Valkyrie
- Thread starter Galactus
- Start date
TheVileOne
Eternal
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2002
- Messages
- 70,826
- Reaction score
- 15,073
- Points
- 103
For now, Cruise is back on the wagon.
Antonello Blueberry
Inglorious bastard
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2000
- Messages
- 7,951
- Reaction score
- 12
- Points
- 58
He has his own studio now, I'd say he landed on his feet.
Hush
Wee Little Puppet Man
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2003
- Messages
- 16,732
- Reaction score
- 9
- Points
- 33
Im a huge Cruise fan and this is another add to my collection, I think the guy is great in just about every movie he is in. I really loved this whole movie and how when the characters spoke to each other they all sounded different because that was how they heard them speaking German, it was clever and quite well potrayed. I will be buying this and watching it again for sure.
BestGirl
Reluctantly following Vought's orders
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2008
- Messages
- 11,067
- Reaction score
- 28
- Points
- 58
Have you seen Downfall? It's a German movie about Hitler's final days that was nominated for an Oscar. It's excellent because it's not just about Hitler, but also about his staff and what Berlin was like at the end of the war. I thought it was really interesting listening to the characters speak their native language. You'll have to read English subtitles obviously. Der Untergang is its German title.
BestGirl
Reluctantly following Vought's orders
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2008
- Messages
- 11,067
- Reaction score
- 28
- Points
- 58
I thought both movies were good but in different ways. Valkyrie is a thriller while Untergang is a historical drama. I will say that Untergang is a much better ensemble peice than Valkyrie.
JaD
Thriller Night
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2007
- Messages
- 21,140
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 58
My first film to see in theaters of the new year. What a great way to start! 
I remember being thrown off by the whole 'accent' thing when I first saw a trailer for this film. It didn't bother me at all and I was greatly entertained. The second half of the film (much more) without a doubt and this was a damn good film by Singer. And random I guess, but I loved the final shot of the film with Stauffenberg looking at his family leave in the car. Just a touching final note that I really loved.
I remember being thrown off by the whole 'accent' thing when I first saw a trailer for this film. It didn't bother me at all and I was greatly entertained. The second half of the film (much more) without a doubt and this was a damn good film by Singer. And random I guess, but I loved the final shot of the film with Stauffenberg looking at his family leave in the car. Just a touching final note that I really loved.
nightwing06
Sidekick
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2004
- Messages
- 2,514
- Reaction score
- 129
- Points
- 73
Valkyrie
The second half was stronger than the first half with the exception of an attack scene in the dessert,and thats saying a lot since
i already knew how the story ends.Director Bryan Singer definitely raised the levels of suspense Its odd that Cruise had an accent when he was writing a letter early on in the film,then he totally drops it for the rest of the film.Is it just me or did Bill Nighy look uncomfortable in his uniform?
Kenneth Branagh,Bill Nighy,Tom Wilkinson ,Terence Stamp and Eddie Izzard
did a fine job with their roles.
Scale of 1-10 a 7
The second half was stronger than the first half with the exception of an attack scene in the dessert,and thats saying a lot since
i already knew how the story ends.Director Bryan Singer definitely raised the levels of suspense Its odd that Cruise had an accent when he was writing a letter early on in the film,then he totally drops it for the rest of the film.Is it just me or did Bill Nighy look uncomfortable in his uniform?
Kenneth Branagh,Bill Nighy,Tom Wilkinson ,Terence Stamp and Eddie Izzard
did a fine job with their roles.
Scale of 1-10 a 7
Double Down
A New Kind of Thrill
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2008
- Messages
- 6,801
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
Valkyrie: The McGill connection
Renowned expert on anti-Hitler conspiracy advised screenwriters
By Mark Shainblum
It would be hard to imagine anyone less Hollywood than McGill history professor Peter C. Hoffmann. At 78, with his neat bowtie and his impeccably polite, old-world manners, the renowned William Kingsford Professor of History is every inch the classic German gentleman-academic. Which is why it’s so difficult to visualize him poring over the screenplay of a blockbuster action movie directed by Bryan Singer of X-Men and Superman Returns fame.
http://reporter.mcgill.ca/2009/01/tom-cruise’s-valkyrie-the-mcgill-connection/#more-1898
I put it as a spoiler to take up less space on the page. It's an interesting read, though.
Renowned expert on anti-Hitler conspiracy advised screenwriters
By Mark Shainblum
It would be hard to imagine anyone less Hollywood than McGill history professor Peter C. Hoffmann. At 78, with his neat bowtie and his impeccably polite, old-world manners, the renowned William Kingsford Professor of History is every inch the classic German gentleman-academic. Which is why it’s so difficult to visualize him poring over the screenplay of a blockbuster action movie directed by Bryan Singer of X-Men and Superman Returns fame.
The movie in question, however, is Valkyrie, a World War II action-thriller that opened Christmas Day. Based on a true story, Valkyrie follows a group of idealistic anti-Nazi German army officers who plotted to assassinate Adolf Hitler in 1944. The attempt was led by Colonel Claus Schenk Graf von Stauffenberg, a Roman Catholic aristocrat enraged by the crimes of the Nazi regime that blackened Germany’s honour. Stauffenberg was played by Tom Cruise, who also backed the film in his role as one of the principals of United Artists.
Tom Cruise stars as Colonel Claus Schenk Graf von Stauffenberg, the leader of a 1944 plot to assassinate Adolf Hitler in the film Valkyrie. Photo courtesy of United Artists.
“As far as Tom Cruise is concerned, I did not know him except as the brother in the Rain Man,” Hoffmann acknowledged. “I thought he was very good in that, but I’m not one who goes to action movies, so this was new to me. On the whole, in the fundamentals, I think they have done very well. They have produced a film that is true and accurate.”
Hoffmann is widely considered to be one of the world’s leading authorities on the Stauffenberg plot, so it’s not surprising the writers of Valkyrie relied heavily on his massive 1969 history of the assassination attempt and his later, equally massive biography of Stauffenberg for background material.
“I understand that the scriptwriters glanced at my books from time to time,” Hoffmann said with typical understatement. “And on the strength of that they contacted me and wanted to know if they could talk with me. This went on for a few weeks and then they sent me the script, and asked me to read it.”
“Peter wasn’t an official adviser for the film,” said Nathan Alexander, who co-wrote Valkyrie with Christopher McQuarrie, “but we developed a relationship with him over the course of making the movie. He saw a draft of the script and gave us notes and comments. He was incredibly helpful to us.”
Hoffmann’s lack of official adviser status was by choice, he said. “United Artists offered me a contract, but I said I will not take any money. I want to be free, not a hired brain, and I will tell you what I think. On that basis I was able to press them to include things that I thought needed to be included and to correct things I thought needed to be corrected.”
In particular, Hoffman was adamant that the motives of the conspirators be portrayed in a historically accurate and complete way. Over the years, all sorts of dark motivations have been ascribed to Stauffenberg and his co-conspirators, not the least of which was that they wanted to replace the Nazi regime with an only slightly less odious military dictatorship, or that they were opportunists who only turned against Hitler when it became clear Germany was losing the war.
Such musings were uncharitable and without historical foundation, Hoffmann’s meticulous research showed, and the plotters suffered horribly when the bomb Stauffenberg planted failed to kill Hitler and the abortive coup d’etat fell apart. Stauffenberg and his immediate co-conspirators were summarily court-martialed and shot on the spot, while members of his extended family all over Germany were arrested and imprisoned under Nazi “kith and kin” guilt-by-association laws. Many of them were to die in their cells. Stauffenberg’s brother Berthold and several other members of the conspiracy who survived the coup attempt were tried by Nazi kangaroo courts and sentenced to horrible deaths by slow strangulation with piano wire.
“They were conscious of the very marginal chance of success and that they would probably perish,” Hoffmann said. “And even if they didn’t perish, they had no political future. Regicides can’t be kings. They accepted self-sacrifice as a probable outcome to document their opposition to the crimes the Nazi regime had committed, and to rescue a remnant of the honour of Germany.”
Hoffmann’s research documents that Stauffenberg expressed anti-Nazi and anti-Hitler sentiments as early as 1938, over a year before the war began. By 1941, while Germany was still arguably winning the war, Stauffenberg became aware of the enormity of Nazi crimes against civil populations, prisoners of war and the Jews, and became convinced Hitler had to be removed from power by any means necessary.
“Peter felt it was very important for the film that we get that right,” Alexander said. “His thoughts on the motives of the conspirators against Hitler helped shape the movie we have. We love Peter. He was a huge help and very supportive along the way.”
Hoffmann became interested in the Stauffenberg conspiracy in part because his own father played a role in it, he explains.
“He didn’t make much of it, partly because it had failed, and partly because his was not a leading role, not in the public limelight at all, like Stauffenberg or some of the others,” Hoffmann said. “So he never bragged about it, and there was nothing to brag about. He was just glad that he hadn’t been hanged.”
More generally, Hoffmann explains, his career as a historian has been motivated by fundamental questions about the 12 years of the Third Reich.
“How could it happen? Why did it happen? What course did it run?” he asked. “In fact, I asked my parents, my elders in general, who were there and were voters at the time, how could they let that happen? Of course, they didn’t let it happen, they voted for the Free Democrats, but that’s what got me interested in that period.”
Tom Cruise stars as Colonel Claus Schenk Graf von Stauffenberg, the leader of a 1944 plot to assassinate Adolf Hitler in the film Valkyrie. Photo courtesy of United Artists.
“As far as Tom Cruise is concerned, I did not know him except as the brother in the Rain Man,” Hoffmann acknowledged. “I thought he was very good in that, but I’m not one who goes to action movies, so this was new to me. On the whole, in the fundamentals, I think they have done very well. They have produced a film that is true and accurate.”
Hoffmann is widely considered to be one of the world’s leading authorities on the Stauffenberg plot, so it’s not surprising the writers of Valkyrie relied heavily on his massive 1969 history of the assassination attempt and his later, equally massive biography of Stauffenberg for background material.
“I understand that the scriptwriters glanced at my books from time to time,” Hoffmann said with typical understatement. “And on the strength of that they contacted me and wanted to know if they could talk with me. This went on for a few weeks and then they sent me the script, and asked me to read it.”
“Peter wasn’t an official adviser for the film,” said Nathan Alexander, who co-wrote Valkyrie with Christopher McQuarrie, “but we developed a relationship with him over the course of making the movie. He saw a draft of the script and gave us notes and comments. He was incredibly helpful to us.”
Hoffmann’s lack of official adviser status was by choice, he said. “United Artists offered me a contract, but I said I will not take any money. I want to be free, not a hired brain, and I will tell you what I think. On that basis I was able to press them to include things that I thought needed to be included and to correct things I thought needed to be corrected.”
In particular, Hoffman was adamant that the motives of the conspirators be portrayed in a historically accurate and complete way. Over the years, all sorts of dark motivations have been ascribed to Stauffenberg and his co-conspirators, not the least of which was that they wanted to replace the Nazi regime with an only slightly less odious military dictatorship, or that they were opportunists who only turned against Hitler when it became clear Germany was losing the war.
Such musings were uncharitable and without historical foundation, Hoffmann’s meticulous research showed, and the plotters suffered horribly when the bomb Stauffenberg planted failed to kill Hitler and the abortive coup d’etat fell apart. Stauffenberg and his immediate co-conspirators were summarily court-martialed and shot on the spot, while members of his extended family all over Germany were arrested and imprisoned under Nazi “kith and kin” guilt-by-association laws. Many of them were to die in their cells. Stauffenberg’s brother Berthold and several other members of the conspiracy who survived the coup attempt were tried by Nazi kangaroo courts and sentenced to horrible deaths by slow strangulation with piano wire.
“They were conscious of the very marginal chance of success and that they would probably perish,” Hoffmann said. “And even if they didn’t perish, they had no political future. Regicides can’t be kings. They accepted self-sacrifice as a probable outcome to document their opposition to the crimes the Nazi regime had committed, and to rescue a remnant of the honour of Germany.”
Hoffmann’s research documents that Stauffenberg expressed anti-Nazi and anti-Hitler sentiments as early as 1938, over a year before the war began. By 1941, while Germany was still arguably winning the war, Stauffenberg became aware of the enormity of Nazi crimes against civil populations, prisoners of war and the Jews, and became convinced Hitler had to be removed from power by any means necessary.
“Peter felt it was very important for the film that we get that right,” Alexander said. “His thoughts on the motives of the conspirators against Hitler helped shape the movie we have. We love Peter. He was a huge help and very supportive along the way.”
Hoffmann became interested in the Stauffenberg conspiracy in part because his own father played a role in it, he explains.
“He didn’t make much of it, partly because it had failed, and partly because his was not a leading role, not in the public limelight at all, like Stauffenberg or some of the others,” Hoffmann said. “So he never bragged about it, and there was nothing to brag about. He was just glad that he hadn’t been hanged.”
More generally, Hoffmann explains, his career as a historian has been motivated by fundamental questions about the 12 years of the Third Reich.
“How could it happen? Why did it happen? What course did it run?” he asked. “In fact, I asked my parents, my elders in general, who were there and were voters at the time, how could they let that happen? Of course, they didn’t let it happen, they voted for the Free Democrats, but that’s what got me interested in that period.”
http://reporter.mcgill.ca/2009/01/tom-cruise’s-valkyrie-the-mcgill-connection/#more-1898
I put it as a spoiler to take up less space on the page. It's an interesting read, though.
dude stannis
Avenger
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2003
- Messages
- 17,099
- Reaction score
- 7
- Points
- 31
Roger Ebert comes to Valkyrie's defence:
Whole article here.
Now consider the case of Tom Cruise. Did you read the buildup before the release of "Valkyrie?" The picture was widely predicted to be the nail in the coffin of his career. On Nov. 18, 2008, before the film was first publicly screened, Courtney Hazlett of MSNBC.com breathlessly reported:
...those who've gotten an early glimpse say not only is the film nowhere near as exciting as a thriller, but Cruise's performance elicits uncomfortable and inappropriate laughs. Among them: A scene where Cruise's character, Claus Von Stauffenberg, is forced to give the infamous "Heil Hitler" salute. "It's an unsettling scene but you almost start to laugh," the source says. "His character is resisting it but you never forget it's Tom Cruise saying 'Heil Hitler.' It's funny and shocking at the same time." Sources also described a scene where Cruise's character Claus Von Stauffenberg removes a false eye. "It was disgusting," said one person who saw the film. "It was like watching someone pluck their contacts out."
Hazlett did not see the film, and apparently did not see her first sentence ("the film elicits uncomfortable and inappropriate laughs") before writing her second one ("you almost start to laugh"). The story lists three sources: (1) "Those who've gotten an early glimpse;" (2) "Sources;" (3) "One person who saw the film." Help me out here. Are we referring to three different people, or the same person three times? How many of us find it disgusting to see someone remove a contact lens? Did the Source(s) notice that Cruise had his back turned when he removed the eye? Does MSNBC employ anyone meeting the description of a copy editor? This story would disgust and be laughed at by a competent one.
Apparently Cruise's mistake was to play a Nazi in the first place. To be sure, he was playing a Nazi who led a plot to kill Hitler, but the gossips don't sweat the small stuff. When you get on a hit list, every decision you make is the wrong one. On Jan. 8, 2008, a year ago, Roger Friedman reported on Fox News: "The burgeoning price tag on 'Valkyrie' could turn out to be a big headache. Most Cruise movies have not made much more than $100 at the box office, with the exception of the "Mission: Impossible" series. And that series was trending downward." Let me be sure I get this straight: "Most Cruise movies have not made much more than $100?" I would assume that's a typo, but it has remained uncorrected on the Fox News web site for 12 months.
Entertainment Weekly, a splendid print publication, relaxes its standards on its website. On ew.com's "popWatch" in early November, the usually sensibleMichael Slezak committed the cardinal sin of reviewing a trailer. Everyone knows the trailer usually has little to do with the movie. I learned that from Mad magazine when I was nine years old. Slezak reports:
Tom Cruise's latest flick, Valkyrie, is set in Nazi Germany, and it's not a comedy, so why does its new trailer (embedded below, or streaming in a higher-quality clip at Yahoo) leave me snickering? Is it the eye patch? Or the way the lightning crashes as Cruise declares "We have to kill Hitler" in his Serious Thespian Voice? Maybe it's that awful line, "When the S.S. catch you, they will pull you apart like warm bread." (Mission: Carbs!) Or maybe I can no longer separate the tabloid staple from the actor.
You know, maybe that's it. EW.com lists Slezak's item in the following "categories:" Film, Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise, Movie Trailers. Katie Holmes does not appear in either the film or the story, but if you are interested in her of course you would want to know that the "Valkyrie" trailer left Michael Slezak snickering.
Charlie Chaplin in "The Great Dictator:" I just want to set the world on fire
But wait. Tom Cruise's trouble are not over. Here's another headline: Cruise May Face Legal Action Over Hitler Globe. Ohmigod! As my Aunt Mary wisely instructed me: "Honey, when it rains, it pours!" She taught me to read those words off a box of Morton's salt. The story appeared on the New York Post's Page Six. It says "the couch-jumping star used a replica of one of Adolf Hitler's prized possessions in the movie without permission." The possession was Adolf's world globe. If Page Six had ventured a few more pages deeper into the paper and consulted the Post's movie critics, Page Six no doubt would have been informed that the globe became world-famous after Charlie Chaplin did a ballet with it in "The Great Dictator" (1940). They could also have reported that the collector's attorney does not foresee a big lawsuit but simply an acknowledgement. And even a 9-year-old would know that Cruise will face absolutely no legal action, because an actor can hardly be sued because of the props he uses.
But now the gears have suddenly shifted. You've probably already absorbed this from the ether, but I'll say it anyway: After "Valkyrie" actually opened, no one laughed at the eye patch. No audiences were disgusted by the glass eye. It grossed $52 million domestically in its first nine days. Cruise will live to fail another day. Movie critics didn't do back-flips over either picture. On Metacritic, "Australia" scored 53, and "Valkyrie" 56.
...those who've gotten an early glimpse say not only is the film nowhere near as exciting as a thriller, but Cruise's performance elicits uncomfortable and inappropriate laughs. Among them: A scene where Cruise's character, Claus Von Stauffenberg, is forced to give the infamous "Heil Hitler" salute. "It's an unsettling scene but you almost start to laugh," the source says. "His character is resisting it but you never forget it's Tom Cruise saying 'Heil Hitler.' It's funny and shocking at the same time." Sources also described a scene where Cruise's character Claus Von Stauffenberg removes a false eye. "It was disgusting," said one person who saw the film. "It was like watching someone pluck their contacts out."
Hazlett did not see the film, and apparently did not see her first sentence ("the film elicits uncomfortable and inappropriate laughs") before writing her second one ("you almost start to laugh"). The story lists three sources: (1) "Those who've gotten an early glimpse;" (2) "Sources;" (3) "One person who saw the film." Help me out here. Are we referring to three different people, or the same person three times? How many of us find it disgusting to see someone remove a contact lens? Did the Source(s) notice that Cruise had his back turned when he removed the eye? Does MSNBC employ anyone meeting the description of a copy editor? This story would disgust and be laughed at by a competent one.
Apparently Cruise's mistake was to play a Nazi in the first place. To be sure, he was playing a Nazi who led a plot to kill Hitler, but the gossips don't sweat the small stuff. When you get on a hit list, every decision you make is the wrong one. On Jan. 8, 2008, a year ago, Roger Friedman reported on Fox News: "The burgeoning price tag on 'Valkyrie' could turn out to be a big headache. Most Cruise movies have not made much more than $100 at the box office, with the exception of the "Mission: Impossible" series. And that series was trending downward." Let me be sure I get this straight: "Most Cruise movies have not made much more than $100?" I would assume that's a typo, but it has remained uncorrected on the Fox News web site for 12 months.
Entertainment Weekly, a splendid print publication, relaxes its standards on its website. On ew.com's "popWatch" in early November, the usually sensibleMichael Slezak committed the cardinal sin of reviewing a trailer. Everyone knows the trailer usually has little to do with the movie. I learned that from Mad magazine when I was nine years old. Slezak reports:
Tom Cruise's latest flick, Valkyrie, is set in Nazi Germany, and it's not a comedy, so why does its new trailer (embedded below, or streaming in a higher-quality clip at Yahoo) leave me snickering? Is it the eye patch? Or the way the lightning crashes as Cruise declares "We have to kill Hitler" in his Serious Thespian Voice? Maybe it's that awful line, "When the S.S. catch you, they will pull you apart like warm bread." (Mission: Carbs!) Or maybe I can no longer separate the tabloid staple from the actor.
You know, maybe that's it. EW.com lists Slezak's item in the following "categories:" Film, Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise, Movie Trailers. Katie Holmes does not appear in either the film or the story, but if you are interested in her of course you would want to know that the "Valkyrie" trailer left Michael Slezak snickering.
Charlie Chaplin in "The Great Dictator:" I just want to set the world on fire
But wait. Tom Cruise's trouble are not over. Here's another headline: Cruise May Face Legal Action Over Hitler Globe. Ohmigod! As my Aunt Mary wisely instructed me: "Honey, when it rains, it pours!" She taught me to read those words off a box of Morton's salt. The story appeared on the New York Post's Page Six. It says "the couch-jumping star used a replica of one of Adolf Hitler's prized possessions in the movie without permission." The possession was Adolf's world globe. If Page Six had ventured a few more pages deeper into the paper and consulted the Post's movie critics, Page Six no doubt would have been informed that the globe became world-famous after Charlie Chaplin did a ballet with it in "The Great Dictator" (1940). They could also have reported that the collector's attorney does not foresee a big lawsuit but simply an acknowledgement. And even a 9-year-old would know that Cruise will face absolutely no legal action, because an actor can hardly be sued because of the props he uses.
But now the gears have suddenly shifted. You've probably already absorbed this from the ether, but I'll say it anyway: After "Valkyrie" actually opened, no one laughed at the eye patch. No audiences were disgusted by the glass eye. It grossed $52 million domestically in its first nine days. Cruise will live to fail another day. Movie critics didn't do back-flips over either picture. On Metacritic, "Australia" scored 53, and "Valkyrie" 56.
Whole article here.
Superark
The Purveyor of Good
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2005
- Messages
- 7,115
- Reaction score
- 1,268
- Points
- 103
I have to give Ebert major props for that!
That basically confirms what a lot us were talking about on here. People hating on Cruise and the film simply because its the things to do.
I'm surprised Ebert even mentioned Valkryie's RT score, since its obvious that some of the reviews are totally biased and hold no intergrity to them.
I'm so glad this movie is doing well. Maybe that will shut up some of the Cruise bashers.
Good job Ebert!
Lobo
The Architect
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2002
- Messages
- 39,018
- Reaction score
- 2,731
- Points
- 103
I'm not a big Cruise fan by any means, always thought he was decent to good. His role in this however, is one of the strongest I've ever seen from him. I thought he was really fantastic as Stauffenberg.
I also very much enjoyed the movie 8/10
Stamp gives you what we've come to expect from him, and Branagh and Nighy were fantastic in their roles.
I also very much enjoyed the movie 8/10
Stamp gives you what we've come to expect from him, and Branagh and Nighy were fantastic in their roles.
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2008
- Messages
- 40,446
- Reaction score
- 6,223
- Points
- 103
Ebert is really the only critic I read. Because he actually gets it and knows what he's talking about. But he's unpredictable.
The Senator
Avenger
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2004
- Messages
- 12,222
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 31
I saw this recently, and I had two major problems with it: First, why did every single German in the film, aside from Hitler himself, have a British accent? I understand that in American adaptations of foreign history, the actors are going to speak in English. But the fact that none of the main cast members bore a German accent annoyed me a bit, especially since this film was directed by Bryan Singer, who tends to pay attention to these sort of details.
Second, regardless of what Roger Ebert may say, Tom Cruise was probably one of the worst choices to play Colonel Von Stauffenberg. He was wooden, cold, and delivered most of his lines poorly. He is the film's biggest flaw, and it is unfortunate because Valkyrie is such an interesting, tense thriller. If Cruise actually made an effort to ACT (considering that's his job), or if he was replaced by someone better, this film could have been Bryan Singer's best film since The Usual Suspects.
That being said, the film stays afloat due to its excellent directing and screenplay. The film is tense, and the suspense was real. And even though everyone knew how Operation Valkyrie turned out in the end, the scenes where Von Stauffenberg and his followers were taken under arrest and executed were still thrilling.
Overall, I would rank this somewhere between a 7 and 7.5 out of 10. This is just one of those films where the story and direction couldn't cover up poor acting.
Second, regardless of what Roger Ebert may say, Tom Cruise was probably one of the worst choices to play Colonel Von Stauffenberg. He was wooden, cold, and delivered most of his lines poorly. He is the film's biggest flaw, and it is unfortunate because Valkyrie is such an interesting, tense thriller. If Cruise actually made an effort to ACT (considering that's his job), or if he was replaced by someone better, this film could have been Bryan Singer's best film since The Usual Suspects.
That being said, the film stays afloat due to its excellent directing and screenplay. The film is tense, and the suspense was real. And even though everyone knew how Operation Valkyrie turned out in the end, the scenes where Von Stauffenberg and his followers were taken under arrest and executed were still thrilling.
Overall, I would rank this somewhere between a 7 and 7.5 out of 10. This is just one of those films where the story and direction couldn't cover up poor acting.
BatJeff7786
Sidekick
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
- Messages
- 2,254
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
Why would they need a german accent if they were all speaking English? They bridged that gap in the first thirty seconds of the film. Cruise starts talking in German, then it slowly translates into English. No accents required. We know they're German. We know they're actually "speaking German", it simply eliminates the need for subtitles. I'd rather have that then a bunch of actors use fake German accents and speak English.
scifiwolf
Superhero
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2004
- Messages
- 5,150
- Reaction score
- 38
- Points
- 58
Saw this last night, and I gotta agree about the accents. The technique of having a foreign language transition into English is not new, but as Valkyrie proves, it's very effective. The accents are a little strange at first, but the movie sucks you in and then you forget all about them. I also marveled at how much I was on the edge of my seat and grinding my teeth from the suspense. Everybody knew the plot failed, and the conspirators were executed, but Bryan and his writers did a fantastic job of making a thriller out of it. I also loved the portrayal of Hitler. That has to have been one of the creepiest performances I've ever seen in my life. In Stauffenberg's first meeting with him, the nervousness was so palpable. I felt as if I were the one facing Hitler.
I gave this movie 8/10, but mostly because I'm very picky about what gets a 9 or 10. I would definitely recommend the movie, especially to those who love WWII history as I do.
I gave this movie 8/10, but mostly because I'm very picky about what gets a 9 or 10. I would definitely recommend the movie, especially to those who love WWII history as I do.
Matt Mortem
Karloff is King
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2007
- Messages
- 18,517
- Reaction score
- 43
- Points
- 58
Loved the film. It was exciting, it was tense. You knew the ending because it was a historical film, but that didn't take away from the suspense in the least. The accents didn't bother me, the transition in the beginning really helped to eliminate the confusion with the accents. Should they have had German accents, the film probably would not have been as good IMO. I will definetly purchase this film. It was fantastic. Every player in the film did a top notch job.
AVEITWITHJAMON
Badass Cloud
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2003
- Messages
- 42,421
- Reaction score
- 7,897
- Points
- 103
Cant wait to see this, comes out here near the end of the month, will be my first cinema visit this year I think.
echostation
Superhero
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2000
- Messages
- 5,093
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
this has totally dropped off from the box office top twenty.. makes no sense??
Antonello Blueberry
Inglorious bastard
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2000
- Messages
- 7,951
- Reaction score
- 12
- Points
- 58
It's at the 14th place with a total of more than 77 million. Not that bad.
Similar threads
Staff online
-
Hunter RiderRonin
Latest posts
-
DC Television James Gunn's Suicide Squad Spinoff ‘Peacemaker’ Starring John Cena on HBO Max (8 Viewers)- Latest: AVEITWITHJAMON
-
Action-Adventure Sonic the Hedgehog Spin-off films being developed (4 Viewers)
- Latest: AVEITWITHJAMON
-
-
-