When Trumpets Fade
Rating: *** (Well constructed and executed motion picture) Evaluation: Gritty, gray and unhappy World War II movie revolving on one character. A man is thrust into a leadership position he dislikes and even fears, and must perform or wastes the lives of himself and his men in an obviously silly and worthless manner. He is not portrayed as a hero, as no man really is, and faces challenges which are trivialized in most other war movies. No happy or teary ending, things just happen, though predictably (and not unrealistically considering the operation) everyone dies at the end. Unexpectedly good made for TV movie. Scale: ???? - Unevenly done (Full Metal Jacket, Stalingrad) * Poor or Unimpressive (The Sands of Iwo Jima) ** Worth Seeing (Saving Private Ryan) *** Good, Solidly Constructed Film (Platoon) **** Excellent, a Masterpiece (Das Boot)
Directed by: John Irvin
Cast
Ron Eldard: Manning
Zak Orth: Sanderson
Frank Whaley: Chamberlain
Dylan Bruno:Sgt. Talbot
Martin Donovan (II): Capt. Roy Pritchett
Timothy Olyphant: Lt. Lukas
Dan Futterman: Despin
Dwight Yoakam: Lt. Colonel
Devon Gummersall
Steven Petrarca
Jeffrey Donovan: Bobby
Bobby Cannavale
Frank Kobe
András Stohl
Matthew Ruston Cooney
Written by
V.W. Vought
Cinematography by
Thomas Burstyn
All qualitative judgments are IMHO. It seems that Hollywood has recently reopened its interest in the Second World War (the more or less undeserved success of _Saving Private Ryan_ will only strengthen this interest: look for more war movies next summer). There are at least three WWII movies which will be opening in theaters in the near future. HBO, not to be outdone, made the first entry into the WWII-fest on June 27 with _When Trumpets Fade_, a character movie about an American soldier, Manning who is split between his will to survive and his self respect when he is made a squad leader, and forced to continue on in a battle he will most likely die in. The battle is the failed offensive in the Hurtigen forest, overshadowed in most WWII accounts by the somewhat later Battle of the Bulge. I have only seen one other product of director John Irving's, _The Dogs of War_. Despite the fact that almost every mercenary stereotype is used (morally questionable mercs, corrupt leaders of authoritarian countries, weapons smuggled by boat, etc.) and despite the rather amateurish ordinance-heavy combat footage, I thought it was a reasonably good movie. The stereotypes are justified, because just about every modern day privately contracted mercenary story involves most of them (the business in Angola, Mike Hoare's Congo, or even the Congo of today, just about every issue of _Soldier of Fortune_). The ordinance is less justfiable. Irving makes good on this mistake in _Trumpets_. This is probably the most ordinance-light World War II combat movie I've seen. One sees little more than personal weapons; the usual Garands, Tommy guns and Mausers. Even squad machine guns are curiously absent, aside from occasional glimpses of firing MG42s. Artillery is occasionally seen. The Americans are slaughtered by a well placed group of 88mm Flak cannons. Tanks, armored cars, buildings, mortars, airplanes, rocket launchers are all absent. This is not to say the movie isn't bloody. It rates among the more graphic depictions of a battle I've seen. Most prominently is a scene where a large group of soldiers (company IIRC) are caught within the 88's fields of fire, and are naturally slaughtered in droves. If weapons are too expensive for this HBO production, lots of fake blood, exhausted and grubby looking actors who perform well, and good filming aren't. Many of the "I've been shot" clips are powerful, even if they're a dime a dozen in war movies. This is due to the good cinematography; the gray of the Hungarian winter is well paired with the red of the blood. Camera angles are well chosen, and the camera does not dwell on each wounded soldier the way other movies do (eg _Full Metal Jacket_ when Cowboy meets the sniper). Of course, the actors contribute to this. Many of these factors also combine to give the movie it's gritty, unhappy look. It's a most appropriate look for this movie. However, I did have a strong objection to the cinematography in the night assault scene close to the end. It was obviously shot at night, but they also obviously used a floodlight to illuminate the actors, creating a very artificial sort of effect. I would have prefered it if they left things dark, and let the natural confusion, and fear of the unknown and the dark into the scene, which is undoubtably present in a nighttime combat operation. The thing that makes the movie, despite the cinematography which only sets the stage, of course is the performance of the actors. Invariably they all run around in worn and dirty fatigues; are unshaven (to the point that many of them look almost the same), and have a general bearing that matches. Manning is not portrayed as the hero most other war movies seek to find. He is dirty, unshaven and exhausted looking; and in the opening scene the rest of his squad is wiped out. He is made squad leader by his company commander; though he is completely unwilling to perform the task. The company commander orders, and then uses the usual excuses ("you're the only one I've got") and praise("you have the potential to be a good leader", "you're a smart survivor") to persuade Manning. This is an interesting point of the film. The Captain's points, actions, and indifference are completely justified by the situation, yet they also condemn Manning to death and both of them know it. Are they simply military lies? Or are they the Captain's best attempt to get good performance out of Manning, or a combination of many different aspects, good and bad, of a war? Manning reluctantly is simultaneously forced and sweet-talked into the rank of sergeant. He receives a squad of completely fresh replacements. An aspect of this film that I have not seen done well in any other movie, replacements, is done quite well here. The green troops look fresh, happy, and even physically unfit (especially in the case of one fat Private Pyle type). They certainly do not have the air about them the "combat experienced" actors do. One feels sorry for them. Manning treats them unevenly. He is no heroic, admirable John Wayne. He frequently treats them roughly, without much justification. One sympathizes with his contempt to a degree, but one cannot but draw the conclusion that Manning is not an experienced leader. During one of the combat missions, he even ends up intentionally shooting one of them, though not unjustifiably. There is obviously an air of distrust and a Sergeant Talbot in another squad whom he dislikes makes every attempt to increase it. After a while, he accepts his position, and establishes a reasonable relationship with what subordinates survive after their first combat mission. By the end of the movie, the big fat Private Pyle tries to save Manning, dropping his weapon and carrying Manning back to friendly territory. However, Manning is dead, leaving Pyle the only survivor of his squad and the movie ends there. Perhaps Pyle is bumped to Sergeant like Manning, to start the movie over again, perhaps he meets a Mauser round from pursuing Germans. This ending is probably one of the better ones, short of sentiment (though one detects a trace of it in some of the camera shots and in the fact that everyone else is dead) and ambiguous, though perhaps not as good as _Full Metal Jacket_'s combination of burning cities, nonsensical, selfish commentary, Mickey Mouse club, and a sped-up version of the Rolling Stone's _Paint it Black_. Both of them just end at a logical spot; they do not seem as artificial as, say, the ending to _All Quiet on the Western Front_ (though the ending in both the book and in the color 1960s version are quite powerful). The officers in this movie do not come out looking good. The platoon commander is just plain stupid and the captain is rather unsympathetic towards his men. Superiors are almost completely absent and their absence is the subject of harsh words. One technical kudo I would like to give this film: its use of actual US hand and arm signals. Though this was a minor point, and perhaps questionable historical accuracy (I don't know if signals used then were the same as today), I was still delighted that the producers included this little bit of detail which so many other war movies forget. In all, this was an impressive beginning to a series of Neo-WWII films. The fact that it was made with no name actors, on a tight budget, and for TV makes it even more so. The strength of the movie is based on the characterization and actions of Manning, its good cinematography and its attention to minor detail (the men look convincingly dirty, exhausted, and unhappy, no mean achievement). _When Trumpets Fade_ have set a high hurdle for further WWII movies to pass over.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==----- http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews