Valkryie trailer & review ( spoilers)

Valkryie has failure all over it based on Cruise’s performance.

Just the trailer alone with him speaking an American Accent und he is suppose to be a german is a flashback to Kevin Costner in Robin Hood, only without Hans Gruber…err Sheriff of Nottingham saving the entire film.
Part of me enjoys watching Nazi films. (Springtimmmme for Hitler!)

Another part of me enjoys watching really awful films ( I blame MST3K).

A bigger part of me really enjoys seeing Tom Cruise fail.

This could be a tsumani of bad with just really good photography and things that get blown to peices.

I wonder how well this film will do in the theaters?

In all fairness, Costner was trying for same faint/faux-British accent, but not very consistently or believably. Cruise isn’t trying something affected like that–he’s just talking like he ordinarily does. I think the convention of films with all [fill in nationality] characters still employing across-the-board English-yet-accented performances is a silly and unnecessary one.

Agreed. The movie is going to be bad because Cruise is a mediocre actor and (apperantly, I haven’t seen it yet) the plot meanders and Singer portrayes the men as one dimesional heroes rather than people.

Lack of a bad German accent from Cruise is actually something I am putting in the plus catagory.

A friend of mine saw it ( he and I can pick apart movies pretty well.) and said it was more drama than action. The scenes and sets and costumes were well done, but Cruise was really distracting with his American Accent.

He took his 10 year old son who is a WW2 buff to see it and this kid doesn’t know Tom Cruise from a Turnip and he even asked, " Why is that American a Nazi?"

I’ll wait for PPV

Actually, IIRC every major actor in the film is using his normal speaking voice, regardless of accent. It was a directorial decision not to attempt German accents, not an actor’s choice.

I can’t even get past the trailer when I see Cruise with the eyepatch.

It was okay. A little talky and confusing at first, but it got better as it went along. Actually, the whole thing was a lot more of a talking-heads drama than the “boy’s own” adventure I’d expected, which was a little disappointing/disorienting at first.

Cruise was okay, though yes, far too American in the role. I’m not sure what it was. I’m glad he used his regular accent; in fact, I think they should probably have had all the characters use American accents – the mix was kind of distracting. I thought maybe it was Cruise’s all-American looks, but on looking it up afterwards, it turns out he actually kind of looks like von Stauffenberg (who was quite the handsome devil – better looking, even, than Cruise, IMHO).

I saw it and was pleasantly surprised. Cruise doesn’t stand out for his 'merkin voice any more than Kenneth Branaugh, Tom Wilkinson, et al do for their British ones. What was incongruous was that Cruise was virtually the only Yank in a sea of English Nazis, Thomas Kretschmann’s Remer notwithstanding. Kitschy deutsche accents would’ve been equally ripe for catcalls, and FWIW, German is sufficiently varied in its dialects and accents to justify the Anglo-American thespian divide on display, and then some.

If you really want to nitpick the casting, the guy who played Adolf was too young, thin, and hale (I didn’t pick up on any Parkinson twitches), and Cruise was too old (von Stauffenberg was 36 when all this happened and Cruise is probably a decade older).

Here’s what impressed me about the film: the way the July 20 plot is grounded against a context of more-or-less continuous plotting and simmering discontent, the priority given to the procedural aspects of the story, and the priority given to cinematic suspense over action. I was concerned going in to it that the whole movie would be a distorted, hagiographical “all von Stauffenberg, all the time” show chronologically weighted towards the hours after the bomb goes off, but director Bryan Singer takes pains to show how committed General Olbricht and Maj.-Gen. von Treskow were to assassinating Hitler, even in '42, before they ever met von Stauffenberg. Accordingly, the plotting and planning phase occupies about two-thirds of the movie, which builds suspense and deepens the viewer’s appreciation for the complexities involved, before the proverbial shit hits the fan.

Another strong plus is that the film was shot mostly in Germany, using some historically very sensitive sites. (The North Africa scene was shot in the California desert… Death Valley, perhaps?) Overall, the degree of verisimilitude looked very high, but I’m sure sooner or later the military hardware, weapons and uniforms experts will chime in with their impressions, if not here, than on IMDB or similar.

Having said that, I do have a couple of quibbles. Claus von Stauffenberg was a devout Catholic with ties to the Confessing Church (led by dissident theologian and fellow plotter Rev. Bonhoeffer); a fierce nationalist (albeit never a Nazi) and dedicated career army officer whose primary beef with Hitler was probably his excessive and self-defeating belligerency (although we can never know for sure what mixture of motivations may have driven him and the others); and a proud aristocrat (with the noble titles Graf and Schenk in his name, as well as the von) – all of which figured heavily in his deliberations on the meanings of patriotism, duty and honor. A brief scene [even a fleeting image of a few seconds in a montage sequence could’ve sufficed] showing, say, von Stauffenberg praying in a church and meeting with Bonhoeffer of another liberal cleric (perhaps being introduced to him by another plotter) would’ve helped flesh out his character and transformation from loyal officer to assassin.

To expand upon the aristocratic angle, von Stauffenberg was from one of the most militarily distinguished families in all Germany; in his social caste, it was expected that one or more of the oldest sons from each generation would serve in an officer capacity in the armed forces. In Claus’ case, his family had supposedly racked up an uninterrupted string of consecutive generational service going back to Frederick the Great, with many of his ancestors serving with distinction. There was, literally, an old castle somewhere in Prussia with his family’s name on it (although I don’t know if his family still owned it). I say all this to stress the point that no such young nobleman of his background would dispense with his [Prussian] cultural heritage and family honor lightly, and that his concern for how this would be seen to stain his family’s honor – his family’s name – would probably have weighed more heavily on him than his fears for his own life.

Too add even more pressure to von Stauffenberg’s deliberations, Nazi “blood guilt” laws in place provided for draconian punishments for the families of traitors (and probably lesser categories of crimes). So when Tom Cruise tells his wife that if he fails, “they’re going to be coming for all of you,” that could’ve been made clearer or otherwise confirmed second-hand (like, in any of the conspirators’ conversations, any one of them could’ve name-dropped the sad fate of some unrelated dissident’s family disappearing in the wake of the initial arrest).

The script could’ve further alluded to these concerns if, in the heated dialogue between von S. and von Treskow [Kenneth Branaugh], von S. had said, instead of [paraphrased] “I can’t do this without there being some chance of success,” something along the lines of “I’m not going to blacken the name of von Stauffenberg, and sacrifice my life and the lives of my family, if there’s no real chance of success…”. Similarly, when he was introduced to Hitler, he should’ve been properly introduced by his full name (with the Graf and Schenk titles restored); not only is that the proper protocol, it reinforces his aristo lineage to the viewer, who probably doesn’t know much about this history.

Oddly, most of the professional reviewers write that the film shows how close the conspirators came to success, to changing history, if only a few little things had changed, etc. While that’s true enough WRT the first goal of the plot (killing Hitler), I don’t think it holds up WRT the larger and more complicated goal of installing a cadre of their own whilst simultaneously deposing the SS, SD, and Gestapo organizations in favor of the Wehrmacht and civilian authorities. Much is made of the timing of Olbricht’s activation of Operation Valkyrie to mobilize the Reserve Army to make the initial rounds of arrests of SS, SD and Gestapo forces in Berlin – as if the failure of the plot stems from the tardiness of its execution. But I took away a very different conclusion: that without an inside man commanding the forces of the R.A. (which the conspiracy lacked, given General Fromm’s fence-sitting and Remer’s Nazi loyalty), they lacked the muscle to do or retain any progress at these key Berlin installations. Since Hitler survived the bomb, it was only a matter of time before that became public knowledge and the R.A. “dupes” would reverse course and turn against the plotters. As it played out, the plot was doomed to fail because Hitler managed to survive yet again, regardless of whatever measures the conspirators would take, or mistakes they’d make, after that point. But even if Hitler had been killed, that would have had no bearing on the Nazi restorationists’ connecting the dots, setting up a dragnet, and turning tables on the plotters, if only to replace the plotters with Hitler’s inner circle of loyalists (Himmler first and foremost among them).

All of which leaves the viewer to wonder, were these plotters merely incompetent, unlucky – or all the more idealistically driven, given how remote their chances of success seemed to have been, regardless?

Wow, I certainly don’t hope to top what Scrivener wrote. By the way, how do you know so much about the subject? Are you German? Does the average German know so much about the story?
At any rate, I enjoyed the movie. As far as atmospherics are concerned, I’d have to say the movie couldn’t really do better. They filmed in all the right locations in Germany and I think that really helped. And for me, atmospherics are a big part of my enjoyment of the movie.

As far as what Scrivener wrote, I do agree with most of it, only the flaws he pointed out weren’t so apparent to me. It’s weird to see a movie like that when you essentially know how the story will end.

But I did thoroughly enjoy it. I was also happy to see that there were a good deal of famous British actors. Bill Nighy was pretty good too. Being a PG-13 movie he got to drop the only F-Bomb, and it was funny. He became pure Bill Nighy for a split second.

As far as the mood of the OP is concerned, I feel I can add something to the discussion. I have also been hesitant about Tom Cruise lately. Scientology freaks me out big-time and I’ve felt a little alienated by Tom Cruise’s behavior since the Oprah incident. However he’s made a few moves lately that makes him seem a bit remorseful for his weird behavior. I’m willing to accept his weird self as long as he continues to play compelling characters. Does Tom Cruise even act? It’s hard to say what it is he does. The American accent was a bit strange, but it is possible to look past it.

But all in all, the movie left me with a positive impression. While the characters weren’t incredibly complex, it was made up for in terms of plot intrigue. I suppose the lack of fleshing-out of the characters keeps it from being a great film. I also like the idea that this guy was an unsung hero who – for whatever reason – felt it was worth risking his life and family over. That means something. Tom Cruise exudes a different version of himself in this movie. He manages to make it seem less about him than he does in any other movie.

All in all I’d recommend it. I don’t think it’s an embarrassment for TC at all. I think it’s a pretty good credit to his career

I saw it, and I would recommend it as well. I am not a fan of Tom Cruise’s comments (especially about psychiatry) but I am even less a fan of letting that affect how I view someone’s work. It seems unfair to me that he can suddenly do no right. If he had done an accent, that would have been criticized, too.

I was more weirded out by all the British accents than Cruise’s American accent. IMHO, it would have made more sense to have all the accents be the same than to have one US, buncha Brits, and 2 or 3 Germans. On the other hand, casting Brits allowed me to see my next husband, Kenneth Branagh.

It was especially lacking in comparison to Bruno Ganz’s performance in Der Untergang.
I think the accent thing isn’t an issue. I think it’s almost childish to have actors fake an accent - what, we can’t pretend he’s the character he’s playing? We can’t just remember that the actual guy the character is representing is speaking German? Fake accents treat us like idiots, and make it harder for the actors to act naturally. I wish more movies would forego the whole thing.

I thought the movie was pretty good, although it would’ve been better without Tom Cruise. He’s become such a circus that several times during the movie I kept thinking of his antics.

I was interested to see that there was only one line in the movie about closing the concentration camps. I thought they might’ve played that up to make Stauffenberg and friends more unambiguously heroic. Were Stauffenberg and his co-conspirators even in a position to be familiar with the holocaust? It certainly wasn’t as open as people think it was. They were more motivated by concern over what Hitler was doing to Germany than anything humanitarian.

Having recently seen Tropic Thunder, I also kept thinking of Tom Cruise as Les Grossman. “This is Les Grossman, who is this? Hitler, eh? Fuckface. Take a step back…”

Merkwurdigliebe, you’re very kind, but I’ve done very little reading about the German resistance specifically. (And I also love watching Bill Nighy… have you seen his performance as a burned-out rocker with stagefright, in Strange Fruit?) Most of my info comes from Wikipedia and such. I’ve read some histories of various aspects of the German war in Europe, though, so that helped provide a basic background. Most of the info that follows I’ve pulled from the short chapter on the German resistance movement in Days of Infamy: Military Blunders of the 20th Century by Michael Coffey, rounded out with some info from Wiki.

Re. the German resistance and its depiction in the film Valkyrie, the greatest authority and moral figurehead of the resistance in general, and of the particular cell (which the Gestapo had code-named the Black Orchestra) featured in Valkyrie, was General Ludwig Beck [ret.]. Beck [portrayed by Terence Stamp in the film] had been the Chief of Staff of the Wehrmacht [army] in the 1930’s, until he resigned in protest prior to the German invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1938 – firing off a final memo to his fellow senior commanders explaining his motives.

I think it’s safe to assume that Beck’s disapproval of Hitler was well known to the Gestapo, and that he was protected by his prestige and continued ties to Wehrmacht leaders. (I also suspect the Gestapo’s handling of Beck reflected his unknowing exposure of fellow conspirators to Gestapo surveillance, given his prominence, by his participation in the cell.) Hints of ongoing Gestapo surveillance of at least a couple of the July 20 plotters would’ve considerably heightened the claustrophobic feel of the film and racheted up the suspense, while underscoring the heroism of the plotters, and probably would’ve been true enough to the historical facts of the story. It also would’ve been nice if the filmmakers had found a way to flesh out Beck’s back story, but it would’ve been difficult to pull that off without resorting to clunkily expository dialogue or informational text at the beginning of the film, and either would’ve hindered the pace or diluted the focus of the story.

Beck’s successor in the army was the like-minded Franz Halder, who, along with Colonel Hans Oster and General Erwin von Witzleben, initiated plotting to kill Hitler – also prior to the invasion of Czechoslovakia. That plot was abandoned when the Munich Agreement (which Neville Chamberlain declared achieved “peace in our time”) was reached in September of 1938.

A largely civilian and communist-affiliated group, dubbed the Red Orchestra by the Gestapo, emerged in 1939 but lost its cohesiveness and commitment to action after the Hitler-Stalin Pact of August, 1939.

Plotting was stilled within the military in the wake of the successful invasion of Poland, but when Hitler announced plans for invading countries in western Europe, the plotting resumed, centered around Admiral [and head of Armed Forces Intelligence] Wilhelm Canaris, Army Commander-in-Chief Walther von Brauchitsch, and some of Canaris’ top staffers. Canaris [who would be executed in the wake of the July ‘44 plot; his diary candidly detailing his conspiratorial activities and contacts was used to condemn a number of others] and von Brauchitsch tried to delay these invasions; the cell of Canaris’ staff cooked up a bomb plot of their own.

Other cells were forming at this time, but none of them were coordinated with each other or with the Canaris group.

The first actual assassination attempt occurred on Nov. 8, 1939 [the anniversary of the Beer Hall Putsch], when a bomb was planted in a beer hall where Hitler was scheduled to deliver a speech. Hitler survived by giving a very short speech and leaving unexpectedly early. In the wake of this attempt his security was tightened and the government cracked down even more harshly on political dissenters. Conspirators were further demoralized by the military victories of the next three years, during which time relatively few attempts were made on Hitler’s life (although Valkyrie depicts a serious one, the bomb planted on Hitler’s plane in 1942 by General Olbricht and Maj.-Gen. von Tresckow).

The military [and conspiratorial] turning point was the Battle of Stalingrad, in the winter of '42-Jan. '43. It was at this point that many plotters resumed their activities in earnest, and the “Black Orchestra” group coalesced around the key figures of Beck, von Tresckow, Olbricht, von Witzleben [ret.], Adm. Canaris, and, eventually, Col. Claus von Stauffenberg; and the civilians Carl Goerdeler [the former Mayor of Leipzig and the cell’s pick for Chancellor of Germany], Ulrich von Hassell (former German ambassador to Rome), and the Rev. Dietrich Bonhoeffer (founder of the dissenting Confessing Church). These July 20 plotters were loosely affiliated with two other conspiratorial cells, one of young diplomats in the German foreign office, and the other led by Helmut von Moltke, the great-grandnephew of the German national hero and military icon Field Marshal Helmuth von Moltke.

In the lengthy period prior to July '44, the plotters sent out many feelers throughout the military to line up as much support as possible. The film depicts some of the plotter’s successes in recruiting, as well as their failure to secure a reliable ally in Gen. Fromm [head of the Reserve Army]; other failed contacts not shown in the film included the Field Marshals von Rundstedt [who would head the military courts-martial of the officers], von Kluge [who would commit suicide under duress in the wake of the July 20 plot], Rommel [whose fate echoed that of von Kluge’s], and von Manstein. It appears that none of these men turned the conspirators in and thus all shared the crime of complicity [to treason] – even von Rundstedt, who headed the military “Court of Military Honor” trying the officers involved (condemning some, but stripping others of their military affiliation only to be sent off to be condemned by the civilian Nazi kangaroo Volksgerichtshof [People’s Court], presided by the rabid ideologue Roland Freisler).

The case of Erwin Rommel is the focus of much interest, given the his enduring cult as a military genius and martyr. Rommel was affiliated with, but not an advocate of or participant in, the July 20 plot. He was more active in pursuing diplomatic feelers with American OSS and other contacts in the U.K.; his goal was to save Germany via a separate peace with the western allies. He specifically disapproved of assassination plots if only because he viewed them as likely to lead to a second round of postwar conspiracy theorizing of a self-defeating “stab in the back,” fueling a lingering nostalgia for Nazi policies and leaders and a similarly enduring, reactionary xenophobia, anti-Semitism, etc. [I happen to share his view on the long-term political and cultural downside of a successful Hitler assassination.] Unfortunately for Rommel, however, he was incriminated by the private notes of Dr. Goerdeler, who had short-listed him as a possible future Reichspresident, and his enemies on the Court of Military Honor voted he be stripped of his military affiliation… and be thrown to the mercies of the People’s Court. His suicide under duress followed shortly.

I think it’s debatable whether the July 20 plot could ever have succeeded, tweaking any variables you’d like, given the failure of the plotters to secure these army commanders as allies.

As for the execution of the July 20 plot, the film depicts an earlier aborted attempt (jettisoned in the difficulties of obtaining the “go ahead” from enough parties before the meeting ended); actually, however, von Stauffenberg carried the briefcase bomb on three prior unconsummated attempts before committing to detonation on July 20. The film could’ve covered all these attempts in the service of historical completeness, but I’m guessing that was considered undesirable due to pacing/editing concerns or for being overly confusing to the audience. (It certainly would’ve racheted up the tension, though!)

Finally, I have two final quibbles with the film. The closing postscripts failed to offer a historical overview of the scope of the conspiracy and of the Gestapo roundup. Depending on who you read, the final tally of arrests directly or indirectly motivated by the July 20 Plot ranges from around 5000 to as many as 7000, with about 200 people executed. The executed included many diplomats, college professors, jurists and lawyers, along with other educators, theologians, businessmen, a couple of farmers, an architect and his wife… all unacknowleged in any specific way in the film. I think a line offering the raw numbers would’ve illuminated the true scope of these proceedings for most of the viewers, especially since the film only alludes to about a dozen top conspirators being executed.

Most of the conspiracy leaders (and others condemned for complicity) were dealt with by one of three outcomes: a first group was executed by firing squad at Bendlerblock on the night of July 20-21 on orders of Gen. Fromm (four suffered this fate, as shown in the film); several others committed suicide to avoid a worse fate (Beck, von Tresckow, von Kluge, Rommel, and a few others); and most of the other plot leaders got piano wire (at Hitler’s insistence), with the bulk of the condemned plotters being hanged normally or shot by firing squad. I can understand, for reasons of delicacy and MPAA board ratings, why director Bryan Singer soft-pedalled the visceral details and the sheer extent of the executions, but I do think he should have depicted a final insult humiliating these men – namely, an SS flunky (or perhaps Goebbels himself, I don’t know how it went down exactly) setting up a film camera to document the hangings, a breach of decency which actually happened. In fact, Hitler is reported to have greatly enjoyed watching the snuff film that Goebbels prepared of the piano-wire hangings…

I like your post Scrivenor. The only thing I have to disagree with is that is was probably wise to not include aristocratic titles when one was introduced to Der Furher. Hitler despised the aristocracy. They returned the animosity, considering him a jumped-up little Austrian peasant. Part of the fallout of Valkyrie was that Hitler used it as a means to purge many of the aristocrats from the upper ranks. I would have liked it if the film had included some of the class resentment on both sides and shown how even petty animosity can influence such momentous acts.

A correction: I should’ve used the term Heer for army; Wehrmacht is often used to mean the same thing colloquially, but it properly refers to all armed forces collectively.

I agree that that the film would’ve been enriched by depicting that angle (one such opportunity being the job interview when von S. gets his adjutant; he could’ve aimed a question or comment about the man’s class/regional/cultural background) and that it wouldn’t have been wise to trumpet his aristo pedigree to the Fuhrer. IIRC, in the film it was one of Hitler’s flunkies who introduces von Stauffenberg, so he probably would’ve left out the titles, even if he’d known they applied to von S., but I like to think that a Wehrmacht man with balls would’ve trumpeted the whole shebang anyway, just to piss off “the Corporal,” ha-ha.

FWIW, a lot of top commanders could disagree with Hitler – even raise their voice against him in their arguments over how to conduct the war – and, if not always retain their command, at least survive the encounter. I read once about one prominent general (can’t recall which one) whom Hitler relieved of his command three times, only to be recalled each time, basically because the German war effort needed every competent leader it could get. I think quite a number of generals went through at least one of these cycles of getting sacked and recalled (if not three times). But you’re right that it would’ve been unwise for Colonel von Stauffenberg to risk antagonizing him.

Wurttenburg. They were Swabian nobility, not Prussian.

I saw it two nights ago and really liked it - much better than I thought I would, based on the mixed reviews to date. It’s just as well all the actors didn’t try to fake German accents. Terence Stamp and Bill Nighy were terrific; von Stauffenberg’s young aide was also good in a small part. Wished there’d been more of Kenneth Branagh; he stole every scene he was in. I thought Tom Cruise did just fine in the lead role. The actor who played Hitler wasn’t very convincing, though.* Good cinematography, script and costuming all around. I’d give it a B+/A-.

*The same actor played Mr. Collins, the obsequious clergyman in the 1995 BBC production of Pride & Prejudice - a little IMDB research revealed that the actor who played Hitler’s aide in Valkyrie (the one who wanted to see the operational plan that von Stauffenberg was bringing for Hitler’s approval) played Mr. Collins in the 2005 version of Pride & Prejudice!

Question: I went to see it on Christmas weekend, but I took my mom, and she got sick just about the time the bomb went off. I heard, somewhere, that that is when it started to get a lot better. Right or wrong?
Thanks,
greathakes

btw, so far, is it a moneymaker, or a bomb?

I saw it recently and I basically liked it.

What I would have liked better was a little backstory on the other conspirators, showing why they personally wanted Hitler dead.
The movie basically played as grey Nazis (regular army) vs Black Nazis (SS)

So far it has grossed about 73 million dollars in the US. I know it got good reviews in Germany, I’m not sure what the international gross is like.

For a Tom Cruise movie the US gross is dissapointing. Not ‘bad’ perse but it will struggle to make a 100 milliion. I’m sure that when all is said and done, it will be a profitable film, just not a huge money maker, like War of the Worlds, Mission Impossible, etc.

I do have a question about the uniforms.

The jackets had little holes in them where US service men would have there service medals. Were these ‘button holes’ to hold medals on formal occasions?

I think those were little loops to mount medal strips on, not holes.

greatshakes, I liked it all the way through, so I would say “no.”