Valkyrie (movie)

I see this film has been put back from this summer to October something to do with having to re-shoot some scenes which were accidentally destroyed.

Hmm.

 

Hi Richard. I would almost bet that that is due to them now trying to be politically correct. Just kidding of course ;-))

 

Agreed. I think "Collateral" was actually a pretty good movie......I think he's a froot loop, and he's 3 cans short of a 6 pack, but he's not a bad actor......Now if Keneau Reeves was in it, well. thatd be different..

Now the one problem I had with the trailer is the spiffy $300.00 haircut Cruise has. I might be mistaken, but I dont think haircuts were that modern looking in 1940's Germany, and certainly a military man of his stature wouldnt have such a thick, luxurious mane, would he?

 

Wonder if it will end in DVD release only....

 

A PC film!


If that is the case I will not be throwing popcorn at the screen, bricks on stand by.

 

Hi Richard, I threw that in there just for you mate ;-D

 

Lol.

 

Well......I actually paid to go see this flick. It was not as bad as the critics have made it out to be but it was not great. Cruise does not carry the film at all and really does not do even a good job of acting. I hope they did not pay him a superstar's salary because he did not earn it.

As with a majority of films, there was some things missing and some inaccuracies. The number one that sticks out is the troops guarding the Rastenburg complex are Heeretruppen instead of Waffen SS. I only say the Waffen SS guarding Hitler's Bunker. Also, the actions taken by the conspirators in the taking of Berlin seemed drawn out compared to what I read. I would consider it controversial.

I think the film did a good enough job to educate the public about the events of 20 July but it was not entertaining, thrilling nor action pack. The use of computer graphics was minimal and was used wisely.

Worth a single viewing but as always, interested in y'alls perspective.

 

Cruise's Valkyrie blasted as "Nazi apologia"


An influential US critic on Friday blasted Tom Cruise's latest movie Valkyrie as ``Nazi apologia'' in the sharpest criticism yet of the WWII thriller.
The movie features the US superstar as Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg, an aristocratic German who headed a group of top officers who hatched a plot to kill Hitler late in the war.

Roger Friedman, film critic for Fox News, said the movie appeared to intentionally minimise the impact of Nazism.

"I'm concerned that Valkyrie could represent a new trend in filmmaking: Nazi apologia. Not once in Valkyrie do any of the 'heroes' mention what's happening around them. Hitler has systemically killed millions,'' said Friedman.

"Valkyrie opens the door to a dangerous new thought: that the Holocaust and all the other atrocities could be of secondary importance to the cause of German patriotism.''

Friedman criticised the set designers for minimising or hiding the swastikas that have become symbols of the evils of Nazism, and blasted the portrayal of Hitler as a ``doddering fool with a British accent and a nice suit''.

Friedman's political criticism of the movie may have been the sharpest of US reviews, but it was far from the only negative assessment.

Writing in the Washington Post, Phillip Kennicott blasted the film's puzzling failure to portray von Stauffenberg's life before his unsuccessful assassination attempt - when he was untroubled by Nazism and served as Hitler's loyal soldier.

Kennicott also criticised the movie for failing to point out that the plot was hatched not out of moral objections to Nazism but only when Germany was facing imminent collapse.

Stauffenberg ``was not a committed anti-Nazi until very late in the game'', wrote Kennicott. ``Many anti-Hitler conspirators weren't so much against Nazism, with its vile racial and militarist policies, as they were against Hitler's disastrous leadership of the war''.

Cruise himself came close to distorting the extent of German support for Hitler and his policies.

``It's important to know that it wasn't everybody - not everybody felt the way (Hitler did) or fell into the Nazi ideology,'' Cruise said during the film's US press tour.

``The thing that stood out to me was Stauffenburg himself and the amount of desperation and pain for him,'' Cruise said. ``He wanted a moral country that participated in the world, not one of annihilation and Holocausts and world domination.

``He was a man who was able to see through all the propaganda and see how utterly insane Hitler was, and ultimately he was the one to say, 'Somebody's got to shoot that bastard.'''

AdelaideNow... Cruise's Valkyrie blasted as "Nazi apologia"

 

Eh, I don't agree with the author. I doubt it if Stauffenberg knew the exact details of what was going on in the camps, especially those in the East. They knew about the camps but not all of the details. So, putting the holocaust in the movie would just add more time to it, be inaccurate and would just not fit into the plot.

Many of the anti-Nazis did not do anything because they were outnumbered or at least thought so. At the end of the war, there were those who spoke against the Nazis but only after the war. Kind of like being a Dallas Cowboys fan. You're a fan when they are winning but when they are losing, fans are like rats abandoning a sinking ship. But these guys have been conspiring for a long time, they just did not do anything as drastic until 44'.

Can anyone really know why these men did what they did? To keep it accurate, one must stick to the facts. As Cruise put, the movie was about a conspiracy, not a war movie. I don't see Cruise as an 'apologia', he probably took the role just to look cool in a German uniform.....

So I totally disagree with the author's assessment on the 'trend' of recent movies. It is funny that the article did not print the author's name.

 

It is funny how the same article is posted on different sources yet none mention the author. Only the critics.

 

This movie was great. All critics are idiots, who are unfamiliar with History. It pisses me off when I see someone talking bad about this movie. Tom Cruise was a good choice for this movie for one reason his resembelance to Stauffenberg. I enjoyed the movie I thought the "Wolf's Lair" looked authentic and this movie had the old WW2 film feeling. It was great movie very entertaining. Just watch and enjoy try not to critique it so much. I can't think of one film ever that depected a historic event in perfection. The only thing I wished to see more of is more cinimatics of the german army marching around and Hitler after the bombing being mended by his doctor. From what I have read when HItler's dr was mending him. He was fustrated Smashing his fist on his knee's saying "they dont undertstand!"

 

One yes vote in. Come on American folk I need to hear your views on this film.

Go fourth and watch the film.

I'm sure JC will give me all the bones on this one.

 

First off. There are many critics who are very knowledgable in History including Military History. I personally know one here in Portland. And because two critics do not agree with your point of view you paint all as idiots? There are a few reviews that are quite positive. Are those critics idiots also or does that not apply because you agree with them? Second. Just because someone resembles who they are portaying does not make the movie or the acting any better. Cruise has the same wooden acting skills that he has used for decades. His acting is not any different from any of his other movies. It is an actor's job to portray his character and make a believable performance. Just from what I have seen I do not think he does so. I do not see him as Stauffenberg just because he looks similar. And I for one do not have a problem with the movie itself. I do have a problem with the choice of Cruise and his acting skills for the part of Stauffenberg. In addition I find your comment about seeing " more cinimatics of the german army marching around" interesting, How and why would this improve the move, if at all??

 

Sounds like a well-produced film but perhaps the "feeling" missing. No Oscar there it seems for Mr Cruise.

 

If TC gets a Oscar for this one he will be bouncing up down on as many sofas as he can.

BTW: I feel Tom Cruise is not the right actor for such a film but that said I will be seeing it from a historical point of view.

 

I agree that the movie was good but again Cruise as being miscast. I think they chose him just because they needed a big name American actor for it to sell in the US market. Personally, I think that Thomas Kretschmann would have done just as good of a job if not better and it would have kept it more of a European, thus more realistic, feeling. But that is my two cents worth. Good flick and definitely better than what the critics said.

 

Thanks for the critique Ike! This is why I didn't go see it!

 

When I refer to critics I am mainly refering to rottentomatoes.com The everyday person who voices their opinnion on movies. These people know nothing (If you do not believe me go visit the site) I should have made it more clear when I originally typed this. I posted this right after I was reading reviews on that website. I am not refering to anyone on this website. I have not read any reviews by anyone who has Knowledgeable mililtary History on that website. NO critics who do not share my view are not idiots. I am a political science major I would get nowhere with that attitude. I am strictly refering to the everyday person who critics a movie based on action and irrelevent aspects. I could suggest other actors but I believe Cruise did the job Heck I would rather see Ed harris as Stauffenberg. The reason for more cinimatics of the german army marching around is.. for my own satisfaction of seeing old war relics being worn and used. Instead of just talking about them on a website or looking at them through glass windows in a musem. I never posted on here to start an argument I have nothing but respect for everyone but I like debates thank you for you input!

 

Saw the movie this afternoon. Did not get the critics "Nazi apologia" angle at all. Also, saw plenty of Swastikas displayed. That guy must of watched a different movie than I did. Think he is way off base with that. All in all, a pretty decent film. Also thought the actors did a very credible job, including Cruise. Not a great film, but a good film that is well worth seeing.