowed private ownership of businesses and paved the way for foreign investment.
These measures were intended to redirect the country's resources from costly Cold War
military commitments to more profitable areas in the civilian sector.
Despite initial skepticism in the West, the new Soviet leader proved to be
committed to reversing the Soviet Union's deteriorating economic condition instead of
continuing the arms race with the West. Partly as a way to fight off internal opposition
from party cliques to his reforms, Gorbachev simultaneously introduced glasnost, or
openness, which increased freedom of the press and the transparency of state
institutions. Glasnost was intended to reduce the corruption at the top of the
Communist Party and moderate the abuse of power in the Central Committee. Glasnost
also enabled increased contact between Soviet citizens and the western world,
244
particularly with the United States, contributing to the accelerating détente between the
two nations.
Thaw in relations
In response to the Kremlin's military and political concessions, Reagan agreed to
renew talks on economic issues and the scaling-back of the arms race. The first was
held in November 1985 in Geneva, Switzerland. At one stage the two men,
accompanied only by a translator, agreed in principle to reduce each country's nuclear
arsenal by 50 percent.
Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1988
A second Reykjavík Summit was held in Iceland. Talks went well until the focus
shifted to Reagan's proposed Strategic Defense Initiative, which Gorbachev wanted
eliminated: Reagan refused. The negotiations failed, but the third summit in 1987 led to
粸¢
a breakthrough with the signing of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty
(INF). The INF treaty eliminated all nuclear-armed, ground-launched ballistic and cruise
missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometers (300 to 3,400 miles) and their
infrastructure.
East–West tensions rapidly subsided through the mid-to-late 1980s, culminating
with the final summit in Moscow in 1989, when Gorbachev and George H. W. Bush
signed the START I arms control treaty. During the following year it became apparent
to the Soviets that oil and gas subsidies, along with the cost of maintaining massive
troop's levels, represented a substantial economic drain. In addition, the security
advantage of a buffer zone was recognized as irrelevant and the Soviets officially
declared that they would no longer intervene in the affairs of allied states in Eastern
Europe.
In 1989, Soviet forces withdrew from Afghanistan and by 1990 Gorbachev
consented to German reunification, the only alternative being a Tiananmen scenario.
When the Berlin Wall came down, Gorbachev's "Common European Home" concept
began to take shape.
245
On December 3, 1989, Gorbachev and Reagan's successor, George H. W. Bush,
had declared the Cold War over at the Malta Summit; a year later, the two former rivals
were partners in the Gulf War against longtime Soviet ally Iraq.
Faltering Soviet system.
By 1989, the Soviet alliance system was on the brink of collapse, and, deprived of
Soviet military support, the Communist leaders of the Warsaw Pact states were losing
power. In the USSR itself, glasnost weakened the bonds that held the Soviet Union
together and by February 1990, with the dissolution of the USSR looming, the
Communist Party was forced to surrender its 73-year-old monopoly on state power.
At the same time freedom of press and dissent allowed by glasnost and the
festering "nationalities question" increasingly led the Union's component republics to
declare their autonomy from Moscow, with the Baltic States withdrawing from the
Union entirely. The 1989 revolutionary wave that swept across Central and Eastern
Europe overthrew the Soviet-style communist states, such as Poland, Hungary,
Czechoslovakia and Bulgaria, Romania being the only Eastern-bloc country to topple its
communist regime violently and execute its head of state.
Soviet dissolution
粸¢
Gorbachev's permissive attitude toward Eastern Europe did not initially extend to
Soviet territory; even Bush, who strove to maintain friendly relations, condemned the
January 1991 killings in Latvia and Lithuania, privately warning that economic ties
would be frozen if the violence continued. The USSR was fatally weakened by a failed
coup and as a growing number of Soviet republics, particularly Russia, threatened to
secede the USSR was declared officially dissolved on December 25, 1991.
Legacy
Formation of the CIS, the official end of the Soviet Union Created on December 21,
1991, the Commonwealth of Independent States is viewed as a successor entity to the
Soviet Union but according to Russia's leaders its purpose was to "allow a civilized
divorce" between the Soviet Republics and is comparable to a loose confederation.
Following the Cold War, Russia cut military spending dramatically, but the
adjustment was wrenching, as the military-industrial sector had previously employed
one of every five Soviet adults and its dismantling left millions throughout the former
Soviet Union unemployed. After Russia embarked on capitalist economic reforms in the
246
1990s, it suffered a financial crisis and a recession more severe than the US and
Germany had experienced during the Great Depression. Russian living standards have
worsened overall in the post-Cold War years, although the economy has resumed
growth since 1999.
The legacy of the Cold War continues to influence world affairs. After the
dissolution of the Soviet Union, the post-Cold War world is widely considered as
unipolar, with the United States the sole remaining superpower. The Cold War defined
the political role of the United States in the post-World War II world: by 1989 the US
held military alliances with 50 countries, and had 1.5 million troops posted abroad in
117 countries. The Cold War also institutionalized a global commitment to huge,
permanent peacetime military-industrial complexes and large-scale military funding of
science.
Military expenditures by the US during the Cold War years were estimated to
have been $8 trillion, while nearly 100,000 Americans lost their lives in the Korean War
and Vietnam War.
Although the loss of life among Soviet soldiers is difficult to
estimate, as a share of their gross national product the financial cost for the Soviet
Union was far higher than that of the US.
粸¢
In addition to the loss of life by uniformed soldiers, millions died in the
superpowers' proxy wars around the globe, most notably in Southeast Asia. Most of the
proxy wars and subsidies for local conflicts ended along with the Cold War; the
incidence of interstate wars, ethnic wars, revolutionary wars, as well as refugee and
displaced persons crises has declined sharply in the post-Cold War years.
No separate campaign medal has been authorized for the Cold War; however, in
1998, the United State Congress authorized Cold War Recognition Certificates "to all
members of the armed forces and qualified federal government civilian personnel who
faithfully and honorably served the United States anytime during the Cold War era,
which is defined as Sept. 2, 1945 to Dec. 26, 1991."
The legacy of Cold War conflict, however, is not always easily erased, as many of
the economic and social tensions that were exploited to fuel Cold War competition in
parts of the Third World remain acute. The breakdown of state control in a number of
areas formerly ruled by Communist governments has produced new civil and ethnic
conflicts, particularly in the former Yugoslavia. In Eastern Europe, the end of the Cold
247
War has ushered in an era of economic growth and a large increase in the number of
liberal democracies, while in other parts of the world, such as Afghanistan,
independence was accompanied by state failure.
film's survey
representation of Germans during the renewed escalation period upon the
invasion to Afghanistan
The Bunker (1981)
Hitler's last days – based on the book by Joachim Fest
Genre and General information
Biography, Drama, Histoty
Hitler's bunker was the center of an underground gigantic concrete labyrinth in
the heart of Nazi Berlin, more than ten meters deep, The Fuhrer's Bunker, where one of
the greatest dramas of modern history took place for 14 days: the fall of Hitler and her
people together with the final collapse of the Third Reich.
The film, which was called A Bunker's Prose in Germany, describes the last hours of
粸¢
the inhabits of the bunker: the increasing paranoia of exhausted and frenzied Hitler, he
moved from hallucinatory hopes to desperation. He issued commands of attacks to
forces which had been crashed already, while Nazi leadership collapsed through a chain
of desperate actions of treason, accusations and suicide actions among its members. At
the same time a bloody warfare was going in the ruined streets of Berlin.
The historian Joachim Fest used evidence of eye witnesses and findings of a
scrupulous research for many years of these last days, and comes up with important
insights about the nature of Hitler and other persons of Nazi leadership, about their
mistaken feeling about their global and historical mission, about their pathological
passion for destruction and their insistence to make the fall of Germany into a gigantic
murderous show.265
In recent years there is a trend of a way of writing about the Germans, which tries
to purify them, saying that "the Germans were also miserable."
265
Joachim Fest is one of the most important German historians who investigated Nazism. His biographical
comprehensive research "Hitler: The Portrait of a non-Person" (Keter, 1986, in Hebrew) made him
famous world-wide, and is a basic research in studying Hitler and the Third Reich. He also published
studies about the German resistance movement towards Nazism, and a biography of Albert Speer. His
book "The Face of the Third Reich" was translated into Hebrew (Maarchot, 1987).
248
It is certainly interesting to know how did the "small" Germans live and think,
what did they know and what they did not, and what they believed, how they were
caught in this belief. Are the dual feelings in this context are knew or old, and whether
they are in line with the films that have been done in the sixties and the seventies. We
know there is a dichotomy in many films, and this is not new.
About Hitler himself, every detail is fascinating about this awful person, anything
one can find. Joachim Fest interviewed the last survivors of the bunker, he crossed
investigations from the time of the conquest and wrote his essay Inside Hitler's Bunker.
The collapse of Germany in the war is one of the colossal collapses in history. One
usually does not want to think about it. How a state reconstructs itself from the
problems of the previous war, It is reborn from itself, goes out to war, succeeds to
bring destruction over a continent and ends up by being ruined due to this same black
power.
Hitler knew already in 1941 that he was going to lose the war, and he talked about
it in November of that year. In 9145 he said "if we fall, we will bring down the world
with us." But all the same, he did not know how to finish the war, and even went on
demanding his people to die for him to the last person, including the children in Berlin.
粸¢
What really happened there is an enigma. Nobody knows what happened to the
bodies of Hitler and Eva Brown. Many details have remained vague. Only in 1955
prisoners of war started to come back from Russia. Among there was Hitler's dentist
and a few of the workers of the bunker, and they could be investigated. How could a
person like Hitler live for many months, ten meters under the ground, without coming
up, without seeing besieged city, without any connection with the world.
When Churchill arrived in Berlin after the war, he asked to see the bunker. He
went down one or two storeys, but he was told that the important, private storey is two
storeys down, he refused to go down any more and came out. He never explained why.
Did he, too, asked himself these questions about his bitter enemy? How did he live
there? What impact this life had on his decisions, even if he was already half crazy at
the time?
The bunker was not made during the war. In 1935 already Hitler instructed to build him
a bunker underneath the chancellor cabinet. In the future there spread more and more
bunkers, connected by endless corridors.
249
In 16.4.1945 the Russian army started an attack aimed at conquering Berlin. Huge
powers were concentrated for this fateful battle. There is a reason why it was called the
conquest of Berlin, rather than Germany, which had been conquered already.
Conquering Berlin was the end of Hitler.
One of the difficult and strange questions is how did Hitler's personality influence
the experienced generals. They heard analyses of the situation which were detached
from the reality they knew. So why did they obeyed the instructions they knew were
out of any reason. How did Hitler believe Goering and others that the war would end by
Germany's victory? They did not say there was hope, they said they were sure.
When there came the first news about the successes of the Allies, Hitler said: "I'm
surrounded by traitors and treason everywhere. Only bad luck is faithful to me, and
Blondi too." Blondy was his bitch. He got hope from a horoscope that said that there
was a change in his favor, and a few days afterwards Roosevelt died, and for a moment
it seemed as if the stars were right.
Tens of people lived in the bunker. Except for the top of the military and the policy
makers, there were a large group of assistants, secretaries, physicians, telephone
operators, couriers and many more functionaries. In his private room Hitler had to be
粸¢
there was a big oxygen balloon. Hitler had a strangulation anxiety. Before describing
the life in the bunker, Fest tries to analyze the reasons for Hitler's rise into power. This
question was asked again and again, but there is no unequivocal answer. It was not the
"mood of the nation", nor the disappointment from Weimar. These are partial reasons.
Hitler's promises for a glorious future were part of the reasons. No one imagined the
scope of the dictatorial totalitarian control he would administer. At that time there were
no examples for comparison. Germany is not Russia, and the Nazis were not
communists, and what was known in the West at the beginning of the thirties about the
regime in Russia. Nobody could imagine the scope of deprivation of rights and the
degree of violence of the party and its street forces. Of all the many possible reasons,
one cannot refrain from returning to the one who managed to give an ancient answer
by the power of his personality: Hitler himself. I have not heard yet a reasonable
explanation to the submission of a nation to a hysterical, noise and theatrical
personality. What was it that made people believe in him. How did this man make his
awful egocentricity and Germany into an inseparable existence, and how did the people
250
accept this terrible fact. What was it in his personality that hypnotized the Germans, but
not other people. It all circles around the man himself. Is it all about a gambler who
became a politician and took a gamble and lost? Some time before he committed
suicide, he said the officers who were around him, as he was looking at the ruins:
"what value does it all have? Anyway at a certain stage one has to leave all this
garbage behind."
On April 20th was his 56th birthday, and it was the last time that all the Nazi top
gathered together at one place to celebrate this birthday. Eva Brown had come to live
in the bunker a few days beforehand. Most of the people there were actually interested
in getting away from the city. They knew the Russian army was surrounding the city
and within a few hours it would be impossible to turn out from the city. Goering blew
up his estate. He told an officer who was him that "an heir does such things
sometimes." Hitler decided not to tun away from Berlin, his ministers and all the top
functionaries who came to greet him ran away from Berlin after greeting him.
The next days were hectic. Hitler tried to reorganize the defense of the city. He
gave order and then changed them, appointed generals in the morning and fired them
in the evening. Nobody knows what to do, if something could be done. The people who
粸¢
were with Hitler in these days described him as hysterical, trembling, with feverish
eyes. The battle over Berlin was closing its end. There were coming news about the
Soviets getting closer and closer, breaking the last lines of defense.
Hitler's hysteria attacks increased up to a point he threatened he would shoot
himself in the head, and everybody panicked. Fest does not mention it, but Schirer's
writes in his book about one of these days when Hitler fell on the floor and started
biting the carpet out of fury. The loyal Goebels understood that something happened.
He brought his wife and six children to live in the bunker. When Hitler calmed down he
came out of his room and announced that he had no more instructions, and that
everyone should do what he sees right. When he tries to transfer his authorities to
Goerng, he was told that no soldier would fight for the Reichsmarschall. "What do you
mean fight? There is nothing to fight for any more, and if you refer to negotiation, the
marschall can do it better that me," said Hitler. He moved from fury to madness to
acceptance along the day.
251
Goering, who escaped from Berlin, heard what was going on in the bunker and
sent a telegram, asking to be appointed as the formal heir of Hitler. There was loyalty
to Hitler and at the same time there was also a concealed struggle for the heir. Hitler
dismissed Goering and called him a traitor. He complains again of his luck. "The world
hasn't spared me anything, not disappointment, not infidelity, not disrespect neither
treason." Luck is to blame for everything.
Another scene that took place in the bunker was when there was a rumor that
Himler suggested himself as an arbitrator of peace with the Allies. Hitler saw the great
treason gets formulated in front of his eyes. He could understand it if it was Goering, as
he had not had a good opinion of him. But Himler, the one who talked until the last
moment about total loyalty, this made him break down and enter another hysteria in
which he could interpret all the failures as treason.
One cannot know what did Hitler think about when he decided to marry Eva
Brown. If he had decided to commit suicide in the coming hours, maybe he wanted to
die as a married man, or maybe he wanted to respect her as a widow or a married
woman, if she commits suicide with him. The marriage ceremony was conducted hastily
at midnight, and this ceremony encouraged another such ceremonies which took place
粸¢
in the bunker. Hitler told his fellow celebrators that the idea of National Socialism was
dying and would never come into being again. He retreated to his room to write his
political and private will. He dismissed Goering and Himler, appointed a new
government and a line of other appointments. In the last sentence he called to the
German people: "I command the leaders of the nation and the citizens the duty to keep
strictly the Nuremberg Laws and struggle mercilessly the world poisoner of all nations,
the international Jewry." This obsession has not leave him to his last moment.
The first to die in Hitler's decision to commit suicide was the bitch Blondy and its
five puppies. Hitler said that he did not want it would fall into the hands of the
Russians, but maybe he actually wanted to check the efficiency of cyanide pills.
In the meanwhile there came the news about the end of Mussolini. Hitler was not sorry
about his death, but was bothered by the possibility that the mob would punish him
severely, or that he would be taken prisoner to Russia and would be presented like a
monkey in a cage. Maybe only then he made his final decision.
252
While in the floor above him the people of the bunker were making a wild feast,
eating and drinking the superb products of the warehouses of the chancellor, Hitler
gathered in his private wing about twenty people who were close to him, said goodbye
personally and released them from their loyalty oath to him.
On April 30th, Hitler understood that the defense of the city collapsed. He gave his
private assistant his last orders to burn his body and scatter the ashes so that it would
never be found. "Anyway the whole world will curse me tomorrow," he said when he
refused to run away from Berlin.
There are several pieces of evidence about Hitler's death. IN some of them it is said
that he shot himself in the temple. In others it was said that he poisoned himself by
Cyanide and shot himself. Eva Brown poisoned herself.
There are description of the burning of the body, but none of the people in charge did
not go out to check whether this last order was carried out. Some time after Hitler's
suicide, Goebbels and his wife poisoned their six children and committed suicide.
At that night, a short while after midnight, the Reichstag was conquered by the Soviets
who flew the flag of the USSR. For photo purposes the flag was flown again on the next
day at daylight.
粸¢
Fest tries to analyze Hitler's personality and his intentions, his immense impulse of
destruction. In the fall of 1944, upon the first failures, he issued a decree of scorched
earth to every part of the army which had to withdraw. On March 19, 1945, he issued
the Neron Decree, indicating not only a scorched earth, but "a wasteland with no sign
of civilization on it."
He enjoyed destruction, says Fest. One could see it from the beginning, when
Warsaw wanted to surrender after the revolt in 1944. Hitler issued a command to ruin
the city and watched it through a binoculars from afar. He wanted to burn Paris, and
planned a similar fate to Moscow and Leningrad. He played with the idea to send
rockets to America's shopping centers. The malice and destruction which were hidden
inside him started to be understood only after his death in a long process of trying to
decode his personality by many scholars.
At the end of his way he turned against the "weak" German people, which was not
strong enough and was not prepared to sacrifice enough… He would not pour tears (for
the people)… If the war terminates with a defeat, the people would also be vanished.
253
There is no need to consider the required basic conditions for the survival of the
German people. On the contrary, the people proved to be the weak party." These are
just a few sentences Hitler said again and again towards the end.
The film includes detailed descriptions of the war and the atmosphere. The feeling
is of an amazing thriller, which captures the spectator and leaves him breathless in the
race of defending Berlin. It describes also what was going on the ground, in the city.
The destruction, raping women, the fall of humanity. But one should forget it is a film
about Hitler, about the Nazis. There is nothing that calls for mercy or empathy, maybe
just questions. This is a film about the end of a horrible regime and about people one
cannot define.
The Downfall
The Downfall is a fascinating cinematic document. There are not many films that you
can say about them that they important for people, especially Israelis. It is a kind of
work of art that revives history from the dusted books, the cataloged documents, the
dry facts, and the faded people from museum oblivion. The Downfall urges us to think
hard and investigate our presuppo9sitions about Nazi Germany, its rise and fall into the
abyss of crime and atrocity.
粸¢
The film focus on Hitler's last moths in Berlin, deep in his detached bunker. It is
based upon crossed testimonies told by eye witnesses, most of not alive any more, and
through their stories we are exposed to a detailed picture of these last days. The film is
based, among other things, on the book of the historian Joachim Fest and the personal
memories of Melissa Muller and Traudel Junge, the latter was Hitler's private secretary,
and witnessed his slow deterioration up to his suicide together with Eva Brown.
Through an intimate interview with old Junge (a short time before she died), the
project receives bears cinematic credibility and makes it obvious that it was not a fiction
work, but a documentary reconstruction of the Nazi past, done with talented actors.
254
The Downfall – Eva Brown, Hitler & Albert Speere
The importance of The Downfall is that it enable us penetrate into the secret bunker of
Nazi Germany and watch the complex dynamics of the heads of the regime: Hitler,
Goebbels, Himler, and so on, the heads of the military, generals like Feiglin, Widling,
Munke, Kerbs, Curgerdorf, Keitel, Jodl, Goering, Greim and others, the minor class of
officers, the clerks and the citizens of Berlin. Unlike other movies and books, which tried
to describe Nazi Germany as a kind of Empire of Total Evil, this movie tries to stay close
to the historical evidence as much as possible, and draw a human multi-dimensional
profile of a European culture that destroys itself due to an extreme cruel viewpoint that
cannot exist for a long period of time.
Extreme moment in the movie, like Goebbels wife who poisoned her six children,
turn pale in light of the wide picture the Downfall presents: Nazi Germany collapsed
蛐¢
because its political strategy faces the firm resistance of the rest of the world. Hitler did
not commit suicide because he was sorry for his deeds, but because he understood that
there were too many strong states which were not prepared to submit to him. Hitler's
obsession towards the Jews, we see in the course of the film, does not end until his
heart stops beating. Even the most courageous people in the film do not deserve to be
admired and they are not heroes. At the most, they were decent and reasonable, small
islands of modesty in an ocean of stupidity and violence.
It is interesting to see the submissive and obedient behavior of the toughest men in
the Reich's army: men who do not blink in front of canons and guns, but cannot react
normally in the face of the stupid behavior of their leader. The hysterical Fuhrer curses
the generals, slanders the army and the soldiers, attacks the civil population for its
"weakness", and most of the people in the top do not dare rise against him openly.
Some people who dedicated most of their years to the regime find out that they had
missed their lives and decide to commit suicide, but they are not the majority. The
Downfall brings a realistic, serious production with a lot of details in a convincing way.
255
One can say that the script writers managed to put the puzzle together into a factual
picture from the scattered pieces.
The Downfall – Hitler's young secretary, Traudel Junge
The film raises the questions, who is the good guy, and who is the bad one? Is there
such a thing as a good German or a bad German? Are they all bad, or they are just
victims of their leadership? The answer is that when the regime is corrupted and the
leadership is sick, the public has to make a great effort, through immense personal
sacrifice, in order to change the circumstances. In certain cases it is almost impossible,
and dark dictatorships, like Sadam Hussein, for instance, withstand for decades until
they are destroyed from within or from without. In Hitler's case, unfortunately, the
German culture of obedience, strictness, authority and hierarchy, played a critical role in
his survival. In another country he would have been murdered by a military or a civil
粸¢
person much earlier.
People know that Hitler survived until 1945 as several attempts of assassination
failed. There were Germans who objected to him, others put a great effort in destroying
him, but Hitler was lucky. Cunning and a skilled mechanism saved his life more than
once. The Downfall presents a desperate picture of a stupid leader who is not destroyed
or neutralized by his subordinates.
None of the senior Nazis had the intellectual courage to go against the stream and
pull a gun at him, even when it was clear to everybody that he had lost the minimal
capability to lead the German people. Hitler's refusal to surrender can be considered as
genocide, as by so doing he hurt severely the civil population. Therefore, The Downfall
cannot release the people of the bunker of responsibility for the European tragedy.
Furthermore, The Downfall is a proof for the failure of any regime based on an
individual, and a convincing song of praise of the success of the democratic, pluralistic
and non-violent system.
Some claim that The Downfall cleansed the German society and put most of the
responsibility on the shoulders of Hitler and Goebbels, but the film itself does not do so,
256
even for a single moment, and Junge's closing decisive testimony is the proof. She says
very clearly that "a young age is no excuse. One could have known all these things (the
holocaust and the ethnic purification)." The makers of the film did not release the
German society from responsibility for the horrible crime against the whole world. Those
who knew or should have know about the atrocity, and also had the power to prevent it
or bring it to an end, and did not do it – is guilty. The accumulated picture is not that
"Hitler was crazy, what do you want of the rest of the Germans?" but "you were there,
you could do something, but you did nothing." Morally speaking, The Downfall does not
cleanse anyone and does not throw mud at anybody. It shows the reality with all its
complexity and depth, making the viewer compose his own set of values, which is the
most difficult assignment, especially in a time of war. For many reasons children cannot
watch this film. The psychological and plot complexity, the amount of secondary
characters and the required historical background do not enable a simplistic thinking to
perceive its depth. The length of the film, 154 minutes, makes it difficult to reach a wide
public of average and less than average capability of concentration, and yet it stands in
line with super films like The Pianist, The Magdalene Sisters, and Arna's Children, in its
capability of illustrating in details a chapter in the history of the crimes of the modern
person. Bruno Ganz as Hitler, the main character, deserved the Oscar, and Juliana
粸¢
Kohler as Eva Brown and the other supporting actors made a wonderful job. The fact
that most of the cast consists of German actors adds a great cinematic and social
power to the film.
To sum up, The Downfall entered the pantheon of WWII films that just have to be
seen. It shows the viewer the depth of the Nazi regime, explains in a clean and polished
way the reasons for the German failure, clarifies the severe strategic mistakes of the
Nazi ideology, and enables to look at the depth of the atrocity and scope of the crime.
This film, like other films from the sixties, asks questions about the Germans: Who was
the good guy and who was the bad guy, is there such a thing as a good German or a
bad German, were all of them bad, or they were the victims of the leadership? Another
example of a good film is: The Quiller Memorandum.
Weapons of the Spirit (1986/7)
It is 1940, France. The Germans conquer France within six weeks and divide it into
two parts. The northern part is under the Nazi control, and a new leader, Philippe
Pétain is nominated to rule over the southern part. Pétain is a war hero from WWI, 84
257
years old. He settles in Vichy and cooperates with the Nazis, and according to the
arrangement with them, he can go on ruling France. Within four months he issues new
instructions which discriminate the Jews in all fields of life. Jews who have come from
other countries in Europe are put in concentration camps according to the instructions.
These concentration camps were located in the non-conquered zone, and sometimes it
was possible to take Jews out of them, but all the same, about 3000 people died in
these camps. In 1941 started the collection of Jews and sending them to the northern
part of France, and from there to the concentration camps in Germany. Le Chambon, a
mountainous region of farms and villages in central France was about 65 Km from
Vichy. The Christian community there is Protestant. Le Chambon has a history of
resistance since the time of their ancestors used to read secretly chapters of the New
Testament and cultivate the land according to their belief. In 1900 Le Chambon
accepted sick children from the surrounding towns. In 1930 it accepted the refugees
that came from the Civil War in Spain. And in 1940 they accepted the persecuted Jews
from Europe (Paris, Warsaw, Vienna, Prague). There were children, single persons,
families and adults. In 1941 the church of Le Chambon formulated its attitude, saying:
"It is the obligation of the Christians to object to violence through the 'weapons of the
粸¢
soul'. We will resist without fear, without pride or hatred."
In 1942 the Nazi Final Solution was issued, and general Heidrich arrived at Paris in
order to speak about the transports of Jews to Germany as part of the plan. The
Germans pressed Pétain's administration to send as much Jews as it can in order to fill
the quota of the death trains. President Pétain and his Prime Minister accepted the
Germans' instruction to send French and non-French Jews. They also send children,
even though the Germans did not requested it from them, under the pretence not to
separate families.
Step by step Le Chambon becomes a village of children, and the Red Cross comes
and establishes three homes for Jewish children. Auguste Bonni is the manager of all
the project. He is a Swiss teacher, and under his management the homes become a
paradise of learning, songs, peace and solidarity. Christians, the boy scouts youth
movement, and children from all over the village join them and take part in the efforts
of saving Jewish children. The Simad organization was established. It consisted mostly
258
of women who have decided to help in transferring refugees to Switzerland. The
organization respected the Jews as the people of the Old Testament, and the Jews
respected the Christians as people who are connected to the Old Testament.
When the Minister for Youth's Affairs in the Vichy government came to Le
Chambon, he received a letter from the youth in which they say they do not intend to
discriminate between Jews and non-Jews, and they would hide every Jew the
administration would want to transfer to the concentration camps. A few weeks later,
the French police comes and asks vicar Trocmé to give them a list of all the Jews in Le
Chambon, and all of them have to be registered in the town hall. Trocmé refuses to this
request and says: "The role of the shepherd is not to separate the herd." In November
1942 the Germans enter the southern part of France and Le Chambon comes to be
under the German occupation. Pierre Fiole, a French Jew, has become the leader of the
movement and arrived at Le Chambon and was received there warmly by the
inhabitants. They had meetings in the area, where the freedom fighters learned how to
use weapons. One could hear in the forests of Le Cahmbon Jewish songs and people
dancing to the melody of the Hora. The Germans arrive at Le Chambon and settle in
粸¢
two hotels. They establish their headquarters exactly in front of the headquarters of
the resistance movement. It seems that the Germans knew that the place was full of
Jews, but somehow they did do anything about it. At the same time, not far from there,
Jews were burned and shot. How come these news did not arrive at Le Chambon, and
how come the SS in Le Chambon ignored the Jews, who were a few meters from them?
Forged documents and certificates were a must under the German occupation, and
Le Chambon has become the center for issuing and distributing such certificates. Im the
fall of 1942 a young man with exceptional skills arrived in the village and has become
the forger of the resistance movement. They prepared the documents in daytime, and
at night they distributed them. This activity of forging documents took place in the
house of Henry and Emma Hartier until it was moved to beehives without bees. A local
shepherd helped in distributing the documents, and he did it out of the kindness of his
heart.
In order to control of what went on in Le Chambon, the French sent a policeman to
live in the village and report what was going on there. The policeman reported every
259
day, but there never has happened anything as a result of these reports. Following the
business of forgery that has developed in Le Chambon, it has become the main point in
the route of refugees to Switzerland.
At a certain moment the authorities arrested the vicar and his assistant, Andre
Trocmé and Edoward Theis, and after a month they were miraculously released,
probably with the help of assistant of the Minister for Youth's Affairs. When they come
back they become more active in the resistance and even accompany refugees to
Switzerland.
In 1944 Le Chambon is released by the Free Resistance Movement, a long time
before the Allies arrived to free France. But Le Chambon has never suffered from a lack
of freedom, it has always been free.
Genre: Documentary.
The film manages to pass the feeling of authenticity. Pierre Sauvage, the director,
manages to establish an interesting link between accurate information in a historical
level together with interviews with the inhabitants of Le Chambon, the heroes. They are
粸¢
the focus of the story. When a documentary manages to bring real heroes in their
natural location, forty years after the event, it does its job. At the same time, it is not
difficult, since what happened in Le Chambon is really unique. It takes an interesting
story with interesting heroes, and the person who would connect between them and
present it in a unique way to make a good film. One may say that everything has
happened in this film. Watching it is inspiring to everyone.
Vichy Administration
There is a harsh criticism in the film towards the Vichy administration and its
behavior towards the Jews. We understand that France was the only place where the
government cooperated with the Nazis. The French police participated in collecting the
Jews and sending them to the concentration camps. When Pierre Sauvage interviews
who used to be the Minister for Youth's Affairs in the Vichy administration, he says that
he had not known anything about sending people to concentration camps.
260
Summary
The conspiracy of goodwill. Something very special issues from the film Weapons
of the Soul, a special authenticity that testify of natural nobleness that comes from a
deep belief. It seems that in Le Chambon there was God's hand that kept the place and
its inhabitants. This special place dedicated itself to saving others, no matter who they
may be. Le Chambon becomes a significant point and a symbol in everything that has
to do with resisting the occupation. In all the region surrounding le Chambon, the vicars
and the churches served in key roles in helping Jewish refugees. There is an
atmosphere of peace and serenity and the inhabitants manage to save 5000 Jews,
which is identical to the number of inhabitants there, and everything is done out of
simple good will and what had to be done at that moment of distress. At the time when
Jews all over Europe are sent to concentration and extermination camps, the Jews in Le
Chambon manage to conduct their ritual holidays under the nose of the Germans.
There is the administration on the one hand versus the simple man as a symbol of
compassion and help on the other. This is another sign that real help would always
come from the people and not from the administration.
粸¢
Hotel Terminus [Documentary]. (1987/8)
Shtetl and Hotel Terminus(1987/8)
Producers of documentaries usually assume that those involved in history and
historical documents are just "facts", and do not need much mediation or interpretation.
Robert Rosenstone indicates that the film was done according to this approach, and it
gives "memory (nostalgia) instead of history… as it never asks the witnesses any
questions, and never comments on their opinions, even if they are mistaken of
inaccurate…" This approach is questioned, especially by movies like Shoah (1985).
Along this line, Marcel Ophuls' film, The Sol-row and the Pity (1970) attacked the heroic
memory of the nation about the resistance in the time of the war. His later film Hotel
Terminus (1987) and a new film Shtetl by Marian Marzynnku expose the complicated
nature of the holocaust and examine the role of the personal and the collective
memory. Both these films raise a question about our unquestionable acceptance of oral
evidence and documentation. These films attack the accepted historical methodology,
urging us to look for meaning in the holocaust in history in general.
261
Hotel Terminus, Ophuls' first film for ten years, is a documentary about Klaus
Barbie, his victims and friends and the heritage of Vichy. At the center of the film
stands Barbie, the notorious Butcher of Lyon. Young Barbie is described by the
inhabitants of his town and his classmates as the son of a schoolteacher and a decent
Catholic boy. In his role as captain in the SS Barbie headed a department in the security
police in Lyon during the years 1942-44, and was responsible for the torture, death and
deportation of many victims. After the war he worked for the American intelligence, and
escaped to Bolivia in 1949 with the help of Washington and the Vatican. Under the
name of Klaus Altman he worked for different Bolivian dictators, until he was found and
handed over to France in 1987, and was found guilty of crimes against humanity.
Hotel Terminus, as can be understood from its name is a documentary, who is
less interested in Barbie and more in France of Vichy, especially Lyon. In this hotel was
the headquaters of the Gestapo of Lyon. In a wider sense, Ophuls examines the legacy
of the holocaust. He uses interviews with different people who knew Barbie as the one
who tortured them, as a friend or a neighbor. The movies begins with Johannes
Schneider-Merck, Barbie's south American friend, who tells how his friend burst once
out in anger when he heard the Adolf Eichman betrayed the idealism of the German
粸¢
youth. Then Ophuls moves to a café in Lyon, where men in their middle age play
billiards and reminisce their experiences under the Nazi regime. One of the interviewees
even recalls that when he was a service boy in Hotel Terminus, he received kind tips
from the Gestapo men. Afterwards there is a series of visual pictures of the hotel, while
the sound track utters a strident sequence of statements coming from Barbie's
contemporaries, who describe him as kind and moral, or brutal and satanic. From the
opening sequence it seems that Ophuls was more interested in memories and legacies
that in Barbie's personality that appears in a discontinuous and filtered way by the
witnesses.
Ophuls dedicates a lot of attention to the ambiguous and controversial legacy of
the war. In a speech given by the French Prime Minister after Barbie's extradition, he
emphasizes that the trial would "respect the memory of that time of agony and struggle
in which France maintained its honor." But when the prosecutors decided to find Barbie
guilty of the murder to Jean Moulin, the martyr of the French resistance movement, the
trial raised a debate about the divisions, mainly the ideological ones, that bothered the
262
movement of resistance. This debate brought back the attention to the difficult
assignment of how to settle the reality of rightist and anti-Semitic ideas in France with
the myth of national unity in the resistance movement. At one point in the film it can be
understood from the words of one of the interviewees, that maybe the conservatives,
like Rene Hard, cooperated with the Nazis in order to get the leftis people, like Moulin.
Other interviewees try to align their actions during the war with accepted historical
myths. A police officer of Vichy claims that he defended suspected Frenchmen, not only
non-Jewish dignitaries. A woman who demanded high rent rates from Jewish refugees
claims that she acted out of patriotism. German interviewees blame Ophuls by looking
for sensations, but Wofgang Gustmann raises his colleagues from the SS who arrested
the communists before 1944.
Ophuls present side by side different sections in order to challenge non-historical
memories. In an interview with Simone Lagrange, a Jewish survivor who whispered and
her family was exterminated, Ophuls let her describe her memories as a girl of 13 years
old, who was arrested on D-Day. In a visit to her old apartment, Lagrange chatted with
an old woman, and afterwards Lagrange says she hid in her apartment when her family
was taken by the Germans. She remembered that she saw in Hotel Terminus a person
粸¢
with a "friendly smile" who held a cat. Later on she realized it was Klaus Barbie. The SS
commander pulled the girl by her hair and hit her in an attempt to find out where her
brothers were.
After this section there appear an interview with the leader of the National Front,
who describes Barbie's trial in the Israeli/Jewish propaganda. Ophuls returns afterwards
to Lagrange, who recalls how her family was betrayed by the gentile neighbor.
The director of the film Shtetl, Marian Marzynski, who lives in Chcago, allocates the
legacy of the holocaust in the middle of his bothering journey back to the Jewish
ghetto, or the shtetl Bransk near Bialystok. The director describes historical events of
the deportation from Bransk around 1942, but his film deals with the physical survival
and the power of memory. The film starts when Marzynski, who survived the holocaust
as a child in a Catholic almshouse, tells a heart breaking story how he tried in 1969 to
visit his shtetl. Now he returns with Nathan Kaplan, an American Jew of 70 years old,
whose parents lived there. Marzynski looks for a personal understanding of the
holocaust through studying Kaplan's past and the history of Bransk. He focuses on a
263
young local historian, Zbyszek Romaniuk, who helps them to find the civilization of the
shtetl that was gone. Pretty soon we see that the legacy of the holocaust has not been
processed by the Poles. Romaniuk tells his guests that he had not studied anything
about the shtetl at school, and only later on he discovered that before the war 60% of
the town's population was Jewish. They meet a butcher of pigs' meat, who proclaims
himself as a specialist of Jews and economy. He explains how Jewish capitalists used
cunning and capital in order to control the economy. Another Pole describes a search of
valuable in the houses of the Jews who had been deported to Treblinka. What is more
problematic was to realize that almost all the 300 Jews who had escaped the
deportation were caught, and since there were only five German soldiers in town,
probably the Poles cooperated in the hunt after them. But when the maker of the film
approaches a Pole who was accused of extraditing escaping Jews, he sees that the man
is senile. After that Marzynski visits an old man who was accused of killing Jews for a
financial award. Instead of anger we feel pity for a man who can only repeat the words
"death sits on my nose."
In the middle section of the film, Marzynski accompanies Romaniuk on his visit to
America and Israel. The Americans, mainly survivors from Bransk, accept him. His
粸¢
knowledge and sincerity convince the people. But for the first time in his life Romaniuk
hears unpleasant statements of the gentile Poles. A former inhabitant of the town
speaks about her last memory of Warsaw in 1938: students demonstrate outside a bus
in which she was, carrying signs saying: "to hell with there Jews!" Another survivor and
a curator in the holocaust commemoration describes the destiny of her family when
they came back to their shtetl after the liberation. Neighbors attacked them at night
and killed her mother and her baby brother. The accusations reached their peak in a
meeting with highschool students in Israel, who demanded of Romaniuk that the Poles
take responsibility for the holocaust.
The film ends when Marzynski returns to Bransk with Jack Rubin, a survivor of the
deportation from Bransk. The director uses Rubin, who used to be "the king of geese of
Bransk" and a successful textile merchant in Baltimore, as a living symbol of the vitality
of the shtetl. Rubin visits in the house of his family and in their business in the shtetl,
and starts friendly conversations with some former employees. For a moment Rubin is
the shtetl, and it is alive again. Rubin tells of the difficulties he has gone through when
264
he and his brother fled Bransk and hid in barns of some peasants with whom they had
working relationships. But when Rubin organized a trip in a sled to Bialystok, the
Germans got information of his plan, probably from local Poles, and killed all the
passengers except for Rubin who escaped. The film ends when Marzynski goes back to
Bransk. At that time Romaniuk was the deputy of the mayor and was preparing for the
500 years anniversary of the town. The young Pole, who has been lately the aim of
gossip and anti-Semitic graffiti, decided not to include the Jews in the memory
monument and in the celebrations. For the towns people, the only allusion of Jews is
when they play the melody of Fiddler on the Roof. Romaniuk defends himself. Once
there was a time when the Jews fulfilled a vital role in Bransk, he admits, but the locals
do not want to hear about that, and finally today there are no Jews in Bransk.
Shtetl and Hotel Terminus focus our attention in the past as events that are kept
in memory. They lead us to a historical understanding through memory, this instable
instrument that becomes blunted with age and covered with clouds of conscience and
will. These two films are a personal journey of their makers, who look for the elusive
history of the holocaust as it is passed over by the memories of the survivors, and when
the survivors die, the memories die with them. When Marzynski talked to a public in
粸¢
Atlanta, a woman stood up and took out a piece of cloth for covering the Sabath challah
and spoke about her childhood in Bransk. When put the piece of cloth on the table,
"what was was," she said, "and it will never be again. This is a civilization, a way of life
that has gone forever. It will never be reconstructed. It can't be, It was a very very rich
civilization."
The Music Box (1989)
A court drama. A senior prosecutor of the attorney general (Jessica Lange in an
amazing role) decides to represent her father as his defense attorney due to a request
of extradition coming from Hungary.
Accusation: being a member of a death squads within the Hungarian pro-Nazi Arrow
Cross party, for murders and severe war crimes and assistance to the Nazis
during WWII. For her work of the defense, the daughter digs into her father's
past, goes to Hungary and finds things which she might better have not
known.
265
The film deals with holocaust and trial. I will discuss the historical and educational
contexts of the film. Joe Eszterhas, the script writer, was born hi Hungary in 1944, and
his father, Istevan, who had been a newspaper editor, cooperated with the pro-Nazi
Hungarian regime during the war and had written anti-Semitic literature.
The Music Box was produced with the trial of John Demjanjuk in the background,
and one can see resemblance to his case, and probably questions that came up during
it are relevant to the discussion about late trials of War criminals.
The film deals with an American family of a Hungarian origin. The American idyll of
the father, Michael J. Laszlo, his daughter Anne Talbot and her brother Karchy Laszlo is
shaken when the past of the father as a war criminal comes up.
Mike Laszlo was born in Hungary and has been living in the US for many years. He
is a dedicated family man whose children and other relatives are very close to him. On
the surface it seems that Mike is a normative, positive person, liked and active in the
community. His daughter Anne is a lawyer, and mother of Mikey, who is called after his
grandfather. Her brother Karchy is a veteran soldier from the Vietnam War. In many
respects it seems a typical All American family.
The story starts with a request of the American authorities to cancel Mike Laszlo's
粸¢
American citizenship under the accusation of forgering an immigration request form
many years earlier. According to the American authorities, Laszlo forged the form since
during the holocaust he had served in a special unit of the Nazi Hungarian gendarmerie
and had committed war crimes. When Laszlo receives the charge sheet, he denies any
accusations against him. According to him, "I worked in a plant, raised my children…
here is my country, I've lived here for 37 years." It should be indicated that the chain of
events at this point is pretty similar to the beginning of Demjanjuk affair, which began
in a similar suit of the American Ministry of Justice, in 1975, the court in Ohio was
requested to cancel his citizenship in almost identical circumstances.
Confronting the past
At this point, Laszlo's family members had to take a stand regarding the deeds
attributed to him. At first, the accusations about the past of the father of the family are
accepted by total disbelief. His daughter, Anne, who is a lawyer, accompanies him in
the primary legal proceedings with confidence that the accusations stem from a mistake
of identification, and that there must be another Michael Laszlo. After hesitations
266
whether her involvement as a family member in the file is right, and due to her lack of
training in trials of war criminals, she finally accepts her father's request and serves as
his advocate.
At these circumstances, the confrontation between Anne and her father's past bears
an intimate nature and forces her to cope, in addition to the legal proceedings, also
with her great love to her father and their close relationship. This conflict between her
being his advocate and being his loving daughter, is one of the main axes of the plot.
Through this plot the film enables us to look at the viewpoint of the second
generation of the murderers, and in this case, the second generation was unaware of
their parents deeds. In their eyes, their father was an ideal father and husband, a
valuable person who is beneficial to his environment. Along the film, even when Anne is
exposed to the accusations against her father, she continues to defend him without
doubt. Furthermore, she tries to seal herself from every testimony which might shake
his innocence, and at the end she even succeeds as the court declares him not guilty.
Guilt and responsibility – different aspects of the past
Different questions come up in relation to the trials of Nazi criminals, like is the law of
limitation valid for war crimes executed during the holocaust? Is there a consensus
粸¢
about finding these criminals guilty and their personal responsibility, and who takes part
in this discussion and what are their different opinions and motives.
These issues came up in Israel for the first time in 1961, in the Eichman trial. This
trial received a wide international cover. The correspondent of the New Yorker to
Jerusalem at that time was Hannah Arendt (1906-1975), an outstanding political
theoretician. Arendt, born in Germany, left her country upon the Nazis coming to power
and in 1940 she emigrated to the US. She attended at least part of the sessions in the
Eichman trial, and her journalistic reports were collected in a book that was published in
English in 1963, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. Arendt
objected to Eichman's personal responsibility for the extermination of the Jews. She
regarded him as a gray bureaucrat, who showed initiative in executing his role, but
absolutely not a decision-maker or one who determined the agenda. She said he was
an "expert clerk for Jewish affairs." But the humanization Arendt had done to the
criminal included a most essential aspect of her political theory. In her academic work
she dealt with the origins of totalitarianism. She identified the roots of totalitarianism in
267
anti-Semitism, in nationality, in imperialism and in the totalitarian vision. Therefore,
according to her, the issue of Eichman's guilt is less essential that the wide discussion
about totalitarianism. She said that the totalitarian system takes control over people
and social systems, more on the "big" interests than on individuals. The individual is
just a small part in a powerful system, a victim of the totalitarian system.
Arendt's criticism naturally aroused a wide debate in the American papers and in
intellectual circles in Israel and America. But one should remember that this debate
took place less than twenty years after the holocaust.
The issue of responsibility and guilt comes up years afterwards in the discussion
about the Demjanjuk affair as well as regarding Laszlo's character in the film. Eichman
was a senior Nazi functionary with a critical role in organizing the practical aspects of
the Final Solution, who was a "murderer of the desk", whereas Demjanjuk and Laszlo
were in the field, and executed their crimes with their own hands, and therefore they
cannot be regarded as victims of the system, or think about them in relation to political
theories. Between Eichman and his victims there was his desk, as a physical or
metaphorical distance, but Demjanjuk was accused of direct violence, in pushing his
victims into the gas chambers and in murders. IN the imaginary case of Laszlo, he was
粸¢
accused of murder and rape within his activity in the Arrow Cross in Budapest.
Although the responsibility is different – Eichman was accused of being responsible
for the murder of millions, while Demjanjuk and the imaginary Laszlo were accused of
murdering tens or hundreds – there are still the issues of responsibility, guilt and the
law of limitation.
In addition, the issue of public opinion and criticism about the Eichman trial and
Demjanjuk trial is relevant for the Laszlo trial as well. As time goes by, most of the war
criminals are not alive any more and the old survivors, who testify against the criminals
in courts, the defendants' lawyers manage to cast a shadow of doubt on their evidence.
As to the question of identification of the criminals, which is the main issue in
Demjanjuk's affair and Laszlo trial, it is recommended to look at the testimonies of the
survivors in the film, especially the last testimonies of the witness of the labor work,
who had witnessed the murder of his family on Lánchíd Bridge in Budapest. He is
incapable of looking at the picture of young Laszlo when it is presented in the
courtroom, and finally he does it quickly and with great difficulty. In the next testimony
268
there stands a woman survivor, who was a victim of rape by Lazlo and his colleagues,
and her determination to confront him after many years brings Laszlo to a physical
breakdown. This is the point where even the denial mechanism cannot protect him.
If we deal with the faulty health of the criminal, the faulty health of many old war
criminals always come up in the legal and public discourse about being put to trial and
in executing the verdict. Here, too, we have to ask ourselves what are the origins of
empathy towards the problematic medical condition of criminals who seem today as
"harmless old people," or is there a hidden agenda here.
Eventually I will refer to the two last points in the discussion. Along the film there
are two demonstrations in relation to Laszlo. One after the exposure of the affair in the
media, as Laszlo and his grandson Mikey enter their home from the back door and hear
the voices of the demonstrators in front of the house. A stone is thrown and breaks the
glass of the window. In this shot young Mikey is the victim of an unnecessary violence
(at school students also harass him). The second demonstration takes place when
Laszlo and Anne enter the courtroom. This is a support demonstration of holocaust
deniers. This demonstration represents the opinions of Anne's father-in-law, Harry
Talbot. He expresses his anti-semitic opinions before Anne and his grandson, and his
粸¢
support of Laszlo exceeds beyond his personal affection of the man.
"How could you do it to Mikey and me?" – conclusion
The last issue in our discussion deals with Anne's coping with discovering the truth
about her father's past. After the court travels to Hungary following a testimony, Anne
visits Lánchíd Bridge, and after this visit she decides to meet the sister of Tibor Zoldan,
a man from her father's past. During the visit she finds out that Zoldan was a member
in the Gendarmerie with her father, and finally his system gives her a receipt of a pawn
shop and askes her to retrieve the object her brother had pawned. Upon her return to
the US she goes to that pawn shop and finds the music box. The pictures that had been
hid in this box prove her father's guilt, and Anne is forced to cope with this truth.
The issue of the second generation of the holocaust victims occupies us a lot. The
film focuses on the conflict of the second generation of murderers, a conflict that has
many emotional complexities. The film enables us to look at the fascinating and gradual
process Anne goes through on the way to acknowledging her father's guilt. Her father's
denial of his past is presented next to Her denial of the past. Upon reading the primary
269
investigation material, you can see that Anne experiences empathy towards the
testimonies of the survivors and their stories and is abhorred by the cruelty attributed
to her father.
At the same time she fulfills her role as advocate and does not deter from confrontation
with the witnesses in an attempt to shake their reliability. She also refuses to listen to
the discoveries of her legal secretary, which may pour light on her father's past. The
moment of discovery and the confrontation with her father that follows it is the peak of
the film. Throughout the conversation between them Laszlo refuses to admit the truth.
At the end of her words she asks her father: "How could you do this to Mikey and me?"
It seems that in this question she expresses her anger and pain of her father's
behavior, which leads her to important decisions about her behavior towards her father
and the trial. She disconnects her connection with him and delivers the incriminating
evidence over to the prosecution team.
The music Box is a good film. It brings the story of WWII, the Germans and the
refugees in a unique and gentle way. Although it is forty years after the war, we can
feel the atrocities, and it becomes more intense throughout the film. The open and
hidden strata of the feelings from the war come up and go down along the film, ,and it
蛐¢
leaves us a deep impression. There is a feeling of authenticity and fear that these
things would never repeat themselves, and it seems they do not forgive anyone who
was part of the evil, even if a long time has passed.
The German aspect is mentioned by the way, but it is present all the time. As
Mile's neighbors hear that he is accused of war crimes, they go out immediately to
demonstrate near his house with signs about the deaths of people at war, as if it
happened a few days ago. Memory is strong, and the film makes a deep impression.
Triumph of the Spirit (1989)
Triumph of the spirit is a film starred by Willem Dafoe about the real life story of the
boxer Salamo Arouch, a boxing champion, a Jew from The saloniki who survived the
concentration camp of Auschwitz due to the boxing battles he was forced to conduct in
order to entertain the Nazi prisoners. The people he defeated were sent to death,
whereas he received additional food that helped him and his family members survive.
Willem Dafoe is impressive in the main character in one of the best holocaust dramas
270
that came out of Hollywood. The title of the film is an answer to the notorious film of
Leni Riefenstahl, Triumph of the Will.
Shlomo Aroch (in the film Salamo Arouch) is a Jewish boxer who lives in the city of
Thessaloniki with his parents, brothers and sisters. When the Germans invade Greece in
1941, the family moves to live in the ghetto. Salamo works in forced labor under the
Nazi conquest but he continues to keep a Jewish way of life. In 1943 the Germans
order all the inhabitants of the ghetto arrive at the train station. After a journey of eight
days in a cargo wagon, the Aroch family arrive at Auschwitz at night. Unlike the original
story, the train in the film enters into Birkenau. When they arrive they go though a
selection, Salamo, his father and brothers remain alive, while his mother and sister are
sent to the gas chambers.
Life in the camp
Salamo, his father and brother are sent to forced labor. One day Salamo decides not to
be silent at the sight of the cruel capo as he abuses Jews. He hits the capo with his
fists, and when he beats him, Salamo is led to one of the SS officers. This officer wants
Salamo would fight in boxing battles intended to entertain the Nazis. In these battles
two prisoners fought until one of them was unable to stand up. Soon enough Salamo
蛐¢
became a very good boxer who does not lose in any battle. For each victory he receives
extra food, which he shares with his mates in the barrack. Salamo socializes with the
new capo of the barrack and gains from him some food, drinks and cigarettes. One day
a lineup is conducted in which the Germans order a number of people, including
Salamo's brother to move to a new job. This job is to be part of the sonderkommando
at Auschwitz. During this scene, which is repeated towards the end of the film, the gas
chambers are seen in detail. Salano's brother and friends refuse to be part of the
process of murder and are sent to extermination.
Throughout the film more selections are being done. In one of them Salamo's father is
sent to the gas chambers to his death. In the women's camp Salamo's girlfriend and a
friend of hers survive. In one of the days of labor the sirene is heard as a warning of an
attack of the Allies.
The end of the film
Towards the end of the film, the last Jews who are capable of working are sent to
Germany in the Death Parade, while Salamo is sent to work in the gas chambers.
271
During the briefing they get, the Jews operate the Revolt in Auschwitz, a revolt in which
the Jews who worked in the sonderkommando revolted against the Germans, blew up
crematoria 2 and 3, and killed three Germans. The revolt failed and about 200 Jews
were executed as a punishment for it. Salamo manages to stay alive in the revolt, and
he is sent to Block no. 11, the block of prison and torture. At the end of the film Salamo
comes out of the gate of Birkenau, determined to find his girlfriend and go to the Land
of Israel.
The authenticity of the film
The script was written according to the testimony of Shlomo Aroch, an Auschwitz
survivor, and according to details of information. Aroch attended the shooting, which
have mostly been taken in Auschwitz and Birkenau. The film clearly presents the harsh
conditions in the camp, the hard labor, the cold and the famine. In addition, the film
presents how a transport to Auschwitz had been conducted from the moment the Jews
boarded the wagon in the city there had been until they were burned in the crematoria.
The life in the camp, the work in the camp, the death in the camp and even the Death
Parades are presented in the film. In order to shoot the scenes in the gas chambers,
the producers built the buildings according to the original plans. The end of the film
粸¢
exceeds Aroch's testimony. Aroch was sent in 1944 to Bergen Belzen, while in the film
he is seen being liberated in the camp of Auschwitz, But this ending is still authentic
due to testimonies of the revolt in Auschwitz and on life in Block 11, the block of
torture.
Schindler’s List(1993)
The film is based upon a book written by Thomas Keneally, and it tells the true
story of the German manufacturer Oskar Schindler, who dealt in saving many Jews
during the holocaust. Schindler was the owner of industrial plants and he bribed
German officers in order to employ Jews in spite of the risk he took for his life. He
employed about 1200 Jews. When he was an old man, Schindler was acknowledged by
Israel as a righteous gentile and later was even buried in Jerusalem.
The film won the Oskar for the best film for 1993.
Germany's invasion to Poland
The German army defeats the Polish army in the moves that opens WWII in Europe.
The Jews who live in conquered Poland are ordered to move to the center of the cities.
272
The plot begins with a gathering of Jews from all over the country, religious and nonreligious, rich and poor, who come to the train station in Kraków, and stand in line of
administration clerks with typewriters and lists.
At the same time a German citizen comes to Kraków, Oskar Schindler, who was a
failing businessman in Germany, and came to Poland aiming to take advantage of the
war and the conquest in order to improve his economic situation, like many other
German citizens at the time. Pretty soon Schindler got in touch with the conquest
authorities, as a member of the Nazi party and by flooding and bribing commanders in
the army and the SS, who now run the south of Poland.
Schindler's plant
After he won the closeness and appreciation of the Nazi administration clerks,
Schindler wanted to take over a plant of manufacturing cooking and house utensils and
utensils with enamel coating which had been in Jewish ownership. Schindler did not
have the necessary capital to buy the plant, and his managerial skills, as had been seen
in his business past, did not suit running the plant. Aiming to take over the plant,
Schindler established a connection with a Jew called Itzhak Stern, a functionary in the
local Judenrat who was connected to the business Jewish community who went
粸¢
underground. Schindler suggests the Jewish businessmen a deal, which in light of their
desperate condition, they cannot refuse. According to the deal the Jews would finance
for Schindler the acquisition of the plant, and in return they would get a small part of
the pots and frying pans manufactured in it. The deal was done by taking advantage of
the distress of the Jews, since Schindler knew the hardships of the daily existence in
the ghetto and the fact that the Jews could trade the utensils in the ghetto for food. In
addition, Schindler took advantage of the fact that according to the Nazi law that had
been cast in conquered Poland, it was forbidden for a Jew to handle in trade or be the
owner of property.
273
Schindler's original plant as it is today.
The hill above the Kraków ghetto from which Schindler and his wife observed the cruel
liquidation of the ghetto, as they went out on their horses for a ride.
粸¢
After Schindler takes over the plant, he maintains his close relationships with the
administration clerks through benefits he distributes them from his profits and out of his
will to cooperate with them. The plant was actually run by Itzhak Stern with no
interruption from the Nazi commanders, and its laborers were Jews whose low wages
was paid according to law to the Nazi administration, and not to the laborers. Due to
the special circumstances of the plant, i.e., employing Jewish hard laborers, and due to
Stern's efficient management, the plant becomes highly profitable for its new owner,
and Schindler becomes rich and dedicates his time to luxuries and debauchery. In the
course of time, with the worsening of the conditions of living of the Jews, Stern uses his
status in order to help his fellow Jews, who are now gathered in the Kraków ghetto.
The workers in the plant are allowed to go out of the ghetto, and are declared as
"essential workers," and so gained immunity from being deported to the extermination
camps in the night raids of the Gestapo. Stern uses his managerial and organization
skills to help as many Jews as possible to receive the status of "essential workers" by
the Nazis, including the children and parents of the workers, and even the disabled,
274
who usually were the first to be sent to the extermination camps. Schindler is aware of
what goes on, is not satisfied with it, but does not take any action to stop it and by so
doing actually enables the saving of many Jews.
Saving the Jews
As time goes by and the conditions of living become inhuman, the plant becomes a
protected and safe area for its workers against deportation to extermination and
arbitrary harassments. Although Schindler distinguished getting Jewish workers for this
end only, he ignored unwillingly, and actually contributed to saving Jews. After the cruel
liquidation of the ghetto, which was conducted like a military battle by the ghetto
commander Amon Göth, Schindler started to feel compassion and learned to
appreciate, in spite of the anti-Semitic propaganda, his Jewish workers and started to
help actively in saving them. As time went on, Schindler dared initiating accepting Jews
in his plant even if there was no business need of them. At the end of the war Schindler
was requested to move his plant westward in light of the approaching Russian front. At
this period Stern and Schindler worked on the list of the necessary workers who would
not been sent to extermination. This list was in fact a saving list. When the plant was
conquered by the Allies, the workers were released and their lives were saved. In
addition, in the last days of the war, when the Nazi network of trains was out of order,
Schindler found a few wagons for carrying cattle full with Jews, part of them dead, and
most of them dying. Schindler decided to save them and in spite of the harsh economic
conditions that plant went into, the plant maintained them in the plant's yard and so
saved many of them.
Criticism of the film
The criticism claimed that the Jews were presented in a stereotype way as people
who love money on the one hand, and as submissive characters on the other. Attention
was focused mainly on the Jews who were saved, while those who perished remained
mostly unknown. The film does not tell about the Jews who arrived at the plant from
labor camps, whereas in the book they are mentioned. Speilberg's answer was that
there was no room to introduce these section in the film.
The director was accused of refraining from dealing with a real handling of the
atrocities of the holocaust, presenting a soft picture of reality. It was claimed that many
people who had not any previous knowledge about the holocaust might think that the
275
Jews who were saved were much more than in reality. Part of the critics claims that the
ending did not suit the rest of the film and was too emotional. In spite all the above,
the film gained sympathy on the part of the critics and had an exceptional success.
The impact of the film on the awareness of the holocaust in the world
Spielberg managed to stir up interest in the holocaust of the European Jews in
circles who did not know or were not interested in it. In addition, as the film went out,
Schindler's actions got repercussions in Israel and public acknowledgment in Israel and
the world.
266
7.5 A thematic discussion and analysis of the various Representations.
A critical examination of the German representations in the films
and their analysis
Representation of historical figures
The gallery of images of the Nazi leadership was described as an ensemble of
caricatures. Hitler's ecstatic speeches and Goebbels' screams presented the leadership
as crazy and hysterical. The hedonism and greed of the Minister of Aviation, Herman
Goering, whose fat appearance represented the beastiality and barbarism of the Nazi
leadership, were repetitive motives of personal representations in films, wich produced
Between 1939 – 1989.
In The Film the Bunker
Adolf Hitler (Anthony Hopkins) is a megaloman, calculated, crazy and looks like a
machine. It seems he wants people would accept what he says and not question
anything. People address him as Mein Fuhrer, that is My Leader, probably to connect
Hitler's destiny with that of the addresser. Hitler moves all the time between quiet and
kind speech and crazy screams accompanies by ticks of his face. One can tell that he
suffers from some kind of disease, as there are vibrations in his arms and legs. He gets
injections on a daily basis and makes supreme efforts to seem as if everything is alright
with him.
There are a few scenes in which he seems human (with Eva Brown, and his
connection with Blondi, his bitch, and in reading stories to the children of the Goebbels
family). But one can see the truth. If there is something that serves his personal
benefit, he would sacrifice everyone for it.
266
Shlomo zand, (2002). The cinema as history: to imagine and direct the twentieth century, Tel Aviv:
Am Oved. pp. 254-257, 258.
276
Blondi, his bitch. At the beginning we see she is treated like a queen (spoiled, meat
everyday and attention). But at the end Hitler tries on her the cyanide pill to see if it
works, and she dies a short time after giving birth.
He has a feeling that the general surrounding him do not do their job properly.
Sometimes he says: I wish my generals would have been faithful to me as Eva Brown
is. As time goes by he trusts no body and shouts at everyone that they lie to him and
betray him.
Hitler is a megaloman, and he wants to exterminate all the towns and villages in
Germany if Germany loses the war. If he dies, so should the people.
Albert Speer (Richard Jordan). A German architect that Hitler comes to like, who
becomes one of the closest people near him. During the war he was nominated as the
Minister of Armament and in charge of all the manufacturing of weapons in Germany.
When he saw that Hitler did not intend to change his mind about the destruction of
Germany, he tries all sorts of ways. He even thinks about trying to kill Hitler by
infiltrating mustard gas to his bunker. He is not afraid to say the truth of what happens
to Germany, since he is confident that in a certain way Hitler wants to hear it. There is
a feeling that Albert Speer is the only sane person in the bunker. Between him and
Hitler there is a deep connection, and he even tells Hitler that he cheated him, and yet
Hitler does not do him any harm.
Joseph Goebbels (Cliff Gorman). Hitler's propaganda minister is among the most
close people to him, who is totally loyal to him. He is sharp, lacks any emotion, focused
on propaganda. In every meeting he has with Hitler he encourages him and believes in
Bermany's victory. He uses every piece of information that comes from the front and
changes it in a way that would be in favor of Germany, as he does with its history. He
does not want to see the truth as it is. In this respect Hitler is an excellent partner. The
greatest expression of his loyalty to Hitler is when he tells him that his wife and children
have come to the bunker to be with him and die with him. Up to the last moment
Goebbels continues to talk enthusiastically to the generals about Hitler's rule, even
though they are absolutely not interested in hearing him. He looks coldly at his children
who go sleep, knowing that they would never get up any more. Not a muscle moves in
his face and no word of love to his wife and children does not come out of his mouth.
277
Representation of German Women
in the film ilsa, she-wolf of the ss
Ilsa (Dyanne Thorne). The commander of the medical experiments of Camp 9. She
is cruel, beautiful, sensual, sadistic and loves sex. She makes up a theory and does
everything to confirm it. Ilsa does not put aside any kind of torture, and even performs
part of the things by herself. She is fond of men and looks all the time for the perfect
one who would satisfy her endless passion. It seems that both issues, the experiments
and the sexual issue fill her life, and mix with one another. In the camp under her
command there is an atmosphere of a prostitutes house and sexual orgies among all
the inhabitants of the camp. She fells in love with Wolf and trusts him totally after he
succeeds to satisfy her in a way that no one has done before, and she even fantasize of
having children by him. Her own passion makes her fall eventually, when she is killed
by the general's personal assistant, whom she appreciated so much. It seems that all
inhuman features were supposed to be in her.
Ingrid and Meigert (Jo Deville and Sandy Richman). Illsa's assistants. They look
like Ilsa's doubles and act with no thought or emotion as they do what Ilsa tells them to
do. One cannot detect any kind of shock from they do. They look like robots in their
粸¢
behavior. Beyond being soldiers they participate in Ilsa's love pleasures, and again
without any expression of their own opinion about that. It seems they lack any aspect
of humanity. They get killed by the women whom they had tortured. Their significance
in the film is to strengthen the atmosphere of madness Ilsa is in. They are together, in
torturing as well as in bed.
In The Film The Boys From Brazil
Frida Melony (Uta Hagen). Frida Melony was a woman prisoner in a concentration
camp, who tortured children in all sorts of ways. She has been in prison for the last
thirty years, married to an American and with two children. She used to work for an
adoption agency and was the connection between the children that Dr. Mengele had
created in Brazil and their adopting families in the US and Canada. It is not clear if she
was aware of the whole plan, but one can see that she is still a German who obeys
orders in the name of the Reich. We see her only for a short period of time in an
interview with Lieberman, but we feel her throughout the film.
278
In The Film the Bunker
Magda Goebbels (Piper Laurie). Joseph Goebbels' wife, who like her husband,
feels that her and her children's lives have no meaning without Hitler. With cold
calculation and full belief she tells Albert Speer that she feels it is a great privilege to
die together with Hitler, she and her children. She gives them chocolate candies which
include poison before they go to sleep and afterwards we see her playing cards and
waits for Joseph, her husband to commit suicide together. When the children go to
sleep, one can see that something happens to her, but still no emotions comes out.
Eva Brown (Susan Blakely). Hitler's girlfriend, and towards end also his wife. Eva is
connected to Hitler in all respects and loyal to him. She brings an atmosphere of
nonsense and youth with her. She prefers to come to Berlin and join him in the bunker
in order to be with him, although she has an option to go elsewhere. The military issues
are out of her interests, and there is not clear from the film why did she fall in love with
him. She loves clothes, drinking tea together and things like that. One could think she
was with Hitler in order to be with the Big Ones, but this thought is out of the question
when we see she gets married to him in the bunker and even commits suicide with him.
Representation of Nazis or people who believe in the Nazi ideology
粸¢
In the film Ilsa, She-Wolf of the SS
General Wolfgang Rohm (Richard Kennedy). Ilsa's commander, a rough person
with weird perversions and unpleasant to look at. Following Ilsa's requests he comes to
visit the camp to see her work, which makes her very excited.
He seems crazy at first, and later on it is confirmed indeed. It does not look as if he
is shocked by what happens although he criticizes Ilsa for taking it as a personal
project. He brings her a medal for her work and she makes him a present by preparing
a festive dinner for him. At the center of the table stands a woman on an ice cube, with
a rope is around her neck. He is amazed at the idea and bursts into a crazy laughter
that shows what kind of person he is. His perversions come out when he asks Ilsa to
urinate on his body. Although he does not do anything violent, there comes a violent
energy from him, and energy of madness.
In The Film The Boys From Brazil
Dr. Joseph Mengele (Gregory Peck). Through Mengele we see the whole the Nazi
experience; cruel, inhuman, ordered and polished all the time, violent, determined and
279
arrogant. No sense of emotion comes out of his image. Even now, thirty years after the
war and all the experiments conducted on human beings, he goes on and actually
never stops doing them.
The only thing that takes emotion out of him is Bobby, the child of the Wilock
family. He feels as if he were his real father. Mengele is full of a crazy motivation to
make his plan come true, and he does not leave any means to execute it. We see that
in secluded farm he lives in Brazil he continues to perform experiments on human
beings as they were animals. When the "Comerade" organization, a secret German
organization whose central members are generals from the time of Hitler. The
organization stops financing his project, and Mengele decides to go on his own in order
to finish the experiment. We see his appreciation and longing to Hitler and the Reich
rule, and this feeling increases as the film goes on. Even thirty years afterwards, and a
war that destroyed many countries, nothing has changed in Mengele's perception. As
far as he is concerned, the Germans are the supreme race which has to rule the whole
world.
He dies as befits his notorious image. Dogs bite him to death by an order of one of
the children he had created.
粸¢
The other German images. There are many more secondary German figures that
appear in the film, and I have chosen to being them together because no one of them
is characterized differently. They all look the same in their character. They lack emotion
and just fulfill orders without questioning them, even if they have to do with murdering
people of 65 years old, who had been clerks. It seems that thirty years which have
gone by did not change their behavior. There are young men who were not born yet in
the time of the war, but they look and behave as Nazis.
In the film Schindler’s List
Amon Goeth is a representative figure of Nazism and evil. He is a monster who
violates every norm of decency. His evil is shown an innate and leaves the spectators
with a deep feeling of rejection. Amon Goeth, unlike Hitchcock's Norman Bates, is
psychologically bi-dimensional. There is evil innate in him, which can be seen in the
shower scene. The Nazis are seen as inhuman and monstrous, planning and performing
the genocide of the Jews because of deep hatred and cold blood. As he is represented
280
in Schindler's List, the Nazis are describes as corrupted monsters with an innate evil,
who look for causing pain to the Jews.
The moral abyss of this period has become a simplified confrontation between the
Bad German (Ralph Fiennes) and Schindler (Liam Neeson), while the Jews were
allocated in the background of this moral confrontation.
Do sequences of central sadistic violent scenes against Jews describing Amon
Göth, the SS commander of the Nazi concentration camp in Plason in Poland, were
focused on the Nazi commander in order to produce identification with him and with the
aesthetics of violence he personifies? On one level, I just ask from which viewpoint the
story is told. But more than trying to differentiate among different perspectives, I want
to examine the discussion about viewpoint in general, and its integration within the
narrative of the film and the aesthetic effect. The main question is not, as has been
said many times, how can one describe the holocaust through the eyes of a German.
There is no doubt that the film tries to include the story of the Jews. But we have to
ask whether the strong aesthetic effects of the film enable a representation of the
Jewish experience as completely separated from that of the Nazis. Like the perverted
粸¢
and destructive attraction of Göth to his Jewish maid presented like a show, that in its
best neutralizes the horrors of Nazism and in its worst takes advantage of a continuous
attraction to the power and glamour of fascism. In many books and films about the
holocaust from the seventies and the eighties there was a shift from "a renewed
interest in Nazis, from horror and pain, even if silenced by time and changed form into
a restrained sorrow and endless thinking, into an anxiety that arouses passion and
beautiful images." As the focus is on the character of Oskar Schindler, as a failed Nazi,
a capitalist, a playboy, and a savior – it succeeds as long as the genre can contain his
persona, his - story.
Representation of non-Nazi Germans – professional soldiers and other
Germans
In the film Raid On Rommel
Captain Houptman Schroeder (Karl-Otto Alberty). A soldier in his nature. His
speech is short and practical, and no emotion comes out of him, even when he gets a
slap in her face from Signorina Vivian. He received orders and acts to execute them
with no further thought. He seems a little bit crazy in his speech. He loves war and it is
281
interesting for him. As he puts is: "It suits me to be in the desert among men, fight and
smoke a Dutch cigar." He does not seem to be resourceful, or suit to be a great
commander. He just does what he is told by them. Forester manages quite easily to
take over the convoy under the command of Schroeder and change the situation from
one of captives to one of capturers. His status seems very low especially when he
meets Rommel and he is accountable for what happened. He does not comment and
stays cold.
General Erwin Rommel (Wolfgang Preiss). The supreme commander of the
forces in North Africa and the direct commander of the tank division that made the
main work in the fast taking over of important places. Although he is in the desert, he is
always dressed properly. We get the impression from talks about him rather than from
him. He shows self-humor in his conversation with the physician and even invites him
for a conversation about their common hobby – collecting stamps. In the film he seems
as a representational figure more than a military one.
In The Film The Boys From Brazil
Colonel Edward Syvert (James Mason). Was the commander of the liquidating
unit of the Germans during the war. He is the middleman between Mengele and the
粸¢
Comrades organization, which finances Mengele's project. At first we see his
appreciation and support of the project, but slowly he sees Mengele as a crazy person
who might endanger the whole organization. At a certain moment he comes with a
group of people and burns down the farm aiming to burn any evidence. His behavior
does not seem Nazi in the regular sense. He looks more like an older person who likes
to take pleasure in thinking of old times and fears to do something which might show
who he is.
Conclusions of chapter seven
In the seventh chapter I have examined the influence of the events of the Cold
War over the German representation, from the beginning of the Détente (1970) until its
end and the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.
When trying to examine the question of representation in the period under
discussion, we were four trends:
•
Representation of historical figures.
•
Representations of German women as a metaphor for Germany.
282
•
Dividing the Germans into two groups: Nazis and other Germans. The first group
is represented negatively and the second is usually represented positively.
•
A tendency of ambivalence and complexity in the equivocal meaning of the
representation, a tendency that continued in the all of the Cold War.
I have shown that there are four models in films regarding the German
representation, which have begun at the end of the sixties, and has become more clear
later on:
a. We see a clear dichotomy between the Nazis and other Germans.
b. A collective guilt and accountability for the whole German people. The stereotype of
the German as a crazy, irrational killing machine still exists in films.
c. An obvious separation between the Nazi leadership and the German people.
d. The way of writing lately, purifying, trying to tell us that the Germans were also
miserable.
German Figures are mentioned as one entity that conquers and rules. Everything
we know about Germany is mentioned in these films. An interesting and unexplained
point has to do with the fact that at the time of the German occupation, especially in
France, and the southern part in Le Cahmbon, no efforts have been done in capturing
粸¢
the Jews. Moreover, it seems that the Germans knew that there were many Jews in her
region and somehow did not do anything about it. It suits the separation trends
between Nazis and their leadership and the "innocent" German people, as if it did not
cooperate in the crimes.
As a whole, we can learn about the interaction between Hollywood and the
administration from the question of the German representation. One can say that
this period, 1971-1989, was divided into three sub-periods:
•
Between 1971-1980 Hollywood was relatively free to describe the situation and
criticize it and even the American administration.
•
Between 1981-1989, the height of the Second Cold War,with the invasion to
Afghanistan And the Star War, Hollywood was very modest and adjusted itself
to the winds that came from the administration. In this period many films are
done as if according to order.
283
•
From 1989, the Cold War is weakened with the fall of the Berlin Wall and the
American interests in Europe stabilize and Hollywood has a more pluralistic
atmosphere.
Anyway, Germany was in the focus of the ideological-political interest for a
period of time, and by describing life under the occupation, Hollywood usually
expressed the prevailing opinion in the American public. This stand was generally
similar to the stand of the administration, but when there was a contradiction,
the relation between Hollywood and the administration was complicated and
ambivalent. We have seen this in a number of films, as well as among a number
of auteurs who criticized harshly the administration. Auteurs like Billy Wilder and
Stanley Kubrick, and Stanley Kramer. In Hollywood there are different people
and different opinions, and they got their expression in varied positions.
Films Summary 1971-1989
German Characters
The German characters are characterized, generally, by insensitivity and total
loyalty to the Reich and the Fuhrer, Hitler. There is a blind loyalty to the Nazi ideas
even thirty and forty years after the war. Generals and soldiers from the time of the
war, who live today as citizens all over the world, still speak in concepts of the Aryan
theory, and live by it, although secretly. All people, soldiers, citizens and women seem
neatly dressed all the time and deal with some sort of cultural entertainment. It can be
a classical musical piece Mengele listens to a few moments after he had performed an
experiment and changed the color of the eyes of a Brazilian child; or it can be the
painting Hitler takes with him wherever he goes, or the conversations General Rommel
has over a bottle of wine.
There is coldness among the German characters, and we a nice relationship, it
usually has to do with some kind of interest regarding the status of the character or an
Aryan context. When we see couples, we witness that in their conversation there is no
warmth between husband and wife that is usually increased in a time of war.
The women have a marginal role in the films, although they share the same destiny
with men. An extreme example can be the film Ilsa, where we see a monstrous person
within the beautiful woman Ilsa. She shifts between her role as the commander of a
camp of cruel medical experiments and her being a nymphomaniac. All rules are
284
violated in the feminine context and her distortion is immense. In the film The Boys
from Brazil we see also a woman that people say about her that she used to abuse
children and participated in Dr. Mengele's monstrous plan. Another example of the
feminine context we see in the film The Bunker, where Goebbels' wife, Goebbels the
Minister of Propaganda, as she brings their children to the bunker, knowing that they
would die, and she herself gives them the chocolate which contains the poison. She
does it because if Hitler dies, there would be no meaning to her, her husband's and
their children's lives.
There are a few cases in which we see human feelings in the German characters,
like in the character of Albert Speere, Hitler's Minister of Armament, who wants to
hinder Hitler's plan to bomb the cities and villages of Germany.
Another case is
Rommel, who sits with the captive physician and talks to him about his stamps
collection. In the film Weapons of the Spirit we witness a situation in which German
soldiers knew that there were Jews close by but did not do anything about it.
In general, we do not find any depth or warmth in the German characters, and one
can say that these characters are under the shadow of Hitler's character that
overshadows them as the symbol of Germany.
粸¢
Other Characters
The other characters are like an antithesis versus the German ones. We see in
almost all the films from this period that the individual was strong in his stand and
belief, although he lacked any means versus the German machine. We see warmth,
sensitivity and strong belief coming from all the other characters. It seems the Germans
cannot cope with this situation. Among the German characters we see a division
between the male soldiers and women, whereas among the other characters we see a
close cooperation among people. In the film The Music Box it comes to a situation
where Anne causes her father to be accused of executing war crimes that he had
performed as a policeman in Hungary in 1944. Truth is above everything.
Genres
Most films are in the genre of drama-thriller. It seems the most suitable genre to
deal with Germany during the war and afterwards. It goes to the documentaries as
well. We experience the authenticity of the events and feel the drama that prevailed
during the war Weapons of the Spirit.
285
General
The German machine remained the same machine in all films, those which dealt
with the wartime, and those that dealt with the period of decades afterwards. The films
of this period show atrocities that are sometimes difficult to watch. It is found out that
even when one get detached from the war, no one forgets the things that have been
done, because otherwise how can one explain producing a film like Ilsa in 1975.
In general, there is an emphasis on the individual person and he meager means
versus the big Germany.
粸¢
286
Chapter Eight
Conclusions
The image of Germany in the American movie industry since the beginning of the
twentieth century has been dynamic, shifting between positive and negative and other
complicated and ambivalent representations. The dramatic events of the twentieth
century influenced this image due to political and cultural reasons. The present
research focused on the German representation in Hollywood from the beginning of
WWII (1939) until the US entrance to the war. The research went on with surveying
these representations in the time of the war until after it was finished (1942-1946), and
it ends in a survey of the representations in the period of the Cold War, until 1989,
upon the beginning of the détente between the two super powers. So, in the period of
1946-1958 I examined the German representation, In the McCarthy period and the
"red" hatred and the fear of communism and its implications on the development of the
German representation, and it ends in surveying the representations during the Cold
War, and how this war influenced the development of the German representation, In
addition, the German representation in Hollywood was a means of examining the
nature of the relationship between Hollywood and the administration, and to what
粸¢
extent did the mechanisms of the administration succeed in shifting the American movie
industry towards the positions of the administration, and to what extent the films under
discussion influenced the relations between these two states. We have to keep in mind
that the nature of the relations was determined more in Washington than in Germany.
I have examined the fluctuations that have occurred in the German representation
and the dichotomy of this representation, mainly between Nazis and other Germans, in
an attempt to study the way in which the film makers handled these issues, and to
what extent they were subordinate, if at all, to the administration and its institutions. I
have shown that the administration had different control mechanisms in these periods,
and Hollywood used a self-criticism system that was called the production code.
Regarding the first question
1. How did the representations of Germans develop and change at that time in
American
cinema.
That
is,
Whether
there
was
a
change
representations, and if so, how , when and in what way did it happen.
in
Germans
287
My research pointed of the following data:
The examination of representation in the period under discussion raises three trends
and two groups of representation: ideological Nazis and other Germans, which can be
seen in the different categories I have described in the introduction. I will refer in a
cross section to the representation of the different German representations:
1. Representation of historical figures.
2. Representation of German women as a metaphor of Germany.
3. Representation of Nazis and people who believe in the Nazi ideology, dividing the
Germans into two groups, the Nazis and other Germans. The first are shown in a
negative light, and the second usually in a positive one. The main question is what
happens to these images and how they become more complicated in the years of the
weakening of the McCarthy's persecutions and in the Cold War. Films which especially
connected to this issue are Judgment at Nuremberg by Stanley Kramer from 1961, The
Quiller Memorandum by Michale Anderson from 1966, The Bunker by George Schaefer
from 1981, Schindler’s List by Steven Spielberg from 1993, The Downfall by oliver
Hirschbiegel from 2004.
粸¢
4. Representation of non-Nazi Germans, like professional soldiers, officials and other
Germans according to their social class. These images have become very positive as
compared to the period of WWII. One can indicate the genre of heroic war films that
prospered at the beginning of the sixties, like Battle of the Bulge by Ken Annakin from
1965. This trend increased in the late fifties and reached its peak in the sixties and
become clearer in the Sevententh and Eightenth in Cold War. One can see it in the
ambivalence and complexity of the German characters, like Patton by Franklin J.
Schaffner from 1970, Raid on Rommel by Henry Hathaway from 1971, A Bridge Too Far
by Richard Attenborough from 1977, The Boys from Brazil by Franklin J. Schaffner from
1978.
Actually, these images are divided between the two groups, i.e., the Nazis and
the other Germans. The thematic discussion in the above categories will show how
Hollywood divided the German representation. I will try to draw conclusions about
Hollywood's relationship with the administration with its goals in foreign policy.
288
Research Findings
The representations of Germans in the films I have examined express the relation
between Hollywood and the administration. The picture that come up from the
representations changes in the four periods, although in all of them one can see the
split between Nazis and other Germans:
IV
In chapter four I discussed the German representation between the years 19391941. That is, from the beginning of WWII until America's entrance to the war. The
ideology of isolationism prevailed in the administration at that time, and therefore
Hollywood avoided from dealing with European issues. The films that did represent
Germans, created a split representation of Nazis and other Germans according to a
number of categories of representation:
1. Representation of historical figures. The representation was done indirectly;like in
Chaplin's film The Great Dictator, where the names of the characters represent the
gallery of the leaders of the Nazi regime through metonymic names. Direct other
representation of historical figures is rare, and when it appears, it has a nature of
a caricature.
粸¢
2. Representation of ideological Nazis. This is basically a negative representation
that strengthens the stereotype that had existed of the Hun and the barbaric
German.
3.
Representation of professional soldiers and other Germans who are not Nazis.
There is a positive German representation, or at least not negative in part of the
films.
4. Representation of German women. There is a tendency of almost absence of
women's representation.
5. Representation of social classes in Germany. The upper classes and the nobility
are represented as opponents of the regime, while the low classes and images of
the masses are represented as supporters of the Nazis.
V
In chapter five I examines the representations of Germans during the war, since
America's joining the war in 1942, and until the end of it and a little afterwards in
289
1946.Here, too, one can see from the findings a picture that maintains the tendencies
of representation:
1. Representation of historical figures. Figures like Heidrich or Rommel are
presented as caricatures, and we see again the split between ideological Nazis,
who are seen as people one cannot reach any compromise with, like Heidrich in
Hangmen Also Die by Fritz Lang from 1943, and professional fighters that one
can reach a compromise with, like Rommel in Billy Wilder's film Five Graves to
Cairo from the same year.
2. Representation of ideological Nazis. The stereotype that had been beforehand of
the Nazi, who was approached through humor, loses something of its humor and
the grotesque image becomes threatening and bothering. The negative image
gets more extreme and Nazism is described as something threatening and
dangerous, not entertaining at all.
3. Representation of professional soldiers and other Germans who are not Nazis.
There is a positive representation, or at least not negative in part of the films.
Towards the end of the war there start appearing actually positive
representations, like in the film the Seventh Cross by Fred Zinnemann from 1944
粸¢
that describes an underground of Germans who are against the regime.
Towards the end of the war there start real positive representations, like in
Fred Zinnemann's film The seventh cross, 1944, which describes an
Underground of anti-regime Germans.
1. Representation of German women. One can see a tendency that gets larger as
the war comes to its end of women who demonstrate ambivalent sexuality, like
Elsa in The House on 92nd Street from 1946 as a metaphor of Germany. This
becomes sharper during the years of the Cold War.
2. Representation of social classes in Germany. Unlike representation in previous
years, the laborers are those who oppose the regime, while the upper classes
and the nobility are represented ad functionaries of the regime. The Nazis are
represented sometimes by people of the low class and as criminals, like
Inspector Gruber in Hangmen Also Die.
290
VI
In chapter Six I described and examines these representations in the period of the
Cold War, that is, from 1947 until 1970. I reduced the representations into three
categories, as the women representations take a larger place in the discussion:
1. Representation of German women. What comes up from most of the films is a
sophisticated and ambivalent feminine representation, in which women maintain
a metaphoric relation to Germany, while the men conduct a romance with them,
symbolizing America and its occupation force. The power relations present the
feminine advantages of Germany versus the disadvantages of decent American
men, mainly their innocence. The German women are cunning and do not
hesitate to use their sexuality in order to promote themselves. They have three
goals: a. survival and getting along with the situation by exploiting the American
soldiers, which symbolized the German opportunism, and the fact that one
cannot trust this nation. b. love to an American soldier, which symbolizes the
American-German alliance after the war. g. Loyalty to the Nazi regime and the
danger of re-emergence of this ideology, as comes out of the ambivalence at the
end of the film The Quiller Memorandum (Assignment Berlin) 1966.
粸¢
2. Representation of ideological Nazis. In the time of the Cold War the Nazis return
to their negative representation in two ways, one is comic, and the other is
threatening.
3. Representation of professional soldiers and other Germans who are not Nazis. At
the time of the Cold War there was a wave of changing representations of this
category. At first the representation of ordinary Germans tended to acquit them
of the crimes of the regime and make them allies, although there were negative
representations of them. At the time of McCarthy's persecutions, the German
representation tended to be positive, a trend that continued afterwards and
repeated itself mainly in war films, like Battle of the Bulge. Finally, at the end of
the fifties, and during the sixties, the trend of criticism of the ordinary Germans
returned in courageous films like Judgment in Nuremberg by Stanley Kramer
from 1961.
291
VII
In chapter Seven I described and examines these representations during the
Revision period, the Period of Détente and the Second Cold War - a sequence of
complex representations or a drastic change (1971-1989). I have reduced the
representations to Four categories:
1.Representation of historical figures. The gallery of images of the Nazi leadership
was described as an ensemble of caricatures. Hitler's ecstatic speeches and
Goebbels' screams presented the leadership as crazy and hysterical. The
hedonism and greed of the Minister of Aviation, Herman Goering, whose fat
appearance represented the beastiality and barbarism of the Nazi leadership,
were repetitive motives of personal representations in films,Wich Produced
Between 1939 -1989, like The Great Dictator, Hitler – The Beast from Berlin,
Hitler's Children,The Bunker and others.
2.Representation of German Women. Hollywood used the metaphor of America as
the conqueror versus Germany as the wanton woman, who threatens to
corrupt America, and America is presented as the conquering man, who
sometimes is innocent and sometimes wanton.
蛐¢
3.Representation of ideological Nazis. During this period of the Cold War-the
Nazis continued to their negative representation in two ways, one is comic, and
the other is threatening.
4.Representation of professional soldiers and other Germans who are not Nazis.
In this period there is a clear dichotomy between the representation of Nazis and
other Germans. And the difference between them gets sharper than in the
previous period of the Cold War. like Amon Göth or Rommel are presented as
caricatures, and we see again the split between ideological Nazis, who are seen
as people one cannot reach any compromise with, like Amon Göth in Schindler’s
List by Steven Spielberg from 1993, and professional fighters that one can reach
a compromise with, like Rommel in Henry Hathaway film Raid On Rommel1971,
that remember Billy Wilder'sfilm Five Graves to Cairo from the 1943.
The films of this period (The Bunker (1981), Schindler’s List(1993),The
Downfall (2004)..)), like other films of the sixties, like Judgment at Nuremberg
(1961), and The Quiller Memorandum (1966), ask the same questions about the
292
Germans: who is the good guy and who is the bad guy here? Is there a good
German or a bad German? Are they all bad? Or they are just victims of the
leadership?
The multi-angle view that The Downfall gives the German society of the mid-forties
makes the viewer find his moral way in the Berlinner jungle. The answer can be
obvious, but not necessarily pleasant to the ear: when the regime is corrupt and the
leadership is ill, the public is called to make an immense effort, through great selfsacrifice, in order to return the situation to its former state.
Regarding the second question
2.
Were these representations influenced by the relations between the government
and Hollywood, and in what way? In this regard, I intend to deal with the
extent and form of the administration's impact on Hollywood's film industry.
Alternatively, to what extent did Hollywood act and work as an agent of the
American Administration and serve his goals - against the drastic shift in
American foreign policy regarding Germany in the wake of the Cold War?
My research pointed on the following data:
In examining the relationship between Hollywood and the administration, one can
蛐¢
divide the period of 1946-1989 into three sub-periods:
a. Between 1946 and 1952 Hollywood was relatively free to describe the situation and
criticize it, including the American administration.
b. The period of 1953-1958 was the period of the most intensive McCarthy's
persecution. Hollywood adjusted itself to the dictates of the administration and
many films represented the approach of the administration.
c.
In the years of 1959-1989 the McCarthy mechanism releases its grip, and the
American interests in Europe are stabilized more or less. Therefore Hollywood
enjoys a more pluralistic atmosphere.
Beforehand, between 1939-1941, Hollywood took a stand unlike the prevalent
opinion and pushed the administration to intervene in WWII. Between 1942-1945
Hollywood recruits itself to the war effort of the administration.
In these years Hollywood usually expressed the positions that prevailed in the
American public. These expressions integrated mostly with the positions of the
293
administration. But when there were contradictions versus the authorities, the relations
became more complicated and ambivalent. We can see it in a number of films and film
makers who criticized harshly the administration. They included Billy Wilder, Stanley
Kubrick and Stanley Kramer. But in Hollywood there were different people with different
opinions.
The fifties were the most difficult years of the Cold War. Anti-communism reached
its peak at the beginning of the fifties, and created a hysteria that threatened the basic
freedom anchored in the American constitution. Senator Joseph McCarthy from
Wisconsin, whose demagogic speeches put him in the front of the Witch Hunt of
annihilating the "Reds" in America, regarded any liberal or critical opinion as a betrayal
in the country. He got the Republican administration acquiescence since it served the
American interest in the cold War and was supported by large parts of the public.
McCarthyism hurt wide publics, but its severest hurt was in the educated people.
Its greatest damage was in the reduction of the relative autonomy of cultural creation,
which is the corner stone of every liberal democracy. In the academic world, the
education system and the movie and entertainment industry, all the people whose
opinion was not "American" enough were thrown out.
蛐¢
The question is to what extent the HUAC influenced the image of Germany in the
movies during the Cold War, and was it the HUAC which shaped the new attitude
toward Germany.
The historian Les Adler condemned the surrender of the industry to HUAC. He
indicated that one cannot attribute the change in the content of the films after 1947
solely to HUAC. The "Red" hysteria in the US reached new peaks when the television
started overcoming the movie as the leading industry.267 Fascism and racism started to
threaten on America from within. The film The Stranger (1946) describes an ex-Nazi
who lives comfortably in the American community. The film criticizes America's easy
attitude to ex-Nazis. The idea was to show the ease in which the wicked assimilated in
the American society. Alfred Hitchcock's Notorious (1946), deals with this issue.
The attitude towards the holocaust and Nazi anti-Semitism led to an observation
of the risks of racism as a whole and anti-Semitism in particular, in the American
society. Two films dealt with this issue already in 1947 in the films Gentlemen's
267
Daniel, Leab, J., "The Iron Curtain" (1948): Hollywood's First cold war movie", Historical Journal of
Film, Radio And Television. Vol, VIII Nr. 2 (1988): 153-188.p.154.
294
Agreement and Cross Fire. The first referred to prejudice against Jews in the American
society, and the second dealt with anti-Semitism that boils under the surface in the
American culture. It presented the lives of war veterans, and expressed the fear of the
culture of resistance regarding the expansion of evil from within (adopting the Nazi
figures led to adopting Nazi positions in the American society, which expressed a hidden
criticism of the foreign policy and against the Cold War).
During the decade of the fifties, a conservative group took control of Hollywood
and strangled any political daring that stopped, to a certain extent, the momentum of
production and brought about the weakening of creation and imagination, and one
could see it in a number of levels. The number of films made in Hollywood decreased
from 383 in 1950 to 154 in 1960. The producers became cautious and financed only
"safe" productions. The works were mainly escapist, and many of them were light
comedies and family melodramas or horror films of the B-films genre. The anticommunist representation of the fifties was translated into tens of films which were
intended to reinforce the awareness of the "Red danger." Apart from films about the
Korean War, which were popular right after this war, the films could be divided into two
main groups: science fiction films and espionage films, which expressed anxieties and
蛐¢
fears of everything different from the American way of life.268 This explains why there
were films that dealt with the German representation during the fifties versus films of
the Cold War.269
It is hard to explain the Witch Hunt conducted by the administration, which was
aimed primarily at the people in Hollywood. It probably shows the awareness of the
American elite at this time of Hollywood's political power, and their fear of the political
opinions of Hollywood and their potential influence on American policy.270
The physicist Philip Morrison, who worked in a project in Manhattan, claimed that
the nuclear bomb distorts the democratic-political moral. According to him, the
American reservoir of weapons after the war, the support of this reservoir and the
unperceivable scope of this power of destruction created the tradition of evil of the Cold
268
269
270
See a list of part of these films in Shlomo Sand's book, p. 266.
More than 500 films, part of them significantly anti-Soviet, and most of them about spies, traitors and
saboteurs, dealing with the Cold War and espionage, ibid. p. 266.
Wagenleitner, p.228.
295
War. He says that "this is Hitler's tradition."271 This is how societies that fought fascism
have changed; they have accepted part of its characteristics. These declarations have a
dramatic nature, but it is a fact that the American administration relied on atomic
weapon and aspired to have a monopoly over it. But beyond the dramatic element in
comparing this situation with the Nazi tradition, the main force that motivated the
administration's policy and the activity in Hollywood was fear. The film The Stranger
expressed the fears of infiltration of war criminals and of the atomic danger.
Kennedy's being elected for president and the Cuba Crisis consisted a
deterioration in the Cold War. Kennedy's first years in office marked an obvious
confrontation between the super powers. They began with the missiles crisis in Cuba,
when the world was on the verge of a nuclear war. Then came the Vietnam war, which
was also a stage in the Cold War.
In the sixties Hollywood has begun to change, and a new liberal breeze started to
blow in the big studios.272 The weakness of HUAC and releasing the brakes from
Hollywood enabled new ideas, which has been prohibited before, to blossom. In spite of
the crises of the early sixties, the détente which was announced by Khrushchev and
Kennedy brought about a decrease of the international tension and created a new
粸¢
atmosphere in the industry. At this period the German representations became more
positive.
At the late fifties there were produced a few films that reflected a new approach
toward Germany, like The Young Lions by Edward Dmytryk (1958). The hero is a
German, played by the American icon Marlon Brando, who was characterized as an
"ordinary" German, who has an affair with an American woman and was not associated
with the Nazis crimes. This was an attempt to rehabilitate Germany.
Daniel Leab argues that the films about the cold War presented the communists
as enemies or saboteurs, but as much as communism became blacker, so much so the
German image became more rehabilitated. Almost every part of the German society
was rehabilitated and presented as a victim of the Nazis instead of their assistant. The
reds substituted the Huns of WWI, the spying agents of the Axis of WWII, and the
foreign nameless enemy between the wars. At the same time, as this research shows,
271
272
Margot, Henriksen, (1997). A. Dr. Strangelove's America: Society and culture in the Atomic age.
University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, p.40.
zand,p. 271.
296
the German society was not totally rehabilitated and there were still negative
expressions toward the German society in part of the films surveyed here.
The critic Dwight MacDonald was impressed by the way in which the German
population, or parts of it, "have become from a fearful assistant of one totalitarian
regime, into the hero of another such regime."273 Some commentators claimed that the
industry has taken it upon itself because of the fear of the hearing at the HUAC.
Colline Shindler claimed that "the industry behaved like that in order to show its
clean hands, and this is why it produced anti-communist films."274 Russell Shain
talked about political forcing.275 At that time a number of journalists believed that the
studios made the anti-communist films because of their will to facilitate the pressure of
the HUAC. The movie magazine Variety published that "the film Iron Curtain (1947) was
made in order to please the feelings of the committee's members."276 Dorothy Jones,
the principal films analyzer of OWI, wrote in the mid-fifties that "it is clear that the
studios did not expect to gain money out of these films, but referred to them as
necessary to their public relations."277
Various reasons may have influenced the production of films that dealt with the
different representations of Germany, like personal opinions and ideological motives of
粸¢
actors and directors, like Leo McCurry and John Wayne. They did not operate out of
fear of the HUAC or its yes-men, as they were anti-communist and were known for
their conservative opinions.278 We cannot ignore the motive of profit as well. Among the
people of the industry, there were some who claimed that anti-communist films have
become a hot and attractive issue from a commercial point of view. Therefore, the
reasons for the different German representations, whether it was positive, like in The
Young Lions, or negative, like Hangmen also Die, were complicated and depended on
varied factors:
273
274
275
276
277
278
Leab , p. 155, and also: John Mariani, "Let's Not Be Beastly to the Nazis," (Film Comment) Jan/Feb
1979): 49; Dwight MacDonald, Memoirs of a Revolutionist (New York, 1957). For a comprehensive
survey about the change of attitude to the Germans in films, see note 57, in: Daniel J. Leab,
"Deutschland, U.S.A." Randall Miller, ed., Hollywood Views Ethnic Groups (Englewood, N.J., 1980),
156-81, and Daniel J. Leab, "Good Germans/Bad Nazis," Deutches Historisches Museum Magizin
(Summer 1992): 25-39.
Leab, J., "The Iron Curtain", p. 155.
Ibidem,Ibidem.
Ibidem, p. 156.
Ibidem,Ibidem.
Ibidem, pp. 157-158.
297
1. The American foreign policy and the positions of the administration in different
periods.
2. The different committees: the HUAC, the OWI and the independent production
code, Haze Code (PCA).
3. Economic considerations of the studios.
4. Personal considerations of film makers, like Billy Wilder.
5. Prevailing traditions in America. One has to remember that both America and
Germany shared many values, like conservatism, toughness and patriarchalism.
Conclusions of the Research
Films that deal with Germans, which were analyzed in this research point of
certain patterns of representing Germans and their different types. Upon the Nazis
came into power, the picture in the American movie points that Nazism was
represented as a negative phenomenon that threatens the peace in the world. The
American movie loved to hate the Nazis, learned to mock them and put a variety of
comic images and representations of them, like the films The Great Dictator by Chaplin
(1940), and To Be or Not to Be by Lubitch (1942). The directors based their types on
粸¢
the stereotypes that prevailed in America about Nazism and Germany. At times they
stood against the stereotype, and at other times they strengthened it. In the research I
examined the moral weight of these representations, i.e., what was positive and what
was negative in them.
In order to understand the research question and arrive at conclusions about
the relationships between the administration and Hollywood, one should enlarge
beyond the researches that have been conducted in the past and concentrate on the
question of the German representation itself. This question was about to be split almost
along the whole period, and almost in all the films with Nazi and German
representations, and it created a hierarchy between positive and negative attitudes
toward Germans.
After the end of the war in 1945, and upon the outburst of the Cold War in 1947,
Hollywood volunteered to produce films whose goal was to fight the Soviet propaganda
and recruit the American public opinion to accept the Germans as allies. Now there was
a new threat on the American consciousness from within and from without –
communism. It lead to a paranoia of the "red danger", and the conservatives in the
298
administration and the Congress started a campaign of persecutions against
intellectuals and auters who were suspected of sympathizing communism. This was the
McCarthyist persecution that has influenced Hollywood deeply, and on the German
representations I have examined in the research. From the it comes up that the
directors have found creative ways of by passing the limitations of the persecutions and
the institutional dictates, and managed to create a complex image.
On the part of the administration there was a great propaganda effort to push the
issue of Nazism and the horrors that have taken place in Europe in the war to a remote
corner and taking it off the national agenda. The administration had an important goal
in the time after the war, basing the new strategic position of Germany.
The administration wanted that the films would strengthen the democratic values in the
defeated Germany and would strengthen the American hegemony in Europe. It wanted
that the films would present the Germans in a different way of what had been accepted
until that time, that is, in a positive light.
In January-February 1946 a few people in America knew that not being friends
with Germany and a collective guilt were not any more part of the formal policy. Most
of the articles and editorials in the press expressed the opinion that the films were the
粸¢
reminder the American needed in order to conduct a tough policy towards Germany,
but the anti-Soviet ideology was stabilized at last and this tough line was abandoned.
IN the time of the Cold War, the films I examined raised the following questions: who
was responsible for what happened in Germany? Was it Hitler and the Nazi party or the
whole German people? The answer to these questions, as comes up from this research,
is that as a whole, in most of the fifties, and even in part of the sixties, the opinion was
that the blame had to be on the Nazi leadership, since the German people has to be
accepted as an ally. Whereas at the end of this period, as a result of the weakening of
the persecutions and the political pressure on Hollywood, the picture that comes up is
complicated and put the blame on the German people as a whole as it did not act to
stop the Nazi crimes as comes up from the film Judgment at Nuremberg by Stanley
Kramer, for instance.
In the following years and upon the beginning of the Détente in the relationship
between the US and the USSR, the beginning of the second Cold War, this complicated
picture gets sharper, while in spite of certain changes in the representation of Germany
299
and the Germans in the Cold War, generally speaking, there was no real change from
the representation before the Cold War time.
The German image and the face of Janus
The German images contain contradicting aspects, which sometimes maintain a
synthesis of two types of representations, meaning the issues of Nazi ideology and
German bourgeoisie (after the American model). The relationship of the threatening
past versus the ambivalent present exists in the German representations of most of the
films of the Cold War period.
Therefore, the question of the relationship between Hollywood and the
administration regarding the German representation and foreign relations is not so clear
and obvious as could have been assumed. There were different views within the
administration, and it not be true to say that the relations between the administration
and Hollywood were linear. Presenting the Germans in the Hollywoodian films was,
then, not only a vehicle for the administration's policy, but it expresses a complicated
relation between the administration and Hollywood, and Hollywood was not a recruited
tool in the hands of the administration (except for short periods of time).
In part of these films one can find positive German representations, but in no film there
粸¢
is a complete acquittal. In all the models I have presented, one can say in a certain
extent of basis that Hollywood's position was not identical to that of the administration.
As a matter of fact, in many aspects, Hollywood raised a voice against the
American policy toward Germany, and more than once it even expressed open and
hidden criticism of this policy.
Hollywood maintained a complicated relationship with the administration:
1. Hollywood functioned sometimes as an agent of the administration's propaganda
system, but still kept its cultural and economical autonomy.
2. The cultural and economical autonomy enabled a pluralism of positions among the
different auteurs. These positions expressed, sometimes, the positions of the
administrations, and in other times criticized it, sometimes very harshly.
3. Hollywood is not a monolithic entity, and it consists of a cultural relatively pluralistic
system with artists with definite viewpoints, which does not necessarily comply with
the administration. The artistic expression of great directors, like Billy Wilder or
Stanley Kramer represents a complicated and critical narrative towards the objects
300
of its reference. In certain cases, it brought about a collision with the administration
agencies.
4. The very need of establishing and operating the anti-American operations
committee testifies that the administration was pressed by the fact that it did not
succeed in disciplining Hollywood.
5. In a close examination of the Hollywood effort to take part in the political discourse,
one finds the nuances that express different approaches and different pressure
groups in the public and among the American decision-makers.
The contribution of the current research is in the analysis of the different German
representations in Hollywood in order to get a wide perspective of the administration
and its attitude towards Hollywood, and through it about the American public and its
relation to Germany and its destiny in the 20th century.
An additional contribution is by identifying the dichotomic representations of
Germany in the periods of WWII, the time of McCarthy, and the Cold War until 1989, in
order to understand the change that the German representation has gone through in
the different periods. The atmosphere of persecution that prevailed in Hollywood in
certain parts of this period contributed, undoubtedly, to a certain rehabilitation of
粸¢
Germany and its representation in the Hollywoodian movie. But at the same time, a
major part of the German stereotypes that have been designed after the Nazis came
into power, continued to be resent in many Hollywood films at that time. A major part
of these stereotypes appear in a comi or a caricaturistic disguise, which served as some
kind of getting away from the dictates of the administration and the need to deal with
the phenomenon of Nazism seriously.
Towards the end of the McCarthyism period, any way, we witness first attempts to
deal seriously and thoroughly with Nazism and the guilt of the German people, for
example in the film Judgment in Nuremberg(1961).
This trend went on in the seventies and the eighties as well, when Hollywood
produced films which discussed the same issues and raised the same questions, like in
the films: The Bunker (1981) and Schindler’s List (1993)…
301
Filmography and Bibliography
Types of sources and data
A. Primary sources – filmography
Germans in films
1. A section of films from World War II (1939-1944)
1. Hitler – Beast of Berlin. (1939). (AKA – Beasts of Berlin, Goose Step, Hell’s Devils
and Hitler, Beast of Berlin). Director: Sherman Scott (Sam Newfield). Produced by
Producers Distributing Corporation/Superior Talking Pictures. 87 min. B/W.USA
(from the story Goose Step).
2. Confessions of a Nazi Spy. (1939). Director: Anatole Litvak. Produced by Warner
Bros. 102min B/W. USA.
3. Espionage Agent. (1939). Director: Lloyd Bacon. Produced by Warner Bros. 83 min.
B/W. USA.
4. The Man I Married. (1940). Director: Irving Pichel. Produced by TCF/Zanuck
Company. 77 min. B/W, USA. (from the story: I Married a Nazi).
5. The Mortal Storm. (1940). Director/producer: Frank Borzage. Produced by MGM, 100
min. B/W. USA.
蛐¢
6. The Great Dictator. (1940). Director:/producer/screenwriter: Charles Chaplin.
Produced by United Artists. 126 min. B/W. USA.
7. Foreign Correspondent. (1940). Director: Alfred Hitchcock. Produced by Caidin Film
Company/ United Artists. 120 min. B/W. USA.
8. Three Faces West. (1940). [AKA – Refugee]. Director: Bernard Vorhaus. Producer:
Sol C. Blockadel. Produced by Republic. 79 min. B/W. USA.
9. Escape. (1940). [AKA – When the Door Opened]. Director/producer: Mervyn Leroy.
Poduced by MGM. 104 min. B/W. USA.
10. All Through the Night. (1941). Director: Vincent Sherman. Produced by Warner
Bros. 107 min. B/W. USA.
11. Man Hunt. (1941). Director: Fritz Lang. Producer: Kenneth MacGowan. Produced by
20 Century Fox. 105 min. B/W. USA.
12. The Mad Doctor. (1941). [AKA – A Date with Destiny]. Director: Tim Whelan.
Produced by Paramount. 90 min. B/W. USA.
302
13. Sergeant York. (1941). Director/Producer: Howard Hawks, Produced by Warner
Bros. 140 min. B/W. Available in colorized version. USA.
14. Underground. (1941). Director: Vincent Sherman. Produced by Warner Bros. 95
min. B/W. USA.
15. Casablanca. (1942). Director:Michael Curtiz.Produced by Turner Entertainment/
Warner Bros. 102 min. B/W. Available in colorized version. USA.
16. Nazi Agent. (1942). Director: Jules Dassin. Producer: Produced by MGM. 84 min.
B/W. USA.
17. Hitler’s Children. (1942). Director: Edward Dmytryk and Irving G. Reis.Produced by
RKO Radio Pictures. 83 min. B/W. USA.
18. To Be or Not to Be. (1942). Director/producer/screen story: Ernst Lubitsch.
Produced by United Artists. 90 min. B/W, Color, USA.
19. To Be or Not to Be. (1983). Director: Alan Johnson. Produced by 20th /Century
Fox/Brooks Films. 108 min. color, USA.
20. The Devil with Hitler. (1942). Director: Gordon M. Douglas. Produced by RKO Radio
Pictures/ UA. 44 min. B/W. USA.
21. Invisible Agent. (1942). Director: Edwin L. Marin. Producer: Frank Lloyd.Produced
by Universal. 83 min. B/W. USA.
粸¢
22. Berlin Correspondent. (1942). Director: Eugene J. Forde. Produced by 20th Century
Fox. 70 min. B/W. USA.
23. Saboteur. (1942). Director: Alfred Hitchcock. Producer: Frank Lloyd, Jack H. Skirball.
Produced by Universal. 115 min. B/W. USA.
24. Once Upon a Honeymoon. (1942). Director/Producer: Leo McCarey.Produced by
RKO Pictures. 116 min. B/W. Available in colorized version. USA.
25. Reunion in France. (1942). [AKA: Mademoiselle France]. Director: Jules Dassin.
Produced by Franco London Films/MGM. 104 min. B/W. USA.
26. Hitler: Dead or Alive. (1942). Director: Nick Grinde. Produced by Brown, Karl,
Neuman, Sam. 71 min. B/W. USA.
27. Commandos Strike at Dawn. (1942). Director: John Farrow. Produced by Columbia
Pictures. 100 min. B/W. USA.
28. Underground Agent. (1942). Director: Michael Gordon. Produced by Columbia
Pictures. 70 min. B/W. USA.
303
29. Hangmen Also Die. (1943). Director/Producer: Fritz Lang. Produced by United
Artists. 131 min. B/W. USA.
30. This Land is Mine. (1943). Director/producer: Jean Renoir. Produced by Films Jean
Renoir/Franco London Films/RKO Radio Pictures. 103 min. B/W. USA.
31. Hitler’s Madman. (1943). (AKA – Hitler’s Hangman). Director: Douglas Sirk.
Produced by MGM/Producers Releasing Corporation. 84 min. B/W. USA.
32. Five Graves to Cairo. (1943). Director/screenwriter: Billy Wilder. Produced by
Paramount. 96 min. B/W. USA.
33. The Cross of Lorraine. (1943). Director: Tay Garnett. Produced by MGM. 90 min.
B/W. USA.
34. Watch on the Rhine. (1943). Director: Herman Shumlin. Produced by Warner Bros.
114 min. B/W. USA.
35. Sahara. (1943). Director/Screenwriter: Zoltan Korda. Produced by Columbia
Pictures. 97 min. B/W. USA.
36. Background to Danger. (1943). Director: Raoul Walsh. Produced by Warner Bros.
80 min. B/W. USA.
37. Spy Train. (1943). Director: Harold Young. Produced by Monogram. 61 min. B/W.
USA.
粸¢
38. The Hitler Gang. (1944). Director: John Farrow.Produced by Paramount. 101 min.
B/W. USA.
39. The Seventh Cross. (1944). (AKA – The Seven Crosses). Director: Fred Zinnemann
Produced by MGM/Pandro S. Berman. 110 min. B/W. Available in colorized
version. USA.
40. Lifeboat. (1944). Director: Alfred Hitchcock. Produced by 20th Century Fox. 100 min.
B/W. USA.
41. Passage to Marseilles. (1944). [AKA: Passage to Marseille]. Director: Michael Curtiz.
Produced by Franco London Films/Warner Bros. 110 min. B/W, available in
colorized version. USA.
2. A section of films from World War II (1944-1945)
The films of collective accusation
42. Here is Germany. (1944). (Documentary). Director: Ernst Lubitsch. Produced by
Columbia Tri-Star. 52 min. B/W. USA.
43. Know Your Enemy – Germany. (1944). (Documentary). Director: Ernst Lubitsch.
B/W. USA. (on behalf of Frank Capra’s team).
304
44. You're Job in Germany. (1945). (Documentary). Director: Frank Capra. Producer:
Theodor Geisel. Screenwriter: Theodor Geisel. 15 min. B/W. USA.(was
completed by Frank Capra’s team).
45. Death Mills. (1945/1988). (Documentary). Director: Hanus Burger. 47 min. Color.
USA. (Was distributed in 25/07/1946).
46. The House on 92nd Street. (1945). Director: Henry Hathaway. Produced by 20th
Century Fox. 88 min. B/W. USA.
47. Hotel Berlin. (1945). Director: John Gage and Peter Godfrey. Produced by Warner
Bros. 98 min. B/W. USA.
48. Counter Attack. (1945). Director/Producer: Zoltan Korda. Produced by Columbia
Pictures. 90 min. B/W. USA.
3. Post-War Germany: Nazism has not passed away (1946-1946)
49. Cloak and Dagger. (1946). Director: Fritz Lang. Produced by United Artists (WB).
106 min. B/W. USA.
50. Let There Be Light. (1946). (Operation Hollywood)[Documentary].
Director/Screenwriter: John Huston. Produced by Victory Video. 60 min. B/W.
USA.
51. Notorious. (1946). Director/producer: Alfred Hitchcock. Produced by RKO Radio
Pictures. 101 min. B/W. USA.
粸¢
52. The Stranger. (1946). Director/screenwriter: Orson Wells. Produced by International
Pictures. 95 min. B/W. Available in colorized version. USA.
4. German representations from the beginning of the Cold War
Until the construction of Berlin Wall (1961) (1947-1970)
53. Crossfire. (1947). Director: Edward Dmytryk. Produced by RKO Pictures. 86 min.
B/W. Available in colorized version. USA.
54. Gentleman’s Agreement. (1947). Director: Elia Kazan. Produced by 20th Century
Fox/Darryl F. Zanuck Productions. 118 min. B/W. USA.
55. Germany, Year Zero. (1947). [AKA – Germania Anno Zero]. Director/ producer/
screenwriter: Roberto Rossellini. Produced by Teve Film. 75 min. B/W West
Germany, USA.
56. The Iron Curtain. (1948). (AKA – Behind the Iron Curtain). Director: William
Wellman.Produced by 20th Century Fox/Darryl F. Zanuck Productions/Sol C.
Blockadel. 87 min. B/W. USA.
57. Berlin Express. (1948). Director: Jacques Tourneur. Produced by RKO Radio
Pictures. 86 min. B/W. USA.
305
58.A Foreign Affaire. (1948). Director/screenwriter: Billy Wilder. Produced by
Paramount. 116 min. B/W. USA.
59. Command Decision. (1948). Director: Sam Wood. Produced by MGM/Sidney Franklin
Productions. 112 min. B/W, available in colorized version. USA.
60. Battleground. (1949). Director: William Wellmann. Produced by MGM. 118 min.
B/W, available in colorized version. USA.
61. Twelve O'clock High. (1949). Director: Henry King. Produced by Darryl F. Zanuck
Productions. 132 min. B/W. USA.
62. The Third Man. (1949). Director/producer: Carol Reed. Produced by General Film
Distributors/London Films. 104 min. B/W. UK, USA.
63. The Big Lift. (1950). Director/screenwriter: George Seaton. Produced by 20th
Century Fox/William Perlberg Productions. 119 min. B/W. USA.
64. The Desert Fox. (1951). [AKA – Rommel – The desert Fox]. Director: Henry
Hathaway. Produced by 20th Century Fox. 87 min. B/W. USA.
65. Decision before Dawn. (1951). Director/Producer: Anatole Litvak. Produced by 20th
Century Fox. 119 min. B/W. USA.
66. The African Queen. (1952). Director/Screenwriter: John Huston. Produced by United
Artists. 105 min. Color. USA/UK.
粸¢
67. What Price Glory? (1952). Director: John Ford. Produced by 20th Century Fox/
Franco London films. 120 min. Color. USA.
68. The Devil Makes Three. (1952). Director: Andrew Marton. Produced by MGM. 96
min. B/W. USA.
69. Stalag 17. (1953). Director/producer/screenwriter: Billy Wilder. Produced by
Paramount. 120 min. B/W. USA.
70. The Story of Mankind. (1957). Director/producer/screenwriter: Irwin Allen.
Produced by Cambridge Films/Warner Bros. 100 min. Color. USA.
71. Witness for the Prosecution. (1957). Director/screenwriter: Billy Wilder. Produced by
United Artists. 116 min. B/W. USA.
72. Witness for the Prosecution. (1982). Director: Alan Gibson. Producer: Norman
Rosemont. Produced by Norman Rosemont Productions/United Artists. 96 min.
Color. USA/UK.
73. Bitter Victory. (1957). Director: Nicholas Ray. Produced by Robert Laffont
Productions. 102 min. B/W. USA, France, Great Britain.
74. Paths of Glory. (1957). Director/Screenwriter: Stanley Kubrick. Produced by Franco
London Films/United Artists. 86 min. b/W. USA.
306
75. Fraulein. (1958). Director: Henry Koster. Produced by 20th Century Fox. 98 min.
Color. USA.
76. The Young Lions. (1958). Director: Edward Dmytryk. Produced by 20th Century Fox.
167 min. B/W. USA.
77. The Diary of Anne Frank. (1959/1980). Director/producer: George Stevens.
Produced by 20th Century Fox. 150 min. B/W. USA.
78. he Diary of Anne Frank. (1980). Director: Boris Sagal. Produced by 20th Century
Fox/Haff-Pint Productions/Katz-Gallin Productions. 100 min. Color. USA.
79. Verboten! (1959). Director/Producer/Screenwriter: Samuel Fuller. Cinematographer:
Joseph Biroc. Editor: Phil Cahn. Cast: James Best, Susan Cummings, Thomas
Pittman, Paul Dubov, Harold Daye, Anna Hope… Produced by Columbia
Pictures/Globe Enterprises/J. Arthur Rank Productions/RKO – Radio Pictures. 93
min. B/W. USA.
80. One, Two, Three. (1961). Director/producer/screenwriter: Billy Wilder. Produced by
United Artists. 110 min. B/W. USA.
81. Judgment at Nuremberg. (1961). Director/producer: Stanley Kramer. Produced by
Stanley Kramer Productions/United Artists. 178 min. B/W. USA.
82. Town Without Pity.(1961). Director/producer: Gottfried Reinhards. Produced by
United Artists. 105 min. B/W. West Germany/ Switzerland/USA.
粸¢
83. The Guns of Navarone. (1961). Director: J. Lee Thompson. Produced by Columbia
Pictures. 156 min. Color. USA/UK.
84. Hell is For Heroes. (1962). Director: Don Blockadel. Produced by Universal/
Paramount. 90 min. B/W. USA.
85. Hitler. (1962). [AKA - The Women of Nazi Germany]. Director: Stuart Heisler.
Produced by Universal. 103 min. B/W. USA.
86. The Black Fox: The Rise and Fall of Adolf Hitler. (1962). [Documentary]. Director/
screenwriter: Louis Clyde Stoumen. Produced by Image Productions/Levien.
International Productions/White Star. 89 min. B/W. USA.
87. The Longest Day. (1962). Director: Ken Annakin, Andrew Marton, Gerd Oswald,
Bernhard Wicki and Darryl F. Zanuck. Produced by 20th Century /Darryl F.
Zanuck Productions/Franco London Films. 179 min. B/W. Available in colorized
version. USA.
88. Escape from East Berlin. (1962). Director: Robert Siodmak. Produced by MGM. 94
min. B/W. West Germany/USA.
89. They Saved Hitler’s Brain. (1963). [AKA – Madmen of Mandoras/ Return of Mr. H.,
1964]. Director: David Bradley. Produced by Crown International Pictures. 91
min. B/W. USA.
307
90. The Great Escape. (1963). Director/producer: John Sturges. Produced by United
Artists. 170 min. Color. USA.
91. The Victors. (1963). Director/producer/screenwriter: Carl Foreman. Produced by
Columbia Pictures/Franco London Films/Highroad Productions. 156 min. B/W.
UK/USA.
92. Dr. Strangelove or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb. (1964).
Director/ producer/screenwriter: Stanley Kubrick. Produced by Stanley Kubrick
Productions. 93 min. B/W. UK/USA.
93. The Secret Invasion. (1964). Director: Roger Corman. Produced by Corman
Company/United Artists. 95 min. Color. USA.
94. The Guns of August. (1964). [Documentary]. Directory/Producer: Nathan Kroll.
Book Author: Barbara Tuchman. Composer (music score): Sol Kaplan. Cast:
Fritz weaver: Narrator [voice]. Produced by Universal. 110 min. B/W. USA.
95. 36 Hours.(1964/65). Director/Screenwriter: George Seaton. Produced by MGM/
Perlberg-Seaton. 115 min. B/W. available in colorized version. USA.
96. Battle of the Bulge. (1965). Director: Ken Annakin. Produced by Cinerama/Warner
Bros.141 min. Color. USA.
97. The Spy Who Came in from the Cold. (1965). Director/producer: Martin Ritt.
Produced by Paramount/Salem Films. 110 min. B/W. UK/USA.
粸¢
98. Operation Crossbow. (1965). [AKA: Code Name: Operation Crossbow – The Great
Spy Mission]. Director: Michael Anderson. Produced by Carlo Ponti Productions/
MGM. 116 min. Color. Italy/UK/USA.
99. The Quiller Memorandum. (1966). Director: Michael Anderson. Produced by J.
Arthur Rank Productions/Paramount. 103 min. Color. UK/USA.
100. Funeral in Berlin. (1966). Director: Guy Hamilton. Produced by Paramount. 102
min. B/W/color. UK/USA.
101. Torn Curtain. (1966). Director/producer: Alfred Hitchcock. Produced by Universal.
125 min. Color. USA.
102. Is Paris Burning? (1966). [AKA – Paris Brule-t-it?]. Director: René Clément.
Produced by Franco London Films/Paramount/Seven Arts. 173 min. B/W and
color. France/USA.
103. The Devil’s Brigade. (1968). Director: Andrew V. McLaglen. Produced by United
Artists. 130 min. Color. USA.
104. The Rise and Fall of Nazi Germany. (1968). [Documentary]. [AKA – The Rise and
Fall of the Third Reich]. Director: Mel Stuart. Produced by David Wolper L.
Productions. 120 min. Color. USA.
308
105. The Secret Life of Adolf Hitler. (1969). Westbrook van Voorhis – participant. 52
min. B/W. USA.
106. Patton. (1970). Director: Franklin J. Schaffner. Produced by 20th Century Fox. 171
min. Color. USA.
5. German representations in the Revision period – a sequence of complex
representations or a drastic change (1971-1980)
107. Raid on Rommel.(1971). Director: Henry Hathaway. Produced by Universal. 99
min. Color. USA.
108. Slaughterhouse – Five.(1972). Director: George Roy Hill. Produced by
Universal/Vanadas. 104 min. Color. USA.
109. Hitler: The Last Ten Days.(1973). Director/screenwriter: Ennio de Concini.
Produced by Paramount/ Tomorrow Entertainment/West Film/Wolfgang
Reinhard Productions. 108 min. color. UK/Italy/USA.
110. Ilsa, She-Wolf of the SS.(1974). Director: Don Edmonds. Produced by AETAS Film
Productions/American. 45 min. Color. USA.
111. A Bridge Too Far.(1977). Director: Richard Attenborough. Produced by United
Artists. 175 min. Color. USA/UK.
112. The Boys from Brazil.(1978). Director: Franklin J. Schaffner. Produced by 20th
Century Fox/CBS/Fox Video/ Producer’s Circle. 130 min. Color. USA.
粸¢
113. Holocaust.(1978). Director: Marvin J. Chomsky. Produced by Titus Productions.
475 min. Color. NBC, USA.
6. Second Cold War: representation of Germans during the renewed
escalation period upon the invasion to Afghanistan (1981-1989)
114.
Genocide [Documentary].(1981). Director/producer/screenwriter: Arnold
Schwartzman. Produced by Simon Wiesenthal Center. 82 min. Color. USA.
115. The Bunker.(1981). Director/Producer: George Schaefer. Produced by Antenne
2/Societe de Francis Production/Time-Life. 180 min. Made for TV. Color.
USA/France.
116. Victory [AKA Escape to Victory].(1981). Director: John Huston. Produced by
Lorimar Productions/Paramount. 117 min. Color. USA.
117. Shoah [Documentary].(1985). Director: Claude Lanzmann. Cinematographer:
Dominique Chapuis and William Lubtchansky. Editor: Anna Ruiz. Produced by
Films Aleph/Geneva/Historia Films/Para France. 570 min. Color. France/
Switzer-land/USA.
309
118.
Partisans of Vilna [Documentary].(1985). Director: Josh Waletsky.
Screenwriter/Producer: Aviva Kempner. Produced by Ciesla Foundation/EuroAmerican Films. 130 min. Color and B/W. USA.
119. Hitler’s SS: Portrait in Evil.(1985) Director: Jim Goddard. Produced by Colasan
Limited Productions/Edgar J. Scherick Associates. 150 min. Color. UK/USA.
120. Weapons of the Spirit [Documentary].(1986). Director/producer/screenwriter:
Pierre Sauvage. Cinematographer: Yves Dahan. Editor: Matthew Harrison. Cast:
Pierre Sauvage – Narrator. Produced by Franco London Films/Friends of Le
Chambon… 91 min. Color. France/USA.
121. Witnesses to the Holocaust. The Trial of Adolf Eichmann. [Documentary].(1987).
Cast: Joel Grey. Produced by Lorimar Home Video. 90 min. Color. USA.
122. Hotel Terminus [Documentary].(1987/8). Director/Producer: Marcel Ophüls.
Produced by Memory Pictures. 267 min. Color. USA/France.
123. The Tenth Man.(1988). Director: Jack Gold, Richard T. Heffron. Produced by
Rosemont Productions/William Self Productions. 99 min. Color. USA/UK.
124. The Music Box.(1989). Director: Costa Gavras. Producer: Irwin Winkler. Produced
by Carolco Pictures/Tristar. 126 min. Color. USA.
125. Triumph of the Spirit.(1989). Director/Screenwriter: Robert M. Young. Produced by
Nova International Films/Triumph. 115 min. Color. USA.
粸¢
126. Schindler’s List.(1993). Director/producer: Steven Spielberg. Produced by
Universal. 200min.B/W and color.USA.
B. Bibliography: Secondary historical sources and a selection of the research
literature
B.1. Cinema – Theories, Language and Methodology
Hebrew and English sources
1.Avisar, Ilan. (1991). "Documenting and designing historical awareness in propaganda
Films", Zmanim, 39-40. pp.38-47.
2. Avisar, Ilan. (1992). The art of the movie: the poetics and technique of the cinematic
Expression. The Open University, Tel Aviv.
3. Barthers, Roland. (1967). Elements of Semiology, London: Jonathan Cape.
4. Basin, Andre. (1972). "The being of the photographed image," In: Helga Keller (Ed.),
The World of Movies. Tel Aviv: Am Oved, pp. 249-256.
5. Ben-Shaul, Niza. (2000). An introduction to cinematic theories. Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv
University: Dionon Publishing.
6. Browne, Nick. (1999). “American Narrative Studies between Formalism and Post
Modernism,” Quarterly Review of Film. Vol. 10. pp. 341-346.
310
7. Burke, Peter. (2001). Eye witnessing: The Uses of Images as Historical Evidence.
Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
8. Carroll, Noel. (1998). Interpreting the Moving Image. U.K: Cambridge: University
Press.
9. Cassetti, Francesco. (1999). Theories of Cinema 1945-1995. (Translated By:
Francesca Chiostry & others). Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press.
10. Caspi, Dan. (1993). "Cinema, radio and television". Mass Communication. Vol. a.
Unit 4, the Open University, Tel Aviv, pp. 149-169.
11. Chatman, Seymour B. (1990). Coming to Terms: The Rhetoric of Narrative in Fiction
and Film. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
12. Comolli, Jean Louis and Jean Narboni. (1994) “Cinema, Ideology, Criticism”. In:
Contemporary Film Theory. Anthony Easthope (Ed). London, New York:
Longman, pp. 43-53.
13. Deleuze, Gilles. (2001). Cinema 2: The Time-Image. Translated by: Hugh
Tomlinson & Robert Galeta. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
14. Dyer, Richard. (1993). The matter of Images; Essays on Representations.
London: Routledge.
15. Easthope, Anthony (Edited and introduced). (1994). Contemporary Film Theory.
London, New York: Longman.
16. Ellis, Jack C.(1995). A History of Film, Allyn and Bacon, Boston.
17. Ellwood, David W. (Ed). (2000) The Movies as History; Visions of the Twentieth
Century. Stroud: Sutton Publishing.
18. Ferro, Marc. (1968). “1917: History and Cinema," The Journal of Contemporary
History, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 45-62.
19. Ferro, Marc. (1976). "The Fiction Film and Historical Analysis," in Paul Smith (Ed),
The Historian and Film. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 80-94.
20. Ferro, Marc.(1983). “Film as an Agent Product, and Source of History”,
Journal of Contemporary History, 18(3).pp. 357-364.
21. Friedlander, S. (1985). Kitsch and death – about the reflection of Nazism.
Hebrew version: Genny Navot, Jerusalem.
22. Gitlis, Baruch. (1984). Cinema and propaganda: The anti-Semitic Nazi film. Revivim
Publication House Ltd. Together with the Israeli Institute for Propaganda
Research Named after Harry Karren.
23. Grant, Barry Keith (Ed). (1997). Film Genre: Reader II. Austin: University of Texas
Press.
24. Harries Dan M. (1995/1996). "The Semi-Semiotics of Film," Film Criticism; Film
Theory, a Special Double Issue, Vol. 20, pp. 39-53.
25. Hayward, Susan. (2001). Cinema Studies the Key Concepts. 2nd Ed. London and
New York: Routledge.
26. Janty, Lewis, D. (2000). Understanding films. Translated by Dan Daor. The Open
University Publication, Tel Aviv.
27. Jarvie, I. C. (1978). "Seeing Through Movies," Philosophy of the Social Sciences,
Vol. 8, pp. 374-397.
28. Jarvie, I. C. (2004). "The Present State of the Philosophy of Film," Film and
Philosophy, Vol. 8, pp. 142-145.
29. Judt, Tony. (1988)."Moving Pictures," Radical History Review, No. 41, pp. 129144.
粸¢
311
30. Katz, John Stuart (Ed). (1971). Perspectives on the Study of Film. Boston: Little,
Brown.
31. Kerier, Jean Claud. (1994). The hidden language of the cinema, Ofakim Library,
Am Oved Publication, Tel Aviv.
32. Kemnitz, Thomas Milton. (Summer 1973). "The Cartoon as a Historical Source,"
Journal of Interdisciplinary History, Vol. IV, No. 1, pp. 81-93.
33. Knight, Deborah. (2004). "Philosophy of Film, or Philosophies of Films?" Film and
Philosophy, Vol. 8, pp.146-153.
34. Mitry, Jean. (2000). Semiotics and the Analysis of Film. Translated by:
Christopher King. London: Athlone.
35. Monaco, James. (1981). How to Read a Film. New York, Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
36. O’Connor, John E. (October, 1988). “History in Images /Images in History:
Reflections on the Importance of Film and Television Study for an
Understanding of the Past”, the American Historical Review, 93 (4-5), pp. 12001209.
37. Parkinson, David, (1996). History of Film, New York, N.Y. Thames and Hudson.
38. Phillips, Patrick. (2000). Understanding Film Texts: Meaning and Experience. UK: BFI
Publishing.
39. Preminger, Anner. (1995). The magic screen. The Open University, Tel Aviv.
40. Pronay, Richard. (1983). "The Moving Picture and the Historical Research," Journal
of Contemporary History, Vol. 18, pp.365-395.
41. Rosenstone, Robert A. (1982). "Reds as History," Reviews in American History, Vol.
10, pp. 297-310.
42. Short, K.R.M. (Ed). (1981). Feature Film as History. London: Croom Helm.
43. Singer, Irving. (1998). Reality Transformed; Film as Meaning and Technique.
London: MIT Press.
44. Sklar, Robert and Charles Musser (Eds). (1990). Resisting Images: Essays on
Cinema and History. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
45. Staiger, Janet. (1992). Interpreting Film: Studies in the Historical Reception of
American Cinema. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
46. Tylor, Richard. (1999). Cinema, History, and Politics: The Reel and the Real. (An
Inaugural Lecture).Swansea: University of Wales Swansea.
粸¢
B.2 General Literature
Hebrew and English Press
47. Boehnel, William, " 'Beasts of Berlin' Opens at Globe", New York World – Telegram,
Nov. 20, 1939.
48. Cameron, Kate, "'Beasts of Berlin' Powerful Story", New York Daily News, Nov. 19,
1939.
49. Creelman, Eileen, "Review of Beasts of Berlin", New York Sun., Nov. 19, 1939.
50. Gutfeld Arnon, Facts and non-historical quotes (criticism of the book by Zeingrov
Israel & Boim Zeev), the history of the US during the Cold War, Haaretz, books
Supplement, Vol 294, 14.10.1998 (MICR.X-84.
51. Heller Michel, The spy who came in from the cold, Haaretz, p. b6/7.7.1989.
52. Konard, Heiden, "The Germans on Our side: What are they like Today?" Life, 7/6
June 1952: 109-109.
312
53. Le Carre, John, The spy who came in from the cold, Yediot Aharonot, 7 Days, p.
23, 6.7.1990.
54. Mold, Daniel, The spy who came in from the cold, Maariv p. e6, 30.6.1989.
55. Perlmuter, Amos, the mythology of the Cold War, Haaretz p. b6, 1.7.1994.
56. Proiss, Teddy, Growing a spy, Yediot Aharonot, p. 23, 13.3.1987.
57. Proiss, Teddy, Smiley comes back from the cold, Yediot Aharonot, Saturday's
Supplement, 24, 14.6.1991.
58. The spy who came in from the cold, Davar, p. 24, 7.7.1989.
59. Thirer, Irene, "'Beasts of Berlin Anti-Nazi Film on View at the Globe", New York
Post, Nov. 20, 1939.
Hebrew and English sources - Essays and Books
60. Abrams, Jerold J. (2003) “Cinema and the Aesthetics of the Dynamical
Sublime: Kant, Deleuze, Heidegger and the Architecture of Film,” Film
and Philosophy Vol. VII, pp. 60-76.
61. Ambrose, Stephen E. (1981). Ike's spies: Eisenhower and the espionage
Establishment, Garden City, and New York: Doubleday.
62. Ambrose, Stephen E., "'The Longest Day' (1962): "Blockbuster" History, Historical
Journal of Film, Radio and Television, Vol. 14, Nr.4 (October 1994): 421-431.
63. American cinema – VCV_4109. 4 video cassettes. (1995). Jerusalem: The Israeli
Educational Television.
64. Andersen, Michael B., Grodal, Torben K.… (1974). Filmanalyser: History of Films,
Copenhagen, Rode Hane.
65. Anez, Nicholas, (Jul/ Aug 1992)."The Quiller Memorandum", Films in Review, Vol.
43, Nr. 7/8, pp. 237-245.
66. Arad Itzhak, Gutman Israel, Margalit Avraham (Eds.). (1978). a selection of
Documents about the destruction of the Jews of Germany, Austria, Poland and
the USSR, Jerusalem: Yad Vashem.
67. Arnold, Frank, (June 1991). "On a retrospective Festival during Berlinate 91 with the
Theme 'Cold War in Films', EPD Film, Vol. VIII Nr. 6, pp. 10-13.
68. Ariel, Nitza. (2004)." Presentation of Nazism and the Holocaust in Western
Movies: A Discussion in three film narratives", Cinema and Memory –
Dangerous Relationships? Zalman Shazar Center of the history of Israel,
Jerusalem pp. 293-316.
69. Avisar, I. (1988). Screening the Holocaust: Cinema’s Images of the
Unimaginable. Bloomington.
70. Ball, Simon J. (1988). The Cold War: Contemporary History, an International History,
1947-1991, Great Britain, USA.
71. Baron, Lawrence. (December 2002). “Holocaust Iconography in American
Feature Films about Neo-Nazis”, Film and History, V. 32, n. 2, pp. 38-47.
72. Barta, Tony (Ed.). (1998). Screening the Past: Film and the Representation of
History. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger, London, pp. 1-15.
73. Basinger, Jeanine. (1986). The World War II Combat Film: Anatomy of a genre. New
York: Columbia University Press.
74. Baxter, John. (1968). Hollywood in the thirties, London: A. Zwemmer.
75. Baxter, John. (1972). Hollywood in the sixties, New York.
76. Becker, Jillian,(1977). Hitler's Childern: The Story of the Baader-Meinhof Terrorist
Gang, New York.
蛐¢
313
77. Beebe, John. M.D. (Spring 1990) "The Notorious Post War Psyche". Journal of
Popular Film and Television. Vol.18, Nr. 1, pp.28-35.
78. Belmonte, Laura Ann, (1996). Defending a Way of Life: American Propaganda and
the Cold War, 1945-1959, University of Virginia.
79. Belton, John. (1994). American cinema/American culture. Library of
Congress, Cataloging in publication data, USA.
80. Bergan, Ronald,(1994). Jean Renoir: Projections of paradise, the overlook press,
Woodstock New York.
81. Berger, Robert A. (1989)."Ask what you can do for your country? The film version
of H.G.Wells's, the time Machine and the cold war". Literature / film quarterly
vol. 17 No. 3.pp. 177-187.
82. Bertin, Celia, (1991). Jean Renoir, A Life in pictures, The John Hopkins University
Press,Baltimore and London.
83. Billy, Budd, "One, two, three", Films and Filming, Vol. 8. Nr. 6 (March 1962): 31.
84. Bird Kay & Alperovich Gar (1994), Was the Cold War necessary? About the book of
P. Lefler: About the superiority of power: national security, Truman's
administration And the Cold War (a critical article), A file of socialist thought
from world's press, (32): 56-61.
85. Birdwell, Michael E., (September 1997). “A Change of Heart: Alvin York and
The Movie Sergeant York”, Film and History, V. 27 n. 1-4. pp. 22-33.
86. Birdwell, Michael E. (1999), Celluloid Soldiers: The Warner Bros. Campaign against
Nazism. New York University Press, New York and London.
87. Birdwell, Michael, (2001). "Oh, you thing from another world you: How Warner
Bros, Animators respond to the Cold war (1948-1988)", Film et History An
interdisciplinary, Journal of Film and Television studies, Vol.31 1 .pp.34-39.
88. Bischof, Gunter J. and Ambrose, Stephen E. (eds.),(1992). Eisenhower and
The German Pows, Facts Against Falsehood,: Louisiana University Press.
89. Bordwell, David, Staiger, Janet and Thompson, Kristin, (1985). The Classical
Hollywood Cinema: Film Style & Mode of Production to 1960. New York:
Columbia University Press.
90. Bowman, David K., (Feb-Mar 1997). "Martin Kosleck: The Case of the
Typecast Nazi", Filmfax, Vol. 59.pp. 53-55, 72.
91. Brirly David, Cold War.(1985). From English: Michael Aviv, Tel Aviv: Modan
Publishing House.
92. Buckley, William F. (1954). McCarthy and His Enemies: The Record and Its Meaning.
Regnery. ISBN 0895264722.
93. Buhite, Russell D., (Ed.). (1997). Major Crises in Contemporary American Foreign
Policy, a Documentary Hisotry, Greenwood Press, Library of Congress,
Westport, Connecticut.
94. Butz, Otto, (1954). Germany: dilemma for American Foreign Policy, Doubleday &
Company, Inc. Garden City, N.Y.
95. Bzimansky Lev & Palin Alentin, (April 1989). "The lessons of the past: Who ignited
the Cold War?". Values: The problems of peace and socialism, 2 (111).pp. 54-66.
96. Capitanchik, David Bernard, (1969). The Eisenhower Presidency and American
Foreign Policy, London.
97. Carolyn, Woods Eisenberg, (1996). Drawing the Line: The American decision to
Divide Germany, 1944-1949, Cambridge University Press.
粸¢
314
98. Carpenter, Lynette, (Fall-winter 1986-1987). "I ever knew the old vienna": Cold
War politics and the Third man", Film criticism, Vol. XI, Nr. 1-2;pp. 56-65.
99. Cauders, Anthony. (2000). The Nazi past in both Germanies, Zion: a quarterly for
The Study Of the history of Israel 65(3): pp.394-399.
100. Ceplair, Larry, and Steven Englund, (1979). The Inquisition in Hollywood:
Politics In The film community 1930-1960, Berkeley U of California.
101. Chapman, Roger, (2001). "George F. Kennan as Represented by Chuck Jones:
Road Runner and the cold war Policy of containment (1949-1980)" Film et
History, Vol. 31.1 .pp.40-43.
102. Clark, Arthur B. (January 1962). "Judgment at Nuremberg", Films in Review, Vol.
13 Nr 1:pp. 39-41.
103. CNN Cold War – Historical Document: CIA Weekly Summaries.
http://www.Cnn.com/specials/cold.war/episodes/04/documents/cia.html
104. Cohen, Y.F. (1961). The Cold War: Reading chapters for a seminar – chosen
Issues in Contemporary international relationships, Hebrew University,
Jerusalem.
105. Cole, Robert, (June 2001). "Anglo-American Anti-Fascist Film Propaganda in a
Time of Neutrality: 'The Great Dictator', 1940", Historical Journal of Film, Radio
and Television, Vol. 21 Nr. 2.pp.137-152.
106. Coleman, David G., (winter 2000). “Eisenhower and the Berlin, Problem, 19531954”, Journal of Cold War Studies, 2 (1): pp.3-34.
107. Cox, John Stuart, and Athan G. Theoharis (1988). The Boss: J. Edgar Hoover
And the Great American Inquisition. Temple University Press. ISBN
087722532X.
108. Crowe, Cameron, (1999). Wilder, Billy, Conversations with Wilder, and New York.
109. Culbert, David, (October 1983), a Documentary Note on “Wilson: Hollywood
Propaganda for World Peace”, Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television,
Vol. 3 Nr. 2, pp. 193-197.
110. Culbert, David, (1988). "Hollywood in Berlin, 1945: A Note on Billy Wilder and the
Origins of a 'foreign affair'", Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television,
Vol. 8, Nr. 3.pp. 311-316.
111. Culbert, David, (Mar. 1993). "Introduction: Media and the cold war in Europe"
Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, Vol. 13 No. 1.pp. 5-73.
112. Cull, Nicholas J.(2002). "Great Escapes: 'Englishness' and the Prisoner of War
Genre" Film History. Vol. 14, Nr. 3/4, pp.282-295.
113. Dassanowsky-Harris, R., (May 1990). "Billy Wilder's Germany, Germany in films:
Berlin in films", Films in Review, Vol. 41 Nr. 5.pp. 292-297.
114. Dick, Bernard F., (1985). The Star-Spangled Screen: The American World War II
Films, Lexington: UP. Of Kentucky.
115. Diefendorf, Jeffry M., Frohn, Axel, and Rupieper, Hermann-Josef (editors),
(1993). American Policy and the Reconstruction of West Germany 1945-1955,
German Historical Institute, Washington, D.C. and Cambridge University Press.
116. Divine, Robert A. (1981). Eisenhower and the cold war, New York: Oxford
University Press.
117. Documentary cinema: Reality art and change. Even Yehuda: Reches, educational
projects.
118. Doherty, Thomas. P. (1993). Projections of war: Hollywood, American culture, and
World War II. New York: Columbia University Press.
粸¢
315
119. Donald Sapoto, (1991). Alfred Hichcock's life, the dark side of genius. From
English: Oded Dagan, Dvir Publishing House, and Tel Aviv.
120. Duncan, Smith, (1988). Walls and Mirrors: Western Representations of really
Existing, German socialism in the German democratic republic, New York.
121. Eisenhauer Dwight D., (1954). The liberation journey of Europe translated fro
English By Y.Nedava & Y Naor, Ctavim Publishing House Ltd., Tel Aviv.
122. Eisenhauer Dwight D., (1963). My years in the White House: A mandate for a
change, Translated fro English by Arie Hashavia, Tsad Publishing House Tel Aviv.
123. Eisenberg, Carolyn W., (1996). Drawing the line: The American Decision to Divide
German, 1944-1949, Cambridg University Press.
124. Ellis, Jack C., (1995). A History of Film, Allyn and Bacon, Boston.
125. Elsaesser, Thomas. ,(1996). “Subject Positions, speaking Positions: From
Holocaust, Our Hitler, and Heimat to Shoah and Schindler’s List”, in:
Vivian Sobchack (ed.), The Persistence of History: Cinema, Television,
and the Modern Event.Routledge, New York and London. pp. 145-183.
126. Ellwood, D.W. (1993). "The 1948 elections in Italy: A cold war propaganda battle",
Historical Journal of film, radio and television, vol. 13 No. 1.pp. 19-33.
127. Ermarth, Michael, (ed.,), (1993). America and the shaping of German Society,
1945-1955, Berg, Providence / Oxford.
128. Everschor, Franz. (June 20 1995). "Deals with the general Image of 'the Germans'
in Hollywood Films", Film - dienst, Vol. XLVIII Nr. 13.pp. 40-41.
129. Farnham, Barbara R., (1997). Roosevelt and the Munich Crisis: A Study of Political
Decision-Making, PrincetonUniversity Press, New Jersey.
130. Faulkner, Christopher, (1986). The social cinema of Jean Renoir, Princeton
university press, N.Y.
131. Fisher, Jaimey, (April 1997). “Deleuze in a Ruinous Context: German
Rubble Film and ‘Italian Neorealism’: Theoretical Discussion on Post-War
Cinema and Masculinity, Featuring Analysis of Rome, Open City and
Germany, Year Zero, in an issue about Deleuze”’ Philosopher of Cinema, n.
23. pp. 53-74.
132. Ferro, Marc, (1988). Cinema and History, Detroit.
133. Ferro, Marc. (Winter 1991). The film: an anti-analysis of society? Zmanim, 39- 40:
pp. 100-111.
134. Fledelius K. and Jorgensen K.R. (eds.). (1979). History and the Audio-Visual
Media, Copenhagen.
135. Fraulein (U.S.A), (1958). Monthly Film Bulletin, Vol. 25 Nr. 294 (July) 1958.p. 88,
Published by the British film Institute, London.
136. Fraulein, (1983). Library of congress cataloging in publication data Variety film
Reviews 1907-1980 vol.9.(1954-1958) 7 May 1958 p. 6-7 Gerland Publishing, Inc
New York and London.
137. Fox, Darryl. (January 1989). “Crossfire and Huac: Surviving the Slings and
Arrows of the Committee”, Film History, V, 3 n. 1.pp. 29-37.
138. Fried, Albert. (1997). McCarthyism, the Great American Red Scare: A Documentary
History. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195097017.
139. Fried, Richard M. (1990). Nightmare in Red: The McCarthy Era in Perspective.
Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195043618.
140. Friedländer, Saul, (1967). Prelude to Downfall: Hitler and the United States
1939-1941, Chatto & Windus, London.
蛐¢
316
141. Friedman, Michal. "Historical thriller: the double labyrinth". Zmanim, (Winter
1991), 39-40: 84-91.
142. Gat, Ezer,(2001). Isolationism, appeasement, holding action and a limited war:
the Westernstrategic policy since the modern era up to the post-modern era,
Maarachot (376).pp.2-9.
143. Gebler, Neil. (1993). an empire of their own. How the Jews invented Hollywood.
Am Oved/Ofakim Library.
144. Gene, Philip D.,(1986). Alfred Hitchcock, Columbus Books, London.
145. George, Peter, (1970). Dr. Strangelove, or: how I learned to stop worrying and
love the bomb, London.
146. Giannetti, Louis, (1999). Understanding movies, New Jersey.
147. Gilcher, William Harry. (July 1979). Jean Renoir in America: A Critical Analysis of
His Major Films from "Swamp Water"to "the river", Vol. I + II London.
148. Grathwol, Robert P., and Moorhus, Donita M., (1999). Berlin and the American
Military, A Cold War Chronicle, NewYork and London.
149. Greenberg, David. (1967). The Movie. Tel Aviv: Maariv Library.
150. Griffith, Robert and Theoharis, Athan, eds., (1974). "The Politics of Culture:
Hollywood and the Cold War" The Specter: Original Essays on the Cold War
and the Origins of McCarthyism, New York: New Viewpoints – A Division of
Franklin Watts, Inc.
151. Griffith, Robert (1970). The Politics of Fear: Joseph R. McCarthy and the Senate.
University of Massachusetts Press. ISBN 0870235559.
152. Gutfeld Arnon (Ed). (1986). The American Experience: Chapters in the history of
the US and its culture, Tel Aviv.
153. Gutfeld Arnon, (1989). The US since the Civil War up to the Cold War, 18601946, Tel Aviv: The Ministry of Defense – Publishing Department.
154. Hamilton, Ian. (1990). Writers in Holywood, 1915-1951. New York: Harper & Row.
155. Harbutt Fraser, J., (1986). The iron curtain: Churchill, America, and the origins of
the Cold war, New York Oxford: Oxford University Press.
156. Hart, Henry, (March 1962). "One, two, and three" U.S.A / 1961 Monthly Film
Bulletin, Vol. 29 Nr. 338.p. 35.
157. Hart, Henry, (January 1962). "One two, three", Films in review, Vol. 13 Nr. 1
pp.37-38.
158. Hatch, Alden. (1946, c 1945). General-Ike: A biography of Dwight D. Eisenhower,
New Enlarged et –Cleveland: world publishing co., N.Y.
159. Haydock, Michael D., (2000). City under Blockade: The Berlin Blockade and Airlift,
1948-1949, Brassey's, Inc.Washington & London.
160. Hendel, Richard. (2007).Images of Germany in American Literature, University of
Iowa press, Iowa City.
161. Heilbut, Anthony,(1983). Exiled in Paradise, The Viking Press, New York, Boston,
Beacon.
162. Henriksen, Margot A. (1997). Dr. Strangelove's America: Society and culture in the
Atomic age. University of California press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, London.
163. Henry, Nora, (2001). Ethics and social criticism in the Hollywood films of Eric Von
Stroheim, Ernst Lubistch, and Billy Wilder: Praeger, London.
164. Herbert Litty, (1964). A dialogue with the East? – Culture and the Cold War. The
Nation B (6).pp. 257-263.
粸¢
317
165. Higham, Charles and Greenberg, Joel, (1968). Hollywood in the Forties, A.
Zwemmer Limited, London. A.S.Barnes ET co., New York.
166. Hoberman J. (Dec 1993). "When Dr no met Dr. Strangelove", Sight and sound
Vol. 3. Nr. 12.pp. 16-21.
167. Hogan, David J., (spring 1995). "Atomic Memories: You can beat the A-bomb:
The H-bomb and other Hits" Jn: Outre, vol. 1 Nr. 2.pp. 12-13.
168. Holl, H. (Oct 19 1983)."Fraulein Berlin", Variety, vol. CCCXII Nr. 12.p. 22.
169. Holt, Jennifer,(2001). "Hollywood and politics caught in the cold war crossfire
1947",Film and History: an interdisciplinary Journal of Film and Television
studies, Vol. 31.1.pp. 6-12.
170. Hoppenstand, Gary, Barrows, Floyd & Lunde, Erik. (September 1997). “Bringing the
War Home: William Wyler and World War II”, Film and History, V. 27 n. 1-4, pp.
108-118.
171. Horak, Jan-Christopher, (April 1999). “Sirk’s Early Exile Films: boefje and Hitler’s
Madman”, Film Criticism, V. 23 n. 2/3, pp. 122-135.
172. Hughes, Emmet John, (1963). The Ordeal of power: A political memoir of the
Eisenhower Years, London.
173. Hunt, Michael H., (1987).Ideology and U.S. Foreign Policy, New Haven: Yale
University Press, p. 22.
174. Jacobs, Arthur E., (1946). "Foreign Policy and Cinema"., Sight and Sound, Vol. 15,
Nr. 59: 102-105.
175. Jacobs, Lewis, (Summer 1961). "World War II and the American Film", Film
Culture, 47. pp. 28-42.
176. Jowett, Garth, (1976). Film: The Democratic Art., Little, Brown and Company
Boston - Toronto.
177. Jowett, Garth and Linton, James M., (1980, 1989). Movies as Mass Communication,
(Second Edition), London, New Delhi.
178. Kagan, Norman, (1972). The cinema of Stanley Kubrick, New York, Chicago, and
San Francisco.
179. Kaes, Anton, (1990). “History and Film: Public Memory in the Age of Electronic
Dissemination”, History and Memory 2(1). pp. 111-129.
180. Kamm, Jürgen, "The Berlin Wall and Cold-War Espionage: Visions of a Divided
Germany in the Novels of Len Deighton", in: Schürer, Ernst, Keune, Manfred and
Jenkins, Philp (eds.), (1996). The Berlin Wall: Representations and perspectives,
Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., New York, Washington, D.C. Vol. XIII/ pp.61-73.
181. Kanin, Garson, (1974). The Latter's Book: "Hollywood",The Viking Press, New
York.
182. Keier, Jean Claud,(1994). The hidden language of the cinema, Ofakim Library, Am
Oved Publication, Tel Aviv.
183. Keis, Anton. (Winter 1991). History and cinema: a public memory in the electronic
Communication Era. Zmanim, 39-40. Pp.28-37.
184. Kelly, Andrew, (June 1993), “The brutality of military incompetence: ‘Paths of
Glory’”, Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, V. 13 n. 2, Pp.215-227.
185. Kirshner, Jonathan, (2001)."Subverting the Cold War in the 1960s: 'Dr.
Stangelove', "The Manchurian Candidate and the 'planet of the apes'". Film ET
History, Vol. XXXI Nr. 2.pp. 40-44.
186. Klassman, Christof, (1998). Conquerors and conquered: Common antagonistic
lines, the Germans (1945-1990). Tel Aviv, pp. 48-68.
蛐¢
318
187. Klassman, Christof, (1998).The Cold War and the division of Germany. In:
Heilbrunner, Oved, Zimerman Moshe (Eds.). The Germans (1945-1990), Tel
Aviv, pp.69- 83.
188. Koch, Howard,(1942). Casablanca: Script and legend, New York,pp. 17-27.
189. Koppes, Clayton R., & Black, Gregory D., (1990, 2000). Hollywood goes to War:
How Politics, Profits, and Propaganda Shaped World War II Movies, Berkeley:
University of California Press.
190. Kosloff, Max,(2003). American painting during the Cold War. Hamidrasha(6).
pp.161-188.
191. Koszarski, Richard (ed.), (1977). Zinnemann, Fred. "Different Perspective" in:
Hollywood Directors - 1941-1976., London and New York: Oxford University
Press.pp.144-147.
192. Kracauer Siegfried.(1947, 1974, 2004). From Caligari to Hitler: a psychological
history of the German Film edited and introduced by Leonardo Quaresima,
Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
193. Krafsur, R.P. (ed.) The American film institue catalog of motion pictures, R.R.
Bowker Company, N.Y. & London.
194. Lacapra, Dominick, (1994). Representing the Holocaust: History, theory,
Trauma. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
195. Lacapra, Dominick, (1998). History and memory after Auschwitz, Ithaca,NY: Cornell
University Press.
196. Landy, Marcia,(1996). “From History to Memory”, in: Cinematic Uses of the Past,
Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press.pp. 243-245.
197. Landy, Marcia (ed.).(2001). The Historical Film: History and Memory in Media, New
Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
198. Leab, Daniel J., (1984). "Hollywood and the Cold War, 1945-1961", In: R.B.
Toplin.(ed.), Hollywood as Mirror, Changing Views of "outsiders" and "enemies"
in American movies, London.pp.117-137.
199. Leab, Daniel J. (1988). "The Iron Curtain" (1948): Hollywood's First cold war
movie",Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television. , Vol, VIII Nr. 2. Pp.153188.
200. Leab, Daniel J. (1997). "Screen Images of the 'other' in Wilhelmine Germany ET
the United States, 1890-1918", Film History, Vol. IX. Nr. 1.pp. 49-70.
201. Leab, Daniel J., (1998). "The cold war and the movies", Film History, Vol. X Nr. 3
pp. 251-418.
202. Leff, Leonard J. and Simmons, Jerold, (March1983). “Wilson: Holywood
propaganda for world peace”, Historical Journal of Film, Radio and
Television, V. 3 n.1. pp. 3-18.
203. Leff, Leonard J., (Mar/Apr 1999). "Ingrid in the Lions' den: Cutting
notorious", Film Comment, Vol. 35., Nr. 2 .pp.26-29.
204. Legrand, Gerard and Lapr'evotte, G. (April 1991). "Review of the Russia House",
Positif Nr.362 pp. 41-50.
205. Leif, Furhammar, and Folke, Isaksson.(1971). "Torn Curtain", Politics and Film,
pp.139-141.
206. Leitch, Thomas M., (1999). "It's the cold war, Stupid: An obvious history of the
Political Hitchcock", Literature/FilmQuarterly, Vol. 27. Nr. 1.pp. 3-15.
粸¢
319
207. Lenihan, John H. (1984). Hollywood laughs at the Cold War, 1947-1961, In: R.B.
Toplin (ed.), Hollywood as Mirror, Changing Views of "outsiders" and "Enemies"
in American movies, London.pp.139-155.
208. Leyda, Kino J., (1960). A History of Russian and Soviet Films, London.
209. Levy, Jack, ,(1997/8). A reader in the course: Introduction to international
relationships, Haifa: Yozma.
210. Lightning, Robert K., (June 1998). "We Have Secrets" Borzage, Romance and the
Bourgeois State, (Including Discussion of the Mortal Storm), Cineaction, Nr. 46,
pp.64-72.
211. Lipschutz, Ronnie D., (2001). Cold War Fantasies, Film, Fiction, and Foreign Policy,
Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Lanham, Boulder, New York.
212. MacFarlane, Daniel, (2004). Projecting Hitler: Representations of Adolf Hiltler in
English Language Film, 1968-1990. University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon.
213. Madsen, Axel, (1969). Billy Wilder, Indiana-University Press, Bloomington and
London.
214. Mali, Yossi,(1991). Is history photogenic? The historical movie in post modernism
era, Zmanim, 39-40 (Winter 1991): 72-83.
215. Manfred and Jenkins, Philp (eds.).(1996), the Berlin Wall: Representations and
Perspectives, Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., New York, Washington, D.C. Vol.
XIII/ pp. 61-73.
216. Manfred, Jonas, (1984). The United States and Germany: A diplomatic History,
Cornell University Press. Ithaca N.Y. and London.
217. Manvell, Roger, (1974). Films and the Second World War, South Brunswick and
New York: A.S. Barnes and Company, J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd. London.
218. Margalit, Gilad. (2004). Humiliation: a subversive film, an a-political
entertainment, Or a Nazifilm? Cinema and Memory – Dangerous Relationships?,
Zalman Shazar Center of the history of Israel, Jerusalem.pp. 119-132.
219. Marranghello, Daniel, "A Note on Political Film Censorship in Costa-Rica: The
Banning of Confessionsof a Nazi Spy in 1939", Historical Journal of Film, Radio
and Television, Vol. 11. Nr. 2 (June 1991): 185 -186.
220. Mariani J. "Let's not be beastly to the Nazis", Film Comment, vol XV Nr. 1 (Jan-Feb
1979): 49-53.
221. McDonald, Gerald D., (1988). The Complete Films of Charlie Chaplin, The
Citadel Press, Secaucus, New Jersey.
222. McCrillis, Neal R. (December 1996). “Shtetl and Hotel Terminus”: History
And memory of the – Shoah”, Film and History, V. 26 n. 1-4, pp. 94-95,
113-116.
223. McGilligan, Pat (ed.), (1991). Backstory 2: Interviews with scriptwriters of the
1940s and 1950s. Berkeley: University of California Press.
224. Melanson, Richard A. and Mayers, David,(1987). Reevaluating Eisenhower:
American Foreign policy in the 1950s… Urbana; University of Illinois press.
225. Melehy, Hassan.(wintrer 2001-2002). "Lubitsch's to be or not to be: the question
of simulation in cinema", Film criticism, Vol. XXVI Nr. 2.pp. 19-40.
226. Merritt, Richard L., (1995). Democracy imposed: U.S. Occupation policy and the
German Public, 1945-1949, New Havan: Yale University Press.
227. Mews, Siegfried.(1996). "The spies are coming in from the cold war: The Berlin
Wall in the Espionage Novel", in: Schürer E., Keune, M. and Jenkins P. (eds.) The
粸¢
320
228.
229.
230.
231.
232.
233.
234.
235.
236.
237.
238.
Berlin wall: representations and perspectives, PeterLang Publising, Inc. New
York, Vol. 13.pp.50-60.
Mitcham, Samuel W., (1997). The Desert Fox in Normandy: Rommel's Defense of
Fortress Europe, Cooper Square Press, New York.
Mjagkij, Nina,(May 1990). “Know your occupied ally: The image of France
in Passage to Marseille”, Film and History, V. 20 n. 2. pp. 26-34, 37-43.
Morrison Samuel Elliot, Lechtenberg William, Cumager A., Still, Henry. (1983). the
History of the US. Vol 1+2. Translated by Amir Oren. Zmora, Bitan Publishers,
Tel Aviv.
Muckenberger, Christiane, (1993). "The cold war in East German Feature Film",
Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, Vol. 13 Nr. 1.pp. 49-57.
Mueller, John, (1989). Retreat from Doomsday: The Obsolescence of Major War,
New York.
Muja, Danny. (2003). A hundred masterpiece films – we loved so much. Mappa,
Mapping & Publications Ltd.
Murray. L.L. (Oct-Dec 1957). "The film industry responds to the cold war, 19451955:Monsters, spies and subversives", Jump Cut, Nr. 9.pp. 14-16.
Muscio, Giuliana, (Nov. 1984). "Brief account of two films Nazism presented at
The 1984 Venice festival", Segnocinema, Vol. 4 Nr. 15 .p.48.
Mussa, George L.,(1993). Those who died in battle: Redesigning the memory of
two world wars, Ofakim Library, Am Oved publishing house, Tel Aviv.
Must, Gerald. (2003). A summary of the history of the movie. Vol 1 + 2.Translated
by Yoram Sadeh. The Open University, Tel Aviv. pp. 335-456, 619-663.
Naima, Prevots,(1987). Dancing in the sun: Hollywood choreographers,
1915-1937. Ann Arbor, Mich.: UMI Research Press.
Nicholson, Mervyn, (March 2001) “My dinner with Stanley Kubrick, food and
the logic of images”, Literature/Film Quarterly, V. 29 n. 4, pp. 279-289.
Niogret, Hubert, (Feb 2003). "Dossier on Film …Positif", Nr. 504.pp. 80-104.
Novik, Peter,(2000). A comparison of American life, University of Chicago.
O'Connor, John E. and Jackson, Martin A., (1979). American History / American
Film: Interpreting the Hollywood Image, Frederick Unger Publishing Co.,New
York.
Obry, Richard, (1999). Why did the Allies win? Tel Aviv.
Offner, Arnold A., (1969). American Appeasement: United States Foreign Policy
and Germany, 1933-1938, Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Osborne, Richard E., (1997). The Casablanca Companion: The Movie Classic and
its Place in Hisotry, Riebel Roque Publishing Company, Indianapolis, Indiana.
O'shaughnessy, Martin,(2000). Jean Renoir, Manchester University press,
Manchester and New York.
Osteen, Mark, (December 2000). “It doesn’t pay to antagonize the
public":Sabotage and – Hitchcock’s audience, Literature/Film Quarterly, V.
28 n.4, pp. 259-268.
Otto, Friedrich. (1987). City of nets: A portrait of Hollywood in the 1940s. New
York: Harper & Row.
Palmer, Barton R., (Winter 1984/85). "The Politics of Genre in Welles" 'The
Stranger', Film Criticism, Vol. 9. Nr.2. pp. 2-14.
粸¢
239.
240.
241.
242.
243.
244.
245.
246.
247.
248.
249.
321
250. Parker, Danny S. (Ed.). (1999). the battle of the Bulge, the German View:
Perspectives from Hitler's High Command, Greenhill Books, London,
Stackpole Books, and Pennsylvania.
251. Paul, William,(1983). Ernst Lubitsch's American Comedy, Columbia University
Press.
252. Pearcy, Arthur, (1997). Berlin Airlift, West Yorkshire.
253. Perlmutter, Tom, (1974). War Movies, SeCaucus, N.J.: Castle Books, Trewin
Copplestone Publishing.
254. Picart, Caroline Joan (Kay) S. and Frank, David A. (2006). Frames of evil: The
Holocaust as horror in American film. Southern Illinois University Press.
255. Poague, Leland, (Winter1976 / 77). "The Politics of Perception: Wilder's 'Stalag
17'", Film Criticism, Vol. 1. Nr. 3 .pp.19-25.
256. Polan, Dana, (1986). Power and Paranoia: History, Narrative, and the American
Cinema, 1940-1950, New York: Columbia University Press.
257. Pommerin, Reiner, (ed.), (1997). The American Impact on Postwar Germany,
Berghahn Books, Oxford.
258. Pruessen, Ronald W. (1993). “Beyond the Cold War – Again: 1955 and the 1990s”,
Political Science Quarterly, 108 (1): 59-84.
259.Pronay, Nicholas and Wilson, Keith (Eds), (1985). The political re-education of
Germany and Her Allies after world war II, Croom Helm: London. pp.59-81, 8396, 97-106, 151-172, 173-202.
260. Pronay, Nicholas, (1993). "British Films Sources for the cold war: the
disappearance of the cinema – going public", Historical Journal of film, radio and
television, Vol. 13. Nr. 1. Pp.7-17.
261. Raack, R.C. (1983). “Historiography as cinematography: A prolegomenon to film
Work for historian”, Journal of Contemporary History, 18(3).pp. 411- 438
262. Raskin, Richard, (1987). Nuit et Brouillard. On the Making, Reception and
Functions of a Major Documentary Film. Aarhus, Aarhus University Press.
263. Rav-Nof, Zeev. (1982). A big screen, great artists and their films. Uri Klein (Ed.).
Ketter Publishing House, Jerusalem.
264. Reader, Keith, (1981). Cultures on Celluloid, Quartet-Books, London, Melbourne,
N.Y.
265. Rentschler,Eric(ed.). (1986). German Film and Literture: Adaptations and
Transformations, "The other Germany in Zinnemann's the 'Seventh Cross' 1944",
New York: Methuen, pp. 117-131, 132-145.
266. Robin, Ron T. (1995). The barbed-wire college: Reeducating German POWs in The
United States during World War II, Princeton university press, Princeton New
Jersey.
267. Robertson,James C., (1993). The Casablanca Man, The cinema of Michael Curtiz,
London and New York.
268. Rodda, Arlene, (1994). “Cabaret: Utilizing the film medium to create a
Unique adaptation”, Literature/Film Quarterly, V. 22 n. 1, January. pp. 3641.
269. Rodnick, David, (1948). Post war Germans, an anthropologist's account, Oxford:
Oxford University press.
270. Rollins, Peter, C. (Ed). (1983/1998). Hollywood as Historian: American film in a
cultural Context, Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky Press.
粸¢
322
271. Rosenstone, Robert. (October, 1988). A. “History in Images / History in Words:
Reflections on The Possibility of Really Putting History onto Film”, The American
Historical Review, 93 (4-5), pp. 1173-1185.
272. Rosenstone, Robert. A. (1995). Visions of the past: The challenge of film to our
idea of history, Harvard University Press, London.
273. Rosenzweig, Sidney, (1982)."Casablanca and other Major Films of Michael Curtiz",
Studies in Cinema: History of Art, The University of Michigan, Nr. 14 .pp.1-11,
77-108.
274. Rostow, Walt Whitman, (1982). Europe after Stalin: Eisenhower's three decisions
of March II, 1953, University of Texas press.
275. Rostron, Allen, (Summer 2002). "No War, No Hate, No Propaganda": Promoting
Films about European War and Fascism during the Period of American
Isolationism: Examines how the Studios Marketed Films about European Fascism
and War to American audiences between 1937-1941, Journal of Popular Film and
Television, Vol. 30.Nr. 2.pp 85-96.
276. Rubenstein, Leonard, (Fall 1977). "Where all the Nazis gone?" Cineaste, Vol. VIII
Nr. 2 .pp. 32-35.
277. Rubenstein, Leonard, (1979). The Great spy films: a pictorial history, The Citadel
Press, N.J.
278. Sand, Shlomo, , (Winter 1991). "Clio and the moving pircture", Zmanim. Pp.39-40,
57-61.
279. Sand, Shlomo, (2001). "The Mediterranean: an exotic cinematic site, imagined
identity and history". Zmanim, 75.pp. 38-39.
280. Sand, Shlomo, (2002). "The movie as history: imagine and direct the twentieth
century, Ofakim Library, The Open University, Am Oved Publication, Tel Aviv.
281. Sanderson, Jim, (October 1989). “American romanticism in John Ford’s The
Grapes of Wrath:Horizontalness, darkness, Christ, and FDR”,
Literature/Film Quarterly, V. 17 n. 4, pp. 231-244.
282. Schebera, Jürgen, (October 1998). “Hangmen Also Die (1943): Hollywood’s
Brecht – Eisler collaboration”, Historical Journal of Film, Radio and
Television, V. 18 n. 4, pp. 567-573.
283. Schick, Jack M., (1971). The Berlin Crisis 1958-1962, Universtiy of Pennsylvania
Press, Philadelphia.
284. Schmundt - Thomas, G., (winter 1992). "Hollywood's romance of foreign policy,
American G.I.S and the conquest of the German Fraulein, Politics in films: Berlin
in Films", Journal Of popular Film and Television, Vol. 19 Nr. 4. Pp.187-197.
285. Scholz Anne - Marie, (2001). "Eine revolution des films": The third man (1949), the
Cold war and alternatives to Nationalism & Coca-colonization in Europe". Film
and history, Vol. 31. 1. pp. 44-53.
286. Schrecker, Ellen (2002). The Age of McCarthyism: A Brief History with
Documents (2d Ed.). Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 0312294255.
287. Schurer E., Keune M. and Jenkins Philip. (Eds.)(1996). The Berlin wall: Studies in
Modern German literature: representations and perspectives, Peter Lang
Publishing, Vol. 79 New York.
288. Schwab, Ulrike, (2006). "Authenticity and ethics in the film the third man" In:
Literature / film quarterly, vol.XXVIII Nr. 1 .pp.2-6.
289. Schwartz, Oshra.(1995). The cinema. Ramat Fan: Prolog.
粸¢
323
290. Schwartz, Richard A., (2000). Cold War Culture: Media and the Arts 19451990, USA.
291. Scott, Eyman, (1993, 2000). Ernst Lubitsch Laughter in paradise, The Johns
Hopkins University Press, Baltimore and London.
292. Sellers, Robert. (May 2005). “Call Sheet: ‘A Bridge Too Far’”, Film Review, n. 646,
July 2004,pp. 74-82 and v. spec. n. 57.pp. 100-102, 104, 106, 108-111.
293. Sherman, Jodi,(2002). "Humor, Resistance, and the Abject: Roberto Benigni's Life
is Beautifuland Charlie Chaplin's 'The Great Dictator'., Film and History, Vol. 32
Nr. 2, pp. 72-81.
294. Shindler, Colin, Ph. D., (1979). Hollywood Goes to War: Films and American
Society, 1939-1952, London, Boston Rout ledge & K. Paul.
295. Shirer, William L., (1999). This is Berlin, A Narrative History: 1938-40, Hutchinson,
London.
296. Short, K.R.M., (1983). Documents (B), "Washington's Information Manual for
Hollywood, 1942", Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, Vol. 3, No.
2 .pp.171-180.
297. Short, K.R.M., (March 1985) "Chaplin's 'The Great Dictator' and British Censorship,
1939", Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, Vol. 5, Nr. 1, pp.85-108.
298. Short, K.R.M. (Nov. 1993). "The march of time: Time Inc, and the Berlin blockade,
1948 - 1949: Selling Americans on the "new" democratic Germany" Historical
Journal of Film, Radio and Television, Vol. 13 Nr. 4 .pp.451-468.
299. Short, R. and Fledelius K. (eds.). (1980). History & Film: Methodology,
Research, Education, Copenhagen.
300. Shull, Michael S., and Wilt David E., (1996). Hollywood War Films, 19371945: an Exhaustive Filmography of American Feature – Length Motion
Pictures Relating to World War II, Jefferson, N.C. and London:
McFarland & Co., 1996.
301. Sinclair, Upton, (1936). “The Movies and Political Propaganda”. In: William
J.Perlman (ed.), The Movies on Trial. New York, the MacMillan Company.
pp.189-195.
302. Singer, Marc P.(2001). "Fear of the public sphere: the boxing film in cold war
America (1947-1957)", Film and History, an interdisciplinary Journal Film and
Television studies, Vol. 31.1. pp. 22-27.
303. Sinyard, Neil and Turner, Adrian, (1979). "The Films of Billy Wilder", Journey Down
Sunset Boulevard, BCW Publishing Limited, Ryde, Isle of Wight, Farncombe,
Godalming, Surrey.
304. Slide, Anthony, (Dec. 1985). "The Prussian Image on the American Screen", Films
in Review, Vol. XXXVI Nr. 12.pp. 608-618.
305. Slide, Anthony, (Jul/Aug 1991). "Hollywood's Fascist Follies", Film Comment., Vol.
27. Nr. 4. Pp.62-67.
306. Slusser, Robert M. (1973). The Berlin Crisis of 1961, Baltimore and London.
307. Smyth, J.E. (October 2004). “Revisioning modern American history in the
age of Scarface (1932)”, Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television,
V. 24, n. 4, pp. 535-563.
308. Soderbergh, Peter A., (1968). “’Aux Armes!’: The Rise of the Hollywood
War Film, 1916-1930”. South Atlantic Quarterly, Vol. 65 (1966), pp. 509522; and “The Grand Illusion: Hollywood and World War II, 1930-1945”.
University of Dayton Review, Vol. 5. pp. 13-22.
粸¢
324
309. Sorlin, Pierre, (1980). The Film in History: Restaging the Past, Oxford:Basil/
Blackwell, England.
310. Sondirs, Frances, Stonor, (2000). The cultural Cold War, New York.
311. Spitzer, Neil, (1988). “Dividing A City” Wilson Quarterly, 12 (3) .pp.101-122.
312. Spoto, Donald, (1978). "Clift Grieves for Garland and Tracy for the World –
'Judgment at Nuremberg', 1961", in: Stanley Kramer Film Maker, New York,
Putnam's Sons, pp. 225-235, 265-271.
313. Stern, Frank. (1991). "The cinema as school in Germany after the war", Zmanim,
39-40. pp. 48-55.
314. Suid, Lawrence H.,(1978). Guts & Glory: Great American War Movies. Addition Wesley Publishing Company. U.S.A.
315. Swann, Paul, (spring 1995). "International Conspiracy in and around the iron
curtain", Velvet Light Trap, Nr. 35, pp.52-60.
316. Swomley, John M., (1970). American Empire: The Political Ethics of Twentieth –
Century Conguest, the Macmillan Company, London.
317. Taylor, John, R.,(1982). Strangers in Paradise: The Hollywood Émigré's 19331950, London: Faber & Faber.
318. Taylor, Philip M. (1998). "Breaking the German Will to resist, 1944-1945: allied
Efforts to end World War II by Non-military means" History Journal of Film,
Radio and Television, Vol. 18. Nr. 1.pp. 5-48.
319. Taylor, R., (1979). The politics of Soviet cinema, 1917-1929, Cambridge.
320. Tishi, Volfram, (1988). Chaplin, Keter Publishing House, Jerusalem.
321. Toplin, Robert Brent, (October, 1988). “The Filmmaker as Historian”,
American Historical Review, 93 (4-5), pp.1210-1227.
322. Toplin, Robert B., (1996). History by Hollywood: The use and abuse of the
American Past. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
323. Toplin, Robert B. (2002). Reel History: in defense of Hollywood. University Press of
Kansas.
324. Trefousse, Hans L., (1969). Germany and American Neutrality 1939-1941, Octagon
Books, New York.
325. Truman, Harry S., (1955). Harry S. Truman's memories: a year of decisions,
Vol. A.Translated by S, Gilay, D. Sivan, A.L. Kramer, A.S. Stein, Tel Aviv.
326. Truman, Harry S., (1956). Harry S. Truman's memories: years of testing and
Expectation, Vol. B, From English: S, Gilay, H. Kalay, A.L. Kramer.
327. Turner, George, (Aug. 1997). "Life and Death on the Berlin Express", American
Cinematographer, Vol. 78, and Nr. 8.pp.92-96.
328. Tusa, Ann and John, (1988). The Berlin Airlift, Atheneum, New York.
329. U.S., Government, (1990). Documents on Germany, 1944-1961, Committee on
Foreign Relations United States Senat, Library of Congress Catalogue Card
Number: 68-55113, Greenwood Press, Publishers New York.
330. Vago Rafael, (June1978). The Cold War – Proceedings and results. A monthly
review: Journal of IDF's Officers, (6) .pp.27-34.
331. Wagenleitner, Reinhold, (1994). Coca-colonization and the Cold War: the Cultural
Mission of the United States in Austria after the Second World War, Chapel Hill:
university of North Carolina press.
332. Warburg, James P., (1953). Germany - Key to Peace, Cambridge:Harvard
University Press.
333. Weinrib, Elazar.(2003). Postmodernism and history (articles), Tel Aviv.
蛐¢
325
334. Welch David. (1983). Propaganda and the German Cinema 1933-1945.
Oxford.
335. Westbrook, Brett, (April1990). “Fighting for what’s good: Strategies of
propaganda in Lillian Hellman’s," Negro Picture and the North Star”, Film
History, V. 4 n. 2, pp. 165-178.
336. White, Hayden, (October, 1988). “Historiography and Historiophoty”, American
Historical Review, 93 (4-5). pp. 1193-1199.
337. Whiteclay, Chambers II J. and Culbert, David. (eds.), (1996). World War II, Film
and History, New York, Oxford University Press.
338. Whitfield, Stephen, J., (1996). The Culture of the Cold War, Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press.
339. Wieder, Thomas, (2006). American Film-makers in the Trap of McCarthyism,
(Translated by Patrick Bolland), New York.
340. Willard Allen, Fletcher, (1984). United States–German relations, Past and Present,
Washington: Library of Congress.
341. Willett, Ralph, (Mar. 1987). "Billy Wilder's a 'foreign affair' (1945-1948): The trials
and Tribulations of Berlin", Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television, Vol. 7
Nr. I. pp. 3-14.
342. Willett, Ralph, (1989). The Americanization of Germany, 1945-1949, London,New
York.
343. Witztum, David. (2006). The history and the moving picture. In: History as a
mission. A collection of articles in the honor of Moshe Zimerman on his 60th
birthday. Noam Zedof, Yotam Hotam & Mathias Schmidt (Eds.), Hebrew
University, Jerusalem, Pp. 57-64.
344. Wood, Bret, (May / July 1994). "Recognizing the stranger", Video Watchdog, Nr.
23. pp.28-39.
345. Wood, Robin, (1989). Hitchcock's films revisited, Columbia university press,
New York, Oxford.
346. Zeingrov Israel & Boim Zeev, (1998). The history of the US during the Cold
War, Vol. A: Truman's era 1945-1952, The Ministry of Defense, Publishing
Department, Tel Aviv.
347. Zeman, Scott C. (June 2002). “Samuels, Mark Chasins: The Truth of a Mad
Man: collective memory and representation of the Holocaust in the
partisans Of Vilna (1986) and the documentary genre”,Film and History, V.
32 n. 1, pp.38- 42.
348. Zimerman, Moshe and Tuch Michael, (Eds.),(1984). Germany after 1945:
Over comingthe trauma, Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
349. Zimerman, Moshe, (2004)."Hollywood and presenting the Nazi concentration
camps in Real Time", Cinema and Memory – Dangerous Relationships? Zalman
Shazar Center of The history of Israel, Jerusalem.pp. 133-151.
粸¢
326
Appendix 1: Films' Synopsis
1. Hitler – The Beast from Berlin/1939 US
Synopsis
The film, which is known also as The Beast from Berlin, was the first fruits of
Producers Distributing Corporation which was known afterwards as PRC. The story
takes place in Germany and deals with a dedicated group of anti-Nazi people who
distribute propaganda literature.
The leaders of the group were Roland Dru and his wife Stefi Donna. After a terrible
period in a concentration camp, they are smuggled into Switzerland in order to continue
their work in the free world. This short film, which was based on the novel Goose Steps
by Sheppard Graub, belonge to the first American films that described Naza Termany as
evil. It described explicitly the atrocities that were done to the heroes of the
underground as they were discovered by the Gestapo and as they were sent to the
concentration camp. The fact that it was not a good film did not matter to the Bundists
in the US, who conducted a struggle to the excommunication of the film. The fourth in
the list of actors was young Alain Lad, who was known as the star of the film in its
innovated version from the early forties, under the title Devils of Fellow.
粸¢
The Beast from Berlin is better than other films in the same line which were made
later on in Hollywood. The film ignored the production code that has still stuck to the
isolationist approach of the big studios and of the administration.
2. Confessions of a Nazi Spy/1939 US
Synopsis
This was a daring film for its time, right before WWII, and one of the first anti-Nazi
films produced by Hollywood. It tells about a real Nazi espionage network that worked
in the US. Paul Lukas, a dedicated Nazi, arrives at the US in order to conduct public
assemblies of the Bond and recruit German Americans to Hitler's service. His speeches
before the riffraff arouse a blue-copllar laborer (Francis Lederer) to join the Bond, and
then participate in espionage activities. The FBI agent (Eduard G. Robinson) is sent to
investigate the case. After he extracted a confession from the laborer, who is not too
smart, robinson arrives to Lukas. The publication of the capture of the Nazi official and
the fact that he is a security risk, makes the German secret police kidnap Lukas and
smuggle him back home, probably in order to liquidate him. The network is discovered,
327
but Robinson understands that this is just the beginning. The film ends as it had
started, with a court scene in which the district Attorney, Henty O'Neil gives an exciting
summarizing speech to the jury about the importance of fighting this new kind of undeclared war that was going on in America and about the risks of isolationism. The film
aroused a big noise, especially since most of its makers preferred to ignore the Nazis
out of fear to lose the important European market.
3.Espionage Agent/1939 US
Synopsis
Unlike other espionage melodramas before WWII, Espionage Agent is identifies
clearly the bad guys with the Germans. Barry Corval plays Joel McCrea, the son of an
American diplomat who has died lately. When he embarks the train to Berlin, Corval
tries to steal a suitcase full of documents which would prove that the Nazis infiltrate
into essential industrial centers in the US. He gets help from Brenda Balard (Brenda
Marshal), whose behavior reminds sometimes that maybe she is not so reliable.
According to the advertisement machine of Warner Bros, the script by Warren Duff was
based on actual events. As this film came the film Confession of a Nazi Spy from the
same studio, Espionage Agent was a sufficient indication that Warner declared war on
粸¢
Germany a long time before President Roosevelt did so formally.
4.The Man I Married/1040 US
Synopsis
In this warning drama that was done before the war, Joan Benet stars as an
American girl who falls in love with a German (Francis Lederer) and marries him in
1938. At first it seems that he is charming, but Joan finds out that her husband is
gradually persuaded by the Nazi party. Benet, who is determined to leave him, has to
fight Lederer for custody of their child that her husband intends to raise as a fascist.
Lederer's Nazi father (Otto Kruger) breaks the iron will of his son as he tells him that
his mother was Jewish. The film of 77 minutes is an exciting melodrama with a lot of
suspense.
328
5.The Mortal Storm/1940 US
Synopsis
The Nazi coming into power had devastating outcomes for a certain German family.
This drama describes the chaos and the suffering that Nazism brought about to the
family of the professor, to cruel actions that disassemble familial frameworks. Victor
Roth is a professor in a college in Germany in 1933. He leads a calm and sufficient life
with his wife Emily, his son rudy, his daughter Peria, and his step sons Otto and Erich.
But Hitler's coming into power influences their lives unexpectedly. Fritz and Martin woe
Peria in order to marry her, but Martin, who is active in resisting the Nazis, has to
escape to Austria, while Peria is bothered by Fritz's membership in a pro-fascist group.
Victor rejects in his lectures Hitler's theories about the Arian race, and he loses his job
and also brought to court and sentenced to imprisonment in a concentration camp.
Emily and Rudy join Peria who tries to escape to Martin's new home in Austria. But they
are chased by Otto and Erich, who are now members in the Hitler Youth. The Mortal
Storm is perhaps the most explicit anti-Nazi film that was done in Hollywood before
America joined WWII. It condemned Nazism aggressively and even used Hitler's name.
The film was about a family that was torn due to the terror regime, and the political
粸¢
dispute. IS a result all the productions of MGM in Germany were excommunicated.
6.The Great Dictator/1940 US
Synopsis
"This is the story of the period between two world wars, an intermission period
during which the craziness came out, freedom sunk down, and humanity received a
blow." This is how Charlie Chaplin starts his first speaking film, The Great Dictator.
During WWI a Jewish barber (Chaplin) as a soldier in the Tomanian army saves a high
officer, Schultz. While Schultz comes out of it harmless, the barber suffers from
amnesia and is sent to a hospital. Twenty years go by. A dictator, Adenoid Heinkel and
his hesmen Garbage and Herring take over Tomania. Heinkel despises all Jews, and
makes all sorts of troubles in the Jewish ghetto of Tomania, theire lives Hanna. In the
meanwhile, the little barber escapes from the hospital and goes to his barber in the
ghetto. Since he is not aware to the anti-Jewish policy of Heinkel, and in fact he does
not know about his existence, the barber gets into a confrontation with a gang of the
Arian SS men. His old friend Shultz saves him, as now he is an officer of Heinkel.
329
Thanks to Schultz's protection, the ghetto gets a pause from Heinkel's persecutions.
The barber reopens his barber shop and develops warm platonic relationships with
Hanna. When a Jewish banker refuses to finance Heinkel's expected war with
Austerlitz, Heinkel returns to press the ghetto. Towards the end of the film, when the
dictator is expected to give one of his speeches full of hatred and a warmonger, the
barber goes to the microphones, and Chaplin stops being the barber and becomes he
himself and gives an exciting speech of peace, tolerance and humanism. This is a
unique film. The Great Dictator combines a comedy, tragedy, satire and ideology into
one film of 127 minutes. Not always he succeeds (the dialogue and the level of
gimmicks is quite low), but it has enough to be fascinating a long time after its subject
subsided.
Survey
After an absence of five years from the movie, Charlie Chaplin took upon himself
the double role in the first speaking film in full length, famous for its comic attack on
Nazi Germany (and Adolf Hitler in particular). The script was written before Hitler's
invasion to Poland, and Chaplin remarked later that had he had known the full scope of
the evil the Nazis brought on Europe, he would not have used the film as a matter of a
粸¢
joke. The film, which is not so crazily funny like Chaplin's other comedies from the
twenties, has more in common with his later films, which were lyrical in their approach
with open socio-political messages. In this case the film foresaw the future, as soon
enough Hitler proved that Chaplin's worries were not without a basis. This is one of
very few films that were done in the West before WWII that dared attack Hitler and
Mussolini. All the same, many critics found fault in Chaplin's approach, and argued that
as he described the Nazi Germans and fascist Italians as school hooligans and ridiculed
images, he underestimated the influence of their bad deed on millions of Europeans. In
spite of these critical remarks, the ridiculed imitation the Chaplin did of Hitler is a
moment of comic genius that is completed by the exaggerated image up to an absurd
of Mussolini by Jack Oki (who was a candidate for an Oscar as the secondary best
actor). The structure of The Great Dictator is not solidified, and it lacks the pedantic
rhythm and the sense of directing of Chaplin's best films: the long summary speech is
the best example. The film was a candidate for five Oscars, including the best film and
Chaplin as the best actor.
330
7.Foreign Correspondent/1940 US
Synopsis
Fourteen scriptwriters worked five years to make the cinematic version of Personal
History by the military correspondent Vincent Shihan, before the producer Walter
Wagner brought it to the movie as Foreign Correspondent. The outcome was combined
by about two parts of Shihan and eight parts by Alfred Hitchcock. Joel McKrae stars as
American journalist who is sent by his paper to cover the war that develops in Europe
in the years 1938-1940. Almost right as he arrives in Holland he witnesses an
assassination of a dutch diplomat, Albert Besserman. At least this is what he thinks he
sees. McKrae gets to know a peace activist, Herbert Marshal, his daughter Lorraine
Day, who shares his opinions, and an insolent British secret agent, George Sanders. A
wild chase in the streets of Amsterdam, as McKrae evades the bullets, leads to the
classic scene of the changing windmills, which gives the hero a clue of the existence of
a strong subversive organization. McKrae returns to England, where he almost was the
victim of a plot of a hired assassinator, Edmond Gwen. He leader of the espionage
network is discovered in the peak sequence of the crash of the airplane, that like the
windmill scene, is a cinematic show by Hitchcock and the cinematograph Rudolf Mate.
粸¢
During the shooting the producer Wagner was updated of the news events as they
occurred, what enabled him to keep the film as hot as possible: the final scene, when
McKrae transmits from London to dormant America, while Nazi bombs fall around was
shot a short time after a real blitz bombardment in London. The script was written in
cooperation with Robert Benchily, who plays in the wonderful secondary role as a drunk
journalist. Foreign correspondent was Hitchcock's second American film, and is still one
of his best.
Survey
Hitchcock's second American film, Foreign Correspondent, is a thriller made with
talent and well balanced, typical of the artist of this genre. It was popular from the
beginning and was considered one of the most fascinating works of the director. The
main actors, Joel McKrae and Lorraine Day, were a little pale. Hitchcock wanted Gary
Cooper for the leading role, but had difficulty to attract Hollywood stars, as many
regarded his films as just entertainment. All the same, Foreign Correspondent is well
remembered for its wonderful set details, which are examples of Hitchcockian art: the
331
assassinator falls into a sea of umbrellas, the airplane that crashes into the sea, and
the famous scene with the windmills. The blatant call to America to join the war against
Nazi Germany was written by the scriptwriter Ben Hecht (Scar Face, Notorious). Other
films of Hitchcock from the time of WWII are Saboteur, Lifeboat, and Notorious. He
also made two propaganda films in French.
8.Three Faces West/1940 US
Synopsis
The original title was The Refugee. The star was John Waine, Zigrid Gary and
Charles Coburn as John Phillips, Lenny Brown and her father Dr. Brown. All of them are
victims of the economic recession and have to go with all their belongings from the
dust Bowl to the West Coast. Dr. Brown, who had escaped from the fascist oppression
in Austria, hopes to make a new living for himself and his daughter Lenny as farmers,
but she is more interested in uniting anew with her Austrian boyfriend, Erich von
Sherer (Varno) from the moment she arrives at Oregon. John Phillips is in charge of the
move to the West. He loves Lenny but he keeps his feelings to himself. But when Lenny
finds out that her lover has completely dedicated to the Nazi cause, she finds comfort
in the arms of loyal Phillips. One of the scriptwriters of The Refugee was Samuel Ornitz,
粸¢
who later on was among the famous ten in the black list of Hollywood.
Survey
Three Faces West is an interesting anti-Nazi propaganda film and a pioneers film,
and is actually light entertainment. John Waine stars as young farmer who brings
family Brown into town. Spencer Charters is his assistant and flat mate, an amusing
team, and Charles Coburn is very good as the refugee physician who makes the best of
his situation. But Zigrid Gary is one of the most bizar actresses that starred with Waine.
She dows what she can with her role, which is written badly, and there is not much
chemistry between her and Waine. Lm is divided into two parts. The first half deals
with the adjustment of family Brown to their new lives in Ashville Forks. Lenny hates
the town and hates Waine, but falls in love with both of them. The dust storms and the
drought have their physical and psychological price in the town, and the director
Bernard Warhaus makes a good work in showing the struggle of man against nature.
In this case nature wins. The second half deals with the journey to Oregon with the
hope for a better life. There is an inevitable fall of morale when some of the men on
332
the convoy try to undermine Waine's authority. There are some good scenes in this
part, but the clichés are more visible. There is one good scene at the end, in which
Lenny confronts her old lover, when it is found out that he moved to the side of the
Nazis. Warhaus knows his work in making action, and if the film lacks personal style, it
still has enough talent to be interesting.
9. Escape/1940 US
Synopsis
Escape is based on a novel by Ethl Wance, and the star is Robert Taylor as a young
American. The son of a European widow (Ella Nezimova). The mother was arrested in a
German concentration camp, what made her son to ignore the American neutrality and
try to save her. Taylor smuggles into occupied Europe by the Germans, and acquired
the friendship of a countess (Norma Schirer), who is the mistress of a Nazi general
(Konrad Veidt). Taylor is not confident of the contess' loyalties, but she proves herself
by helping in saving the arrested woman. Escape excels by a beautifully refined acting
by Norma Schirer, although she succumbs to her tendency to over-react in her final
condemnation of her Nazi lover.
10.All Through the Night/1941 US
粸¢
Synopsis
Humphrey Bogart plays the role of Globes donahew, a rough New Yorker gambler
but basically decent. The plot is in the style of Damon Runyon. Globes tries to find out
what delays the delivery of the daily cheese cakes to his favorite restaurant. When he
visits the bakery, he comes across a Nazi espionage network, with Konrad Veidt as its
head. There is a night club singer, Karen Warren, whose loyalties are dubious in the
first scenes, but later on it is found out that she is a real patriot, not less than Globes.
By a combination of resourcefulness and quick fists Globes and his friends undermine
the Nazis' intention, before they manage to escape from the country. In the best scene
we are supposed to believe that Bogart can confuse a whole bunch of educated Nazis
by his flow of Manhattan slang. The film describes the subversive methods of the Nazis
in the US and calls for intervention.
333
11.Man Hunt/1941 US
Synopsis
In this thriller from WWII, a hunter finds himself in a world of danger as he
chases a new and dangerous prey – Adolf Hitler. Captain Thorndike (Walter Fidgen), an
expert of hunting big wild animals, happens to be in a vacation in Bavaria and comes
across Hitler's estate in Berchtesgaden. He has a gun, and soon enough he
understands that it would very easy to murder the fascist leader. After he has Hitler on
his viewfinder, Thorndike is about to laod and shoot, when he is caught from behind by
Major Quib-Smith (George Sanders), a Gestapo leader who was positioned to guard the
Fuhrer. Until Thorndike returns to London, the hunter become the hunted, as the
Gestapo agents search the streets of London looking after the man who planned to
assassinate their leader. Thorndike finds an unconceivable ally in Gerry (Joan Benet), a
seamstress and a hooker when occasion arises, who takes him in and helps him hide
from the German forces around him. Man Hunt was directed by Fritz Lang, the great
German director who had escaped to Paris in 1933 in order to evade the nomination
that Joseph Goebbels had wanted to give him to make Nazi propaganda films. A year
later he arrived to America.
粸¢
Survey
The first of the anti-Nazi fiction films by Fritz Lang opens with the moment of "what
would have happened if" that occupies freaks of history and ends up with Lang's
dealing with the changes of destiny. Adolf Hitler is seen through a gun's viewfinder.
The sniper, who hides in the trees, pulls the trigger slowly and we hear the click of the
cock. It was just a training shot. He loads a single bullet, but exactly when he is about
to shoot, a leaf falls on his gun, what makes him miss and he attracts the attention of
an SS guard who patrols there, and he arrests him without delay. The man who was
about to assassinate Hitler is Captain thorndike, played with great charm by Walter
Fidgen. After he had gone through tortures by his Nazi captors, he manages to escape
on board of a ship heading to London. There he recruits the help of a cockney street
girl (Joan Benet), who helps him evade his pursuers. From that moment onward the
film goes on as a regular chase film, although there is at least once a brutal turn in the
plot, from London's foggy streets at night to a rural region in England (the set was
brilliantly organized by the moderated lighting by Arthur C. Miller). The film proves that
334
even when he composes a wartime propaganda film within a certain genre, Lang can
produce a captivating work, and based on his own experiences with the Nazis, it is
most personal.
12. The Mad Doctor/1941 US
Synopsis
Basil Rathboon is the mad doctor. He is a sophisticated gentleman who woe some
of his rich female patients and marries them. Unfortunately, these ladies have a bad
habit of dying prematurely, and the doctor, who is above all suspicion, diagnoses the
death cases as a result of diseases. According to the title of the film, it is not difficult to
image that the physician liquidated his wives by sophisticated medical methods. An
interesting twist in the plot has to do with the physician's loyal assistant (Martin
Kosleck), who is busy in hiding evidence of the buried bodies. Although the script does
not clarify it, it is insinuated that between the physician and his assistant there is a
strong sexual relation. The former fiancé of Dr. Rathboon's last bride (Allen Dru) saves
the woman from the fate of her predecessors, and does not let Rathboon any choice
but to take his life by jumping from a sky scraper.
Survey
粸¢
Maybe due to its title, The Mad Doctor is considered as belonging to later horror
films of Universal and was registered in history as a kind of B film. But this is not so.
Rathboon's performance in one of his haughty roles, along with homo-erotic under
flows should have convinced even the most skeptic spectator that this is not just a
horror film. The Mad Doctor , which took a long time to produce, bore at first the titled
of A Meeting with Destiny, a much more suitable title, since it is exactly what is waiting
for Allen Dru. In some stages of the production there was an intention that John
Barimor and Noel Coward. The footprints of Coward remained in the final script, which
has a wonderful dialogue between Rathboon and his assistant(Martin Kosleck). This
was Tim Villen's first project after he had returned from Britain, and he directed it with
great accuracy, much more than most of the films of this genre (at least until the
renewed MGM version for In The Gas Light in 1944). The outcome is a thriller full of
atmosphere.
335
13. Sergeant York/1941 US
Synopsis
When the hero of WWI agreed to sell his rights for the film about his life story to
Warner Bros, it was under three conditions: (1) that the film would not include faked
heroic episodes, (2) that Mrs. York would be played by a Hollywoodian glamour girl,
and (3) that Gary Cooper would play York on the screen. All the conditions have been
met, and the outcome is one of the most beautiful and full of inspiration biographies
that have ever been brought to the screen. When the audience meets for the first time
the young farmer Elvin York (Cooper), he is the most wild character in the whole
Tennessee valley. All this changes when York is hurt by a lightning in a storm late at
night. He interprets the lightning as a message from God, makes a turn and finds
religion, to the great joy of the local vicar, Rosiel File (Walter Brennan). In spite of
many provocations, York swears not to be angry any more on no one, and decides to
be a husband and ad good provider for his love Gracy Williams (Joan Lesley). When
America joins the war in 1917, York chooses not to answer the decree when he is
recruited, declaring of himself as a pacifist. He is made to go to a training camp of the
navy, and proves to be a born leader, although he is still deterred of the thought of
粸¢
killing someone. York's understanding commander, Major Baxton (Stanley Ridges)
convinces him slowly that violence is sometimes the only way to protect democracy.
Later on, when he serves in the AEF in the Aragon forest, Sergeant York sees some of
his comrades, including his best friend Pusher Ross (George Tobias), being killed in an
enemy ambush. His anger is ignited, and York kills personally 25 German soldiers and
with his bare hands catches 132 captives. As a result of this, York becomes the most
decorated soldier in WWI, and receives the decoration from General John G. Purshing
as "the greatest civil soldier" in the war. Gary Cooper won his first Oscar in this film,
which received also an Oscar for the best editing. It is not surprising that the film came
in the first place in 1941.
Survey
Sergeant York is one of the best war propaganda films, with the wonderful
performance of Gary Cooper in the leading role. It was only natural, when the US
entered WWII that Hollywood would want to produce a film about Elvin York's life. The
original York put some conditions for the production, all of them for the benefit of the
336
final outcome. This is a glorification song of the director's skills, Howard Hox, since in
addition to the historical context, Sergeant York remained one of the strongest
cinematic biographies. It might be a little less than the realism of a later biography,
that of Patton. The sequences of battles which were edited by William Holms, are
generally sharp, and Cooper gives one of his most remembered performances in his
glorious career. Sergeant York competed on 11 Oscars and received 2, Cooper as the
best actor, and Holms for the best editing.
14. Underground/1941 US
Synopsis
Underground is an average thriller by Warner Bros., which was encouraged by the
uncompromising portrait of the Nazis as scums a few months before America entered
WII. Geoffrey Lin plays an impressive young European who is enchanted by the glory
of the National Socialism. His brother, Phillip Dorn, is on the other side of the fence as
a broadcaster in the underground's radio station. At first Lin is full of disdain to his
brother's activities, but very soon he learns that Hitler is not the saint he had believed
him to be, especially after some of his friends were killed by the Gestapo. Lin joins in a
late stage to the struggle of his brother and pays with his life when he helps the
粸¢
underground liquidate a group of a fifth column. Underground is a solid unit of film
making, which lacks only the names of the big stars that would have done it a hit.
Survey
This is a manipulative and shameless film, which does not give an accurate picture
of the German underground during WWII, but Underground is an excellent melodrama.
It was done as a propaganda film and it ensures that its message would not be missed:
there is good and evil, and if you don't know to distinguish who is who, As Geoffrey Lin
didn't know, the price may be awful. This simplistic approach denies part of the film's
influence as a drama, but most of the spectators are still caught in the plot. The fresh
and clean directing by Vincent Sherman keeps the development of the plot by the
dramatic editing of Thomas Pratt, and the blackened photography of Sydney Hicox. The
casting lacks stars, but they do a nice job, even when their roles are not written so
well. Lin is very effective as the dedicated Nazi whose eyes are opened finally, and
Philip Dorn is even better as his brother, who is dedicated to the struggle against the
evil regime. Karen Warren and Mona Maris are very good as well, and Martin Kosleck
337
plays another role in his line of Nazi roles and is very talented. Wolfgang Cilcer makes a
good impression in the small role of a worker in the underground, who is taken
prisoner and is offered his freedom if he betrays his friends.
15. Casablanca/1942 US
Synopsis
Is one of the most loved \American films. A captivating adventure of a romance and
intrigues at the time of the war by the director Michael Cortiz, and it should be
categorized according to the regular categories. This is the story of Rick Blaine, a
former freedom fighter, who is tired of the world, and now he runs a night club in
Casablanca in the early stage of WWII. In spite of the pressure of the local authorities,
mainly Captain Renault, Rick's café ahs become a shelter for refugees who want to
acquire illegal passports that would enable them escape to America. To Rick's surprise,
one day comes a couple, the famous rebel Victor Laslo and his wife Eelsa, who had
been Rick's love of his life, and abandoned him upon the invasion of the Nazis to Paris.
She still wants that Victor would escape to America, but now, with the revival of her
love to Rick, she wants to stay with him in Casablanca. "You have to think for both of
us," she tells Rick, and so he does. His plan brings the story to a logical ending, even if
部¢
not a happy one.
Survey
Many people see Casablance as the greatest Hollywood film that has ever been
done, and even if it is a bit exaggerated, it is hard to think of another film in which all
the parts combine so surprisingly together. The same can be said about the casting of
the main roles. Bogart's tough effortless serenity gives Rick the ideal balance of respect
and cynicism, and Ingrid Bergman's glamorous beauty justifies the fact that men
struggled for the love of Elsa. Victor performed by Paul Henride is quite cold so that we
would believe that Elsa would succumb to her previous love. The co-stars are excellent.
Their performance is so impressive, that we tend to forget that none of them does not
appear on the screen for a long time. The script is sometimes banal, but the plot has
enough twists and the dialogue flows quickly so that the film is fascinating all the time.
Casablanca combines romance, tension, humor and a patriotic drama with great talent,
so that is seems real and the film gets better every year.
338
16. Nazi Agent/1942 US
Synopsis
This production by Irving was something rare, a real B film from MGM studios. The
background for the film is the US before Pearl Harbor, and the star was a real refugee
who had escaped from Hitler, Konrad Veidt, in the role of identical twins, one is a
stamps collector, shy and the owner of a shop for rare books, and the other is the Nazi
consul. Bad Veidt is killed in a dispute between the two, and food Veidt shaves his
beard in order to take his brother's place as the head of a Nazi espionage network. He
managed to undermine the attempts of the group to sabotage the shipping courses of
the Allies before he is exposed by a Canary bird. In his attempt to save the life of a
deserter of the fifth column, Veidt agrees to go back to Germany, and musters the
courage for the difficult test waiting for him in his homeland when his ship goes by the
Statue of Liberty. The film has a fast rhythm and is mostly fascinating. It is the first
fiction film of the director Gilles Dassin, who had been in the department of short films
of MGM. Dassin continued to direct a few revolutionary crime dramas for Universal,
until he found himself in the black list during the witch hunt in Hollywood. He continued
his career in Europe, where he did classic films like Not on Sundays (1959).
部¢
17. Hitler’s Children/1941-2 US
Synopsis
This modest production according to the book by Gregor Zimmer, Education for
Death, surprised everyone in RKP when it has become one of the greatest hits in 1943.
The children in the title are born for the benefit of Hitler. According to the film, this was
a standard course of action in Nazi Germany in which young girls were ready to
conceive to Arian men (with or without a religious ceremony) in order to maintain the
Race of Masters. A girl who refuses to cooperate, is doomed to sterilization or worse.
One such girl who refuses is Bonita Grenvil, a German girl who had been raised and
educated in America and her sympathy for democracy makes her resistant to the Nazis.
In the key scene of the film, Bonita, almost totally naked, is punished by a public
flogging for her revolt, and as a result the consciousness of her lover, Tim Holt, a good
Nazi is aroused suddenly and he stops the flogging. This courageous action leads to the
execution of Holt and Grenvil, but they go willingly to their death, keeping their
principal not to give in to Hitler's demands. Many people went to watch this film due to
339
the sensational aspects that challenged the censorship, but many spectators and critics
recognized the artistic values of the director, Edward Dmytryk and the scriptwriter
Emmet Lorry. Hitler’s Children was the second in its profits for RKP in 1943-44, just a
little behind after Cary Grant's film, Mr. Lucky. The film focused on the behavior of the
Nazi and emphasized their disgusting brutality and their sensational pleasure in front of
pain, misery and humiliation of people.
18. To Be or Not to Be/1942 US
Synopsis
Ernst Lubitsch directed in 1942 the political classic satire To Be or Not to Be in
which Carol Lombard, the comedian, appeared on screen for the last time. At the
beginning of WWII Maria Tora and her husband Joseph put in Warsaw anti-Nazi plays
with their theater company, until they have to shift to Shakespeare's Hamlet.
Lieutenant Stanislav Subinsky falls in love with Maria and meets her when Joseph
performs Hamlet's famous monologue To Be of Not To Be. When Stanislav is sent to
fight, he sends to Maria Prof. Siletzky, who has a secret plan how to liquidate the
underground in Warsaw. The Polish theater company of players have to use their
theatrical skills in order to be saved. Finally they manage to deceive the enemy and
部¢
ensure the well being of the underground against spies. To Be or Not to Be came out to
the screens in 1942 and the opinions about it were contradictory when the US was
deeply involved still in the war. A renewed version was done in 1983 by Mell Brooks
and his wife Ann Bancroft.
Survey
To Be or Not to Be is one of the examples of a propaganda film in wartime, which
retained its freshness and entertaining value after its original historical context. The
film was done during WWII by an immigrant from Germany, Ernst Lubitsch, and it
deals with anti-fascist issues. But these issues do not load the characters, and this
enables Jack Benny, the star, to give a charming performance that exceeds the political
content of the story. While many comedies that deal with a specific issue tend to shift
to a serious drama or to an exaggerated sentimentality, To Be or Not to Be maintains is
satiric sting without shifting to self parody. The film succeeds as a comedy, as a
political thriller, as an anti-fascist satire and as an allegory. The dialogue contains sharp
irony that point at the absurdity of the totalitarian model. Although Lubitsch's specific
340
targets were the Nazis and Hitler, there is in the film a more universal mockery of rule
and oppression and the readiness of bureaucrats to accept with what they are required
to do without protest.
*To Be or Not to Be/1983 US
Synopsis
Mel Brooks and his wife, Ann Bancroft, play the roles of Frederic and Anna
Bronsky, the stars of a comic theater in Poland of 1939. The peak of Bronsky's role is
Frederic's imitation of Hitler. But he has to cancel it out of a fear that it might make the
Nazis angry. In the meantime Anna starts an innocent flirt with a Polish combat pilot,
andre Subinsky. The sign for the pilot that he can come to see Anna in her dressing
room is the monologue of To Be or Not to Be, that Bronsky gives in the Shakespearean
part of the play. When the Germans enter Warsaw, the Bronskys and the other
members of the company have to hide, especially the homosexual Luppinsky, who is
humiliated by having to wear a pink star. Subinsly, who flies in the service of the Polish
underground in England, asks kind Professor Siletzky to give Anna a message from
him: To Be or Not To Be. As Siletzky seems not to know Anna Bronsky, the biggest star
of Warsaw, Subinsky suspects that something is not alright. And indeed, Siletzky is a
粸¢
Nazi spy, who came to Warsaw in order to help Colonel Erhardt liquidate the
underground. Ssubinsky parachutes in Poland and recruits Bronsky's company to help
him undermining the Nazis activities. As a result there is a series of scenes of disguise
and mistakes, which arrive to their peak as Bronsky poses to be the Fuhrer.
Survey
Brooks' version of Lubitsch's classic film from 1942 has some entertaining
moments, but it does not get close to the level of the original. As a whole it is loyal to
the origin, telling the story of a Polish theater company that was stuck in the Nazi
occupation in Warsaw, focusing on the head of the company, Bronsky. Although Brooks
moderates the level of his usual wild comedy, he still instructs his actors to exaggerate
in dealing with the sensitive material, so that a great part of the humor, as well as the
dramatic resonance of the original film are absent here. But all the same, this is a
Brooks film, especially his scenes with Ann Bancroft, and there are enough laughs that
entertain the spectator. The casting is wonderful. The film was not a commercial
success. This was the beginning of a hard time for Brooks in the eighties.
341
19. Invisible Agent/1942 US
Synopsis
The series of Invisible Agent by Universal contributes its part to the war effort in
this mocking-humoristic action melodrama. John Hull stars as Frank Reimond, the
gransson of the man who had invented the formula of the invisible a few films before.
When Nazi agents try to extract the formula from Reimond by force, he slips away
by making himself transparent. Right afterwards the government of the US sense
Reimond by parachuting beyond the enemy lines, assuming that an invisible espionage
agent would be a valuable tool in defeating the Axis forces. He gets help and
cooperation from the beautiful Maria Sorenson (Ilona Masey), who may or may not
cooperate with the scoundrels Hessler (G. Eduard Bromberg in the film Turning Point),
Staufer (Sedrik Hadwika) and the Japanese spy Ikito (Peter Lorry). As usual in
Universal's fantasies in the fourties, the special effects made by Davis Horsly are
superb, with a few unforgettable moment.
Survey
Edwin L. Marin's film Invisible Agent is a strange schizophrenic film. The sequence
starts with peter Lorry and Sedrik Harswika, and seems as if it was taken out of a film
粸¢
by Fritz Lang. Generally speaking, the film is a weak comedy that is spices with some
amazing special effects. The effect may have been quite ineffective if Lorry would not
have been so effective as a dedicated Japanese agent. There are all sorts of ridiculous
dialogues and a few special effects that pull the ridiculous plot and poor performance.
20. Berlin Correspondent/1942 US
Synopsis
Berlin Correspondent is a variation of Foreign Correspondent by Hitchcock under
the auspices of Fox Twentieth Century. In one of his first important roles, Dana
Andrews plays Bill Roberts, an American radio commentator, who is positioned in Berlin
in the months before Pearl Harbor. After witnessing the brutal actions of the Nazis first
handedly, Roberts hopes to warn his listeners about the dangers at hand, and odes it
by sending coded messages in his broadcastings. The Gestapo starts suspecting
something and instructs the famous secret agent Karen Hausen (Virginia GIlmor) to spy
after Roberts. When she finds out that her father (Erwin Kaiser) provides important
342
secrets to Roberts, she turns her back to the Nazis and joins our hero in his efforts. The
film ends in an exciting air born escape from Hitler's country.
21. Saboteur/1942 US
Synopsis
Hitchcock exploits the war paranoia and directs this brilliant thriller, which
contains all his known effects, mainly the motif of an innocent man who is accused and
finds himself running away from the law. In this case it is a worker in an avironautic
plant who is accused of a deliberate sabotage which causes the death of his comrade in
the fire. The accusation takes him out to a journey in which he tries to find out who is
the real saboteur, and on his way he is about to come across some conspirative plans
of the highest level. This would lead him to the corridors of the administration in
Washington and to the Statue of Liberty in New York in an unforgettable scene.
Hitchcock loves so much these famous sites, and makes them as the setting for his un
compromising suspension scenes.
As a matter of fact, Cummings is the scapegoat of a sophisticated ring of Nazi
spies, led by the American philanthropist Otto Kruger, who is above suspicion. Our hero
goes all over the country in a chase after the real saboteur, Norman Lloyd, who is
粸¢
chased by the police. On his way he acquires a mate to the journey, called Precilla
Laine, who at the beginning loathes Cummings and intends to hand him over to the
authorities in the first opportunity, but gradually realizes that he is innocent. Hitchcock
wanted Saboteur to be the American parallel to his British film The Thirty Nine Steps,
and used details like the villain who is the respectable citizen, the hero whose hands
are tied, and the refusing blonde heroine, and a great number of intermediate stations
with a variety of bizarre characters (a crazy street performance, a passionate blind,
who looks for oil, and a make up person who is one of the spies, and so on).
Survey
Hitchcock's Saboteur is a wonderful thriller. It reminds Hitchcock's film North
North-West from 1959, which also showed an innocent man who was suspected of a
crime, and conducts a chase along the country and end up in a national momentum.
The film is full of suspension, laughs, and a romance. It is an extra ordinary film, whose
only disadvantage is in the weak casting of the main characters. Hitchcock cast first
Gary Cooper, Barbara Stanwick and Harry Carry as the stars, but Universal preferred
343
Robert Cummings, Precilla Laine and Norman Lloyd, who is outstanding in his role as
the cunning saboteur. Other characters include Otto Kruger as the crook tycoon behind
the terror, and Han Glazer as the kind blind man and Murray Alper as the assistant
truck driver. They all add a wonderful dimension to the film. One can attribute a large
part of the film's success to the superb script by Eorothy Parker, who takes Cummings
image in a daring adventure to fantastic places. Outstanding pictures in the worrying
opening, a daring escape where cummings leaps into the river like Harrison Ford in
Escape, an extra ordinary picture of a movie theater in which gun fire on the screen
becomes surprisingly real in a grand party where Cummings and Laine are caught, and
a classic peak where Cummings and Lloyd swing from the Statue of Liberty.
Technically, the film was shot and illuminated in an impressive way by Frank Skinner.
The traditional talisman of the director who is shown at a newspaper stand.
22. Once Upon a Honeymoon/1942 US
Synopsis
The surrealistic opening scene, which show us a calendar from WWII on which it
is written A. Hitler should be a strong enough indication that Once Upon a Honeymoon
is not going to be a small, light and romantic film. Ginger Rogers plays Katy, an
粸¢
American chorus girl who tries to improve her status by marrying to the European
baron von Lober (Walter Selzek), in spite of the warnings of the correspondent Pat
(Cary Grant). Katy thinks that Pat is just jealous, but she and the audience are aware
of the fact that von Lober is a Nazi of a high level, whose informal visits to
Czechoslovakia, Poland and France enhance the German invasion to these countries.
When Katy comes back to her senses, she agrees to help the counter-espionage agent
Le-Blanc (albert Dekker) in his efforts to stop von Lober before he would be able to
come to New York. Along the way she falls in love with Pat, who is everywhere all the
time. The strange ending, when one of the main characters is murdered by accident, is
done in a humoristic way, as if WWII is a basis for a comedy of errors. In the most
confusing scene of the film, Katy and Pat, who are considered Jews by mistake, are
imprisoned in a Polish concentration camp. Their anger of this treatment is not based
on Germany's crimes against humanity, but due to the fact that the Gestapo was just
insolent in imprisoning two non-Jewish Americans. Although it is a tasteless and weird
344
mistake by the producer-director Leo McKrae, Once Upon a Honeymoon is undoubtedly
a historical fascinating work.
23. Reunion in France/1942 US
Synopsis
Koan Croford (Mildred Pearce) and John Waine star in a precious war drama of the
excellent director Gilles Dassin. Crofoird plays the image of Michelle, a member of the
Parisian high society, who voids reacting to the war, although she does really love the
German occupation of her country. Everything is going to change as an American pilot
appears at her door step after parachuting in the enemy area, and she gives him
shelter, while she suspects that her fiancé cooperates with the Nazis. This the
beginning of a wonderful friendship.
24. Hitler: Dead or Alive?/1942 US
Synopsis
This bizarre war film of the second grade, is based on a real story. In the first
stages of WWII an important American businessman offered a million dollars to anyone
who would catch Adolf Hitler and bring him to justice, dead or alive. This real image is
a played by Russel Hicks. The people who accept his suggestion with no questions are
粸¢
the former prisoners Bond, Warren Heimer and Paul Fix. These heroes not of their own
choice join the Canadian air force and find their way into Nazi Germany and acquire an
access to Hitler by imposing to be musicians. Robert Watson, who had played Hitler
many times during the war, stars here as Hitler, who is found out to be a coward after
his famous moustache is shorn. The seemingly comic tone of the film becomes very
serious at the end, when stupid Ward bond gives a long patriotic speech as he stands
in front of a firing party, who previously had been seen harvesting little children with
their pyjamas! One of the most bizarre pictures in the film is when we see the three
former prisoners break out Dachau camp, before the world was aware of the horrible
things that have taken place behind the walls of this notorious factory of death.
25. The Commandos Strike at Dawn/1942 US
Synopsis
The script was written by Erving Shaw according to a story by S.S. Forster, who
had written Captain Horatio, the famous horn player. The Commandos Strike at Dawn
is a war film that elevates the morale. Most of it was shot in the shores of Norway. Paul
345
Munny stars as Erik Torsen, a non-political and a-political Norwegian fisherman, who is
pushed to action when his village is conquered by the Nazis. Together with a group of
courageous underground fighters, Torsen tries first to sabotage the morale of the
German forces, and afterwards escapes to England in order to help organize from there
commando raids against the conquerors of his country. Toroting team included Anna
Lee as the true love of the hero, Alexander Nox, two years after starring in the epic and
patriotic biography of Wilson, as a cold Nazi commander, Sedrik Harswika as a tough
British officer, and Lilian Gish, in her first cinematic appearance since 1931, as a
Norwegian with an iron will.
26. Hangmen Also Die!/1943 US
Synopsis
The story takes place in Czechoslovakia during the Nazi occupation. A Czech patriot
tries to kill the cruel head of the Gestapo, Heidrich, and goes down to the underground.
A professor of history, Walter Brennan, who is already under surveillance due to his
insinuated attacks in his lessons on the Third Reich, hides the wounded patriot. A
person of a fifth column, John Lockheart, organizes the capture of the professor and
another 400 Prague citizens as hostages, who are about to be killed if the murderer of
粸¢
Heidrich is not found. Eventually, Lockheart himself is incriminated by the citizens,
which provides the actor with an opportunity to twist and grovel as only he is capable
of. The film was directed convincingly by Fritz Lang, and was based on a story by Lang
and the exile German playwright Bertold Brecht.
Survey
The only common work of Lang and his fellow exile countryman, the playwright
Bertold Brecht, who has renounced from it later on, tells the story of a group of Czech
underground people in WWII. They were ordinary people, who gathered together in
order to hide the hero, Sr. Sbovoda, who was involved in the murder of a Nazi officer.
One can understand why did Brecht, the uncompromising person, disappointed of the
outcome that blurred his radical opinions in an attempt to make a film that would be
viable commercially. The banal Nazi villains come out as caricatures: one of them even
has a monocle and he has a line that says: "We have ways to make you speak." The
hero villagers tend also to be similar to one another in their stoic perfection. But in
spite of waiving what seems as the taste of the public, Lang succeeds to pass the real
346
cruelty of the Nazis, and creates brilliant sequences of tension. This is a good film, if
only for the detailed light and shadow of the artist of cinematography, James Wang
Hau. It contains also one of the most beautiful sets of Lang: the murder of a tough
Nazi officer that takes place in the dead silence of an empty wardrobe in a hospital,
and ends with the freezing sight of a rolling cylinder on the floor.
27. This Land is Mine/1943 US
Synopsis
This Land is Mine was written by Dudly Nichols and directed by the French exile
Jean Renoir, and it is one of the stimulating war dramas that does not prove itself in
the course of time. The story takes place in a European country whose name is not
mentioned, which was conquered not long ago by the Nazis. The conquest is shown in
the opening sequence with no sound, which is the best item in the film. Charles
Laughton players Albert Lorry, a school teacher who is attached to his mother's apron,
and whose pupils mock him. When the underground fighter Paul Martin, the brother of
the pretty teacher Louise Martin, is executed by the Nazis, everybody thinks it is the
fault of coward Lorry, while actually it was Lorry's mother, who was panicked and
handed Paul in. The film shows clearly the barbaric nature of the German Nazis in spite
粸¢
of the many criticism of it.
28. Hitler’s Madman/1943 US
Synopsis
Hitler's Madman is based on a real horrible incident from the war. John Cardin
players Heidrich, the evil SS officer who was in charge of occupied Czechoslovakia by
the Nazis. Heidrich was murdered by the Czech underground, which motivated the
Nazis to plan a horrible retaliation action. The Gestapo chooses a Czech village, Lidice
in order to exterminate it: they kill all the men in the village, throw the women and
children to concentration camps, and burn completely the village. The victims of the
Nazi oppression become tortured martyrs of the underground, and the film ends up
with a note of victory. The film was based on a poem by Edna St. Vincent Miley, and
was produced by the Line of Poverty of PRC studio, but was sold to MGM and was
presented as an A level film in the best movie theaters all over the US.
347
29. Five Graves to Cairo/1943 US
Synopsis
This film was directed by Billy Wilder, and is the third film that has been done
according to the theatrical story by Lios Biro about romance and espionage, Hotel
Imperial. This time the occurrence is taken from Galicia of WWI to Egypt of WWII,
when Rommel's African Corpus urges the British army to withdraw to Cairo. The hero,
John Bremble, is stuck in the Sahara, the only survivor of a team of a British tank.
Corporal Bremble suffers from a shock and a sunstroke, he fails to go in the desert as
he looks for the closest post. Instead he finds Britain's Empress Hotel in the Libyan
frontier town Siday Halfia. The town was abandoned and destroyed. Nobody was left,
except for the hotel owner, Faris, and the French maid Mosh. To her regret, Farid hides
the English soldier when the Germans confiscate the hotel for the residence of General
Rommel. Mosh does not feel sympathy towards the situation of any Englishman. She
thinks that the British abandoned the French army in Dunkirk, where one of her
brothers was killed and another was captured. She remained in Siday Halfiaonly to wait
for the German army and try to help the release of her brother, and not to help the
British. In spite of her protests, Bremble takes upon himself the identity of the dead
粸¢
waiter of the hotel, Davus, who was crashed in an air raid. To his surprise, this disguise
enables him an immediate meeting with Rommel. Davus was actually a secret Nazi spy.
This meeting with Rommel, the unbeatable Desert Fox, motivates Bremble to stay in
the hotel. He takes it upon himself to steal the most important secret of five stock of
supply that the Germans buried between Tubrouk and Cairo, what gave them an
advantage in the battle, and bring about, maybe, a turn in the war in favor of the
British. In the meantime, after being rejected by the general, Mosh has in her despair
to entertain the liar Lieutenant in order that he helps her brother. She and Bremble get
closer, as each one struggles to save his dearest. When the body of the real Davus
starts come up from underneath the debris of the hotel's cellar, Mosh has to finally
decide between saving one brother or saving many people.
Survey
Camerun Crew describes Five Graves to Cairo as a work of art that preceded its
time of the phenomenon of Indiana Jones. More than fourty years before Lukas and
Spelberg, Wilder created a fascinating adventure film that goes in and out of real
348
history. Fictitious Bremble has to discover essential Nazi secrets, and if he succeeds, he
would cause the real defeat that the German African Corpus suffered during WWII. The
risk was high, at stake was the destiny of the world, but the arena in which the story
takes place, is small, an Egyptian hotel, that is a historical fact is skillfully taken to the
personal aspect. This provides room for romance and personal heroic actions.
Moreover, it enables a creative and spontaneous description of the most despicable
documented figures, as can be seen in the comic scene of General Rommel, played by
Erich von Stroheim. It is important to mention that Wilder and his partner of the script,
Charles Barket, do not just exploit the war as a background for a melodrama or
wittiness. When they shot the film in 1943, they understood that contemporary war
films are a strong propaganda. The view of the film is obvious: it praises patriotism,
sacrifice and action, but not blatantly. Wilder's Five Graves to Cairo is an adventure that
is carried out skillfully and the film calls for thought. This is why it withstands the test
of time and its reflections in popular films in our time.
30. The Cross of Lorraine/1943 US
Synopsis
The time is WWII. German forces get in touch with a group of realistic French
粸¢
soldiers and promise them a secured transition to their homeland. The Frenchmen give
in easily just to find out that their next destination is a German concentration camp that
is located near the village of Gally. The expected escape attempt ends up with a revolt
of the French villaged, and this is the origin of the title, that refers to the symbol of the
underground of Free France. The Cross of Lorraine compensates for its Hollywoodian
viewpoint of France, and shows a few impressive sequences that show the German
brutality. The casting of actors of different origins, including the French Jean-Pierre
Aumont as a patriot, Peter Lorry as a hated Nazi, the American gene Kelley as cynical
victim of the German torture, and the Canadian Hume Cronin as the mouse-like
traditional informer.
31. Above suspicion/1943 US
Synopsis
McMurray, who has just married Joan Croford, goes on a honeymoon in pre-war
Germany. As a matter of fact, it is more business than pleasure: They are both secret
agents of the British, who try to smuggle back information about an innovative weapon
349
that is being developed by the Nazis. An evil and cruel German officer, Basil Rathboon,
inprisons and tortures Croford, but McMurray come for her rescue and paves the road
for the peak in a tense pursuit to the border. One may summarize the tendency of
Above Suspicion in a scene in which, after he comes across a unit of the cruel Nazi
Brown Shirts, who do not know English, Fred McMurray says in English "Nuts for you,
idiot?" and the Nazi answers with a question: "What is a dope?"
Survey
Joan Croford would later referee to Above Suspicion as a "real nonsense". The
espionage drama was accepted by MGM as less than a farewell to a declining star.
Croford reached, of course, greater glory and an Oscar with Warner Bros., and Above
Suspicion survives as an escapist entertaining film of Hollywood of wartime that should
not be taken too seriously. According to some reports, the studio shot it in Wilson
Mountain in California and on Meholland Drive, but most of the action takes place on
the stage that is designed like the Tirol region. Actually, the scriptwriters probably were
impressed by Nazi Germany annexation of Austria more than the Austrians, and the
dialogue refers to Salzburg and its surroundings as "south Germany".
A large casting of exiles adds local color to the plot, and Basil Rathboon makes a
蛐¢
convincing role of the Nazi commander. Veidt, in his final role before his sudden death
of a heart attack, makes his usual coolness an asset for the underground, and the old
star clearly enjoys the dialogue. The best line of the film was given to Fred McMurray,
that after going on a honeymoon executes a dangerous escape to Italy, and asks the
hot question: "What about a little spaghetti?"
32. The North Star/1943 US
Synopsis
This propaganda film from WWII was intended to demonstrate support in the alley
between America and Russia against Germany. Colia (Danna Andrew), Corin (Walter
Huston), Damian (Perlay Granger, and Marina (Ann Baxter) are members in an
agricultural collective in the Ukraine, known as the North Star. The members work hard
but are happy with their lot. They see their way of life as being crashed when
Germany, by defying previous agreements, sweeps the Ukraine by a brutal occupation.
Dr. Otto von Harden (Erich von Stroheim) starts collecting children, who would be used
later on for blood transfusions and medical experiments. A large part of the angry
350
villagers come out to the hills to fight with the anti-Nazi underground, while those who
stay behind destroy courageously the valuable crops instead of transferring them to the
Nazi war machine. The producer Samuel Goldwin made North Star meeting the request
of President Roosevelt, whose son James was a manager in Goldwin's studios. The
irony is that a few members of the creative team of the film, including the scriptwriter
LIlian Hellman, doubted later their motives in making the film, following the Committee
for anti-American Activities that declared it was a communist propaganda.
Survey
As part of the effort that has been supported by the government to encourage the
public opinion to side with the USSR in WWII, North Star has become ironically a cruel
evidence against its creators in the McCarthy period. Although the melodrama by Lousi
Milestone is a well done propaganda, it is in a couple of size beneath the best work of
its main talent. The film confronts rural life, its honest physician and its young people
with the dimensions of evil of the Nazi invaders who conquered the village in order to
pump the blood of it children to treat their wounded. These pictures of unwillingly
blood donation remains bothering enough to understand why they have almost been
censored by the censors of today. Among the aspects worth mentioning of the film
粸¢
there are the refined performance of Erich von Stroheim as the Nazi doctor who acquits
himself, Walter Huston who puts in the image of the village's elder a complexity that
was not in the script. The simple music by Aron Copland suits well the rustic landscape.
33. Watch on the Rhine/1943 US
Synopsis
Watch on the Rhine is an enlargement and improvement of the stage
performance of Lilian Hellman, The star is Paul Lucas, who reconstructs his role in
Broadway of the fearless anti-fascist fighter Kurt Muller. When clouds of war gather in
Europe at the end of the thirties, Muller arrives at Washington DC accompanied by his
American wife Sara (Betty Davis) and their children Joshua (Donald Boca), Bodo (Erik
Roberts) and Bath (Janis Wilson). The Mullers live in Sara's rich mother, Fanny Fenelly
(Lucil Watson), who lives in her social workd and cannot be bothered by politics. In her
use their lives also a Romanian aristocrat, Tec de Baranovic (Deorge Coloris) and his
American wife Martha (Geraldin Chaplin). In order to protect his family, Muller keeps
his "underground" activities as a secret for Fanny and her guests, but de Baranovic
351
suspects the visitor. It is found out that de Baranovic is actually a Nazis sympathizer,
who is ready to betray Muller for a price. Using blackmail as one of his weapons, de
Baranovic threatens to destroy all that Muller has fought for. To prevent this from
happening, Muller kills de Baranovic in cold blood. Since technically it is a murder,
Muller says goodbye to his family unwillingly, and starts his way back to Europe in
order to continue with his essential work. If there ever has been a justified murder in
the movie, it was the killing of the disgusting de Baranovic in Watch on the Rhine.
Anyway, the production code dictated that the murderer has always pay for his crimes,
and so an ending was added, insinuating about Muller's death that provides a golden
opportunity for a final speech by Betty Davis of a smile beyond tears. The script was
written by Lilian Hellman's lover, Dasiel Hamet. Watch on the Rhine achieved a few
candidacies for the Oscar, as well as the Oscar for the best actor to Paul Lucas.
Survey
Although it is a propaganda film, and for a modern audience, at least, it is
sometimes didactic and giving a lecture, Watch on the Rhine Continues to excite and
impress the spectators. It is hard to deny the accusation that the script is
melodramatic, or that the writers direct the plot according to their point of view, or that
粸¢
parts of the film embellish its stage origins. In any case, these disadvantages add to
the final impression of the film, which takes advantage of its capabilities. The dialogue
is sometimes artificial, but its major part is convincing and exciting. The script is full of
brilliant turns, and it excels in very good casting. Betty Davis gives a rare performance
in a more restrained performance that usual, but still impressive. She makes the most
of the opportunities she was given in the script, especially the ending monologue of the
film. Paul Lucas is even better, as his constant fatigue is opposed to his nobility and
responsibility. He steers the difficult transitions of his character easily and admiringly,
and creates an image the transmits its emotional depth to the audience. Lucil Watson is
quite reliable in her efforts to deny the unpleasant truths, like her readiness to fight
after she accepts reality, and George Coloris is a real villain. In spite of its
disadvantages, Watch on the Rhine leaves a great impression.
352
34. Sahara/1943 US
Synopsis
Humphrey Bogart assessed this epic action film, with the directing of Soltan Corda
as one of his bets films. Sergeant Jo Gen (Bogart) is a tank commander (American M3), who is attached to the British eighth army which was defeated by the Germans in
tubrouk. When he joins the scattered withdrawal along the Libyan desert, Gen and two
men who were left of his crew, Jimmy Doyle (Dan Doria) and Waco Hoyt )Bruce
Benet), are looking for water. Instead the tank crew finds an irrational mixure of people
who have been left behind, including officer doctor (Richard Magent) with a few
soldiers and a British-Sudanese sergeant, Tambul (Rex Ingram) and his Italian war
prisoner (G. Carol Naish). The riffraff shoots an fighting plane and takes its German
pilot (Kurt Kruger) as a second prisoner, although one soldier, Fred Klardson (Lloyd
Bridges) was killed in battle. They find one well that is dry. The group arrives finally to
an abandoned mosque with a well that supplies a dripping of water. Another two
prisoners are taken when they stroll in the area and find that a whole German regiment
in on its way to the same well. Gen misleads them to believe that the water are about
to finish, and lets them go free to report back to their commanders, and then convince
粸¢
his allies to help him to fight the enemy which is on the way, although they are inferior
in number of men. Betrayal, a released prisoner, and quarrelling come in a sequence
when Hoyt goes to look for help, while Gen and his country men try to defeat the
German regiment. Sahara (1943) provided an inspiration for some action films
afterwards, the best of them was The Last of the Comanchees (1952), which was done
in 1995 as a television film.
Survey
Sahara by Soltan Corda was one of the most exciting action films from WWII, with
a combination of good performance and plot that stem from The Last Patrol and a
Soviet documentary, The Thirteen, and a western called The Last of the Comanchees.
The director, soltan Corda was the most leftist in a family of film makers that was led
by Alexander Corda. Throughout the thirties he had to sublime his ideological
tendencies to the direction of his brothers who were more conservative. When Soltan
worked under Alexander, the dramatic content of his films was always pro-imperialistic
and a little patronizing towards the Africans. (One can see it in his film The River's
353
Workshops, a film that Soltan intended to be sympathetic to the peoples of Africa, but
Alexander casting and photography reflected a condescending approach that insulted
its star, Paul Robson, who therefore he never has done another film for the Corda
brothers and apologized for being in this film. Sahara, which was done for Columbia
more than for Alexander Corda, was a film in which Soltan's opinion in favor of the
oppressed peoples under the imperialistic rule came out openly, and his objection to
the British imperialism was discovered finally. The hero is American, described in
delicate lines by Humphrey Bogart. He is a cold tactician with a clear thought, who
does not suffer from racial or social class prejudice, and immediately takes the
command over the British soldiers who are running away from the Germans and tells
them how to survive, and in another way, how to live. The British are not presented as
so bad as detached in terms of their class of officers, and in terms of their motivation
of fighting the Germans. This is an ideological film with an emphasis on action, and it
gave Bogart as well as Bruce Benet and Dan Doria an opportunity to do heroic roles.
This film maker did later Cry the Beloved Country of Allen Patton in a time in which
only a few people outside South Africa knew or cared about the racial apartheid in this
country.
粸¢
35. Background to Danger/1943 US
Synopsis
The thrilling novel by Erik Embler, Irregular Danger was the source for the series
by Warner Bros., Background for Danger. George Raft, who has always been cast
incorrectly, players an American intelligence agent who operates in Turkey. Sensuous
Ossa Massen hands him some secret papers right before she is being killed. Our hero
finds himself at the hands of an enemy agent, Sydney Greenstreet, who knows that the
papers contain Nazi plans to invade into Turkey. In spite of a few brutal blows, Raft
and his partners Peter Lorry (a good guy for a change) and Brenda Marshal throw the
table on Greenstreet. Background for Danger was the first film by Warner Bros, which
came after the great hit of the studio, Casablanca.
36. Northern Pursuit/1943 US
Synopsis
The fact that the star Erol Flyn got involved a short time beforehand in a rape case,
only increased the sales in the box office for Northern Pursuit by Warner Bros. Flyn is
354
cast as a policeman, Steve Wagner of the Canadian riding unit, whose assignment is to
follow and catch the Nazi pilot Hugo Keller (Helmut Dantin) in the most snowy regions
of Hudson Bay. When Wagner and his colleague Jim Austin (John Ridgley) get von
Keller, they pretend they are on his side, hoping that he would give them his espionage
plans. When von keller is caught in this deceit, he leads the riding policemen to a
secret Nazi hiding placed, where the Germans hid a gigantic bomber plane in order to
use it against North America. The fact that "Wagner imposes to be a supporter of the
Nazis does make him attractive in the eyes of the hostage of von Keller, Laura McBain
(July Bishop), but when the truth comes out, she declared of her love to him. In light of
Flyn's problems at that time, one line in North Pursuit brings storming applause in
1943: after he promises Laura that she was the only woman he has ever loved,
Wagner/Flyn turns to the camera and sends a sarcastic remark: "What do I say?"
37. The Moon is Down/1943 US
Synopsis
In this drama, based on a novel by John Steinbeck, which was made on the stage
as well, German forces invade Norway in WWII, and Nazi forces control a small town.
Colonel Lancer (Sedrik Hardwik), the officer in charge of the occupation, believes the
粸¢
common sense and the illusion of cooperation would achieve more than open hostility
against the towns people. So he tries to convince the important figures of the town to
work with him. Anyway, within a short time an anti-Nazi underground starts operating,
and they start by sabotaging German materials and facilities and murder officers of the
Axis forces. The mayor, Orden (Henry Travers) refuses gently but stubbornly to help
Lancer in any way, as he helps silently to the underground. Finally, Lancer has to
respond to the anti-Nazi operations that go on in a series of arrests and executions, but
the Norwegians remain stable and courageous against the enemies until the end. One
of the children is played by Natalie Wood, who was only five years old at the time. It
was her second film, after a small part in Happy Country).
38. Lifeboat/1944 US
Synopsis
Looking for several years for great melodramas, the director Alfred Hitchcock puts
all the actors of Lifeboat in a small boat, which sails in the Atlantic Ocean. The boat
contains eight survivors from an attack of a Nazi torpedo: a sophisticated reporter in a
355
magazine, the photographer Constance Porter (Telula Bankhead), the communist sailor
John Kobek (John Hediak), the nurse Alice McKenzy (Mary Anderson), the radio
operator with the bad manners Sten (Hume Cronin), the ovens fireman from Brooklyn
who was badly wounded Smith (William Benedict), the unbearable capitalist Charles
Rittenhouse (Henry Hull), the housekeeper of thee Black house, George Spencer
(Candy Lee), and a half crazy passenger, Mrs. Higgins (Hether Angel) who carries the
body of her dead baby. This intelligent group is a microcosmos of humanity. Mrs.
Higgins kills herself. After a day or so of expectation, the survivors get another
passenger to the boat, Willy (Walter Selzek), who is a survivor of a German submarine.
At first, everyone assume that Willy does know English, but when it is necessary to
speak, he shows that he can talk a few languages and that he is very intelligent. As a
matter of fact, he was the captain of the submarine. Since he is the only one on the
boat with knowledge of sailing, Willy steers the boat to his mother ship, while the
others surrender as war prisoners. When there is a need to cut Gas' leg, Willy decides
that the oven fireman is a surplus weight in the boat. When the others are asleep, he
throws Gas to the water and looks indifferently how he drowns. When the other
passengers find out what Willy has done, they all, with one outstanding exception,
粸¢
attack Willy wildly, and the boat sails with no steering.
Survey
Lifeboat shows how disaster films since the seventies could have been seen, if they
would have take away the special effects and concentrate on character more than on
action, and if they would have been directed by a real artist, of course. The audience of
today, who grew up on Adventure in Poseidon and others like it, might see the basic
setting (a bunch of images from all walks of life and making them work together for
their common survival) a bit banal, but the director, Alfred Hitchcock and his
scriptwriters, take this based assumption and make a fascinating film with tension and
suspense. Hitchcock deserves the praise for keeping the interest in the story with such
a limited setting, but he deserves also a greater credit for the wonderful work he
extracts out of his team.
356
39. Why We Fight – World War 2: The Nazi Strike/1944 US
Synopsis
In 1944 the American Chief of Staff, George S. Marshal nominated the director
Frank Capra to produce a documentary series about WWII. The outcome was seven
cassettes of one hour each that documented the war in all its aspects. The best forces
of Hollywood were recruited for this assignment, and contributed parts that make the
series a fascinating historical document, and one of the greatest propaganda efforts in
the history of the movie. Among the great names who contributed their part to the
series are the directors: John Huston (The Hawk from Malta), William Wiler (Our most
beautiful years), Carl Furman and George Stivens (Giant). The music was written by
demetri tiomkin, and the animation that accompanies the series was produced by Walt
Disney.
40. Tomorrow the World/1944 US
Synopsis
Skip Homeyer, 14 years old, repeats his stage role as a youth in the Hitler Youth in
the cinematic version of the play by James Gau/Arno Dosso, Tomorrow the World.
Homeyer is a German orphan who is taken to the house of his American uncle (Frederic
粸¢
March), a university liberal professor. Although he is the son of an anti-Nazi, robot-like
Skip becomes a fanatic follower of the Third Reich, when he condemns his late father
as a traitor and behaves horribly towards the professor's Jewish fiancée (Betty Field).
Homeyer accepts democracy only with the professor forgets his liberalism and give the
child some "physical culture". The lesson surely does not have to be "love America or
we'll break your bones," but when taking into consideration the time in which the film
was done, one can forgive this exaggeration.
Survey
Tomorrow the World is an important film for its time, when America was a year
way of winning WWII. In the center there is an American family which tries to cope
with a brain washed German orphan, Emil Brukner (the child Skipy Homeyer). Emil is a
product of the Hitler Youth, he was trained to hate his father, a leftist intellectual of the
Weimar republic. He was brought to America by Professor Mike Prime (Frederic Match),
one of the old colleagues of his father. Troubles begin when Emil tries to materialize his
Nazi behavior in America, as he arouses hatred by everyone around him. In many
357
ways, the troubles that Professor Prime confronts in his attempt to rehabilitate the child
were the introduction to what was the audience's lot in the forties, that is, the problem
of re-integration of the brain washed German masses back to the world of culture. In
this sense, the film fulfilled its role at that time. He educated the audience about the
need to re-integrate, and more important, the need to show compassion and
forgiveness. From a modern point of view, anyway, the film seems as a long cliché
about the Hitler youth, of condemned Nazi automatic behavior. This is a familial drama,
with some comic moments brought by young Homeyer. From a contemporary point of
view, Tomorrow the World can tell us more about America than about Germany in
WWII.
41. Passage to Marseilles/1944 US
Synopsis
This film was planned as a continuation of Casablanca with its great success.
Passage to Marseilles uses many talents of many of the classic works of Warner Bros.,
those who are behind the scenes. In a complicated development of a flashback within a
flashback, we see the story of Matrack (Humphrey Bogart), a freedom lover, French
journalist, who sacrifices his happiness and security in order to fight the Nazi tyrant.
粸¢
The film opens when the French communication officer, Freisint (Claude Rhine), who is
positioned in London, tells Matrack's story to a British correspondent (John Luder).
Freisint finds out that Matrack, who is happily married to Paula (Michelle Morgan), was
incriminated by the pro-fascists and was sentenced to exile to the Devil's Island. Here
he managed to conduct a daring escape with other prisoners like Marius (Peter Lorry(,
Garo (Helmut Dantin), Petit (George Tobias) and Renault (Phillip Doren). He is drifted
away in the sea in a lifeboat, while the others were taken on board a French ship under
the command of Major Duval the pro-fascist (Sydney Greentstreet). With the help of
Matrack and the prisoners, the patriotic captain of the ship (Victor Francen) undermines
Duval's plot, and enables Matrack go on with his struggle against Nazism as a member
of the British Air Force. In modern standards, Passage to Marseilles is overdone, with
over acting and over success. Anyway, it certainly fulfilled an obvious need in America
during wartime, and proved as a great commercial success.
358
Survey
Michael Curtiz was a wheel horse of Warner Bros, since the thirties and up to the
fifties. His best achievements include 20,000 Years in Sing-Sing (1932), Female (1933),
The Cargo of the Light Brigade (1936), Casablanca (1942), Mildred Pearce (1945), A
Man with a Horn (1950), and many others. In his career he made more than 170 films
as a director in the US and in his homeland, Hungary (under his original name Mihaly
Curtesh). Unfortunately, Passage to Marseilles is not one of his most successful films,
and it did not add to the reputation of Humphrey Bogart, that star of the film. Claude
Rhine, Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorry are there to support, and it seems as if the
spectator is transferred to the setting of Casablanca, and the charm that has been
there would work again. But the film is built in a weak way by the casting of Michelle
Morgan as the object of Bogart's love. There is no chemistry between them. One
should just look at this film and then watch Howard Hawk, There is and there isn't
(1944), which was made a short time after this one, in order to see the difference that
casting can make. As a French journalist whose newspaper was destroyed by fascit
hooligans, Bogrt leaves his legacy convincingly. He transfers his lines, and Curtiz
continues the project with his brutal efficiency. But at last, one cannot ignore Lauren
粸¢
Bacal hugged by Bogart, rather than Michelle Morgan. And so Passage to Marseilles
cannot escape the fact that it was made with a commercial compromise.
42. None Shall Escape/1944 US
Synopsis
In this drama, a veteran of WWI, an invalid, tries to bring together his late
experiences with his former ideologies. After the war he came back home to his home
town on the German Polish border to his old position as a teacher. Time goes by and
he becomes more and more cynical and bitter. He finds himself attracted to dark and
oppressive ideologies that make his fiancée abandon him. Then he rapes a girl pupil
and finds himself thrown out of his village. A short time later he joins the Nazi party,
where he goes up the ranks very quickly. When he goes back to his village, he is
already a scary Nazi commander.
Survey
In this solid and fascinating drama about the human evil, None Shall Escape isles
attractive to the modern audience than to the audience of WWII. This is an obvious
359
propaganda film which contains many of the disadvantages of a work of this kind, but
this film does all the same say some strong statements and raises moral issues that can
lead to thought raising discussions. It tends to be a little heavy sometimes, but it is
necessary in order to support its message: make people aware of the atrocities that
normal people can do and how the circumstances and personal tendencies can combine
to create a monster. The film is interesting also because of its emphasis on the guilt of
the "small person" more than on the army and the political leaders who plan and
orchestrate the horrible outbursts. A large part of the strength of the films stem from
the commitment of Andre de Tot, whose talent and skill are reinforced by personal
feelings he has about this subject. The film excels also in the extra ordinary
performance of Alexander Nox, whose work is in a higher level that the ordinary. He
shows us characteristics of his nature that other actors, greater stars than he is, would
have feared to show, and he is reliable. This is a fascinating film, with an exciting
performance that makes us want to see Nox perform more roles which show his
capabilities along his career.
43. The Master Race/1944 US
Synopsis
粸¢
The Master Race claims convincingly than although it seems that the Nazis are
going to lose the war, it was stupid to assume that Hitler's legacy would not infiltrate to
the post-war period. An important Nazi commander, von Beck (George Colonis) arrives
at a small Belgian village on the eve of its being liberated by the Allies. The plan of von
Beck is to arouse disharmony and prejudice among the villagers, and by so doing, let
the basis for a German Victorian the next war. But von Beck finds out soon enough that
the population is not so naïve as the German people had been when Hitler came into
power. The film ends with a warning: the only way to avoid a future global conflict is
destroying the inciters of the current war. Quite ironically, right after the hostility
actions have ended, Herbert G. Biberman, the co-writer and director of The Master
Race was punished by the Red Brigades for being, among other things, "an immature
anti-fascist."
360
44. The Conspirators/1944 US
Synopsis
This espionage thriller in the style of Casablanca in WWII concentrates on the
heroic actions of the notorious Flying Dutchman. The leader of the underground
escaped from Holland heading to Lisbon, where he was supposed to join other
members of the underground. One of them was a young beautiful woman whom no of
the others trusted her because she was married to an important German officer. He
confronted troubles when he was incriminated with the murder of a colleague agent.
He escaped from prison and hid with his comrades, while he was trying to prove his
innocence, and was carrying out a big secret mission for the underground.
45. The Hitler Gang/1944 US
Synopsis
Although this film used a free hand sometimes with facts and motives, The Hitler
Gang tells the story of Hitler's coming into power. Adolf Hitler (Robert Watson, known
for his comic appearances as the Fuhrer), an anonymous German corporal from WWI,
complained of the Versailles Agreement, and joined a marginal political party that was
called the National Socialists. With the help of a few "trickers" like Joseph Goebbels and
粸¢
Heinrich Himler, Hitler takes from the inefficient Captain Rohm the control over the
Nazis. After being arrested for getting involved in political issues, like the putsch in the
beer cellar in 1923, Hitler was sentenced to a short period of imprisonment, during
which he write his manifest, Mein Kampf. He recruits the support of other losers who
do not have the right to vote and becomes influential. Finally, he gains political
respectability when the senile General von Hindenburg nominates him to a respectable
political position. When Hindenburg died in 1933, Hitler could rule of the German
government, and he starts right away with an indoctrination of the German youth,
telling them about the marvels of Nazism, murdering his political foes, and bringing
about WWII. Although the film was made in 1944, it ends with a tone of hope, and
promises the spectators that Hitler and his yesmen would not be able to withstand for a
long time the counter-attack of the Allies. The film makers were less sure of that than
they would be six months later. As a film, it is clear that this is a propaganda film. One
cannot say about The Hitler Gang that it is very accurate. For example, Hitler's
prosecution of the Jews is described as a cynical political tactics, rather than a final
361
outcome of the anti-Semitism that is stamped deep in Europe. The death of his niece
Gally Raubel is interpreted incorrectly as a murder and not as a suicide. But in light of
the lies that have been distributed by the Nazis every day, one can forgive the few
deviations from the facts in The Hitler Gang. The real disadvantage of the film is the bidimensional image of Hitler as Robert Watson does it. Even perfect actors like Alec
Guiness and Derek Jacoby found out that one cannot actually play well the role of Hitler
because his cruelty is beyond any description or imagination.
46. The Seventh Cross/1944 US
Synopsis
Fred Zinnemann directed this strong and polished drama about WWII, which is
considered one of the best anti-Nazi drama that came out of Hollywood during the war.
The story deals with seven prisoners (freedom fighters) in a Nazi concentration camp,
who manage to evade the guards and the Gestapo. The commander, out of anger of
their escape, nails crosses to seven trees, and plans to cross each one of the prisoners
when they are caught. Six of them are found one by one by the Gestapo, and crossed.
The one who escaped, George Heisler (Spencer Tracy), becomes bitter and cynical
after the years of staying in the concentration camp. But when friends and others help
粸¢
him evade the Gestapo, he manages finally to arrive a neutral Holland, and his trust of
mankind returns to him. It was Jessica Tandy's first role on the screen as Lisl Reder,
the wife of Paul Reder, one of the friends who helped Heisler on his way to freedom.
The director made a weird thriller, with no sentimentality, high and above part of the
infantile propaganda films that characterized the American movie during the war. this is
a very expressionistic film, full of threatening and cloudy atmosphere.
47. Hotel Berlin/1945 US
Synopsis
Vicky Baum, the writer of the novel Grand Hotel, wrote also this story, which is
similar to the former in its structure. It tells about a group of different types who meet
in a hotel in Germany when the state is on the verge of collapse towards the end of
WWII. Martyin Richter, a member in the German anti-Nazi underground, escapes from
a detention camp, and now he is on the run from the Gestapo. He hides in Hotel Berlin,
which had been a grand mansion and now what remained is only a shadow of the past.
Martin used to work with Johanes Kenig, who had been a famous scientist, before he
362
was enforced to use his skills for his Nazi captors. Now he lives under a pseudonym
and barely makes a living as a waiter, his main idea is not to help the war machine of
the Axis countries. Ernim von Dahanovich is a Nazi general who fell out of favor due to
a conflict with a Gestapo commander, Joachim Helm, who is bothered by many
matters: he is looking for Martin, he follows Ernim, and he puts an eye over ernim's
girlfriend, Lisa Doren. Lisa, quite a successful theater actress, is among the few in the
hotel who can live in something that reminds the former glamour of Berlin. Her
wardrobe arouses jealousy in tilly Willer, the concierge of the hotel, who pretends to be
a friend of everyone, but actually follows the anti-Nazi activities of the hotel dwellers
and intends to turn them in to the Gestapo. Hotel Berlin was completed hurriedly, since
in the middle of the production it was found out that Berlin would fall soon and the war
in Europe would end. Warner Bros. were so eager to bring the film out to the movie
theaters before the end of the war would make it irrelevant. Therefore Hotel Berlin
went through reediting department of the studio within less than a week.
48. The House on 92nd Street, 1945 US
Summary of the plot
This film, which was shot as a half documentary, is drama of the kind of "now it
粸¢
can be told already", about the demolition of a Nazi espionage network that operated in
the US. The FBI got to know about them through a secret surveillance of a few
suspicious people in New York. William Aith is an American-German college student that
the spies addressed suggesting him to work as a secret Nazi agent. As a result of this,
Aith turns directly to the head of the FBI, Lloyd Nolan, and offers his services as a
double agent. His mission is to allocate the head of the espionage network, an unseen
figure, who known only as Mr. Christopher. For this end Aith penetrates the network,
whose headquarters is in a building in the city, in 92nd street. Among the members of
the network there is an educated German colonel and the pretty landlady. Part of the
plot involves smuggling American atom secrets to Germany by a weird official. The film
deals lengthily with the meticulous research methods of the FBI. The meaningful
development happens in the last sequence, when Mr. Christopher is discovered and the
secret agent Aith runs for his life.
363
Survey
The House on 92nd Street (1945) received the blessing of the FBI and was
produced by the producer of the news reel of that time, Louis de Rochmont, and
became the first important half-documentary crime thriller. The director, Henry
Hathaway used footage of an espionage case that was conducted from a house during
WWII, which was connected to the atom bomb. He combined footages of news reels
about German suspected spies together with scenes that were shot in locations in New
York and Washington DC to describe the penetration of the FBI into a Nazi espionage
network, which had settled in the building in New York that gave the film its title. The
casting was based mainly on character actors and theater actors, rather than movie
stars. Hathaway empowered the documentary atmosphere by an objective story and
sub-titles that explained the factual sources of the story, indicating the presence of an
FBI team as extras. In spite of the documentary emphasis, the fast pace of action, the
eccentric spies and the method of film noir in black and white wrap the facts with a
restrained suspension. The film was a hit in the eyes of the criticism and commercially,
won an Oscar for its script and was an inspiration for a number of half-documentaries in
the late forties, including Hathaway's film 13 Madeleine Street (1946) and Death Kiss
粸¢
(1947), and Ilia Kazan's film Boomerang (1947).
49. Counter Attack/1945 US
Synopsis
This drama is based on a Broadway play, One Against Seven, which in turn was
based on a Russian play called Puveida. IUT takes place in WWII and concentrates in a
Russian officer, a Russian woman and seven German soldiers who were caught in a
destroyed cellar of a bombed factory under the Nazi occupation. While they wait that
someone would save them, the Two Russians try to keep that the Germans would not
get closer. Eventually, the Russian officer starts amusing himself with the German
officer, and vice versa, as they try to extract information from one another. The Russian
releases information that his forces plan to build a tunnel beneath the river. The woman
is terrified from this betrayal of giving information, but her partner promises her that he
is able to kill the enemy before they have time to share this information. But first of all
they have to be saved. As time goes by slowly, the tension increases, especially as the
Russian finds himself falling asleep. The film was made in the short period after WWII
364
when Russia and America were allies and the political significance of the film were not
intentional. Later on, when the Cold War was on, many of the actors who participated
in this film were called to testify before the committee off anti-American activities and
were accused as communist fans, and part of them were included in the black list.
50. Cloak and Dagger/1946 US
Synopsis
The exile German director Fritz Lang (Metropolis) presents a film noir as an antiNazi espionage film, integrated with a romantic story. An American physician is sent to
Europe in order to discover something about Germany's efforts to produce the atom
bomb. His attempt to rescue a German scientist in Switzerland is failed, and he
continues to Italy and there falls in love with a local scientist. Gary Cooper (High Noon)
in the leading role, stops being a cowboy for one day, and Lily Palmer (Secret Agent) at
his side.
This is an anti-Nazi adventures film about the rescue of a scientist from the
hands of the Nazi occupation. An American professor goes on a secret mission to
Europe aiming to find the footprints of a Nazi atom scientist. He arrives at Switzerland,
finds the footprints in Italy and with the help of the local underground manages to get
粸¢
him out of the country. Under the inspiration of the actual events, Cloak and Dagger
was the first great melodrama about an atomic force after the war. Gary Cooper stars
as a physics professor Elba Jasper, a type that is certainly based on the developer of
the bomb, Robert Oppenheimer. He was recruited to the service by the OSS (the
intelligence agency that preceded the CIA) in the last two months of WWII , and was
sent to Europe in a search after Dr. Pulde, an atomic scientist who was held prisoner by
the Nazis. In Switzerland gets into trouble with the spies of the enemy who murder the
only man who knew something about Pulde. He moves to Italy and get in contact with
the partisans, falls in love with a beautiful, Gina. He goes in a disguise and finally
allocates Pulde and spend the time in a desperate struggle for freedom. The
scriptwriters intended that the film would be a warning for complacent America. The
director, Fritz Lang, was reminded in recent years that the ending would come after
Jasper and a group of the Allies soldiers were stuck in the debris of a Nazi factory for
bombs, with evidence that the German scientists escaped to an unknown place with the
atomic secrets. "It was the first day of the atomic attack, and God help us if we think
365
that we can go on keeping the secret." This long ending was removed, and the film
changed from a thought arousing film into just a romantic thriller.
Survey
This excellent espionage thriller finds Gary Cooper in a secret mission in which he
has to find details about the German effort for constructing an atomic bomb. The story
is very exaggerated, and there is very little real chemistry between Cooper and Lily
Palmer. But everything is presented in quite a reliable way. Other actors have important
roles, like Mark Lawrence as an evil pro-Nazi Italian, and there is a scene of a brutal
fight between him and Cooper, Helen Timig appears as a German physicist who ran
away from Switzerland and Dan Seimour plays, for a change, a different role that the
servant, and he is one of the best. The script touches all the important patriotic points
that one can expect from such a film, but fortunately, it is more concentrated in making
a good criminal film. A major part of the original political content of the script was
removed, but there is an impressive picture in which Cooper tell the manager of the
spies, Colonel Welsh, that if the government invest money and effort in finding a cure
to tuberculosis or cancer, as it invests in preparing the bomb, the world would be a
better place. The directing of Fritz Lang is full of atmosphere as usual, dealing with
粸¢
secrets and dangerous activities and little and wonderful touches that are important to
the plot more than it seems in a first glance. For example, when Cooper covers his face
when a photographer tries to photograph him when he arrives to Switzerland,
insinuating of certain suspicions that put the plot into action. Cloak and Dagger is worth
watching if only to see Cooper as an atomic scientist. But beyond this innovation, this is
a kind of story of international intrigues that Lang loves to do.
51. Let There Be Light/1946 US
Synopsis
John Huston's documentary was ordered by the army during WWII. The film
describes the atrocities of the war through stories of about 70 soldiers suffering from
combat fatigue, but was put aside by the Pentagon as they fear it would lead to
demoralization. This is an important milestone in the history of the documentary movie
and the American history of the 20th century.
John Huston made a documentary following a request of the military
communication unit. It deals with the veterans of the battles who came out of the war
366
with emotional disturbances, and they are treated in Maidon General hospital. Huston
put himself into this project for three months, observing different methods of bringing
these people out of their psychological suffering, treatments that ranged from shock
and up to hypnosis. The key picture of Let There Be Light shows a crying soldier who
comes back to the real world through trans arousing medications. There is not a hint of
sensation, and certainly not the warm and calming narrator, John Huston's father. But it
was scheduled to be projected in a private screening in the Museum of Modern Art, the
army banned the film and refused to enable its release to the civil audience. Later
Huston decided that the army simply did not want that people in America would see the
soldiers in situations in which they do not win, smile, and confident. Let There Be Light
did not go out to the public until 1980, and then only through a special order of Vice
President Mundale.
52. Germany, Year Zero/1947 US
Synopsis
The third and last film in the trilogy by Rossellini about WWII, the director shifts the
focus from Italy, his home country to the destruction of bombed Berlin, where 12 years
old Edmond Kohler struggles to survive. He lives with nine people: a father, who suffers
粸¢
from malnutrition and chronic illness; a brother, a former Nazi soldier who hides in
order to evade imprisonment; and a sister, who has become a whore. While looking for
food, money and cigarettes in the debris of the city, he comes across a former teacher,
Herr Ening (Erich Gohn), who shows an unrestricted sexual attraction to the child, and
gives him records of Hitler's speeches that are good merchandise in the black market.
He also infiltrates classic Nazi propaganda to the child that says that it is important to
be courageous to exterminate the weak. Under his influence, the young hero
deteriorates to a tragic ending.
Survey
Before he starting shoot the film with a low budget in March 1947, the director
described his experiences in a desolated city. "The city was abandoned. The grey color
of the sky flowed into the streets, and a person could look standing up on the roof tops
that collapsed. In order to find the streets under the debris, people evacuated the
debris and piles them in heaps." The director, who used to employ unprofessional
actors to achieve greater objectivity, designs a powerful shuddering drama from the
367
simplest materials. In spite of the destruction seen everywhere, the quiet scene of Herr
Ening, who puts the record with Hitler's speeches for the child to listen, Rossellini
focuses on the damage that has been done to a whole generation through the
incessant brain washing of fascism. By showing Edmond not too likable and not heroic,
the director empowers our identification. The last scene, which is subjective and
surreal, makes it almost unbearable in its intensity.
53. Notorious/1946 US
Synopsis
Hitchcock's film, Notorious, was produced by David Selznick's production company,
but Selznick himself was not involved in the production, which was undoubtedly to
Hitchcock's satisfaction, being very independent. Ingrid Bergman played Alicia
Huberman, whose father was accused with treason in WWII and committed suicide. An
American secret agent under the name of Devlin (Cary Grant) is assigned to recruit
desired Alicia as bait for catching Alexander Sebastian, the head of a Brazilian Neo-Nazi
group. Devlin shows open contempt to Alicia in spite of her loyalty to the American
cause, and guides her dispassionately to woo Sebastian and marry him, so that the
"good guys" would have someone inside to report about the movements of the Nazi
粸¢
leader. Only after Alicia and Sebastian get married, Delvin admit to himself that he is in
love with her. The MacGuffin in this case is a reservoir of uranium that is hidden some
place in Sebastian's estate. When Sebastian finds out that his wife is a spy, he does not
hurry to get rid of her until his mean mother orders him to do so. The suspension goes
up when Devlin, in a delay of one day and short of cash, makes an effort to save Alicia
from Sebastian's murderous plans. The most outstanding sequence is a long love scene
between Alicia and Devlin that is very hot but is careful not to exceed the code of the
production. In later years Hitchcock has never stopped telling how he and the
scriptwriter, Ben Hecht (who was nominated for an Oscar), were under the FBI
supervision when he decided to choose uranium as the MacGuffin. This was before the
bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Notorious made a profit for all the people
involved, and it is still one of the Hitchcock's best espionage melodramas. In 1992 a
television version was made of it.
368
Survey
Notorious is one of Hitchcock's biggest films that shows him in his best satanic and
elegant self-confidence. It is a great work of art that works like a crossword puzzle that
is connected without seams, and each part fits into its place with full accuracy. The
smooth cover is responsible to a large extent to the inner impression: under cover there
go on actions of the most grotesque kind, whose refined appearance make them even
more cunning. Except for one of the most famous MacGuffins of Hitchcock, the uranium
reservoir, there are also a few examples of his photographic work, especially the
wonderful shoot that follows the party in Sebastian's house, which leads the spectator
from the height of the staircase to Alicia, who grips the key that would lead her to the
uranium reservoir. The camera moves with the calm intimacy of an unnoticed guest, in
a snake-like travel. Hitchcock makes a sophisticated use of shoots of point of view,
especially the one in which Alicia wakes up with a hangover, and watches Devlin who
walks towards her as the camera turns in 180 degrees. The audience who looks
through Alicia's eyes identifies with her, and her image becomes one of the immortal
heroines of Hitchcock. The success of Alicia as a character is due to a large extent to
Bergman's performance. She is tragic and excels in logical cynicism. It is one of her
粸¢
best performances. Cary Grant and Claude Reins are good as co-stars. Grant, unlike his
light and nice charisma, played at first a graceless person whose moral values are
dubious not less than those of the heroine. Reins once more as Bergman' spouse after
Casablanca. He makes Sebastian one of the more sympathetic characters of the film.
Reins' talent is shown when Sebastian turns to go up the stairs in the final scene, and
we really worry of what would happen to him. The fact that his fate is an outcome of a
manipulation he does on others and on himself is the heart of the real MacGuffin of the
film. Notorious, a thriller of the Cold War is one of the classic black romances of the
industry.
54. The Stranger/1946 US
Synopsis
The Stranger is often considered as a traditional directing of Orson Wells in a
Hollywood style. Wells plays a college professor, Charles Renkin, who lives in a pastoral
town in Connecticut with his wife Mary. One afternoon a nervous German, Meineke,
comes to town. Prof. Renkin seems bothered, but not too much, from his presence. He
369
invites the stranger to a walk in the forest, and when they get away from the center of
town we learn that the nice Prof. Renkin is actually the notorious Nazi war criminal
Frantz Kindler. Meineke, who suffers from pangs of conscience due to a murder he had
committed during the war, comes to town to convince his ex-commander, Kindler, to
turn himself in. The professor responds by murdering brutally his ex-partner. If Kindler
thinks that he is safe now, and he has a good reason to think so, since nobody in town,
especially Mary, has no idea of his previous life. He is about to change his mind when
Wilson, who investigates war crimes, comes to see him, pretending to be an antics
dealer. The Stranger is a protest against the conscious and unconscious US politics after
the war.
55. Gentleman’s Agreement/1946 US
Synopsis
The film was processed by Moss Heart of the novel by Lura S. Hobson, Gregory
Peck stars as a journalist who has been widowed not long ago, Phil Green. Green has to
provide for an adolescent son, and is ready to accept the offer of a publisher of a
magazine, John Menepe, to write a series of harsh articles about the curse of antiSemitism. In order to experience the information first handedly, Green decide to impose
粸¢
to be Jewish. As the weeks go by, Green experiences all sorts of prejudice, and the
most cunning of all of them is the hidden racism, the Gentleman’s Agreement, in which
one takes for granted anti-Jewish feelings. Green's imposture disturbs the developing
romance between him and Menepe's niece, Kathy, who starts understanding from her
personal experience that even those who claim they do not have any anti-Semitic
feelings are capable of prejudice. Green's old friend, a Jews called Dave (John Garfield,
maybe in his best role) observes the situation. Although he is against injustice based on
racism, he has learned to accept philosophically the disadvantages of other people, but
he is not willing to give up the struggle against blind hatred. In spite of the warnings of
some Jewish tycoons in the field of the movie industry, saying that producing this film
would just make troubles, Darryl Zanuck, the manager of Fox Twentieth Century (who
not a Jew) continued with the project. His decision was proved to be intelligent. Not
only Gentleman’s Agreement brought a lot of money to Fox, but it also won three
Oscars, including the best film, the best director (Ilia Kazan) and the best secondary
actress (Selest Holm).
370
Survey
Gentleman’s Agreement is more interesting in a historical perspective than due to
its qualities. Before WWII there was an unspoken agreement in Hollywood that one
could only hint of anti-Semitism or remind it by the way, even if the film deals with an
anti-Semitic deed. instance, when watching The Life of Emil Zola (1937), which won an
Oscar as the best film, the fact that Captain Dreyfus, the French soldier who was found
guilty for no fault of his own was Jewish, is not mentioned. Gentleman’s Agreement
broke the barrier and enabled admitting that a prejudice against racists and ethnic
groups is active in our society more than we would be prepared to admit. Maybe
Gentleman’s Agreement entered a new field with calculated and cautious steps, it is less
influencing today. The characters are one-dimensional and we can easily foresee what
they would do. From the positive aspect, the acting, although one-dimensional, is good,
especially that of Gregory Peck and Selest Holm, who won the Oscar for the best
secondary actress. Hollywood will go on making better films with greater insight, but
the importance of Gentleman’s Agreement stems from the pioneering daring to deal
with this subject. The film is professional and well done, and if in the standards of our
time it seems soft or weak, it is because we, as a society and as individuals, know and
粸¢
understand much more than we did in 1947.
56. Crossfire/1947 US
Synopsis
This drama was one of the first attempts of an important studio to deal with antiSemitism, precedent in a few months Gentleman’s Agreement. It presents an
impressive acting by Robert Ryan as a racist soldier on the run. Monty Montgomery
(Ryan) is a violent and unstable soldier, when on vacation goes out to get drunk with
three friends, Floyd, Arthur and Leroy. As they get drunk in a taberna, they meet
Joseph Samuels and his girlfriend Gini, who invite the soldiers for a party in their flat.
But Monty hates Jews deeply, and later he gets furious as a drunk and hits Joseph to
death. Monty's friends can barely remember the event through their vague booze filled
memories, but they are reminded of it to a sufficient extent to get lost when a police
detective, Captain Finley starts going around looking for information about the murder.
Sergeant Kelley, a soldier who knows the four people, starts suspecting something, and
works in cooperation with Finley and Gini in order to expose the murderer among his
371
soldiers, while Monty kills Floyd, when he is convinced that he is about to talk with the
authorities. The director, Eduard Dmytryk showed courage in bringing the story to the
screens, but the resonance was greater than what he could have foreseen. The
controversial issues of the film led to condemn Dmytryk by the Congress Committee for
anti-American activities in the McCArthy period. Fortunately, Dmytryk, unlike other film
makers who had been accused by the committee, continued to work regularly during
the fifties and the sixties.
Survey
This is a classic film noir by Dmytryk about anti Semitism in the army. It was
processed according to the book by Richard Brooks, The Bricks Pit, which deals with
homophobia in the army, an issue which was too hot in the eyes of RKO to deal with.
Like many film noir films, it deals with the shaken condition of the soldiers who came
back from the war and still recover from the trauma they had experienced and try to
adjust to the changed world. Dmytryk created a swamp of anxiety with the vocabulary
of the film noir, ambushing shadows, diagonal angles and dim lighting. The professional
detective that plays Robert Young leads the investigation that takes a collective quality
upon the intervention of the sergeant that is played by Robert Michum. The film
粸¢
confronts the calm sanity versus disorientation of life and the wild paranoia of the
murderer. Robert Ryan is most impressive as the murderer, full of a whole bunch of
hostilities that anti Semitism is only one of them. The essence of the original story
remained in a somewhat exceptional scene, which seems as detached from the plot, in
which a soldier talks about his alienation with a stranger that shows him sympathy. As
the first film that dealt with anti-Semitism, it is still effective in spite of moments of
preaching. Test screenings of the film for Jewish audiences showed a concern on their
part, that a blatant pathological connection like that of the murderer with anti-Semitism
would enable the spectators ignore the more common and cunning shapes of this
prejudice. Due to the content of the film, the producer and the director were
summoned in 1947 to testify before the Congress' committee, and were the two first
members of ten Hollywood most famous producers, directors and scriptwriters,
including Ring Lardner Junior and Dalton Trombo, who refused at first to testify against
their colleagues and were sentenced to imprisonment. In return for an early release in
1950, Dmytryk identified his former colleagues as communists, and in 1951 pointed on
372
Scott, his friend, who produced his three bets films, as a member of the communist
party. Scott has never produced any additional films, while Dmytryk renewed his career
and has never regained the quality of his previous works.
57. To the Victor/1948 US
Synopsis
To the Victor is one of Hollywood's first films which dealt with the issue of the guilt
of the war. There are no high level Nazis or gas chambers. The people who stand to
trial are French citizens who are accused of cooperation. Since it is a production of
Warner Bros., the casting contain "authentic" Frenchmen, like Dennis Morgan, Bruce
Bennet and Dorothy Melone. The leading role, Vivka Lindforce is not from Burbank, but
she is not French either. The film raises a few interesting moral and ethical issues, but
it was made too close to the events to be objective. There is also a romance between a
French girl and a black speculator, which does not contribute anything to the plot. It
gets a B for the effort, and C for the outcome.
58. Sealed Verdict/1948 US
Synopsis
In this war drama an American officer is accused of acting secretly as an SS man.
蛐¢
Although all the evidence are against the officer, one military attorney is not convinced
that the man is guilty, and he starts acting to prove his innocence. He gets help from a
beautiful woman who knows that the defendant is innocent. In the course of affairs the
attorney and the woman have to go through a series of attacks and accusations of
treason, but finally they overcome.
59. The Search/1948 US
Synopsis
Montgomery Clift shoot this film after the Red River (1948), and the common
success of both of them made him a star immediately. The film was the first American
film that has been done in Europe after WWII with an American director and casting,
and was partly based on The Children of Europe, a book of photographs by Therese
Bonnaiy that documented the orphans of the war. It was photographed in the American
region in Germany. A large part of it was based on real cases, after years of research. It
starts with a welfare, administration and rehabilitation camp of the UN, where orphans
of war, who were found wandering in the debris of bombed areas, get temporary
373
dwelling. The children have gone through severe traumas, many of them survived the
concentration camps after their parents died there, and they find minimal
communication as almost impossible. Karl Malik (Ivan Yandel), a young Czech boy, is
one of them. His mother, Hanna (Yermilia Novotna), lost contact with him when they
were in Auschwitz and now she goes from one refugee camp to another in a search
after her son. As they are driven in an ambulance, a few children, including Karl, escape
and scatter. An American GI soldier, Ralph Stivenson finds him strolling aimlessly and
takes him back to his base to feed him and starts teaching him English.
Survey
In Fred Zinnemann's half documentary film about the troubles of the orphans of
WWII, there are banal moments, but it leaves the spectator aware of the unthinkable
damage that was caused by the war. Montgomery Clift gives a refreshing and arousing
performance. The decision of the film makers to divide into two parts, one is quite
detached documentary with a narration about the UN's work for to well being of the
children, and the other deals with Clift's relationship with the boy Ivan Yandel, and it
gives the film another kind do quality. Although many children are survivors of the
death camps, the film touches their experiences only through deduction, like their
粸¢
desperate escape from the ambulance that expresses something of their horror. The
natural acting and lack of clichés in Clift's performance provides reliability to his efforts
to take care of the child. It was a refreshing innovation at that time and it influenced
other actors. Clint Eastwood, surprisingly, quoted this performance that influenced
deeply his career. And indeed, Clift's presence is so strong, that in comparison with the
work of the opera star, Yermilia Novotna, who players the child's mother, it seems odd
that the child would go with her finally.
60. The Iron Curtain/ 1948 US
Synopsis
This is another drama of Fox Twentieth Century in the late forties, which has been
taken out of the newspapers headlines. The Iron Curtain is based on a real defection of
an expert of coding in the Soviet embassy, Igor Gojenko. Gojenko (Dana Andrews) is
brought to Canada under a curtain of secrecy by Soviet special agents in order to assist
them in their espionage activities. Although he is far from Russia, Gojenko is persecuted
by his suspicious superiors and he is denied the most basic tights. When Gojenko
374
understands that his government is about to take him back to Russia very soon in order
to take part in the "war of the classes", the coding official decides to defect by stealing
secret information to give it to the Canadian Ministry of Justice. At first they ignore him,
but when the Canadian government processes the information he has in his hands, the
authorities arrest the communist espionage network. Gojenko and his family are put
under a protecting arrest by the Canadian government, while some of his Russian
superiors are punished by their communist superiors for letting him slip through their
fingers. The film was shot like a documentary, and is basically factual and less paranoid
that other films about the horror of the reds, which have been done at that time.
61. Command Decision/1948 US
Synopsis
The war over the sky, as it was reflected from the activity of a bombing crew in
England, which did everything it could to prevent German manufacturing of bombers.
Clark Gable (Gone with the Wind) plays the image of the force commander who has to
make fateful decisions, as he loses pilots on the one hand, and popularity among the
decision makers in the high ranks, but in the army, the administration and Congress on
the other. The film was based on a successful play from Broadway. Clark Gable plays
粸¢
the role that was done by Paul Kelley in Broadway, of Brigadier General Casy dennis
from the Air Force. When he is under pressure of time, he sends waves of bombers into
Germany to destroy the plants of the jet planes. Although it seems that Dennis is not
interested at all in the fate of his pilots, the audience knows that his duty takes a high
price from him. Thanks to a pressure on the part of an American Senator with mistaken
information, Dennis "the butcher" is substituted by Brian Donloy, who is supposed to be
more human. But Donloy realizes that Gable's decisions were correct and he swears to
continue his way in the suicidal missions.
Survey
Command Decision is a fascinating film. There is manipulation and war wisdom,
and Clark Gable does one of his best roles after the war. The auteurs developed the
original play, but not enough, although they refused to follow the pilots in too many
missions. Had they shown what happened to the pilots and to the innocent people who
were killed in their raids, it would have worked. It was opposite to the main argument
of the script, which was in favor of tough decisions, sometimes brutal, at war time. One
375
cannot argue about the film's point of view, and according to the view of the auteurs,
they did a good work. At the same time, the film tends to be too talkative, and the
dialogue, which was so strong on stage, seems a little artificial in the film. Fortunately,
Gable gives a brilliant performance, as well as Walter Pigan, Brian Donloy, Van Johnson
and John Hodjak. Sam Wood directed accurately and carefully and the outcome is a
good, solid war film.
62. Berlin Express/1948 US
Synopsis
The film deals with Germany after the war, with fear and lack of faith toward
Germans and Germany. It also deals with the US former enemies, showing compassion
and consideration toward them. It is in favor of the unification of Germany, while it
condemns the Nazis who brought death and destruction on Europe. In the months after
V-Day, an American, Robert Ryan, an Englishman, Robert Cott, a Frenchwoman, Merle
Oberon, and a Russian, Roman Toporov, work for a new Germany in the heart of a
ruined township. They are helped by an anti-Nazi enthusiastic German, Paul Lukas,
while against them there works a cartel of pro-Hitler fanatics. The dramatic effect of the
film is increased by RKO's decision to shoot many scenes on site in Berlin and Frankfurt
粸¢
that were destroyed in the bombings. The American-Russian cooperation described in
the film would not have been probable had the film done two-three years later, at the
height of the Witch Hunt against the communists.
63. Foreign Affairs/1948 US
Summary of the plot
The scriptwriter/director Billy Wilder, who worked in cooperation with the
producer/scriptwriter Charles Barchet, received his first condemnation by the critics
regarding this film. They accused him of moral degradation, and demanded that he
proves what can be funny in blaming the Nazis for the war, in seeing Berlin devastated
the Black Market, or a suicide attempt. All these elements re in the film, and they are all
very funny. John Lund is a captain in the American army, who has a light affair with a
Berliner singer, Marlene Dietrich, who is willing to answer his courting as long as the
deal includes smuggled cigarettes and nylon stockings. A congresswoman from Iowa,
Gene Arthur, is sent to Berlin as a member in an American delegation of examining
facts, and Lund is forced to behave himself. In spite of the first shock of the scrupulous
376
Congresswoman in light of the corruption around, she falls in love with Lund; But
Dietrich has much more experience in this game. Showing the film together with
Wilder's war-time comedy One, Two, Three, from 1961, should be an interesting film
and sociological experience.
64. The Third Man/1949 US
Synopsis
In this classic espionage film about the Cold War, Holly Martins (Joseph Cotton),
an American writer not too famous, arrives in post-war Vienna, where a job was
promised to him by his old friend Harry Lime (Orson Wells). Upon his arrival, he finds
out that Lime was killed in a car accident, and his funeral is about to take place right
away. Near the grave he meets Major Calaway (Trevor Howard), who is kind outwardly,
and the actress Anna Schmidt (Elida Valley), who cries endlessly. When Calaway tells
Martins that the late Harry Lime was a thief and a murderer, loyal Martins gets angry at
first. Gradually he discovers that not only Calaway was right, but that the man who lies
in the coffin is not Harry Lime, and that Lime is very much alive (he was the mysterious
third man in the scene of the fatal accident. And so comes the summit confrontation of
the film in the sewage network of Vienna, and the last shot, in which Martins pays an
粸¢
emotional price for doing "the right thing". The Third Man is a classic story, written by
Graham Greene. The citar music by Anton Caras is very meanful. The film has two
versions: American and British. The American copy, with an introduction by Joseph
Cotton, is shorter than the British version, which is told by the director, Carol Reed. The
Third Man was a candidate for several Oscars, and won the prize for the best
cinematography by Robert Krisker.
Survey
The Third Man by Carol Reed is one of the bizarre successes of the international
films in the late forties. Films tended to be more vague, and this one is an English film
full of intrigues, with hints that remind Hitchcock and a strange sense of humor. It is
serious and witty, and preserves and even increases the sensitivity of the writer
Graham Greene. The making of the film was a story of compromises that have become
an inspiration. The producer Alxander Korda wanted that Noel Coward would play Harry
Lime, but since Orson Wells was cast to the role, the film has become a statement of
his presence and influence. He appears on the screen in about a quarter of the film, but
377
he is the actor that everybody remembers. Actually, Wells shot another film at the same
time, and attended The Third Man only in a later stage of the shootings, and in many
scenes he had a double, Carol Reed's assistant, who would be the director of
Goldfinger, Guy Hamilton, who is seen running in a black military coat in the dark
streets of Vienna. At the end of the pursuit we see the fingers of the director Reed that
popped out of the sewage grill at the end of the pursuit. Giving the role of Holly Martins
to Joseph Cotton enables Greene bring to the screen for the first time his aversion to
the Americans and their pretending to be innocent attitude to the problems of the
world, a theme that would be cleared more directly regarding Vietnam in the film The
Quiet American.
65. Battleground/1949 US
Synopsis
In winter 1944, an American infantry unit is stuck deep in the mud of the world
war, near the town of Baston in Belgium. The tough weather and especially the fog do
not enable them proceed, and they find themselves confined in the forest without
sufficient ammunition and not supply of fuel and food. In addition to all this, the
Germans add to the de-moralization from the air and send spies in American uniform.
粸¢
This is the description of their unbearable experience in the film that won two Oscars
for the photography and the script.
The new production manager of MGM pushed Battleground into the timetable of
the studio against strong protests of MGM's manager, Mayer. The result was a film that
succeeded in the box office and started the end of Mayer's power. This dramatization of
the battles of Baston and the bulge at the last days of WWII focuses on one infantry
unit. Van Johnson and John Hodiak are the stars allegedly, but James Witmor steals
the show as an experienced fighter who chews cigars. There is also Ian McDodnald as
General McOlif, whose legendary response to the suggestion of the Nazis that the
Americans would surrender was one word: nuts. The scenes of Witmor's last minutes
before the reinforcement arrives are unforgettable. Battleground tries to be realistic
within the limitations of MGM, and it does compromises as the scriptwriters could not
use the rough army language, and also in the secondary plot that involves the actress
Denise Dercel. The film was not popular like other war films, such as The Story of G.I.
378
Jo, or Walking in the Sun, but in 1949 Battleground was considered as an important
milestone of a real film that takes off the glamour of the battle field.
Survey
This film was accepted well by the critics, the audience and the veterans. William
Wolman's film Battleground, together with other war films, like a former film by
Wolman, The Story of G.I. Jo, and Louis Milestone's film Walking in the Sunset a new
standard of taking off the glamour of the war films that went on for decades. The
common elements of loyalty focused on the lives of the soldiers, an almost
documentary characterization of the killing and the brutality of war, and a renewed and
cynical definition of heroism, patriotism and duty. A few decades and wars later, films
like MASH (1970), Platoon (1986), The Hill of the Brave (1987) and Saving Private Ryan
(1998), for example, shared these principles and were considered at their time as
excellent war films. The background of Battleground is interesting like its plot. The
producer Dor Sherry, preferred that the film would contain relevant social messages,
brought the project to MGM, after he was rejected by RKO. But MGM's manager, Louis
Meyer, objected to produce Battleground since he believed that the American public
was fed up with war films. As the film gained commercial success and was candidate to
粸¢
half a dozen Oscars, including the best film and the best director, Sherry won the
confrontation with one of the strongest figures in Hollywood, and Meyer's career has
begun declining.
66. Twelve O’clock High/1949 US
Synopsis
This a classic war drama directed by Henry King (The Old Man and the Sea,
Carousel) that tells the story of an American bombers unit at the beginning of WWII.
General Frank Savage (Gregory Peck, The Boys from Brazil) commands the bombers'
unit that suffers from low morale due to heavy losses in the sky of Germany. In spite of
their first objection, the tough and stubborn general teaches them to be proud of their
important mission and keep the high standards of the Air Force. This intense war drama
integrated archive authentic air battles. Gregory Peck was a candidate for an Oscar for
his role, and Dean Jager was a candidate for the secondary role of Billy Rose Jambo,
and he also won the Oscar.
379
How much can a person give? When bombing group 918 of the eighth unit of the
American Air Force gets the order in its fourth mission within four hard days, Brigadier
General Frank Savage demands of them a maximal effort. The bombers had to fly lower
and farther and check themselves, as they were tired and exhausted. When their
dedicated colonel tries to protect them, Savage takes the command and says that an
officer does not have to show his men sympathy. The Brigadier general makes the
pilots stop feeling sorry for themselves and sharp the morale in front of the danger, but
when the men get less enthusiastic due to Sabage's orders and the missions bring them
closer to their German targets, the officer learns that he cannot elevate the selfconfidence of young people who are sent to their death. He starts to understand that
the yole of command makes even the toughest commanders to care. Finally he takes
care of him men more than any other thing. Savage has to bear the difficulties of
maximal effort, as he asks himself how much can a man take.
Survey
Most of the war films argue that the experience of an officer is not comparable
with the trauma the soldier goes through. The outcome is a genre of stories which deal
always with the distance between the senior officer and his subordinates, an
粸¢
exaggerated separation that can be closed only by a common goal (to win the war) and
never a common experience (fighting in battle). Henry King's film Twelve O’clock High
rejects this formula. The film describes the war pressures as traumatic for all the
soldiers and as a catalyst for mutual admiration and compassion.
Twelve O’clock High shows that a commander can understand his people, and
alternatively, these people can care for their commander. The story of Savage was
based on the real story of Brigadier General Frank Armstrong, and it remained one of
the famous stories about leadership. King was one of the first directors who integrated
real parts of American airplanes which have been shot down by the German Air Force.
The plot seems real, and it is a sincere, realistic film. It gives so much inspiration, that
for years it has been screened in the academy of the Air Force.
67. I Was a Male War Bride/1949 US
Synopsis
Towards the end of WWII, Henry Rochard (Cary Grant, International Intrigues)
was sent as a French officer on a mission to Germany. His relationship with the
380
American soldier Katherine Gates are tensed at the beginning and then change to love,
and the two get married. When his newlywed wife is called back home at the end of the
war, Rochard has to impose as "the bride of the war" in order to get into the US. This is
a romantic comedy, not in a Hollywood contemporary style, directed by Howard Hox
(Men Prefer Blondes). Hox directed this classic farce that tells how love tries to
overcome military toughness after WWII. Captain Henry Rochard is a French officer
whose assignment is to stop the activity of the black market in occupied Germany with
the help of Lieutenant Katherine Gates of the American Women's Army. In their first
meetings they barely reach any agreement, and in the course time Rochard find out
that opposites are attracted to one another, and they fall in love. They decide to get
married, what seems quite simple, but the moment Gates gets an order to go back to
the US, and Rochard wants to join her, they find out to what extent the army make
things complicated. The army has a tough protocol that deals with "brides of war", but
there is not known procedure regarding men who get married with a woman soldier.
And so, in order to join his new wife, rochard has to disguise as a woman soldier. From
that moment onward, almost everything that happens to Rochard is an insult to his
dignity and patience, starting from his inability to share a room with his bride, and up to
粸¢
the discovery that the army's regulations prevent him from driving a motorcycle. Grant
gives a good comic performance, but he certainly does not look French, let alone a
woman.
Survey
I Was a Male War Bride does not reach the level of the previous comedy with
Cary Grant, His Girl Sheshet. This film is enjoying, funny and romantic. It is a little more
delicate, and at the beginning even a bit boring, when it focus too much on the
environment and less on comedy. But afterwards Grant is at his best, showing us what
he can do. At his side there is Ann Sheridan, who does not reach his level, but she is
good, and sometimes really brilliant. It would have been better had they have more
chemistry between them. The connection is a bit artificial.
68. Air Lift/ 1950 US
Synopsis
The film was shot on location and is an exciting reconstruction of the airlift to Berlin
in 1948. The Russians lay a blockade on the Western quarter of Berlin and refuse to let
381
the Allies send supplies to the starving inhabitants of Berlin. A group of American pilots
endanger their lives in order to transport supplies from Templehoff airfield. Paul
Douglas plays an operation sergeant, who has a few scores to settle, since he had a
hard life as a POW, and Montgomery Clift is a co-star playing a navigator who develops
a love affair with a German girl, Cornel Borchers, an affair that is doomed to fail. The
film raises the questions whether all the perceptions people have about Germans being
monsters should be attributed to part of the German people, or to the whole nation;
can one love a German woman, socialize with Germans?
69. Decision before Dawn.1951 US
Synopsis
In this wonderful war drama by Anatole Litvak (Anastasia), the Americans get
close to making Germany surrender, but need another one laser push. For this end the
army activates two German war prisoners as spies, in spite of the great risk that they
might betray their mission and remain loyal to their original homeland. Litvak insisted
on shooting the film in authentic locations, that is, in destroyed Germany of 1950. The
stars are Richard Beseheart (Being There) and Oscar Warner (Jules Et Jim).
Upon the dismantling of the Third Reich, some German soldiers desert to the
粸¢
American side and offer their services as spies. The American officer Gary Merill does
not trust any of them, but the prisoner Oscar Warner seems honest to him. Warner
insists that by helping the Americans he actually saves Germany from destruction. Merill
sends him behind the enemy lines as a counter-spy with an American officer, who is not
convinced yet that the German refugee really intends what he says. In a few crucial
crossroads it seems as Warner lied regarding his mission, but in the last moment he
saves the life of the American by paying with his own life. But is this courageous deed
is intended? This thoughtful drama was shot in Europe. Pay attention to young Klaus
Kinsky with the ailing appearance as a deserter who tries too hard.
70. The African Queen/1951 US
Synopsis
An English nun and a Canadian supplier evade the German forces on an African
river upon the outburst of WWI, and from two people with different education,
background and character they become a loving couple. The emphasis is put on the
change in the character of the two of them and about the stupidity of war. This is one
382
of Huston's best films. Humphrey Bogart won the Oscar for the best actor for it. Clint
Eastwood based the plot of his film White Hunter, Black Heart on the adventures that
the crew in this film have gone through, especially obsessive Huston, in the jungles of
Africa.
After years of courting after the director John Huston through good critics, the film
critic James Aggy received an opportunity to write a script for a film by Huston. The
script was processed according to a novel by Forster, starring Humphrey Bogart,
playing Charlie Olant, the negligent captain and the gin drinker of a ship called The
African Queen, which delivers supplies to small villages in East Africa in WWI. Katherine
Hupburn plays Rose Sayer, the lady sister of the British missionary. When the Germans
invade and kill the missionary and destroy the village, Olant offers to take Rose back to
civilization. She cannot stand his drinking and his bad manners, and he is not crazy
about her judgmental and patronizing approach either. But is does not take a long time
before the hostility changes to love. The relationship holds in order to a certain their
survival in the dangerous region, and they plan a genius way of destroying the German
war ship. The African Queen could be, perhaps a perfect
adventure film, as the
changes in the story complement the chemistry between the stars. The difficulties of
蛐¢
shooting in a location in Africa were documented extensively in a number of books,
including a book written by Katherine Hupburn.
Survey
The comparison between the drunken sailor and the missionary's sister would
eventually go beyond the bottomless differences between them and find love. But this
change has never been done with so much laughter as in John Huston's master piece.
The African Queen is a good example of a mischievous adventure. It has everything:
action, comedy and romance in a wonderful accordance with the plot, the images and
the dialogue. The film received rightfully four Oscars: Huston and Aggy for the script,
Huston for the directing, and Bogart and Hupburn for the acting, although only Bogart
received it. Band Hupburn were at the height of their careers. One can believe that they
learned to love one another, and the actions that proved their dedication, like when
Rose jumps into the water full of lice to help Charlie, you feel real sentiment. The
beautiful photography in what had been Belgian Kongo was very difficult. But as Charlie
and Rose who tried to cross the river, Huston and his crew did not surrender.
383
71. What Price Glory/1951/2 US
Synopsis
WWI serves as the background for a story of adversary and love for John Ford (The
Searchers). An American officer and his sergeant fight for the heart of the same French
woman, who tries to find herself a husband. The film opens with a comic sequence,
which is followed by a more gloomy part of the atrocities of the battle. This is about
love, war, and deep friendship. Starring James Kagni (Scar Face) in the leading role.
James Kagny signed to play Captain Flag in a reconstruction that Fox produced in
1952 for the classic film from 1926, The Price of Glory, which was shifted to a musical.
Until Kagny realized that Fox did not intend to add songs and dances to the respectable
version of the play, it was too late to leave, so he decided to go with it. The director
John Fred strong anti-war message has been weakened, while the roughness and the
drinking of Captain Flag and his friendly adversary Sergeant Quirt (Dan Daly) is
emphasized. Most of the debates go around a girl bartender called Charmin. There is
the roughness and the instability of Flag, Quirt and his colleagues from the Marins on
the one hand, and the romance between Private Robert Wagner and the French girl
Marisa Pavan on the other. Barry Norton, who played Wagner in the original play,
粸¢
playes here the vicar. The new version received its vitality from the rough relationship
between James Kagny and Dan Daly.
Survey
The idea to make a musical of What Price Glory is quite weird. The director John
Ford objected to the idea, although there are some musical moment which remained in
the final product, but he did not come with a new idea that justified a renewed version
in the first place. Instead, Ford reduced the anti-war message, and what remained is a
war comedy about two adversaries who quarrel over the sympathy of the people under
their command and the woman they would like to command. Unfortunately, the
comedy is not so fresh, and it does not integrate with the more serious parts that deal
directly with war, and give the film a sense of a split. Ford shot almost everything in the
studio, and therefore was unable to satiate his attraction for wide landscapes. The
casting is good, under the leadership of Kagny and Daly, who demonstrate positive
chemistry. Kagny exaggerates sometimes, but he does it lovably, and he and Daly bring
a lot of energy that helps moving the film forward.
384
72. The Magic Face/1951 US
Synopsis
Luther Adler, who had played Adolf Hitler in Desert Fox from 1951, does it again in
The Magic Face, but this time he does a double role, as Hitler and as a famous stage
mimicker, The Great Yanus. As Yanus playes in Vienna he attracts Hitler's attention,
who tries to seduce his wife, Vera (Patricia Mite). When Yanus protests, he is beaten
and thrown to jail by the Gestapo. Yanus escapes and swears to destroy Hitler, and for
this end he disguises as the German leader, in order to sabotage the Nazis' war plans.
The film is based on a story that many people would have liked to believe. It gains
credibility by William S. Schirer, the historian of the Third Reich. The film was shot in a
site in Austria and was distributed by the Hollywood company, Columbia.
73. The Desert Fox/1951 US
(AKA – Rommel – The Desert Fox)
Synopsis
Desert Fox is a superb cinematic biography about the German general Erwin
Rommel, which concentrates in the period between his withdrawal from North Africa
and his death by a governmental decree. Rommel, who was a brilliant tactician,
粸¢
acquired respect not only on the side of his men, but from his enemy as well.
Unfortunately, Adolf Hitler (Luther Adler) deluded himself that he was a military genius,
and he demands o Rommel more than he can deliver. Rommel was ordered to
withstand in Africa until his last soldier, but he understands that in the long run it would
be more clever to withdraw. This arouses Hitler's anger. But Rommel is a war hero, and
as such he is "untouchable". Hitler despises Rommel's behavior, and Rommel on his
part, joins the conspirators who want to kill Hitler. The attempt fails, and Rommel's
involvement is found out. He has to choose to suffer a terrible death by tortures or
suicide, and he chooses the second option. The formal story which is given to the press
is that Rommel died a hero's death from wound he got in battle. Jessica Tandy appears
as Rommel's wife, and Leo G. Carol as the unbearable nobleman von Rohnstadt. The
film got good criticism for giving ten minutes of suspense before the credits in the
opening, a technique that is totally redundant today. Desert Fox was based on a book
by Brigadier Desmond Young, who narrates with his voice and appears in the first
scenes.
385
Survey
This production from 1951 was among the first films of post-WWII that described
sympathetically the image of a German officer, in this case, Erwin Rommel, who was
called The Desert Fox due to his cunning tactics as a tank commander in the sands of
North Africa. In order to shape his image in the film, a number of means were used: a
fine dialogue, battle scenes taken from the archive that show his military genius quality,
and staged episode which illustrate his mysticism as an allegedly foolproof fighter, that
the enemy fears and respects. In the beginning Rommel is shown as a superman.
British commandos from a submarine sneak onto the shore and attack his headquarter
in North Africa, stabbing and shooting the guards as they proceed. After the clash, a
British dying soldier looks on a German and says: "Did we hit him?" and the German
answers, "Are you serious, Englishman?" James Maso, in one of his best roles playes
Rommel convincingly in a way that illustrate that Germans can be heroes too. All the
same, the film avoids emphasizing the big ego Rommel had and his tendency to stand
in front of the cameras. In any other aspect, the film is loyal to historical reports,
including the details about Rommel's support of the conspiracy of overthrowing Hitler.
Luther Adler plays Hitler brilliantly as Hitler shouts and swears at Rommel, and Everet
粸¢
Sloan and Leo G. Carol are full of poison as Nazi officers. The scene ends as Rommel
has to choose between an immediate death by a pill of poison and a public trial that
would endanger the interest of his wife and son – is sharp and well remembered.
74. The Devil Makes three/ 1952 US
Synopsis
Gene Kelly copes with a rare casting, with no singing or dancing, in this post-war
drama. He personifies Captain Geoff Elliot, whose life was saved in WWII when a
German family saved him after his plane was dropped above Munich. In 1948 Elliot
goes to Germany to thank Lehert family for their kindness and finds out that had been
killed in an American air raid toward the end of the war. The only survivor is the
daughter, Wilhelmina (Pier Angeli), who works as a bar tender in a plain night club, and
there she developed a bitter hatred toward the Americans. Elliot falls in love with this
tragic woman and spends his time in the club enough time to know Heisman (Klaus
Clauson), the entertainer, who conducts dark and secret life. Heisman also smuggles
gold and is a member in a Nazi underground movement, which hopes to overthrow the
386
government that came into power after the war and bring the Third Reich back. When
Elliot tells his superiors what he had found, they order him to go on with his affair with
Wilhelmina as a cover in order to gather material about Heisman's smuggling
operations. This film was made as one of the films made by MGM in Europe in order to
use the frozen money that the main office in Hollywood could not transfer in cash, but
could use to finance productions. Another film that had been produced prior to this
program was one the projects most dear to Kelly, Invitation for a Dance.
75. Stalag 17/1953 US
Summary of the plot
The plot takes place in a German camp of POWs, sometime in the mid-forties. The
camp is populated by American sergeants, the sadist commander Oberest von
Schernbach (Otto Preminger) and Sergeant Schultz (Sig Roman) with the misleading
nice appearance. The camp inhabitants spend their days trying to fight the boredom of
being in prison. At nights they try to organize escapes. When two of the runaways,
Johnson and Manfred are shot like dogs by the Nazi guards, the camp inhabitant, smart
guy Septon collects calmly the money he won by betting on the chances of their
success. Everyone suspects that Septon, who manages to achieve every convenience
粸¢
he wants, was planted by the Nazis. Things get complicated when Lieutenant Dunbar
(don Taylor), who is located temporarily in Stalag 17 prior to his transfer to the officers'
camp, tells his neighbors in the barracks that he was responsible for the sabotage in a
German ammunition train. This information is leaked to the commander and Dunbar is
interrogated cruelly. The other inhabitants of the camp, who were confident that
Septon was the mole and hit him aggressively, but quite soon Septon found out who
was the real spy, and tells it on the night of Dunbar's planned escape. In spite of the
severe situation, Stalag 17 is a comedy and a war drama at the same time, and most of
the laughs are made by Robert Strauss who was crazily attracted to the movie star
Betty Grabel. More outstanding figures in this casting are Richard Erdman as Hoppy,
the spokesman of the prisoners, Neville Brand as Duke, Peter Graves as Price, the
typical American guy, blond with blue eyes, Gill Stratton as Septon's assistant, Kooky,
and Robinson Stone as catatonic Joey, who got a shock in a bombardment. The
scriptwriter/producer/director Billy Wilder and his partner Edmond Bloom remained loyal
to the plot and the atmosphere of the play by Donald Bowen and Edmond Trachinsky,
387
although the text was changed. Trachinsky based his play on his experiences as a POW
plays in the film as a naïve guy, who believes his wife's story about the baby who had
been abandoned on her doorstep. William Holden won a prize of the academy for his
part as tough Septon.
Survey
Stalag 17 was in 1953 a war film of a new kind. It showed a more realistic
perspective on life in a prisoners' camp, as opposed to previous films about POWs, most
of the British, with descriptions of stealing, treason, sadism, hangmen's sense of
humor, and almost a lynch of an innocent person. Wyler and his actors create tension
that makes the spectator believe. Stalag 17 helped William Holden base his cynical
macho character as a continuation to images by Humphrey Bogart in the forties, like
Casablanca and The Hawk from Malta. The success of Wilder's film paved the way to
additional attempts and provided the basis for a TV series, Hogan's Heroes, which
emphasized the humoristic elements that had been used first in Wilder's film.
76. I am a Camera/1955 US
Synopsis
Jullie Harrris returns to her stage role as unpressurable Sally Bowels in the film by
粸¢
John Van Dortan I am a Camera. The film is located in Berlin before Hitler's time and
specifies the pure and odd relationship between Sally, an entertainer in a vulgar night
club, and the young and experienceless writer Christopher Isherwood (Lawrence
Harvey). Shelley Winters stars as a secondary star together with Natalia Lamdaouer,
whose soon marriage to a young Jewish man are endangered due to the anti-Semitism
that develops in Berlin, as trhe Nazis gather political power. I am a Camera is the nonmusical herald of Broadway's hit Cabaret. Both works were based on Christopher
Isherwood's Berlin Stories. Certain elements that appear in Cabaret were weakened in
this film. For example, Isherwood's homosexuality, here Harvey says in the beginning
that he is single, and Sally's abortion in the third act changes into an imaginary
pregnancy. In addition, the dynamic interpretation of Jullie Harrris as Sally is not so
powerful as Lisa Minelly in Cabaret. The film is well directed and adjusted to the screen
(by John Collier) and Miss Harris remains one of the charming stage figures of the midtwenties.
388
Survey
I am a Camera has lost a great part of its vitality in the course of the years, partly
because the musical (Cabaret) is a better version of the basic story, and it is a little
censored versus the stage version. Another problem is that the masculine leading figure
is actually void of content. Things usually happen to him that with Christopher, and it is
disturbing that his image is too much a victim. Fortunately, Lawrence Harvey has
enough charm to moderate this impression. The film is about Julie Harris and her
wonderful performance. Sally Bowels is quite a character and Harris plays her well with
enough skill to keep it from becoming a caricature. From time to time Harris plays a bit
too much for the audience rather than to the camera, but it is quite rare. Most of the
time she does a wonderful job of building a theatrical image in celluloid. Except for the
leading roles, there is also goo camera work and some witty lines and situations. But
there is also a ridiculous sequence of framing, inability to deal with Christopher's
sexuality and avoiding bothering issues. At the same time, if I am a Camera is less than
perfect, it is still valuable as one of Harris's most brilliant performances.
77 . Witness for the Prosecution/ 1957 US
Synopsis
蛐¢
The legendary British prosecutor, Sir Wilfred Robards (Charles Laughton), who has
just recovered from a heart attack and received an order from his physician to give up
the most important thing for him, brandy, cigars and especially make his appearances
in court. Robards did not intend to obey his physician, but he leaves it behind when he
receives to defend Leonard Wall (Tyron Power), a nice man who is accused of murder
of a rich old widow. This case is changed as the man's German "loving" wife, Kristine
(Marlene Dietrich) declares that she is not formally married to Wall, and that she
intends to appear in court as a witness of the prosecution! At the end of the film the
narrator asks the spectators not to tell people the end, and so we won't do it here.
Witness for the Prosecution is an enjoyable mixture of humor, intrigues and melodrama,
with an excellent casting of co-stars: John Williams as the police inspector, Henry Dale
as Robards' partner, Unna O'Connor as the deaf maid of the murdered, Torine Thatcher
as the prosecutor Rota Lee as a spectator who weeps in court, and Charles Laughton's
wife, Elsa Lancaster as the nurse that takes care of Robards, a function that was
written especially so that Lancaster would be able to take care of Laughton on the set.
389
The film was processed by Wilder, Harry Kornitz and Larry Marcus according to a play
by Agatha Christi, and it was made into a TV film in 1982.
Survey
Witness for the Prosecution is an attempt of Billy Wilder, whose work was very
diversified, to work on the genre of court films, and he did it skillfully. In processing
Agatha Christi's short story into a script, Wilder equipped the play with new tools of
humor in the dialogues between the physically weak defender, Charles Laughton, and
the domineering with the good intentions, who takes care of him (his wife in life, Elsa
Lancaster). Laughton and Lancaster have good chemistry between them, and they give
a perfect acting that exceeds the limits of the genre. Wilder is also amusing in Dietrich's
role, the defendant's wife, in using moments of her private life, especially in the
sequence of the wonderful flashback to Berlin Cabaret. The turns and the twists of the
plot appear with no emphasis in a drama of a systematic pace. While the ending
stretches the reliability in order to by-pass the inevitable limitations of the code of the
production, Wyler's film is a satisfactory experience with a few unforgettable
performances, including the last performance of Tyron Power. This film was nominated
for six awards of the academy, but coped with David Lin's film, The Bridge on the River
粸¢
Kwai, which won the award.
78. Bitter Victory/1957 US
Synopsis
This is an intensive war film of one of the greatest Hollywood directors, Nicholas
Ray (Rebel without a Cause). Two adversaries confront a common assignment against
Rommel's army in North Africa, when the wife of one of them arrives for a visit and it is
found out that she had in the past an affair with the other. The tension goes up.
Starring Richard Burton (Who is Afraid of Virginia Wolf) and Karl Yurgens (The Spy Who
Loved Me). Two British officers, Captain Light and Major Brand, a South African, are
considered as leading a daring raid for stealing essential documents from a Nazi African
post in Libya. The two do not like each other. Brand's wife, Jane, arrives to the base
and there is an embarrassing situation when Brand introduces her to light in the
Officers' Club. It is found out that the two know each other intimately and had a
romantic liaison a long time ago, until Light stopped it without an advance notice. Later
on Jane met Brand. Light and Jane keep their past connection as a secret, but Brand
390
understands that something is going on when he goes out for a while and when he
comes back he finds them dancing together. Afterwards he is angry to hear that his
wife calls Light by his first name, Jimmy. Brand and Light are chosed to lead the
mission together. Jane says farewell to Light and a few soldiers see them together.
The raid goes on quite smoothly, until Brand cannot bring himself to kill a German
guard, and Light has to do it. Brand's drudge against Light gets reinforced. The team
steal the documents and goes to the desert to escape from the place. They are
attacked by a German patrol, and after the quarrel Brand becomes suspicious as he
instructs Light to stay with three badly wounded soldiers, while the others go on to the
meeting point. Bitter Victory is based on a novel by Renne Hardy. Jean-Luke Goddard
said about the film that "Nicholas Ray is movie."
Survey
"I kill the living and save the dead," says Captain Light in an ironic laughter. This
kind of dialogue, in which a seemingly heroic figure complains of not having a real
chance of heroism, is an important moment in the strong and meaningful war drama.
Many other directors would have shown Light as a noble figure, and Major Brand as his
coward counterpart, as the hated villain. But Ray and his actors manage to bring
粸¢
humanism out of each one of these characters. All along his career Ray was interested
in the suffering of the strong ones that is turned against themselves, and it goes
beyond the Hollywoodian clichés of honor and fear in the battlefield. The disagreement
between Light and Brand is well known. It is part of who they are as individuals in the
love triangle with Jane, which makes the conflict between them inevitable.
The photographer Michel Calver provides wonderful cinemascopic images in black
and white. But the real power and delight of Bitter Victory is in Ray's vision – strong
morality and emotional honesty – and through the meaningful and surprising acting of
Yurgens (Brand), Brand becomes human in his suffering, and we are capable of finding
empathy towards him in spite of the devastating outcomes of his activities. This aspect
brings Bitter Victory to the level of the best remembered films of this director.
391
79. Paths of Glory/1957 US
Synopsis
Kirk Douglas is trained by Stanley Kubrik toughly a little prior he is connected again
with Spartacus. This time douglas is a general who likes medals and pressures a
commander in the field to bring him glory. On the other hand, the commander
pressures his soldiers in the field, who rebel and withdraw without permission. WWI is
seen by Kubrik as one big infertility, including its pseudo-heroic trenches tactics.
This is an adjustment of a novel by Humprey Cobb with the directing of Stanley
Kubrik and his people, Kalder, Wilingham and Jim Thompson, and they go out to make
a strong anti-war film and manage above and beyond all expectations. In the third year
of WWI, the French scholar but corrupt Broler instructs his forces to take the fortified
hill Ant Hill from the Germans. General Miro knows that this action would be suicidal,
but he would sacrifice his men in order to promote his name. As opposed to his
judgment, Colonel Dax leads the attack and the result is shocking. When a group of
French soldiers realize the massacre of their comrades, they refuse to leave the
trenches, and Miro almost orders the artillery to shoot his own men. When they still
suffer from the defeat, Miro cannot admit to himself that the attack was a bad idea
粸¢
from the beginning: he convinces himself that the loss of the Ant Hill was an outcome
of the cowardice of his men. Miro demands that three soldiers would be chosen by a
toss to be executed as an example to the rest of the soldiers. As he serves as their
defender, Colonel Dax claims skillfully in favor of the lives of these three poor men, but
their lot is predetermined. Broler, who is interested only in boasting, laughs and ignores
the last mintre evidence which proves Miro's inability. The film failed when it was
released for the first time. It was forbidden for screening in France for a few years, but
it took its place in the pantheon of the classic war films, and its message has become
more and more strong and relevant with years. It was especially popular during the
Vietnam war.
Survey
Paths of Glory is an outstanding anti-war film which maintains its influence tens of
years after it release. The inevitable tragedies together with the open style of Kubrik
create a film with a rare power about inflexibility in making decisions during wartime.
Kirk Douglas, who produced the film, seems as a weird choice of the French colonel in
392
WWI, but he fills the screen with his fury. Kubrik brings his accusation against the
military elite who is disconnected from reality, and is even opposed to its people. The
film is difficult and brilliant. It was shot in black and white that reflects the thematic
emphasis on the confrontation between goo (soldiers) and evil (officers). Kubrik focuses
on details, and Paths of Glory is an intellectual and visual experience. The film touches
many sensitive points, and was banned for screening in several European countries,
and France was the last to remove the ban at the end of the seventies. The end shows
the woman who would be Mrs. Kubrik in a sentimental and melodramatic picture that
got criticism as irrelevant to the gloomy film.
80 . Fraulein/1958 US
Synopsis
In this film, Dana Winter plays a German girl who comes from a good family and
has to cope with reality when her family is killed in an air raid during WWII. She helps
an American officer, Mel Ferrer, to escape the Gestapo, and then has to find a way to
evade the Russian soldiers who captured her. The main figure among them was
Theodore Bikel. After she manages to escape to the American sector of Berlin, Winter is
listed in her naiveté as a prostitute, which leads her to a series of hardships. Eventually
粸¢
a German officer, Helmut Dentin covets Dana for what he thinks she is, while the
American officer, Ferrer, loves her as he knows that she is not a prostitute. The film
was shot on location, and was based on a novel by James McGowan.
81. The Young Lions/1958 US
Synopsis
This film is based on a best-seller by Irwin Shaw, and in its adoption to the script
some parts were deleted due to the demands of the censorship and the box-office, but
the final outcome is effective. The background is WWII, and the plot focuses on four
people, two Germans and two Americans. Marlon Brando plays the role of an idealist
German that is enchanted by Nazism at first, and afterwards starts doubting it and
sobers up. Maximilian Schell plays a dedicated Nazi who sticks to his goals all the way
through. The American entertainer, Dean Martin, who is at the brinks of his
breakthrough of his career, makes everything in his power to evade being recruited to
the army, but finally finds himself in uniform. The fourth one is the Jewish American
Montgomery Clift, who is sensitive and fragile and has to cope with anti-Semitism not
393
only on the part of the Germans, but also on the part of his fellow soldiers. Romance
gets into the picture in the figures of Hope Lang, as Clift's non-Jewish girlfriend, and
Barbara Rush as a woman of the high society who pushes Martin to enlist because of
the shame, and there is also May Britt as Brando's counterpart. The scriptwriter Edward
Enhalt had to insert a sequence of a camp of newly recruits, in which one could see
that the officers did not see eye to eye with the racial behavior of Clift's commander,
Lee van Cleef, and therefore changed the ending. In the film's ending Brando's image is
still bitter, but patriotic, when he shoots the figures of Martin and Clift as he shouts
Welcome to Germany! In the film Brando expires symbolically for Hitler's sins.
Maximilian Shcell is Branson's cynical friend, while John Banner, who is unreliable as
Sergeant Schultz in Hogan's Heroes, plays a pompous mayor, who pretends as if he
does not know anything about the horrible concentration camp that is located in his
neighborhood.
Survey
The Young Lions is a pretentious film that integrates politics, romance, nationalism
and morality, and it was a film that wanted to reassess Hitler's legacy after WWII. It
was one of the few important films of this time that brought up doubts regarding the
蛐¢
conventional attitudes toward the war. This film was supposed to be an epos according
to Irwin Shaw's best-seller, but was daring enough to bother the censor. Brando in his
first attempt to imitate a German accent continued his role of dispelling a myth as he
plays a Nazi officer that has become sober up of his illusions. Montgomery Clift played
as a Jewish American soldiers who fought against anti-Semitism in all fronts. The plot
includes romantic complications of all of the main participants but manages to maintain
a challenging sharpness. The bothering and thought arousing drama was directed by
Edward Dmytryk according to a script by Eduard Enhalt. Not many directors and
scriptwriters were prepared to be so daring in the fifties, and touched one of the most
sensitive points.
82. The Diary of Anne Frank/1959 US
Synopsis
This is an autobiographic drama of a Dutch Jewish girl who hides from the Nazis
during WWII. Anne and her family share a claustrophobic attic with another family.
The tension is often unbearable, when the hiding people know that if they are
394
discovered by the Germans might lead almost certainly to their death. They also have
to cope with the Dutch Gestapo or the Green Police, that it would hand them in to the
Nazis if they are discovered. In spite of the horror and the crowded conditions, they
find time to celebrate Hanuka and rejoice quietly in the little attic that has become their
world. The story is told from Anne point of view, a young girl who hopes to live and
reach her femininity. The film competed on a few Oscars and won two for the best
supporting actress (Shelley Winters) and the cinematography (William Melor).
Survey
Although it appeared almost fifteen years after the end of WWII, The Diary of
Anne Frank was one of the films that coped with human aspect of the holocaust. Frank
family is "every family", and it is an evidence of all the victims of genocide executed by
the Nazis. It was shot in a panoramic cinemascope. The photographer, William Melor,
who won the Oscar, and the director George Stevens captured the claustrophobia of
the situation as two families have to live together in cave-like conditions, remain quiet
all day long, and shut the window at night. This claustrophobia creates a feeling of
horror in the audience. Shelley Winters hysteric performance won the Oscar, but
sometimes she seems as if she is in another film in relation to the other more restrained
粸¢
stars. Milly Perkins was a little too old (21) for the leading role, but she gives a candid
performance of the problematic adolescence of Anne. The strength of the two families
in light of the frightening conditions give the film a moral center and a tragic strength
that overcomes its small weaknesses.
83. Verboten/1959 US
Synopsis
Post-war Germany is a location of political and human intrigues in the film of the
rebellious director, Samuel Foller. An American soldier violates the prohibition to
socialize with the local population in the time of the American occupation over defeated
Germany. He marries the German girl who saved him. He uses his connections in order
to get for her food and supplies, and he is unaware of the existence of an antiAmerican and pro-Nazi guerilla goup, which plans to use him in its efforts to drive away
the conqueror.
The director, Samual Foller, combines skillfully German death camps with pictures
from the thought arousing drama of a forbidden love story after the war. David is an
395
American soldier who is positioned in Germany with the governmental force. He in love
with Helga, a young German woman, and she loves him too. But their love story is not
accepted forgivingly in the people on both sides. In addition there is a complication with
a neo-Nazi gang who go wild, kill, steal and help war criminals to escape the law.
Helga's younger brother is a member in this gang, and he breaks when he attends the
Nuremberg trials and sees films about the death camps. As a result, he changes his
mind and is ready to help the American army, and maybe also the liaison between his
sister and David.
84. Sink the Bismarck!/ 1960 US
Synopsis
The Bismarck was a German war ship which has become a symbol in WWII. This
film follows the ship since its launching (with authentic newsreels), through the
numerous battles and escapes, and its final sinking that was far from being inevitable in
the spring of 1941.
Since one cannot expect that a ship would lead a film of 97
minutes, the story concentrates in the human element, and especially in an intelligence
British captain (Kenneth Moore), who lose his family in the Blitz in London, and so he as
a personal reason to see the Bismarck explodes. The captain's incessant efforts get
粸¢
some encouragement by the love and support of a marine officer, Dana Winter. The
sinking of the ship is the peak. It consists of archival and new shootings of small
models.
Survey
Captain Jonathan Sheppard plans a strategy in the war room in London, in a
desperate attempt to lead the Royal British Navy to a victory over the most terrible war
ship, the Bismarck. The mission is so important to keep the essential supply routes, that
Churchill gives the order: "Sink the Bismarck!" The action in the underground war room
is at its height, as British ships with a lower fire power than the Bismarck close on the
fire spitting Bismarck in May 1941. This is the biggest, the fastest and the strongest
ship in the world. But Sheppard does not fight the only Nazis. He fights the demons
from within after his wife got lost in an air raid and his son was declared missing in
action. Kenneth Moore characterizes Sheppard as a distanced, quick tempered
strategist, who struggles to keep his feelings under control as he makes dangerous
decisions that influence the lives of thousands. His performance is incredible. Ably plays
396
his sympathizing assistant is Dana Winter, who knows his master's inner storm and
helps him cope with it and with the Bismark. All the other actors are good as well,
except for Carl Stepank as Admiral Lutianes. He is too much the German aggressive
superior person, an admirer of the Fuhrer and is after glory of the Reich and of himself.
In spite of the limited technology of 1960, the special effects are good, especially the
attack. The picture shows the destruction of the British best ice-breaking ship, Hood,
which gives the Bismarck the final blow.
85. On the Double/1961 US
Synopsis
Danny Kay stars in this nice comedy. He plays an infantry soldier who prepares
with his force to the D-Day. The troubles begin when he is caught pretending to be the
most important general in England, a person he is very much similar to. They are so
much alike, that the military intelligence gives him a mission to go on imposing to be
the general inorder to keep the Nazis in suspense. He does well his job and makes fun
of many of the general's people. He does not make fun of the general's alienated wife,
who cooperates in the trick in order to defend her country. Things get really sticky
when the real general is killed and the military intelligence asks Kay to go on with the
粸¢
decept.
86. One, Two, Three/1961 US
Synopsis
In this film James Cagney plays CP McNamara, a Coca Cola manager who is sent to
run the company's branch in West Berlin. McNamara dreams of moving to London, and
in order to achieve it he has to please his boss Hazeltine (Howard St. John) who is
located in Atlanta. As part of his efforts to please, he agrees to keep an eye over
Heseltine's impulsive daughter, Scarlet (Pamela Tipin) during her visit to Germany. The
weeks go by, and on the eve of Heseltine's visit to West Berlin, Scarlet announces that
she has been married, and what is worse, her husband is an East German communist,
Otto Pipel (Horst Bucholz). Cunning McNamara sees to it that Pipel would get arrested
by the East Berlin police and the marriage are annulled. But then he finds out that
Scarlet is pregnant. McNamara has to act quickly, like one, two, three, a) to see to it
that Pipel is released from the communists, b) to present Pipel, who is a stubborn anticapitalist, as a suitable husband for Scarlet. He has to all this in less than 12 hours,
397
while he tries to appease his wife (Arlene Frances), who finds out about her husband's
affair with his secretary Ingburg (Lilo Pulver).
Billy Wilder's film is a farce with a crazy rhythm, which scatters satiric remarks
toward Coca Cola, the cold War (the film was done a few months prior to the
construction of Berlin Wall), the Russian beaurocracy, the communists and capitalists
hypocrisy, the racism of the south of the US, the German guilt of war, Rock music, and
even Cagney's image. Not all the jokes are in good taste, and most of the punch lines
are anachronistic, but Cagney's hypnotizing performance holds it all together. Billy
Wilder and IAL Diamond processed their script according to an unknown play by Frantz
Molner. It is worthwhile mentioning Red Batance as a military police and listen to Zig
Roman's voice coming from Hubert van Mayernick (the count von Drust Sternburg).
Survey
This is a sharp satire about the partition the Cold War creates between East and
West. This farce takes place in West Berlin, attacks everything, starting from capitalism
of soft drinks and up to communist hypocrisy, soviet mess, masculine greed, feminine
recklessness, Germany after the war and American pop music. In a weariless flow of
punch lines and comic numbers, like torturing a prisoner by an incessant playing of the
粸¢
song Itsy Bitsy Teeny-Weeny Yellow Polka Dot Bikini and a crazy striptease on the
table, which causes a picture of Stalin to fall of the wall, Wilder and Cagney do not slow
down the pace for a moment, until the final punch line of Pepsi Cola. One, Two, Three
was praised by the critics for its wit and star, and won the award of New York's Movie
Critics' Club for the best director, the best script, and the best actor, but was nominated
only to one Oscar for Daniel Ach Pap's black and white cinematography (Pap won the
Oscar for cinematography in color at that year for his work on West Side Story). One,
Two, Three became a popular hit in Germany after the fall of Berlin Wall in 1989.
87. Judgment at Nuremberg/1961 US
Synopsis
After the end of WWII the world has become aware of the full scope of the war
crimes the Third Reich had executed. In 1948 there were conducted in Nuremberg a
series of trials by an international tribunal, headed by legal and military Americans,
intending to bring to justice the people who were guilty for crimes against humanity.
But at the same time most of the main characters of the Nazi regime were already dead
398
or absent for a long time, and the American judges have found themselves quite often
confronting the question: what was the responsibility of people who just "fulfilled
orders". Judgment at Nuremberg is a dramatic version of the proceedings in one of
these trials, in which the judge Dan Hywood (Spencer Tracy) sits in judgment in trials
of four German judges, especially the most outstanding ones of Dr. Ernest Janing (Burt
Lancaster) and Emil Han (Werner Klemperer), who are accused that they sentenced
people to death knowing that they had been innocent because they cooperated with
the Nazis. The defense is represented by Hans Rolf (Maximilian Schell), and the
prosecutor is the American Colonel Ted Lawson (Richard Widmark). In the course of the
trial the American guests and their restrained German hosts confront quite often the
outcomes of the war and the irrevocable change that has occurred because of it in both
parties.
The co-stars of this film include Marlene Dietrich, Judy Garland and Montgomery
Clift as witnesses in the trial. The film version of Judgment at Nuremberg, which was
written and produced as a TV play, was nominated for 11 awards of the academy, and
Maximilian Schell and Avi Man won the Oscar, the first for the best actor, and the
second for the best processing of the script.
粸¢
Survey
Judgment at Nuremberg reconstructs the third of the famous trials that were
conducted in 1948 for war criminals. It was an impressive film mainly due to the subtle
characterizations of the victim and his prosecutor. The bad guys seem like any other
person, and this is one of the central points of the film regarding the raise of the
Nazism. The film excels in attractive performances, mainly those of Montgomery Clift,
Judy Garland and Burt Lancaster in the leading roles. Spencer Tracy shows a respected
figure.
Visually speaking, the film is a little static, like legal dramas in general, although
the dramatic power of the historical subject makes it easier to ignore this defect. The
film was nominated to 11 Oscars, including the best film, the best director to Stanley
Kramer, and nominations for the best performance for Tracy, Garland and Montgomery
Clift. Avi Man won the award for processing the script from the play, and Maximelian
Schell for his performance as the defender of the Nazi criminals.
399
88. Town without Pity/1961 US
Synopsis
The song of the soundtrack, sung by Gene Fitney, was a hit, and it lasted longer
than that of the film. The plot takes place in post-war Germany in a village called
Neustadt. A group of four drunken American soldiers come across a young girl, Karen
Steinhoff (Kristine Kaufman) in a forest out of town. Her boyfriend Frank Borgman
(Gerhard Lipert) had tried to seduce her, but the inexperienced youngster lost his head
and ran away. The soldiers take advantage of the situation and are accused of rape.
Karen's father, Herr Steinhoff (Hans Nielsen) wants they would get a death sentence.
Major Steve Garret (Kirk Douglas), a military lawyer the army brings for managing the
defense, puts pressure on Karen's parents, warning them that he would call her to the
stand. He also speaks with peoples in town and they tell him that Karen uses to stand
naked in her window when people walk near the house. Garret builds a strong file that
leads to a dramatic trial and a shocking ending.
89. The Guns of Navarone/1961 US
Synopsis
This classic war drama by J. Lee Thompson (Gold McCane) was adopted from the
蛐¢
novel by Alistair McLean. Two effective German canons control the sea beyond the
Greek island of Navarone, and prevent from the airplanes of the Allies to fly there.
Rescuing the British soldiers who remained on the neighboring island becomes an
impossible mission. Six British soldiers and one Greek are sent to the island to meet the
partisans, and try to explode the canons. In spite of the complexity of the mission, it
seems that the Germans have another advantage on the poor group.
Starring Gregory Peck, Anthony Quinn, David Niven, Stanley Baker and others. The film
was a candidate for many prizes, including BAFTA, Golden Globe, and the Oscar which
it got for visual effects.
The Guns of Navarone are gigantic Nazi canons installed in an island in the
Aegean Sea behind the enemy lines. Anthony Quail is the British officer who got eh
mission to put the canons out of order. When Quail is hurt, the mission goes to the
unexperienced hands of Gregory Peck. There is not much love between Peck, the
explosives expert David Niven and the Greek patriot Anthony Quinn, especially when it
becomes known that there is a spy among them. The leader of the underground, Irene
400
Papas, expels the spy, but the mission still has to be done. The film was shot in the site
of the action in Rhodes and won the Oscar for the special effects. The Guns of
Navarone was very successful in the box office in 1961, much more than the next in
the series, Force Ten from Navarone (1977).
Survey
The film The Guns of Navarone is a proof that the excitement and the drama have
always depended more on the ability to tell a story than computerized graphics and
colliding asteroids. This is a classic war story about an anti-hero, which tells a strong
human drama and high emotional involvement, mainly due to the impressive
performance of Gregory Peck, Anthony Quinn, David Niven and Anthony Quail. The
huge scope of the production, hundreds extras which were done in another site in the
Mediterranean, adds to the realistic suspense. Navarone won an Oscar for special
effects. The script writer, Carl Forman was a candidate to the Oscar for the first formal
script since he was in the black list.
90. The Longest Day/1961 US
Synopsis
The Longest Day is a giant reconstruction of the invasion on D-Day, and it
蛐¢
demonstrates the dimensions of the drama of the Allies' invasion to Normandy on June
6, 1944, an invasion which indicated the beginning of the end of the Nazi domination in
the West front, in a film full of stars that was conducted by Darryl Zanuck. Whenever it
was possible, the production used the original locations, with the participation of an
international casting in this huge production, from high officers to private soldiers. Each
actor speaks his mother tongue with subtitles. Alternative takes were taken for each
scene, where the actors spoke English, but those scenes were presented only in the
first screenings of the film in 1972.
Survey
The producer, Darryl Zanuck, wanted to make the epic and most important battle
of WWII into the greatest war film that has ever been made. Did he succeed? Not
completely, but this huge work is still one of the most massive war films that have been
ever made with a great number of stars, five directors, (including Zanuck), and a few
fascinating battle sequences. But the great scope lessens the impact. For example, the
401
great number of stars makes the film into a Hollywood presentation more than a war
film.
The stars include John Waine, Eddy Albert, Jean-Louis Barrault, Richard Burton, Red
Batance, Sean Connery, Henry Fonda, Gert Probe, Kurt Yurgens, Peter Leoford, Robert
Michum, Kenneth Moor, Edmond O'Brien, Robert Ryan, Gene Erbi, Rod Steiger and
Robert Wagner. Paul Anka, who wrote the leading song on the soundtrack, appears as
a private in the army. The scenes include parachuting of the Allied forces in St. Mir
Eglise, where the parachutists were killed in great numbers by the Germans; A real
sequence in which German soldiers and Ally soldiers march unaware of one another in
the dark` and three minutes of a shot taken from above on the fighting and dying
soldiers in the streets of Kisterham. The film reinforces a patriotic theme: the victory of
democracy over dictatorship. The courageous American, Canadian and British soldiers
are eager to take the initiative, and are confident in their leaders and their goals,
whereas the German soldiers are confused, afraid to take advantage of opportunities,
and very suspicious about the goal they serve.
The Longest Day, the last film to be made in black and white, gained millions of
dollars enough to cover part of the costs of Cleopatra, which was produced by Fox
蛐¢
Twentieth Century at the same time. The film gained 17.5 million dollar, almost twice
as its cost.
91. Hell is for Heroes/1962 US
Synopsis
This is an excellent war film by Don Segal that takes place in France in 1944. John
Ries (Steve McQuin), a soldier in the American army, is confident that he knows how to
defend the region from the Germans. He offers an exercise which would make the
Germans think they have a huge military force, while actually they were a small force.
When his offer is turned down by his commanders, he decides that from now on he
acts independently. Will he succeed to deceive the Germans and overcome the
opposition from within?
This is the only war film by Don Segal, and the only one with Steve McQuin, an
actor who rebellious and stingy personality suited the vision of the director, as he put
the star in the familiar role of the anti-hero. The hero, Ries, is a bitter soldier who has
been sent back to his unit which has been tired to battles and was holding a post in
402
front of the Siegfrid line in Belgium. He was brought down to a rank of a sergeant
because of his drinking, involvement with people of authority and an outcast in his unit,
although his people were aware of his extra ordinary courage in battle. He is a born
leader, and therefore he convinces his sergeant to implement the plan he had prepared
that would keep the Germans unable to attack by making them believe that the small
unit was actually a bigger one. Ries knows that this exercise can be effective only for a
short time, and it is only a matter of time until the enemy would find out the truth, and
would attack the well fortifies post.
Survey
In spite of the limited budget, this small and solid film is gives a convincing
performance of angry McQuin. While the spectators have been accustomed to a more
enthusiastic treatment of WWII, Segal preferred to emphasize the absurd aspects of
warfare. Not only the hero is a hostile and anti-social type, the whole unit consists of
non-conformistic types, including Bobby Darin and Bob Newheart, whose telephone
calls seem not relevant in a film that shows their comrade who becomes a human
torch. Segal hints in Ries' image, as he did in his policemen films, that those who adjust
best to violent professions are the half pathological types with a tendency to violence.
蛐¢
Although many of the actors, including James Coburn, Nick Adams and Harry Guardino,
were skeptic regarding the fate of the film, and therefore tried to convince Segal to kill
part of the images as soon as possible, they do a good job.
92. Black Fox: the Rise and fall of Adolf Hitler/1962 US
Synopsis
Although the title, Black Fox seems like a Disney film, this is a documentary about
the rise and fall of the Third Reich. Authentic pictures of Adolf Hitler and the war and
the atrocities he caused are designed by a bizarre literary means. Hitler's rise is
compared to that of Reinhard the fox, a crook in a popular legend of the Middle Ages.
While this means can be pretentious, or in the worst case, valuable, the film works
quite well. The sections taken from newsreels are quite familiar, but the treatment of
the director pours new light on an old story.
403
93. Escape from East Berlin/ 1962 US
Synopsis
This documentary drama, directed by Robert Siodmak, is based on a real escape
from East Germany to West Germany that took place in January 28, 1962. Kurt
Schroder (Don Murray) is a young East German driver and he plans to dig a tunnel
under the Berlin wall. He relies on the fact that the guards would not be able to see
him, he goes on with his plan. But he does not think only of himself, and when the time
comes he takes with him his family and several tens of other people.
94. The Great Escape/1963 US
Synopsis
The Great Escape is based on a real story about a group of POWs of the Allied
forces who managed to escape during WWII from a Nazi prisoners' camp that was
supposed to be impregnable. At the beginning of the film the Nazis gather all the
problematic POWs and put them in a new camp that was planned to be safe of
escapes. The prisoners develop immediately a plan, according to which they would
leave the camp by digging three tunnels. Richard Attenborough is a British soldiers who
plans the whole plan and command his varied unit, Charles Bronson is skilled in
粸¢
stealing, Donald Pleasance is a skilled forger, and Steve McQueen is an American rebel.
This is an epic adventure film with music composed by Elmer Bernstein and beautiful
sequences of action, including a famous motorcycle pursuit between McQueen and the
Nazis, which has never been seen before.
Survey
Maybe the Great Escape by John Storges was not appreciated properly, although
it has been one of the most popular adventure films of WWII. This film defined the
movie image of Steve McQueen, James Garner, Robert Attenborough and a large
number of the rest of the cast, and it also was a milestone in the career of Storges. But
all the same, The Great Escape was not appreciated very much until many years after it
came out to the screens. The critics categorized it together with other huge productions
about WWII, like The Longest Day, Navarone Canons and The Battle of the Bulge and
ignored its unique nature as a tragic film. The heroic actions that were based on facts,
the humor of many of the figures and the rich exciting music of Elmer Bernstein helped
to put the foundations for a classic tragedy. The spectators react to the dramatic forces
404
that motivate the figures, like Bartlett's obsession, Hilts' cynicism and being busy with
himself, Hadley's practical approach to survival and to the assignment, whereas the
critics regarded the film as simplistic and empty of content. The Great Escape expresses
the depth and the drama through action, not through a heavy dialogue, and in this
sense it was probably too loyal to its subject. It was one of the most important and
fascinating films that have been produced in the US, which won great success and
varied criticism.
95. The Victors/1963 US
Synopsis
The saga with the heavy irony of the scriptwriter/director Carl Forman is an epic
drama about WWII, which is outstanding in its anti-war approach. It is based freely on
the novel Humankind by Alexander Baron. The film follows the adventures of an
American infantry unit that is positioned in Sicily, participates in the invasion to France,
enters Germany and stays there during the conquest of the Allies after the war. The
film takes about three hours, with stupid scenes from newsreels from the home front
scattered here and there, which are presented as opposed to the bothering events of
the war. George Papard plays Corporal Chase, who has an affair with a woman who
蛐¢
wants that he deserts in order to help her with the black market business she runs. He
visits the wounded sergeant Crive (Elly Wallach) in the hospital, and finds out that he
lost most of his face in an explosion. Sergeant Tower (George Hamilton) develops a
relationship with a woman, and finds out later that she is a whore. The plot is quite
episodic, with coming and going images.
96. They Saved Hitler’s Brain /1963 US
Synopsis
After removing his head in an operation and preserving it, Hitler actually lives in an
island in the Caribeans. When a young woman and her husband go out to look for her
scientist father and her sister, they find a group of Nazis who are still under the
command of the Fuhrer, planning to renew their atrocities toward humankind as part of
a program to control the world.
405
97. Train/1964 US
Synopsis
Paris 1944. WWII. The pro-Nazi Vichy regime rules France. An activist of the
French Resistance tries to deviate a train that goes towards Germany with a cargo of
art treasures on it. John Frankenheimer (The Envoy from Manchuria) directed an
excellent war action thriller, starring Burt Lancaster (Birdman of Alcatraz). Lancaster
plays Lebich, a French train conductor. The Allies threaten to liberate Paris, and Colonel
Frantz von Waldheim gets an order to transfer precius works of art from the museum of
Jeu de Paume to Germany. The nanager of the museum tries to convince Lebich to
sabotage the train in which they transfer the works of art. Lebich is more concentrated
in destroying the German ammunition. After his comrades gets killed in an attempt to
stop the train with the art objects, and after a conscious-arousing conversation with an
hotel owner, Lebich decides to rescue the works of art. Lancaster and Frankheimer had
worked together in the past in the Birdman of Alcatraz and in Seven Days in May.
Survey
This story is based on a real case from WWII, and the mandate to rescue precious
paintings provides a thought arousing background for an exceptional sequence. The
粸¢
film was shot originally in black and white with a French casting around Burt Lancaster.
The director 'Frankheimer focuses in the efforts of the French resistance to prevent a
train with a cargo of stolen works of art to go out of France. It is made with an
accurate realism that emphasizes the human price of a mission that offers just a
symbolic reward. Frankenheimer used real trains and train stations in the action scenes
to make them as suspenseful as possible , especially when the art train comes too close
to a German ammunition train that the Allies Air Force is about to attack. The depth of
the characterization gives the action and its outcomes an additional intensity. Lancaster
performed the stunts by himself, and added intensity to his actions on screen. Train is
made with genius and intelligent skill, and was nominated to an Oscar for the best
original script. One can see this film's influence in hair-raising cars pursuits in the film
Bulit (1968) and The French Connection (1971) and up to the action in Speed (1994).
406
98. 36 Hours/1965 US
Synopsis
Major Pike wakes up in a hospital and finds out that he has been hospitalized for
six years in a state of amnesia, a long time after WWII. What he still does not know is
that it is not an American hospital, but an intelligence facility in Bavaria, that the year is
1944, and that he was kidnapped by the Germans in order to extract from him
information about the D-Day of the Allies. This is a convincing psychological thriller
directed by George Seaton (A Miracle in 34 Street) according to the novel by Roals Dahl
(James and the Huge Peach).
In 1950, Major Jefferson Pike (James Garner), an intelligence officer, who served
with distinction in WWII, wakes up in a hospital with severe amnesia. He is not sure
where he is, how did he get there, or even who is the woman at his side, although the
doctor tells him that her name is Anna and that she is his wife. The doctor tells Pike to
recall, with as many details as possible, what did he do prior to the accident that
caused the loss of a traumatic memory. But the doctor is not a doctor, Anna is not
Pike's wife, it is not 1950, and he is not in an American hospital. WWII was in its
height, and Pike was put into a system of deception that was prepared by Major Walter
粸¢
Gerber, a German intelligence officer. Gerber tries cunningly to extract from Pike, who
had been drugged with materials which were supposed to make him easy to be
influenced, so that he would tell them all he knew. Would Pike be able to see through
the cracks of Gerber's façade before he tell them what he knows, which means death
and a defeat for the American soldiers. 36 Hours was made for the television under the
title Breaking Point.
99. Dr. Strangelove/1964 US
Synopsis
In 1964, when the crisis of missiles in Cuba was still fresh in the minds of the
spectators, the Cold War was in its greatest freezing point, and the hydrogen bomb was
relatively new and horrifying, Stanley Kubrick dared to make a film of what might
happen if the wrong person would push the wrong button, and used this situation to
make people laugh. This black satire, with a script by the director, Stanley Kubrick,
Peter George and Terry Southern, and a lot of excellent comic performances, including
three by Peter Sellers, the film remained fresh and entertaining, especially as its
407
subjects are still actual to a certain extent. An American bomber, loaded with nuclear
arms, is flown by Major EG King Kong (Slim Pickens), in a regular flight close to the
USSR, when there arrive orders to start with Attack Program R – "nuclear battle face to
face with the Russians" as Major Kong puts it. On the ground, in the Air Force base in
Refelson, Captain Lionel Mandrake (Peter Sellers) does not see anything new in the fact
that America is at war. General Jack D. Ripper (Sterling Hayden) informs him calmly
that he has given the order to attack the USSR, because it is about time that someone
does something about fluoridation that extracts the body liquids from the Americans (it
may have something to do with Ripper's defected sexual functioning). In the meantime,
the president Merkin Meply (Sellers again) meets with his senior consultants in the
Pentagon, including General Back Tragidson (George C. Scot), an extremist hawk who
sees here an opportunity to make something about communism in general and the
Russians in particular. But the scope of the gamble rises significantly when the Soviet
ambassador Desadsky (Peter Ball) informs Meply and his crew about the most
innovative development in the Soviet weapon technology: The Doomsday Machine,
which would destroy the whole world if the Russian attack.
Survey
粸¢
The film Dr. Strangelove is considered by many as the greatest movie satire, a
film that includes the fear and the paranoia of the Cold War in an excellent essentiality.
There is no sequence without a dialogue worth quoting. In fact, there are so many
unforgettable moments, that the spectators and the critics can argue which one of
them is the best. But undoubtedly the sight of Major Kong (Slim Pickens) waving his
cowboy's hat as he is mounted on the bomb towards destruction, is of the most
remembered sights of that time. As it always has been in his career, the director
Stanley Kubrick matches brilliantly the actors to their roles, starting with the roles that
Peter Sellers plays up to the premier movie performance by James Earl Jones, whom
Kubrick discovered when he played in the theater. The same refers to George C. Scot,
who plays the Nazi General Back Tragidson, who saw in Strangelove one of his greatest
achievements in movies. Every performance is of the best level, and one can find in the
film many of Kubrick's symbols, from the visual style up to the shift to a camera that is
held in the hand when the Air Force base is attacked with and ironic music. There is
double criticism in the film: the policy of the administration in the /cold War and
408
adopting the Nazi-Germans and evil that still exists for political needs, that is to say that
adopting evil makes us evil.
100. The Spy Who Came in from the Cold/1965 US
Synopsis
The film is based on a novel by John le Carée, and its star is Richard Burton as a
depressed British secret agent on the verge of a nervous breakdown. He comes back
from the cold in order to operate under cover beyond the Iron Curtain. In order that his
faked desertion would seem real, Burton goes out to get drunk. He is arrested and
humiliated publicly. After he has been accepted in the espionage network of East
Germany, Burton finds out that the mission assigned to him was just an excuse, and
actually he serves as a pawn in a quite different action. Although the shooting was
taken in Ireland and England instead of East Berlin, The Spy Who Came in from the
Cold seems authentic, to a large extent due to the gloomy black and white shootings by
Oswald Morris. The film was condemned as incomprehensible by the spectators, who
have been used to simplistic James Bond melodramas, but today the fraud and the
counter-treason seem understood and quite reliable.
Survey
粸¢
Among the revisionist espionage dark films that popped up in the mid-sixties as a
counter-reaction to the James Bond phenomenon, The Spy Who Came in from the Cold
was used for an existential examination of the world of espionage, ant its impact
remained as it has been, even since the end of the Cold War. Richard Burton gives the
film its emotional center. He is perfect for the role of the exhausted indifferent secret
agent. The artistic and concise directing and the impressive cinematography of Martin
Ritt give more power to Burton's reflective performance in the leading role. Ritt helps
the co-stars, Claire Bloom and Oscar Werner, to give a qualitative performance. The
gloomy atmosphere of the film empowers and contributes to the negative
representation of the Germans.
101. The Battle of the Bulge/1965 US
Synopsis
In December 1944 the high command of the Allies is convinced that the German
forces in Belgium are in a low readiness, and may even withdraw. Only one officer in
the front line, the intelligence Lieutenant Colonel Kelly (Henry Fonda) thinks otherwise
409
that the Germans plan an attack. His direct commander (Dana Andrews) and his
superior (Robert Ryan) do not accept his opinion. Kelly discovers in a patrol flight some
suspicious signs of German activity beyond the lines. He is looking for evidence in the
front line when the German counter-attack starts. The Germans take advantage of the
lack of readiness on the part of the Allies and a barometric front that grounds all
aircrafts, and heavy German tanks with the assistance of the infantry attack the
American forces, attacking in five different locations, trying to divide the Allies' forces.
The main German armor officer, Colonel Hessler (Robert Shaw) planned the operation
perfectly, but he runs against time to catch as big area as possible before the weather
front goes away and the American aircrafts will be able to fly again. He aims at taking
the Americans' fuel reservoirs so that the attack could go on up to Antwerp. His men
are totally dedicated to him, but his aide, Konrad (Hans Kristian Blach), who is
exhausted of fighting and wonders what it is good for, has doubts. In the meantime
Kelly tries to find out the weak point of the German attack, and he comes across some
key officials in this drama. Charles Bronson as a field officer who is in charge of
defending the collapsing American positions, James McArthur as a fresh lieutenant who
becomes a leader, and Telly Savalas as a wise guy sergeant, a tank commander, who
粸¢
suddenly finds in himself a nobler, not greedy facet.
Survey
The German tanks destroy everything on their way in this film that describes the
counter-attack of the third Reich against the Allies who march through Europe.
Although the script is mediocre and the personal stories are fictional, the battle scenes
are impressive. The star is the Panzer, a tank wrapped by a thick layer of heavy metal.
This is the new Achilles, seemingly invulnerable, the horror of the battle field, which
scatters destruction with accuracy in the battles in the Ardennes of Belgium,
Luxembourg and France between December 15, 1944 and January 15, 1945. A German
war-room follows the progress of the tanks, and Colonel Martin Hessler (Robert Shaw)
is a merciless officer who loves the war. He arranges his tanks on a top of a hill, grinds
a town that was conquered by the Americans into ashes, smoke and fear. The soldiers
who defend the town withdraw and crate a "bulge" in the front of the Allies. There is
only one problem: There is no fuel in Hessler's tanks. It is a wonderful sight to watch
Shaw and hate him as he plays Hessler as a crazy man who is ready to risk everything
410
for the enjoyment of killing. His private soldiers, many of them are young boys, are
ready to die for his sake, and they even start singing and sing the Panzerlied, the song
of the Panzers, which increases his lust for blood. Henry Fonda plays an American
colonel who goes to patrol flights in a heavy fog to find Hessler. He and other veteran
war horses like Robert Ryan, Dana Andrews, George Montgomery, Telly Savalas and
Charles Bronson play quite well. Hans Kristian Blach plays the most interesting
character in the film, Corporal Konrad who flatters Hessler. When he understands that
Hessler is crazy, he dares say things to the Panzers commander and condemn his
brutality. In this way he shows that a German soldier can think and feel guilt feelings,
but he loses his rank of course. He marches back home to Germany wrapped in his coat
and his integrity. The brilliant music of the film was written by Benjamin Frenkel.
102. Operation Crossbow/1965 US
Synopsis
This espionage film is located in the last years of WWI. It was made with a big
budget. George Papard, Tom Courtney and Jeremy Camp parachute into Germany, with
orders to destroy the V-1 missiles camp of the Nazis in Panmunde. Who would survive
for the longest time? Since the production was MGM, Papard has enough time to
粸¢
express his condolences together with Sofia Loren, the wife of a Nazi collaborator that
Papard plays. The film was a failure in this first release, MGM decided that the title
misled the spectators to think that is was some kind of a Robin Hood film, so it clarified
it with the new title The Big Espionage Mission.
103. The Quiller Memorandum/1966 US
Synopsis
The Neo-Nazis are coming. Who are the Neo-Nazis in Germany of today? In which
ways they achieve their goals? What are these goals? The film The Quiller
Memorandum tries to answer these harsh questions.
This espionage saga (an ancient collection of eposes, a name of a wide-scope
novel that tells the history of a certain subject) differs from the regular films in the
James Bond style, which was popular at that time. There are plenty of sophisticated
instruments, but the hero Quiller (George Segal) does not use a gun even once. Quiller
receives an order by his superior, Paul (Alec Guinness), to penetrate into a Neo-Nazi
gang in Berlin, after two British agents have been killed in the same mission after a
411
school teacher hung himself when he was accused of being a war criminal. Quiller
meets the substitute of the late teacher, beautiful Inga (Santa Berger), and goes with
her to her house, where he is beaten, drugged and kidnapped by Nazi hooligans. But
the head of the Nazis, October (Max von Sidov), lets him escape hoping that he would
lead them to Paul. Quiller is caught on the second time and given a chance until
morning to lead the Neo-Nazis to their headquarters in Berlin. At the end of the film the
Neo-Nazis are caught. The Quiller Memorandum is an espionage thriller. It criticizes the
Neo-Nazis and Neo-Nazism in Germany of today.
104. Funeral in Berlin/1966 US/Britain
Synopsis
Funeral in Berlin was one of three films which were based on the books about
Harry Palmer by Len Dayton. Michael Caine stars here, like in the film Ipcress File as
Palmer, the British spectacles secret agent, who had not such a good reputation. Similar
to what happened in The Third Man by Graham Green, Palmer is sent to Berlin to
examine the suspicious defection of a Soviet colonel under the name of Stock (Oscar
Homulke). Stock's death is a deceit, and Palmer is expected to fabricate the defection of
the "body".
粸¢
Survey
Guy Hamilton's film, Funeral in Berlin (1966) was a pioneering thriller at the time.
Since WWII and up to the mid-sixties, the nature of politics and the paranoia that
prevailed in the West brought about a situation in which almost every description of the
Cold War was done as an exercise in entertainment. James Bond's films took advantage
of this situation by ignoring the Cold War in almost all their films, except for From
Russia with Love, and preferred to deal with other villains, not the Soviets. The fact that
Paramount made Funeral in Berlin pointed on a new spirit. Unlike Bond's films, the story
her ewes full of details about the Cold War, eager to mock the seriousness in which the
matter was dealt by the formal authorities. Hamilton, the photographer Otto Heller, and
the editor John Bloom celebrated in this production in a quick editing, irregular
photographic angles and stinging remarks throughout the script, what made the film
much more complicated and demanding, and finally rewarding than Goldfinger's films.
This film was one of the magnificent thrillers because of the use of the means of the
plot, like Nazis who did not regret for their deeds, and money which was stolen from
412
the Holocaust victims. These are the very characteristics for which the film deserves a
repeated watching. The cinematography is excellent, with the pictures of Berlin and
London in the sixties.
105. Torn Curtain/1966 US
Synopsis
This thriller was directed by Alfred Hitchcock, in which a double agent has to cope
with enemies of both sides of the political barricade, as well as with the woman he
loves. Professor Michael Armstrong (Paul Newman) is an American talented physicist,
who at the height of the Cold War decides to defect to East Germany. To his surprise,
Sara Sherman (Julie Andrews), who is also a scientist, follows him and soon finds out
that Armstrong is not a traitor, but operates as a secret agent under cover. While
Armstrong tries to find ways to the hearts of political and scientific circles in East
Germany, Gromek (Wolfgang Killing) becomes his guide, although Armstrong knows
Gromek is a government agent, whose mission is to follow him. When Armstrong tries
to evade Gromek, he understands that his new "friend" knows what he is about to do.
The Torn Curtain is one of Hitchcock's rare films from his classic period, which was not
accompanied by music by Bernard Herman. Hitchcock dismissed Herman from the
粸¢
project because of the objection of the studio, although parts of the music he had
started to write were integrates as a bonus in the DVD copy from 2002
Survey
From a technical point of view, the film is well made and can be described as
consists of three parts. The first part presents the brilliant scientist that Newman plays,
as he deserts to East Germany, where he is surprised to find out that his girlfriend
(Andrews) followed him. The second part tells us the main reason for his "defection",
and the third and last part deals with the couple's frightened escape. While the first
parts as a little slow, the story gains acceleration and it has a few Hitchcock classic
scenes. IN one of them, Newman's attempt to get rid of his German guard, Gromek,
leads him through a museum, where the only sound that he hears is the footsteps of
both of them. Then Newman kills Gromek with the help of the contact man's wife. The
sequence is brutal and becomes long, as Hitchcock wanted to describe how difficult
executing a murder can be. In the peak scene there is a bus chase and a sequence of a
funny escape full of tension, but they seem quite pale after the murder of Gromek.
413
106. Is Paris Burning?/1966 US
Synopsis
In 1944, when Paris was about to be liberated by the Allies, Adolf Hitler ordered to
bomb the City of Lights and burn it down. General Dietrich von Schultz decides, after a
lot of thinking, that he does not want to be remembered in history as the one who
destroyed Paris. His refusal to obey Hitler's orders would make him excommunicated in
Germany to the end of his life. The Allies did not reward him either. The script grew
from this human story in the height of one of the inhuman conflicts of history, by Gur
Hodal and Francis Ford Copola) of a film full of stars in an international production.
While the earlier film, The Longest Day, was able to carry the whole team of celebrities
and short sub-plots, it seems that Is Paris Burning? Has difficulty to bear this weight.
Anyway, a modern audience would be entertained find the stars all along the film,
especially when they are Gert Probe (as Scholtitz), Jean Paul Belmondo, Alain Delon,
Kirk douglas (as Patton), Glem Fffford (as Bradley), Ives Montant, Simone Signoret,
Robert Stack, and even Anthony Perkins as an innocent soldier. The film was made in a
immense scope and was based on a book by Larry Collins and Dominic Le Pierre. It was
made in black and white, except for the Technicolor ending.
粸¢
Survey
The adjustment of the heavy book by Larry Collins and Dominic Le Pierre was
probably almost impossible, and it is a disappointment, though the film is not bad. It
just does not manage to take off to its supposed intention. Part of the problem is its
length, of almost three hours. The script is too twisted, there are too many scenes, that
even if they are good, they are mainly. There is also the unending march of famous
faces, what distorts the attention. The film also confuses quite often by simplifying
parts of this complex story. The film makers made things vague. And all the same,
there are wonderful moments, and the large use the director did of shooting in on site
is impressive and effective. The film is too cut to sections, but it still provides moments
that make up for it.
107. The Devil’s Brigade/1968 US
Synopsis
During the first days of WWII, while the US gathers its forces for war, England
plans quickly commando raids against German forces in order to keep them away until
414
the American forces would join in. As part of this plan, the Allies establish the first
special service force for planning and executing an attack on Norway in order to stop
the German forces. This commando force of Canadian and GI American soldiers, under
the command of Lieutenant Colonel Robert T. Frederic (William Holden), an office man
who gets his first field command. Right at the beginning there develops an antagonism
between the Canadian Major Allen Crown (Cluff Robertson) and the American Major
Cliff Briker (Vince Eduards). But Frederic uses their mutual aversion as a basis for an
adversary that becomes this group of riffraff of good-for-nothings into a disciplined
fighting force. Frederic received information that the Norway mission is cancelled. After
addressing Washington for another mission for the commandos, the brigade is sent to a
patrol near the German lines in the south of Italy. The brigade takes prisoners the
inhabitants of a village under the control of the enemy and receives the mission that
seem impossible to conquer the La Dipansa mountain.
108. The Producers/1968 US
Synopsis
The theatrical producer Max Bilsistok (Zero Mustel) was once admired in
Broadway. Now he lives in his meager office, gets money from old fat ladies for sex
粸¢
services. Even worse, he goes so much down that he wears a belt of cardboard. X's
new accountant, Leo Bloom (Gene Wilder) is reincarnation of decency, and he suggests
that Max produces a hit in order to try to regain his losses. But Max knows that it is too
late. As an improvisation Leo raises the idea that if Max would have found investors for
failure, he could have kept all the surplus money from a legal point of view. Suddenly,
Max's eyes lit up as he realizes that Leo Bloom is brilliantly corrupt. "I want everything
that I've ever seen in the movies!" says Leo as Max embraces him. Together they
scheme to choose a bad play, with a worst playwright, the worst director, and the worst
actor who would cooperate in their promised failure. The play is A Spring for Hitler, a
nice mischievous story with Adolf Hitler and Eva Brown. The playwright is Frantz
Liebkind (Kenneth Mars), a non-rehabilitated Nazi that in his drunken hallucinations
insists that Hitler was a better painter than Churchill: "He could paint a show flat in one
afternoon, two coats!" the director is a dandy cokesinelle, Roger de Bris (Christopher
Huet), who is supposed to go to a fashion show dressed up like Mari Antoinette, when
Max and Leo come to him (Max, Max, he wears a dress). The star, who has been
415
selected after several strict stage auditions, the hippie Lorenzo S. Dubois (Dick Sean).
After a few weeks, Max has sold 25% of the show, and as a final touch, he bribes the
critics of the premiere with a promising review, knowing very well that such a gesture is
his death kiss. The curtain opens and A Spring for Hitler starts the most tasteless
production ever made in the history of the movie. At the end of the rich show the
audience gets up stunned and quiet. Max and Leo go happy to a bar at the corner to
celebrate their failure. But then, as the first experience of Mel Brooks as a director, The
Producers was not a success, but since that time he had his place among the best
comedies of all times.
Survey
The Producers received two nominations for the Oscar, one for Gene Wilder for the
supporting best actor, and the other to Mel Brooks, for the best original script in his first
funny film. It is a joyful parody in the Judy Garland/Mikky Ronny style. The film attacks
not so gently the dubious morale of the commercial aspect of the Hollywood movie
industry. There are a lot of the funniest dialogues of all Brooks films together with some
most shocking musical parts, which become more effective due to the authenticity of
their composition. Who else besides Mel Brooks could have show the nerve to make
部¢
Hitler an object of his comedy? The film is not dependent on the quick anarchic rhythm
of the marx Brothers films in order to catch the audience. Brooks almost deliberately
slows down the story so that we would be able to enjoy the comic wittiness between
Mustel and Wilder. The Producers is one of these rare comedies that manage to bigger
than the total of their funny components.
109. Where Eagles Dare/1969 US
Synopsis
A war action film in which great men go out to save another man from the preyin
nails of Nazi men. Starring Richard Burton (Cleopatra) and young Clint Eastwood that
the film makes him number one in the box office in America at that time. It is adjusted
according to the book of the magician of action books, Alistair McLean (The Guns of
Navarone).
This expensive but very profitable film, Where Eagles Dare concentrate on a daring
rescue operation and a more daring escape. As they are disguised as Nazi officers, the
commandos Major John Smith and Lieutenant Morris Shefer (Clint Eastwood) and six
416
other brave men parachute beyond the enemy lines. Their mission was to rescue an
American general who was kept captive in an Alpine mansion, allegedly impenetrable.
The get help and encouragement from the secret agents Mary and Heidi and a British
officer who has planned the operation is also in the background. Somehow someone in
the Allies forces would be found traitor. There is a turning the plot when the
commandos manage to arrive to the American general, and there is another turn of the
plot. The peak makes you dizzy and made this film to one of the most requested films
of Clint Eastwood. The script was written for the screen by the espionage writer, Alistair
McLean.
Survey
IN this thriller the Allied forces penetrate into a mansion on the Bavarian Alps in
order to rescue a captive general who knows the plans of the D-Day. The film shows
parachutes, shootings and explosions, a magnificent landscape and frozen hands which
try to survive on the rocks. There are also escape operations where the heroes evade
gun fire in the corridors of the mansion, drive a bus in the mountain passes, and take
off with a plane as they believe that everything is alright, but it is not so. IN short, is an
admired film. The music is very much arousing and the script is alive, process according
粸¢
to the novel by Alistair McLean, with a wonderful performance of Richard Burton and
Clint Eastwood, the British major, John Smith and the American Lieutenant Morris
Shefer. Angry Burton barks orders while cool Eastwood eliminates Nazis with bayonet
and bullets. There is a wonderful performance by Michey Hordern as the British deputy
admiral Roland, and Roland Dern Nesbit as the Nazi major von Harpen, support the
performance of Burton and Eastwood. But the real stars are the rhythm and the action.
Disguised with German uniform, the invaders execute a dangerous drive in the cable
car, catch people from the windows, and mingle with the enemy when a new danger
comes up beyond every corner. Surprises come when they realize that not everyone is
what he is supposed to be. In the meantime, the audience eats their nails as the music
builds up the tension towards a surprising secret that is discovered at the end.
110. Patton/1970 US
Synopsis
In 1943 in North Africa, George Patton (George S. Scott) received the command on
the American forces there. He is at war against the German fieldmarshal Rommel (Karl
417
Michael Fulger). Patton takes the Desert Fox back to the desert, while using tactics of
the Germans. He is promoted to a Lieutenant General, and sent toSicily, where he
enters into a personal war of ego with the British Fieldmarshal Montgomery (Michael
Bates). Pattn acts brilliantly in Italy and risks his future due to a single dmage to his
ego. When he visits a military hospital, the general meets a GI soldier (Tim Cosidin),
who suffers from combat fatigue. He get angry of what he considers as negligence,
and slaps the poor soldier on his face, ordering him to get well fast. This incicent
caused him to lose the command, ,and later on, he misses the D-Day. INthis final
journey, Patton leads the third American Army through Europe. In a showing off and
shameless way Patton remains a valuable source, but he looks like a loser in
comparison with the more sophisticated tactics of his old friend, Omar Bradley (Carl
Melden). Patton won seven Oscars, including the best film, the bets actor foir Scott,
who refused to receive the prize.
Survey
Patton is ranked as one of the greatest biuographical epos that havbe ever been put
on the screen, just as George S. Scott in the leading role is often considered as one of
the greatest performances in the history of the movie. Scott, and the film, benefit from
粸¢
the intelligent script, by Francis Ford Copolal and Edmond H. North, a strange and lucky
couple of different writing styles. After the first 45 minues the film focuses on a small
part of Patton's career, from the North African journey until the end of WWII. There
were only a few compromises with history. For instance, Patton wear a uniform with
four stars, one rank higher than he had, as he give am enthusiastic speech to his forces
at the beginning of the film. The picture was taken, word for word, from a speech
Patton gave in June 4th, 1944. This is ust one example of the credibility that gives the
film its superb texture. Patton benefits also from an extra ordinary technology,
especially the cinematography by Fred Concamp and the orchestra by Jerry Goldsmidt.
111. Raid on Rommel/1971 US
Synopsis
Richard Burton is a British officer in WWII, who goes out to an almost impossible
mission to hit the German forces who camp in the harbor of Tobruk in North Africa.
Against all chances, the inexperienced unit manages to penetrate deep into the enemy's
418
lines, and even confront face to face with Erwin Rommel, the brilliant general of Hitler's
army.
The British navy is on its way to North Africa to attack the Germans, and the best
harbor for landing for them is Tobruk. There they encounter problems: the Germans
control Tobruk and they fortified it with heavy artillery which would prevent the British
landing. The original plan to sabotage the cannons by the use of British commando
warriors who were implanted beyond the enemy lines as war prisoners, went wrong.
Imposing as a Nazi officer, the man who was supposed to lead the attack (Richard
Burton) arrives at the meeting point, but he finds there real prisoners of war, all of
them ill and accompanied by their pacifistic dressers. The lives of many British are at
stake, and a failure might influence the outcome of the whole war. Somehow he has to
use these unexpected recruits to carry out the raid.
112. Slaughterhouse Five/1972 US
Synopsis
This is an adaptation of the fantastic masterpiece by Kurt Vonnegut. Billy Pilgrim,
a middle-aged optician, finds out that he can sail at his free will in time. Three periods
of his life get mixed together, the past, in which he was a prisoner of war during WWII
粸¢
by the Germans and experienced on himself the cruel bombardment on the city of
Dresden by American aircrafts. The present, in which he conducts a middle class way of
life in the US. And the future, in which he spends his time as a guinea pig in the
company of a nude model on the planet Tralfamador. The past nightmares of the war
and the crazy present of family life, transfer Billy to other worlds and times, while using
a bitter sense of humor. This is an excellent adaptation of Kurt Vonnegut's book.
The director George Roy Hill adapts loyally the anti-war black comedy by Fonbut
about a pilgrim (played very well by Michael Sachs), who survives the awful
bombardment on Dresden in 1945,and since them lives in his past as a naive American
prisoner of war and in the future as a lodger in a zoo well kept on the planet of
Trafalmadore with Zeftig as his spouse. In the present he is a middle age optician in
Illium, New York. If it sounds a bit messy, it is actually so. But viewers who want to
watch the film attentively would find this complicated and harmonic film like a melody
played by Glen Gould playing Back on the sound track of the film. This is not essential,
but fans who had read the short and poetic book would find the film as an experience,
419
and it would help them appreciate the genius quality of Hill in bringing this children's
crusade to the screen. Beside Sachs, there are excellent appearances of Ron Leibman
as the crazy goddess of vengeance, the Nemesis of the pilgrims, and John Dehner as
the arrogant professor Romford. Hill, has come to this film, of course, from a big hit,
Kid and Cassidy, and afterwards moved to the next success with The Sting a year later.
The lavish architecture of the Middle Ages and the Baroque of Dresden before the
bombardment was shot loyally in Prague, as most of the architecture of Dresden was
lost in the bombardment, and it was anyway deep inside East Germany, and therefore
was unavailable for shooting at the time.
113. Cabaret /1972 US
Synopsis
It had been a Broadway musical originally. This innovative musical by Bob Fosse
was based on the story by Christopher Isherwood, Goodbye to Berlin, which was
adapted to a stage drama and to a film I Am a Camera with Julie Harris as Sally Bowles.
Fosse uses a vulgar decadent cabaret as a mirror of the German society that slides
toward the Nazis, with a combination of entertainment and social history signaled the
next step towards the cinematic musical. Michael York plays the British writer who
粸¢
comes to Berlin in the early thirties hoping to be a teacher. He gets to know the
American showy entertainer Sally Bowles, played by Liza Minelli. Sally works in a Kit Kat
club in a Berliner cabaret, where every night the ridiculous and hermaphrodite emcee
(Joel Grey) presents a jazzy girls show to his wild audience. As a matter of fact, all the
musical numbers of the film are presented in the club, and each song testifies of the
plot and the "progress" of Germany from hedonism to Hitlerism. The film preserves
most of the Broadway songs by John Kander, with the nice addition of the Money Song.
Although the film did not win the best film award to the Godfather, Cabaret won eight
Oscars, including Minelli, Grey and Fosse. A censored version of 88 minutes of Cabaret
was prepared for a commercial show on television, which is considered by many as
inferior from a dramatically point of view to the full version.
Survey
It is less a traditional musical and more a drama with musical sections. Cabaret is
a full, beautiful and bothering version of life in Germany upon Hitler's coming to power.
By using a choreography that was done by an expert in the Kit Kat club meant to reflect
420
the changes in the German society, the director Bob Fosse shows effectively the
clamoring and illusionary world, showing that the isolated decadence is drastically
opposed to the horror of reality. Sally Bowles is there in the middle of the turmoil,
directing the unrestricted energy and the electrifying joy in the club and is going to be
threatened by what happens outside. Cheeky, shamelessly sexy and with selfconfidence, she is a fresh wind and one of the women of the fullest materialization on
paper, on stage and on the screen. Liza Minelly plays this character with happy energy
that this character calls for, and is one of the best performances in her career. Her
appearance in the Kit Kat club, wearing a Derby hat, boots and something small, and a
new use of a chair, she remains one of the most iconic images on screen. The focus on
the relationship between the main characters of the film, mainly Sally and Brian (played
amazingly, almost poetically and tenderly by Michael York), confronts the whirlpool in
their private lives and the public events. Sally's debauchery, Brian's bi-sexuality, the
informal use of Maximilian in both characters, and the final acceptance of this platonic
friendship reflect fate together with mentality and the mantra of pleasures - will have to
give way to pain. The best and most frightening performance of former debauchery and
the present "progress" towards a new fascistic ideal is of course the Emcee, as it is
蛐¢
played by unforgettable Joel Grey. He is somewhere between human and a ghost, a
cunning performance that is a reminder of fleshly joy and ideological oppression. Like
the Emcee, Cabaret shows us both joy and oppression, providing a portrait of a period
in which the existent is replaced very quickly by a new thing.
114. Hitler: The Last Ten Days/1973 US
Synopsis
Alec Guinness plays against the stereotype of Hitler in Hitler: The Last Ten Days of
Ennio De Concini. The film takes place almost only inside Hitler's bunker in Berlin, and it
documents the days of the end of the Third Reich when the Allies' forces approached
Berlin. Guinness' Hitler is a depressed and introverted person who sings slowly into
madness, depression, and eventually commits suicide as the Reich of thousand years
collapses around him.
421
115. Illsa, She Wolf of the SS/1974 US
Synopsis
Exploitation! Sado-cult from the seventies, starring Dyanne Thorne, who played
several times the sadistic character of Ilsa in all kinds of situations and settings. In this
film she is a Nazi prisoner in a concentration camp who executes experiments that are
supposed to prove that women can stand suffering more than men, and therefore one
has to enable them to fight in the battlefield. We deny this movies.
One of the notorious examples in the seventies of a bloody and disgusting sexyNazi movie of the director Don Edmonds. A show girl with a large breasts in Las Vegas,
Dyanne Thorne, makes a reputation with the role of Ilsa, the corrupted and sadistic
manager of Medical Camp 9. This film was so popular, that Thorne played similar roles
in three other opportunities. In spite of the controversial issues, Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS
is much less a film about a death camp and more so a mixture of a thriller of a women's
prison and an escape film. There is no mentioning of gas chambers or crematorium,
and most of the Nazi characters seem as if they came right from the film Hogan's
Heroes, which has been done within this series. So this is a hybrid film full of blood, sex
and action, which is much less aggressive that one may think, and the bad hero goes
粸¢
beyond the line of good taste. This is not the best film of this series, and it is unsuitable
for a weak heart, but it is recommended to those who are addicted to this genre. The
effects of make up are realistic for their time, Thorne's iks impressive as a bad
character, and Richard Kennedy is an amusing and jolly piggy general. The script by
Jonah Royston uses a lot elements of exploitation, but there are elements that can
satisfy those who look for a real story within all the bloodshed.
116. The Hindenburg /1975 US
Synopsis
"The German Luft Waffe is not at all what it used to be," says Anne Bancroft, the
baroness, about 16 minutes after the beginning of The Hindenburg, then she stops and
adds, "But, then again, nothing is not as it used to be any more." It seems to
summarize Robert Wise's ironic and heavy film based on the post-Watergate
assumption of ideas of intrigue and cover beyond the destruction of the German
airship. The film begins with a Universal's news reel that provides a simplistic history
about this flight, which brings us to Germany in 1937. Colonel Franz Ritter (George C.
422
Scott), a pilot and a former hero who works now for the military intelligence, finds
himself positioned for the flight of the Hindenburg in charge of security. Reports and
rumors about the destruction of the airship were spread in Germany and in America,
and the Nazi takes them seriously. Ritter is about to do the "Grand Hotel" in the air, a
few tens of passengers and crewmen of high positions make Ritter and us jump
through hoops most of the time in the first half of the film, with magnificent shoots of
the airship in the air. The answer to the intrigue against the airship, the identity of the
bomber and its motives are actually presented in the first 15 minutes, but there are so
many misleading section, sub-plots, and dark allies in front of our eyes, that the
solution will pass in front of our faces without paying attention to it. In the meanwhile,
Ritter dances around with his ex-lover (Bancroft), businessmen (Gig Young), and
passengers with skeletons in their closets (Alan Oppenheimer), an entertainer (Robert
Clary), whose talent is to insult loyal Nazis, a few officers and crewmen who do not like
too much the Nazi party (Roy Thinnes) who has an agenda of his own, and two real
mysterious men (Burgess Meredith and Rene Auerjonois), who do not seem to have a
reason to travel in this journey. All this is a bit tiring, or might have be, but the setting
and the special effects are so interesting and the casting is so entertaining.
蛐¢
117. Marathon Man/1976 US
Synopsis
Dustin Hoffman plays a popular university graduate who spends his time between
marathon runs and excelling in his academic studies. Without intention, Hoffman finds
out a dangerous conspirative intrigue that his brother, a Federal Intelligence agent, and
a sadist Nazi, known as the White Angel of Auschwitz, is involved in. This Nazi character
is based on the image of Doctor Mengele. The Nazi terrorizes and tortures people in
cold blood in order to smuggle rare diamonds out of the US to Europe. The disgusting
torture scene was shortened after the audience came out of the theatre purple and
sick. Doc Levy (Roy Sneider) is a cover American agent who maintains a connection
between the American government and an escaping Nazi war criminal under the name
of Shell (Laurence Olivier). It is believed that Shell stole a treasure of gems on his way
from his hiding place in South America to New York. He sees to it that Doc would be
killed, and then kidnaps his brother who does know that his brother, Babe (Dustin
Hoffman). Shell repeats again and again the question "Is if safe?" He used to be a
423
dentist of a concentration camp, and tries to get from Babe information by executing a
sadistic "oral surgery" on him. Babe, who still does know about the gems, escapes and
violates the law he set for himself not to be violent and goes out to defend himself
against his persecutors.
Survey
The most memorable picture, maybe, from The Marathon Man is the one in which
the mean Laurence Olivier tortures Dustin Hoffman who is sweating and helpless during
the dentist operation. The film was directed by John Schlesinger, who based it on two
popular genres of the seventies: a paranoid espionage film, like Three Days of the
Condor and Viewpoint, and the Nazi who evades justice, like The Odessa File. The
script, written by William Goldman, is a bit absurd, but Schlesinger fills the film with
moments of suspense, intrigues and tension. Olivier was a nominee for the best
supporting role, and Hoffman appeared in another paranoid film, All the President's Men
at the same summer.
118. A Bridge Too Far/1977 US
Synopsis
Richard Attenborough (Gandhi) directed a war drama based on a novel by the
粸¢
historian Cornelius Ryan (The Longest Day). The ally forces deploy along Holland
aiming to penetrate into Nazi Germany, defeat the Germans and be back at home by
Christmas. An impressive gallery of stars leads this movie, including Sean Connery,
Anthony Hopkins, Michael Cane, Laurence Olivier, Robert Redford, Gene Hackman and
Liv Ulmann. A real must for those who love this genre.
It is the end of 1944, and the Allies forces are sure they are going to win WWII
and would come home for Christmas. What is needed, says the British general
Montgomery, is a strong smash through Holland, where the German forces are
scattered thinly, and so the Allies would get into Germany. Parachuters, led by General
Major Robert Urquhart (Sean Connery) and the American Brigadier General James
Gavin (Ryan O'Neal) would take a side road and five bridges through Holland into
Germany, as the parachuters, led by Lieutenant Colonel John Prust would hold the most
critical bridge in a small town called Arnhem. The combined forces would go on this
road led by the British Lieutenant General Brian Horrocks and the British Lieutenant
Colonel Joe Vendeler. The plan required accurate timing, so much so that one planner
424
tells Lieutenant General Browning: "Sir, I think we might go one bridge too far." There
is one critical weakness: instead of a small number of German soldiers, the area around
Arnhem is loaded with supreme units of the SS. This is a disaster. The movie is based
on a book by the historian Cornelius Ryan. One Bridge Too Far reminds another book
by Ryan, The Longest Day, and like him, it is loaded with 15 international stars,
including Sir Laurence Olivier, Robert Redford, Hardy Cruger, Gene Heckman,
Maximilian Schell and Liv Ulmann.
Survey
The script writer, William Goldman, said this film is the answer of his generation
to The Longest Day (1962). It reflects the seventies as it is much more dark, less
patriotic, it examines the
awful battle of Arnhem, in which a division of British
parachuters was almost totally destroyed. Director Sir Richard Attenborough and
photographer Geoffrey Unsworth. The film is in a much higher level than The Longest
Day. It is an amazing film, and Goldman, who won the Oscar, deals with the plot in a
much more skilled way than Ryan. There is a lot of blood, and the battle scenes are
more realistic. It is long and detailed, not very happy, but can catch you.
119. The Boys from Brazil/1978 US
粸¢
Synopsis
Gergory Peck plays the image of Dr. Joseph Mengele, the Nazi physician, who
killed thousands of Jews in Auschwitz. Laurence Olivier is Liberman, the Nazis hunter,
who tries to find the traces of Mengele in South America. At the end of the film
Schaffner positions side by side the Nazi and the Jew in a bloody struggle, symbolizing
the war of the armed strong Nazis versus the Jews, who stand empty handed in front of
the satanic forces, and beat them.
This film was done according to the book of Ira Levin. It does not lose much time
basing the fact that a few people, allegedly not connected to one another, were
murdered mysteriously. The growing old Jewish Nazi hunter, Ezra Liberman (Laurence
Olivier) comes in when the clues seem as pointing of a Neo-Nazi connection, and the
traces lead to Paraguay. Here he finds a phyhsician from Auschwitz who does not
express regret for his deeds, as Gregory Peck playes Joseph Mengele. Liberman finds
out that the murdered people begot identical sons, a result of an experiment in cloning
(multiplying human beings) that was meant to create a race of Hitlers.
425
Survey
The Boys from Brazil is a respectable, solid thriller. The casting is excellent, with
Gregory Peck and Laurence Olivier, who perform as their reputation suggest. The old
good structure of a vengeful dual works here very well, maybe due to the age of the
main actors. The film focuses in suspense and mystery more than just action. It was
directed by the late Franklin Schaffner, that 13 of his films include some milestones of
American movies, including The Apes, Patton and The Butterfly. Although The Boys
from Brazil does not reach these classic films, it certainly manages to catch the
spectators. It is based on Ira Levin's book. The story is intriguing and unique. The main
theme is cloning people is more popular today than at the time it was done.
Furthermore, the message of the film that people are more than just "nature or
cultivation" is a human message, confirming the need of free will as we progress to an
unknown future. Olivier, the editor Robert Swink and the composer Jerry Goldsmith
were nominees for the Oscar for their work.
120. Holocaust/1978 US
Synopsis
A mini-series of NBC, which paved the way for Hollywood in producing holocaust
粸¢
films and the public discourse in the US about the extent of the involvement of the
Jewish community in the attempts to save their brothers in Europe. This is a story of
the struggle of a Jewish family to survive the atrocity of Nazi Germany and about the
gradual and systematic exclusion of Jews from the community. Meryl Streep appears
here in one of her first roles.
The legendary mini-series went on air at first as a presentation of the big event of
NBC. It was written by Gerald Green. The story starts in Germany in 1935. We see a
family of a Jewish physician, Joseph Weiss, his wife, his brother Moses, his sons Rudy
and Karl, and his daughter Anna. We meet also Erik Dorff, who is pushed by his
ambitious wife to join the SS upon the beginning of the prosecution of the Jews. Most
of the Weiss family is deported to the ghetto and afterwards to Auschwitz, which is
administered by Erik Dorff. Rudy and his Jewish Girlfriend, Helena, witness the Babi
Yar massacre in 1941, and then join the partisans in their war against the Nazis. Meryl
Streep appears as a Christian woman, Inga. The film won eight Emmy awards.
Originally there were four chapters which were screened in April 1978.
426
121. The Bunker/1981 US
Synopsis
The full version of the television film for which Anthomy Hopkins won the Emmy
award. He playes the image of Adolf Hitler in the last months when he fortified himself
in his Berliner bunker, as the Allies were on their way to the besieged city, destroying
the Third Reich. This is a fascinating doco-drama, many years before The Downfall,
which describes the relationships between the Fuhrer and his close associates – Speer,
Goebbels and Eva Brown – and his deterioration up to loss of sanity as his demonic life
work was falling before his eyes.
The film is comprehensive and tiring, three hours, about the three last months of
Adolf Hitler's life in the bunker in Berlin. Anthony Hopkins is fascinating in a disgusting
way as he plays Hitler, while Piffer Lorry is even more scary as the fanatic Mrs.
Goebbels. Joseph Goebbels nurtures the Fuhrer's ego when the Nazi empire falls down,
while Albert Speer defies against him. One day before his suicide, Hitler institutionalized
his relationship with his lover Eva Brown. The plot goes beyond the suicide when the
victorious Allies argue which of whom has the ownership of the remnants of Hitler. It
was first screened on television on January 27, 1981. The Bunker is based on the best粸¢
seller by Joseph O'Donell, which had been based on reports of first hand.
122. Victory [AKA Escape to Victory]/1981 US
Synopsis
This is a rare cooperation between legends of different fields: the director John
Huston (The Maltese Falcon), the actors Silvester Stalone (Rocky) and Michael Cane
(The Cider House Rules) and the football players Pele, Boby Moore and others. The
location is conquered Paris by the Nazis, who organize a football game between the
Germans and POWs. Their goal is propaganda, but the prisoners have their own plan
for the game… some claim that the film is based on a real story.
123. Mephisto /1981 US
Synopsis
Mephisto is based on the novel by Klaus Mann and it specifies the rise of a
Faustian image, who actually sells his soul in return for greatness. Klaus Maria
Brandauer as Hendrik Hoefgen, gives an electrifying performance. He is a star of the
theatre department which is supported by the state, and he is fed up with his position.
427
Like his colleagues, he pays lip service for fashionable socialist ideal to contemporary
artists, that is, until the Nazis come into power. Then he identifies an opportunity to
achieve the goal of glory: he would perform propaganda plays and in this way would
use the Nazis as a vehicle for advertising his name all over the country. It is too late
when he discovers his mistake. This is a good adaptation of the book, which describes
the first casting of Brandauer with the director István Szabó. Later they will again
together in the film of Colonel Redl and Hanussen. Brandauer attracted attention for the
first time in the US after the film came out, and as a result he was cast as a villain in
Never Say Never Again.
Survey
Among the films about cooperation in time of war Mephisto has a special place
since it succeeds in including so many sharp distinctions about the world of the theater,
and especially about the illusions according to which some artists act. Hendrik Hoefgen
is an actor of certain talent and a great ambition. He works on the best stages in Berlin
after a period of studying in a regional theater, and this ambition helps him be blind to
the rise of Nazism and its meaning for freedom seeking artists like him. Hoefgen
dismisses Nazism as just hooligans, and believes that his status as an actor on stage
蛐¢
leaves him free from dealing with them. His wife leaves Germany to France, where she
works in order to undermine Hitler's regime, but he still does not get the situation. Then
the Nazis treat his black lover. Hoefgen goes on living in denial until it is too late to go
back from his good relations with the regime. Klaur Maria Brandauer gives an
ostentatious show, and the directing of István Szabó leads us to the dilemma Hoefgen
confronts.
124. The Wall /1982 US
Synopsis
One could say that without the great success of the series of ABC Shoah in 1978,
CBS would not have given the green light to the documentary of three hours The Wall
four years later. The film was written by Milard Lempel as an adaptation of his
Broadway play from 1960, which had been written with the inspiration of the novel by
John Herssy from 1950. The Wall is a heart breaking story about the heroic revolt in the
Warsaw ghetto in 1943. When it has become obvious that every Jew in Poland was
doomed to be sent to Nazi work camps and death camps, about 650 members of the
428
Jewish fighting organization which had been established a short time beforehand, takes
a courageous stand against 3000 Nazi soldiers. The story is told through the eyes of the
Warsaw Jew Dolek Benson (Thomas Conti, in his first appearance on American
television), as he passively observes the atrocities around him until he learns the truth
about the plan of "resettling" of the Nazis. For Rachel Roberts, as a former school
teacher, makes her last appearance in this film. She died a short time after the
production has been terminated. The film was shot in Sosnovich, Poland, and was
screened for the first time on television in February 1982. The Wall won the Peabody
Award the following year.
125. The Final Solution /1983 US
Synopsis
This historical documentary approaches the holocaust and its meaning directly
and effectively. It describes the Warsaw ghetto, the gas chambers, the bodies that the
bulldozer pushes into mass graves, and other Nazi atrocities. It presents these quiet
scenes next to the propaganda speeches of Hitler and his yes men. The old Nazi
hunter, Simon Wiesenthal, presents this documentary in a direct language that
emphasizes the importance of never forgetting these atrocities and hoping that nothing
蛐¢
of this kind would ever repeat itself.
126. Hitler’s SS: Portrait in Evil/ 1985 US
Synopsis
The television film of two parts, Hitler’s SS: Portrait in Evil, illustrates this evil by
focusing on two Berliner brothers. In 1931 Helmut Hoffman (Bill Nighy), a brilliant
student and oppurtunist, joins the SS. At the same time, his younger brother, Karl
(John Shea), a sportsman of high level and an idealist, becomes a driver of the SA
(Sturmabteilung-storm troops). When the SS removes the SA from power, Karl arrives
at Dachau. He was saved through the influence of his brother, if one can describe
sending Karl to fight in the Russian front as "saving". As he watches the deterioration of
the Third Reich, Helmut suffers from pangs of conscience. There is another element of
melodrama: a romantic triangle of Karl, Helmut and a beautiful singer in a night club,
Lucy Gutteridge. Among the supporting stars there are Carroll Baker, as the anxious
mother of the brothers Hoffman; Tony Randall as a hermaphrodite named Puzzy (the
429
shadow of the cabaret man, Joel Grey); and David Warner, who repeats his role in the
film Shoah as the Gestapo commander Heidrich.
Survey
What I loved most in this film was the fact that it presented a different point of view
of the Nazi regime, the one of two young German brothers. At the beginning, when the
Nazi party comes into power for the first time, we see the lives of two young Germans.
Like any one else in Germany at that time, they are also caught to Hitler's fanaticism.
One of them joins the SA, and his brother mocks him that he joined "these nonsense."
But eventually he joins the SS when he confronts Heidrich in his university, and he
convinces him to join, not because of his belief in politics, but because of his
intelligence. None of them knew what he was getting into.
The most interesting thing in this story are the emotional aspects in seeing how the
brothers reacted to things that started to happening the Third Reich. At first everything
was in a small scope. Ou could see SA officers push an old man down the stairs. The
younger brother, the noble and naïve one, tries throughout the war to change the evil
he sees around him, but finds out that he is defeated by the resistance of his fellow
Germans. The older brother accepts with what he cannot change and tries to help his
粸¢
younger brother to be more smart in his behavior. Both of them have to go in a road
that becomes more and more difficult.
The actors make a good job. The only complaint was that the actors had a British
accent, which took you out of the realism of the story. It was very touching to see what
they had to go through and what they felt when they saw people dying and the world
around them changes.
127. Shoah /1985 US
Synopsis
The makers of the brilliant French documentary Shoah assumes bravely that their
audience wants to sit for 570 minutes of interviews. AS much as it seems unpromising,
you would sit and listen. Claude Lanzmann, the merciless inquisitor, digs in the
memories of a few survivors of the holocaust and of some ex-Nazis who have helped
executing the atrocities. Gradually people become aware that what had happened in
Germany and in conquered Europe during the years of 1933-1945 was not
430
"indescribable" as it might seem to modern spectators. One spectator said that "it really
could have been shorter." No, it could have not.
The mini-series Shoah, which have become a legend, was screened for the first
time as the big event of NBC. The story, which was written by Gerald Green, starts in
Germany 1935. We get to know the family of a Jewish physician, Josef Weiss (Fritz
Weaver), his wife Berta (Rosemary Harris), his brother Moses (Sam Wanamaker), his
sons Rudi (Joseph Bottoms) and karl (James Woods) and his daughter Anna (Blanche
Baker). We also meet the lawyer Erik Dorff (Michael Moriarty), whose ambitious wife
presses him to join the SS. When the Nazis prosecution of the Jews increases, most of
the Weiss family is deported to a ghetto in Poland, and afterwards to Auschwitz, and
Erik Dorff is its commander. Rudi and his Jewish girlfriend Helena (tovah Feldshuh)
witness the massacre that takes place in 1941 in Babi Yar, and afterwards join the
Russian partisans in their struggle against the Nazis. Meryl Streep appears as the
Christian wife of Karl Weiss, Inga. The film, which won eight Emmy awards, was
screened on television in for chapters in 16, 17, 18, and 19 April 1978. The series
presented shortly and straightforwardly central events and basic terms of the holocaust,
and at the same time the personal story of an imaginary Jewish family – the Weiss
蛐¢
family. The uniqueness of the series was that it was among the first cinematic products
that concentrated on the "final solution" as a Jewish event. Before that no American
film was so unambiguous in presenting what have been considered the focus of Nazism
– the war against the Jews. The series raised a few central issues of the discourse after
the war: resistance versus passivity, the role of the church, the role of groups which
helped the Nazis, and the reaction of the Germans to Nazism. The series evoked great
interest, and millions of spectators "experienced" the holocaust as it was presented in
the series. IN the first screening already it was sold to about fifty countries, including
West Germany, and there it reached the greatest rate of watching and it had an
immense impact. The series was screened in the US in April 1978, and Prof. Elie Wiesel
criticized it harshly and published an article in the New York Times, in which he
expressed the fear that in the eyes of the next generations this historical event would
be dimmed, and replaced by its imaging – the misleading cinematic presentation. But in
spite of the problem of the vague boundaries between the imagined history and the
431
factual one, one can say that the main facts that are presented in the series are correct
and close to the event, even if not always very accurate.
128. Partisan of Vilna/1986 US
Synopsis
The film of Joshua Waletzky tries to follow one of the less known stories of the Nazi
period. Through archival photographs and interviews the film tells the amazing story of
the Jewish underground, the partisans of Vilna, at the time of the disaster of WWII in
general, and the holocaust of European Jews in particular.
More than forty holocaust survivors are interviewed for this documentary about the
resistance fighters in Vilna (or Vilnius, the capital of Lithuania). The addition of the
archival sections enlarge visually the testimonies of the survivors. Their story comes to
life when they tell how they established a commando unit for attacking the Nazi army
(by sabotage). Some of the mistaken aspects of the hard rules of the underground are
also brought to the front of the stage. One survivor told the camera how his mother
came to one operation and asked how she could help, and although she risked her life
by doing so, they rejected her because it was not according to the accepted
procedures.
蛐¢
129. Weapons of the Spirit /1986 US
Synopsis
In this historical documentary a small French village stands against the Vichy
administration in saving 5000 Jews from falling into the hands of the Nazis during
WWII. The parents of the director and the narrator, Pierre Sauvage, were among the
hidden people in the village. The village people were the descendants of the
Huguenots, who had known what it meant to be a minority in a region that was
basically Catholic. The news reels show the persecutions of the Jews in Paris and other
places, as more than 75,000 were willingly given to the Nazis. The village people
believed that it was "the normal thing that had to be done," to endanger their lives in
helping people who were cruelly persecuted. History shows that the majority in France
did not behave in that way and cooperated willingly with the Germans in the active
chase of the Jews.
432
130. Hotel Terminus/1987/8 US
Synopsis
Ophuls Jr.'s film reconstructs the whereabouts of the Nazi war criminal Klaus
Barbie. The director conducts a comprehensive research that starts with his childhood,
goes on to his service in the Gestapo, exposes the hidden chapter of his life after the
war, when he was recruited to the American counterintelligence, and smuggling him to
Bolivia, until he was given away to France in 1983. The great amount of material that
was gathered was edited into four hours of the film, whose main goal was, as the
director emphasizes, was to examine the reactions of the people who got in touch with
him: neighbors, accomplices and victims, in an attempt to pour light on his dark image.
The documentarist Marcel Ophuls directed this brilliant version of 267 minutes,
which examines Klaus Barbie, "the notorious butcher of Lyon." Barbie was the head of
the Gestapo and was responsible for the death of most of the Lyon population,
including women and children during the Nazi conquest in France. After the war he
cooperated with the American intelligence agents who helped him settle in Bolivia in
1951, when he ignored conveniently many atrocious deeds. Finally Barbie was handed
over to France and was put to trial in 1987, a trial in which he received the verdict of
粸¢
life sentence. The director refrains from showing the usual sections of atrocities, and
instead composed his film from interviews with those who knew Barbie, suffered
because of him, or did not do anything while he went on murdering without being
punished. The details that have been accumulated, and the answers to the keen
questions people were asked by Ophuls were shocking and pointed an accusing finger
not only towards Barbie, but also towards France, the US, South America and finally
most of mankind. This is a strong and amazing achievement. The film won the Oscar
for the best documentary in 1988.
131. Music Box/1989 US
Synopsis
Costa Gavras (Z) a man of political movies, racism and suspense returns to the
territories known to him. A court drama, in which a talented lawyer defends her elderly
father who is accused of war crimes and helping the Nazis. In her task she digs in her
father's past and finds out things she might better not have known. With Jessica Lange
(Titus). She plays the prosecutor whose father, the nice Hungarian immigrant, Armin
433
Muller-Stahl is arrested. He is threatened of being deported because he lied about his
actions during WWII. Part of the accusation is that Muller-Stahl was a Nazi collaborator
and guilty of war crimes. Lange is absolutely convinced that her father is accused by
the vengeful communist Hungarian government, and she, Lange, deals with his defense
and finds out holes in his story. She investigates by herself the facts and finds out that
her father had a full life as a bribery and a blackmailer. Why?
Unlike his former films, like Z, Costa Gavras refuses to soften the pill in the Music
Box, and so does the scriptwriter Joe Eszterhas. Everything in the film is given in the
same quiet and restraint, what makes the horror of the story much more effective.
Survey
Costa Gavras and Joe Eszterhas work together again in this empty and
disappointing thriller, which deals with the issue of human blindness when it comes to
people who are close to you. Jessica Lange stars as a lawyer who must defend her
father against accusations that he had committed war crimes as a Nazi. This is a well
done thriller of a low level. At the same time, his capability to create suspense is
limited, because one can expect the end in quite an early stage. Anyway, the film's
greatest weakness is the emptiness of the image of the father, who is never seen an
粸¢
nothing else than an old, confused and nice man. There is no real attempt to connect
this man with the past, to see the events from his point of view, or base his image in
any solid way. But Lange gives one of her best performances as a sensitive woman who
is torn between dedication and the search of truth, and Muller-Stahl is good as much as
he is capable in the existing circumstances.
The weakened range of colors of the photographer Patrick Lussier complements
the nature of the film.
132. Triumph of the Spirit/ 1989 US
Synopsis
The film is based on the real story of Shlomo Aroch, a boxing champion from
Thessaloniki who survived the concentration camp of Auschwitz due to the boxing
battles he was forced to conduct as entertainment to the Nazi prisoners. The people he
defeated in the battles were sent to death, while he received additional food portions
which helped his family members survive as well.
434
There is an impressive acting of Willem Dafoe in the main role of the best holocaust
dramas that came out of Hollywood.
The title of the film is an answer to the notorious film by Leni Riefenstahl, Triumph
of the Will.
Survey
Triumph of the Spirit is a true story about Salamo Aroch, a Jewish Greek boxer
who was imprisoned in Auschwitz during WWII. He was arrested when he tried to help
his family and friends to escape the Nazis and was signaled for extermination. He
manages to survive and be an inspiration for his fellow prisoners by boxing for his life.
He does so as an order of his prisoner from the SS, who gamble of the result of his
fights. With each victory Aroch receives an additional portion of bread, which he shares
with his family. Beside the main story, there is a romantic love story between Aroch and
a prisoner woman called Alegra. The ending is enlightening in spite of the gloom facts.
Triumph of the Spirit was shot in Auschwitz, the first film of its kind which was shot in
this notorious location.
133. Schindler’s List /1993 US
Synopsis
粸¢
This film by Spielberg is based on a real story. Liam Nesan is the star who plays
Oskar Schindler, a German businessman in Poland who identifies an opportunity to
make money from the Nazis coming to power. He opens a company for manufacturing
cooking utensils, while using flattery and bribes in order to achieve connections with the
army, and brings an accountant, Ishak Stern (Ben Kingsley) to help him run the plant.
He employs Jews who were put in the Krakow ghetto by the Nazi forces, and by so
doing got a labor force with no payment, who was dependent on him. The significance
of a position in the plant for Stern could be the reason for his survival and of other Jews
who worked for Schindler. Anyway, in 1942 all the Krakow Jewry were deported to a
hard labor camp in Plashov, which was administered by the commander Amon Goeth
(Ralph Fiennes), a bitter alcoholic who used to shoot prisoners from his balcony.
Schindler arranges to go on using the Polish Jews in his plant, but when he sees what
happens to his workers, he starts to develop a conscience. He realizes that his plant,
which shifted to manufacture ammunition), is the only thing that prevents his people
from being sent to the death camps. Pretty soon Schindler demands more workers and
435
starts bribing the Nazi leaders in order to have more Jews in his list of employees. Until
Germany falls in the hands of the Allies, Schindler has already lost all his capital, and
saved 1100 people from certain death. Schindler's List was a candidate for 12 Oscars
and won seven, including the best film, and the famous director Spielberg won the
award of the best director, and the film won praises as the best American film about
the holocaust.
Survey
Schindler's List was one of the main cultural events in 1993, a reminder of the
fate of European Jews who suffered from persecutions and genocide during WWII. It
goes above what the critics wrote about it, and it has its great social message. At the
same time, there are specific outstanding aspects, especially the complex appearance
of Liam Nesan as a manufacturer who protects his workers from the atrocities of the
concentration camps. Spielberg masterpiece is a milestone of the movie industry. It is
often used as a tool of study, and it helped in increasing the public awareness of the
Nazi atrocities for many years.
粸¢