starring Tom Cruise, Kenneth Branaugh, Terence Stamp, Tom Wilkinson, Bill Nighy; directed by Brian Singer
VALKYRIE flies off the handle.
I admit that I went to see this out of curiosity.
First, I’m doing research on Nazi Germany for a writing project. Admittedly, this film is set later than my target period of focus. But, what the heck, I thought.
Second, given the talent that surrounds the CruiseMissile, I wanted to see what the result was.
The supporting cast is good. They are actually interesting and watchable. Kenneth Branaugh’s part is short, but he makes an impression. Terence Stamp brings a much needed gravitas to his part of Beck. Tom Wilkinson waffles nicely between conspiracy and complicity, and complicity (with Hitler) wins. Eddie Izzard does well with his small part. Christian Berkel as a reserve Colonel is fine. But worth noting the most is Bill Nighy as General Olbricht, who really shows you the turmoil of his character.
The problem is, all this nice work circles round a central character that has no color whatsoever, unless you’re looking for steel grey. Cruise as von Stauffenberg plows through the film all intense and grim and doesn’t show a single thing about the internal thoughts of his character. You don’t ever really see an instance where he wins someone’s loyalty, yet the story presentation just assumes the character has that quality. In fact, at one point when one character speaks to another about von Stauffenberg, he mentions the man’s ability to gain the loyalty of those he commands (just to make sure we, the audience, know of his charisma). Unfortunately, to me, he just comes across as a stubborn, arrogant crusader, believing that he’s the only righteous man in the cause. Hardly an inspiring performance. (And in fact, the “tell, not show” way the leadership quailty is presented to us sends up a huge “Fail” sign in my mind.)
Brian Singer as director does okay, but only okay. Most of his cast are sterling performers in their own right, so of course their work plays well. But the weaknesses in his direction show up in a few things besides Cruise’s non-performance. There’s a party scene, where I found the background players very unconvincing – there’s one woman who tries to make the appearance of conversational social butterfly, but I don’t believe she’s really talking with her companions: she’s literally just going through the motions. A much better director would have given as much attention to the background performances, so that they wouldn’t distract from the foreground actions. But a more notable misfire is his direction of David Bamber as Hitler: this Hitler is a weary little drip of a twit, and you wonder how the heck he held the loyalty of his inner circle. He exudes absolutely no charisma (something Hitler reportedly had in excess in close quarters). Where’s this “greatest evil ever known”? Where’s the personality that generated fear in those who conspired against him? Some might say, “But this event is late in the war, and Hitler was weary at this point.” The problem with that is that in the story we are given an instance where Hitler, over the telephone, keeps the loyalty of one waivering soldier by the sheer force of his personality. But since Hitler had not personality when we saw him on-screen earlier in the film, this telephonic encounter (which apparently really happened) falls flat and unconvincing, as if it was included for plot reasons for a set-back for “our hero”, rather than a real, dramatic twist that sends the story plunging into tragedy. I lay that failure firmly at Singer’s feet – he should have directed his Hitler better.
Like I said, Bill Nighy does well. But frankly, I came away from the theater thinking that I would rather have seen Jeffrey Donovan (of Burn Notice, if the name doesn’t ring a bell) in the central role, because Donovan would have shown us the inner struggles of the stiff Prussian soldier, and engaged my sympathy. Cruise does not: his character is patently uninteresting.
