StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Saw it yesterday, was surprisingly good, there's only really one scene in the movie where you see TOM CRUISE instead of Stauffenberg.

Lack of accents didn't bother me, they started out with Stauffenberg speaking German in a voice over narrating his diary as he writes it (in sutterlin too!) in North Africa; and then segue into English with no accents for the rest of the movie essentially.

Apparently early in the production, they tried experimenting with german accents, but dropped it after Singer decided it was not really worth the trouble/too distracting.

Anyway, while they talk in English, all the written material is in German from not only the plan for VALKYRIE itself, but also for the various materials that come over teletype/telegram during the movie.

Also a surprisingly good recreation of Der Fuhrer's Wolf's Lair and Berghof; they even go down to the smallest detail, like the troops in the woods the Wolf's lair guarding it wearing mosquito netting over their helmets -- the place WAS built on a swamp for security measures int he first place...

Likewise, I was very surprised by how enjoyable I found the movie. I was drawn to it by the supporting cast, particularly Branagh and Izzard (Even though he has a small role, it was worth it). I went into it expecting to be put off by Cruise but I managed to enjoy the movie without ever really remembering that it was Tom Cruise.

Looking back, I don't know why I worried so much about the accents. As you said, it really wasn't bothersome during the movie. I especially liked the way they used to segue from German to English, similar to how Judgement at Nuremberg did.

Well, not being a Tom Cruise fan, I loved the film. It felt authentic to me, and lets face it when ever Hollywood wants a foreign feel to language they find a lot of Limeys to play the role. German, Greek, Roman all sounds like a British accent to Hollywood.

Anyway, the movie was great.

So... it's worth the price of the ticket?

LadyTevar wrote:So... it's worth the price of the ticket?

I thought so.

I really thought everything in this movie worked. That may be because I was already aware of the failed bomb plot and how the German Army and the SS were at odds (I'm a big History Channel fan), so I didn't need a lot of exposition to get me up to speed on the background. I've heard complaints by some people that this wasn't clear enough to them though. I've heard complaints about the coup scenes where the German soldiers are arresting the SS, about how it just looks like mobs of Germans arresting each other, and that is true to an extent, but isn't that what a coup is? A bunch of people all dressed the same, fighting each other?

Also the absolute best part is the quick cut of events right after the bomb goes off, it has a ticking clock feel to it because, while the characters think Hitler is dead, a (smart) movie goer knows that he is not, and that it is only a matter of time before he reasserts his control.

As I said, I was aware of the bomb plot, but I didn't really know the details, so while the failure of the plot was inevitable, there is still a lot of tension as to weather or not certain characters can escape.

All the the one-liners from the trailer are far less cheesy in context, which was a huge relief to me. Though my friends now have a new favorite phrase, "Ve've been duped!"

I saw this film twice, and both times it was absolutely packed and there was almost no talking from anyone. I find that reassuring for two reasons: 1. The movie was just that intense (the bits with no music followed by LOUD militaristic marching music sticks you to your seat) 2. A modern US audience can follow a fairly dry, low action procedural conspiracy film.

(NOT FILM RELATED) Something that annoyed the ever living shit out of me, was talking to my friend's mom who had seen it, and she was convinced that Hitler really had been killed by the bomb because, "You never see him, you just hear a voice and that could have faked." She honestly believes that during the rest of the war no one actually saw Hitler after the bomb plot. When I tried to explain that he killed himself (or if you want to believe a less lame conspiracy, the Russian Army killed him) and his body was captured by the Russians in 1945, she asked, "Well, did they do a DNA test?" GOD FUCKING DAMMIT, people watch too much fucking CSI! Does she think Soviet infantry carried MK.1 DNA testing machines into battle in 19-fucking-45?

I saw an advanced screening a few weeks back. Not too bad and Cruise doesn't sink it, but i'd probably not see it again.

Seen it twice, a suprisingly good movie. I really liked the attention to details and I felt Cruise and the the supporting cast all did a good job with their roles.

It was technically pretty good, but knowing the ending (and the details in general) kinda ruined it for me.

MKSheppard wrote:Lack of accents didn't bother me, they started out with Stauffenberg speaking German in a voice over narrating his diary as he writes it (in sutterlin too!) in North Africa; and then segue into English with no accents for the rest of the movie essentially.

Apparently early in the production, they tried experimenting with german accents, but dropped it after Singer decided it was not really worth the trouble/too distracting.

Anyway, while they talk in English, all the written material is in German from not only the plan for VALKYRIE itself, but also for the various materials that come over teletype/telegram during the movie.

This sounds a bit like The Hunt For Red October and Judgment At Nuremberg before it when a character switches from Russian to English and from German to English in mid-sentence. That's a clever device for handling the language issue for audiences who probably wouldn't tolerate something other than all English or another language with subtitles.

Of course, The Longest Day had all the German characters speaking in German and French characters speaking French (with subtitles) and that wasn't at all distracting for me.

Excellent! I'm finding all the reviews here quite useful! Having been interested in the Second World War for as long as I can remember (hey, who didn't read at least one book on WWII, or looked at WWII pictures in many others as a child?) as soon as I saw the trailer I thought to myself "I'm so going to watch this one, I don't care if Tom Thetan Cruise is in it!"

Cruise may be a tad off when it comes to spiritual preferences , but a reliable -if not outstanding- actor he's always been. So, now I know I'm not going to feel ripped off the second the credits start to roll. Thanks.

Oh, and BTW...

Knife wrote:Well, not being a Tom Cruise fan, I loved the film. It felt authentic to me, and lets face it when ever Hollywood wants a foreign feel to language they find a lot of Limeys to play the role. German, Greek, Roman all sounds like a British accent to Hollywood.

Anyway, the movie was great.

On that... Yeah! Why is it that -according to Hollywood- Ancient Romans couldn't speak but with (formal, educated, very RP) British accents? Apparently also Ancient Greeks, WWII Germans, Soviet-era Russians, and -oh, yes!- even aliens (see 1981's Flash Gordon, the one with the OST by Queen). Why could it be? Aren't foreigners -or aliens- credible with a nice ol' Alabama drawl, by mainstream Hollywood?

Cæsar: "Saaay, you too've gone an' betray'd me, ain't ya, Brutus?"

Pulp Hero wrote:When I tried to explain that he killed himself (or if you want to believe a less lame conspiracy, the Russian Army killed him) and his body was captured by the Russians in 1945, she asked, "Well, did they do a DNA test?" GOD FUCKING DAMMIT, people watch too much fucking CSI!

Hahahah! Good lord. Otto Günsche's confirmation was apparently not enough. Or someone was watching too much Hellboy.

The movie is good though. Surprisingly so for a Tom Cruise movie. The plot, of course, is for the layman. A detailed knowledge of history kinda ruins the tension about the whole plot...

Well this movie was surprisingly good. I was well aware of the overall details of the plot but the specific details were lacking to me so the dramatic tension in the movie worked for me. After the bomb goes off and von Stauffenberg heads off in a hurry and the conspirators working frantically to get all of their pieces into position, I felt myself completely sucked into the movie. All of the actors played their role well; no overacting or cheesy acting. Some of the plot elements seemed faked at first (the lieutenant running up to Stauffenberg during the execution, the field marshal's short speech to the judge) but I guess history was rather quite dramatic. The sheer elaborateness and scale of the conspiracy makes the failure all the more tragic; they were so close. Thus far, one of the better movies in an otherwise dismal movie season. I'm still pissed that Harry Potter was moved back because a few executives had delusions of grandeur in copying Dark Knight.

Some minor spoilers.


I was particularly impressed by how few artistic liberties they seemed to take in the film. Stauffenberg probably didn't think of Valkyrie while listening to Wagner during an airstrike, I doubt the escape from the Wolf's Lair was so dramatic in real life, and most of all, there's simply no way he gave Rommel the idea for how to retreat from Africa. The last one in particular bugged me, but since it was right at the start of the film, I quickly got over it.

Otherwise, it was very well done, and I was impressed by how it managed to generate suspense, despite my knowing exactly how the events played out.

That wasn't Rommel, the actor was too heavyset to be Rommel.

Agent Fisher wrote:That wasn't Rommel, the actor was too heavyset to be Rommel.

That's the history geek in you nitpicking.
George C. Scott didn't look all that much like George Patton either.

When I saw Patton for the first time, I remember thinking 'those tanks aren't Shermans, Tigers or Panthers, they're just M48's or M60's painted up with WW2 US or German insignia.

That said, I loved Patton and will go see Valkyrie because a good actor can transcend physical appearance and good directors and screenwriters can make merely adequate actors look good.

Two questions for those who have seen it:

Does the fact that historically we already know how Operation Valkyrie ended affect how one watches the movie?

How much do we get to see Tom Cruise suffer? This is important.

YT300000 wrote:I doubt the escape from the Wolf's Lair was so dramatic in real life

He did commandeer a staff car and drive out; and he DID use his skillz to convince the guard on the outer gate to let them go. The movie DID take an embeliishment -- In real life, when he was stopped at the second guard post, he called up the commander of the guard, a Captain, and bullshitted his way through -- in the movie he calls, or pretends to call a general.

Darth Fanboy wrote:Two questions for those who have seen it:

Does the fact that historically we already know how Operation Valkyrie ended affect how one watches the movie?

No. The tension in the film the drama, is based off of other things than if Tom Cruise killed Hitler.

How much do we get to see Tom Cruise suffer? This is important.

A lot actually, but I kept forgetting it was Tom Cruise, so that's how good it was done.

Glocksman wrote:

Agent Fisher wrote:That wasn't Rommel, the actor was too heavyset to be Rommel.

That's the history geek in you nitpicking.
George C. Scott didn't look all that much like George Patton either.

Well, that, and in the credits the actor was not listed as Rommel. Plus, that general died.

Agent Fisher wrote:That wasn't Rommel, the actor was too heavyset to be Rommel.

So why the insignia and perspex goggles on his cap? I mostly discount physical appearance in these films because they rarely get it bang on, it's more a question of intent.

EDIT: If he was listed differently in the credits I suppose that makes sense. Still odd about the goggles, though.

Most likely it was Von Thoma, the guy who replaced Rommel as DAK Commandar

EDIT: My memory is bad. While Von Thoma was at one time DAK commander, he got wounded, and Rommel resumed command of the DAK.

Generaloberst Hans-Jürgen von Arnim was the guy who took over the DAK after Rommel was ordered to fly to Italy, and he went into the bag along with the rest of the DAK.

The goggles because they were in the desert and would be driving? Lots of german troops in North Africa had goggles.

Well, instead of the rounder smooth-bridged German goggles, Rommel famously wore a pair of British goggles that he plucked from a captured vehicle, saying something to the effect of "Booty, I take it, acceptable even for a general." I suppose the filmmakers considered that bit of imagery sufficient iconic to include it here.

Fire Fly wrote:The sheer elaborateness and scale of the conspiracy makes the failure all the more tragic; they were so close.

I haven't seen this one yet, but yeah, even quite dry "dramatic re-enactments" in history programs capture this. It is a really strong story, I don't think 'knowing how it ends' would prevent one from being drawn in.