Skip to main content

God and the Serpent have joined hands, and we are all kicked out of Eden.

The Last Valley
(1971)

(SPOILERS) The received wisdom on this more obscure Michael Caine film is pretty much “unusual setting but dull”. I didn’t find The Last Valley so. Dull that is. But then, I didn’t think the highlight was Caine’s studious German accent (per biographer Christopher Bray in A Class Act), which sounds to me exactly what you’d expect of Sir Michael attempting a German accent.

Not that Caine isn’t very good in the role of pragmatic mercenary the Captain (he demurs from giving any other name). Indeed, he rather steals the show from co-star Omar Sharif. And Pauline Kael was probably onto something when she observed of his choice of accent “it gives Caine a style in which to play the role… and I suspect the role wouldn’t work at all without it”. Sharif’s a teacher with an eye to preserving life – principally his own – during the Thirty Years War, no easy task until he stumbles across a pristine valley untouched by famine, plague, strife and slaughter. Hotly pursued by the Captain and his men, he brokers a fragile peace for the winter between the Captain and calculating village patriarch Gruber (Nigel Davenport), although navigating the demands of Catholic priest Father Sebastian (Per Oscarsson) proves more taxing.

In part, the choice of setting that makes The Last Valley a fascinating anomaly. James Clavell evidently thought so too. Now best known for Shogun, he had furnished screenplays for The Fly, The Great Escape and To Sir, with Love, as well as helming the latter, at the time he directed and adapted JB Pick’s 1959 novel of the same name, which would turn out to be his last feature. The 1618-48 conflict isn’t exactly routine inspiration for books and films (The Wiki entry on the war only comes up with Queen Christina besides The Last Valley). Clavell’s film opts out of devoting swathes of exposition to bringing us up to speed on the sprawling conflict (I’m not even sure we’re given a date – the novel is set in 1637-8, and I’ve seen it suggested this 1643-4); mostly, it’s enough to know the basic, of Catholic against Protestant states, of mercenaries marching the land, and of no respite for anyone.

One might also view that as a missed opportunity, given the progressions and regional reaches of the conflict (from straightforward Protestant vs Catholic to France-Habsburg rivalry), but it would be easy for the film to have become enmired in unwieldy and stodgy history lessons (as it is, Cavell tends to overt commentary in spite of attempts to ground the picture in the mores of the period).

The beats of the positions held in The Last Valley are very familiar, in terms of cynicism of stated, or state, motives, the suffering of the people in that regard, the manipulations and control of the religious apparatus, and the methods for holding sway. Kael commented that it wasn’t clear if Clavell was suggesting the valley as a commentary on Vietnam (incursions by a foreign power) or Switzerland (a haven from strife), but with the benefit of fifty years hindsight, the material very much fits into a general lament for the state of humanity (“You are on borrowed time now, judge. So is the village. It’s all doomed”). Anything suggesting an idyllic state must, by its nature, be a mirage: “This valley is so peaceful. It would be so easy to become possessed by it”. At the conclusion, it appears that Vogel has saved the village, and if the Captain suggests he was right, in a larger sense, the take away is that the Captain’s doom saying was.

Clavell attempts to cover repercussions of the War, including references to cannibalism and witch-hunting persecutions, although he curiously makes Erika (Florinda Bolkan) an actual witch, prone to voodoo and offering a pact with Satan (“Protect him and I will worship you forever”), meaning the irrational hysteria part is somewhat dampened.

Vogel’s both idealistic and shrewd – neither a soldier nor a peasant, he persuades the Captain that he can be very helpful – but under Sharif, the character never really develops a spine or sufficient substance to make him feel motivated; it’s no coincidence that he starts and ends the picture on the run and alone, however much it may seem like a moral choice. Indeed, he ends up seeming a weak man without the courage of his philosophy when he stands by and lets the Captain’s woman (Gruber’s former woman) Erika be tortured (he does deign to stab her rather than witness her burnt at the stake, however).

His attempt to save the Captain from an ambush seems more out of acknowledgement of the former’s alpha-dom than doing what is right (there’s only ever a cool respect between the two of them). The Captain’s reasoned nihilism carries with it a certain code of honour, despite his capacity for violence and ruthlessness (dictating that the villagers provide women for his men, he suggests the priest sells them his holy indulgence, total remission for past and future sins, which Gruber could pay for) but it’s difficult to empathise with Vogel when the compare and contrast is that he runs. His urging of Inge (Madeleine Hinde) to stay in the village (he earlier saved her from rape) may seem noble, but in a sense, his departure is as unmotivated as the Captain’s decision to take part in the military campaign that does for him; it’s what he does, his fate. The Captain riding back to the village to die, mortally wounded, never struck me as the most plausible (it is also part of the novel, though).

We invite the Captain’s excoriation of the priest’s motives, but the adverse aspect is its underlining what a very modern character he is, able to perceive the world in a manner none of the proles or priests can; he is, effectively a man of pragmatism, almost of science, one who doesn’t believe in God, or witchcraft, and his cynicism is seen to be justified in the face of a thoroughly invidious church rep (who has informed the villagers of their prostituted womenfolk that “Their suffering will save the village just as Christ’s suffering saved the world”). The Captain attests “There is no hell, because there is no God. Don’t you understand? It’s a legend!” At one point, the Captain and Vogel discuss witchcraft, and the latter relates how his six-year-old sister was legally tried and burned for the crime; Vogel proceeds in an attempt to find the purpose of tens of thousands murdered in the name of God. The Captain replies “You are so naïve. You want to look under the plate they put the food on. Nothing is hidden”.

Gray, in an attempt to inflate Caine as the only worthwhile part of the picture, suggested it was “shot like a big-budget Hammer horror” (which would be to suggest any rural period flick was) and that “the camera enjoys the depiction of violence rather too much for the movie’s anti-war message to be taken wholly seriously”. The latter point is fairly baffling, since the violence in The Last Valley, implied or depicted, is only ever queasy and disturbing, rather than rousing. Likewise, I saw little in the way of “mwah-ha-ha-ing caricaturists” surrounding Caine. Not Sharif and Davenport and not Oscarsson (who is inevitably an extremist, but that’s in the writing rather than a moustache-twirling performance; he’s more possessed with zeal than anything).

You could argue that many of the parts lack sufficient meat on their bones, certainly, but that’s probably true of any given picture. Michael Gothard (who would appear in The Valley (Obscure by Clouds) the following year) is the thoroughly hissable Hansen, out to take power from the Captain, but if he lacks texture, he’s memorable. Brian Blessed gets a knife to the gut from the Captain early on, as the main threat to his authority. Ian Hogg and John Hallam are also notable as mercenary types, and there are roles for Frazer Hines, Vladek Sheybal and George Innes.

Kael suggested The Last Valleyisn’t a work of art, but it’s not really a bad movie either”, and I think that’s fair. And I share her concern that the swooning John Barry score maybe isn’t the most appropriate – it lends the film a romanticism that isn’t quite right. But… I differ with her in that I think it is a great piece of music. I also think the film becomes a more interesting one with hindsight. It might have ended up undifferentiated with any number of historical war pieces of the era – in tandem with Caine’s workhorse ethic – but it feels more distinctive (and purposeful) now. Caine opined “I knew the day it finished it was not going to work” but to call it a failure would be overly harsh. He made enough of those during the subsequent two decades; by comparison, The Last Valley is nothing less than intriguing, valiant and respectable.



Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Popular posts from this blog

Doctors make the worst patients.

Coma (1978) (SPOILERS) Michael Crichton’s sophomore big-screen feature, and by some distance his best. Perhaps it’s simply that this a milieu known to him, or perhaps it’s that it’s very much aligned to the there-and-now and present, but Coma , despite the occasional lapse in this adaptation of colleague Robin Cook’s novel, is an effective, creepy, resonant thriller and then some. Crichton knows his subject, and it shows – the picture is confident and verisimilitudinous in a way none of his other directorial efforts are – and his low-key – some might say clinical – approach pays dividends. You might also call it prescient, but that would be to suggest its subject matter wasn’t immediately relevant then too.

The Bible never said anything about amphetamines.

The Color of Money (1986) (SPOILERS) I tend to think it’s evident when Scorsese isn’t truly exercised by material. He can still invest every ounce of the technical acumen at his fingertips, and the results can dazzle on that level, but you don’t really feel the filmmaker in the film. Which, for one of his pictures to truly carry a wallop, you need to do. We’ve seen quite a few in such deficit in recent years, most often teaming with Leo. The Color of Money , however, is the first where it was out-and-out evident the subject matter wasn’t Marty’s bag. He needed it, desperately, to come off, but in the manner a tradesman who wants to keep getting jobs. This sequel to The Hustler doesn’t linger in the mind, however good it may be, moment by moment.

Abandon selective targeting. Shoot everything.

28 Weeks Later (2007) (SPOILERS) The first five minutes of 28 Weeks Later are far and away the best part of this sequel, offering in quick succession a devastating moral quandary and a waking nightmare, immortalised on the screen. After that, while significantly more polished, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo reveals his concept to be altogether inferior to Danny Boyle and Alex Garland’s, falling back on the crutches of gore, nihilism, and disengaging and limiting shifts of focus between characters in whom one has little investment in the first place.

I said I had no family. I didn’t say I had an empty apartment.

The Apartment (1960) (SPOILERS) Billy Wilder’s romcom delivered the genre that rare Best Picture Oscar winner. Albeit, The Apartment amounts to a rather grim (now) PG-rated scenario, one rife with adultery, attempted suicide, prostitution of the soul and subjective thereof of the body. And yet, it’s also, finally, rather sweet, so salving the darker passages and evidencing the director’s expertly judged balancing act. Time Out ’s Tom Milne suggested the ending was a cop out (“ boy forgives girl and all’s well ”). But really, what other ending did the audience or central characters deserve?

Your desecration of reality will not go unpunished.

2021-22 Best-of, Worst-of and Everything Else Besides The movies might be the most visible example of attempts to cling onto cultural remnants as the previous societal template clatters down the drain. It takes something people really want – unlike a Bond movie where he kicks the can – to suggest the model of yesteryear, one where a billion-dollar grosser was like sneezing. You can argue Spider-Man: No Way Home is replete with agendas of one sort or another, and that’s undoubtedly the case (that’s Hollywood), but crowding out any such extraneous elements (and they often are) is simply a consummate crowd-pleaser that taps into tangible nostalgia through its multiverse take. Of course, nostalgia for a mere seven years ago, for something you didn’t like anyway, is a symptom of how fraught these times have become.

You just threw a donut in the hot zone!

Den of Thieves (2018) (SPOILERS) I'd heard this was a shameless  Heat  rip-off, and the presence of Gerard Butler seemed to confirm it would be passable-at-best B-heist hokum, so maybe it was just middling expectations, even having heard how enthused certain pockets of the Internet were, but  Den of Thieves  is a surprisingly very satisfying entry in the genre. I can't even fault it for attempting to Keyser Soze the whole shebang at the last moment – add a head in a box and you have three 1995 classics in one movie – even if that particular conceit doesn’t quite come together.

This guy’s armed with a hairdryer.

An Innocent Man (1989) (SPOILERS) Was it a chicken-and-egg thing with Tom Selleck and movies? Did he consistently end up in ropey pictures because other, bigger big-screen stars had first dibs on the good stuff? Or was it because he was a resolutely small-screen guy with limited range and zero good taste? Selleck had about half-a-dozen cinema outings during the 1980s, one of which, the very TV, very Touchstone Three Men and a Baby was a hit, but couldn’t be put wholly down to him. The final one was An Innocent Man , where he attempted to show some grit and mettle, as nice-guy Tom is framed and has to get tough to survive. Unfortunately, it’s another big-screen TV movie.

Listen to the goddamn qualified scientists!

Don’t Look Up (2021) (SPOILERS) It’s testament to Don’t Look Up ’s “quality” that critics who would normally lap up this kind of liberal-causes messaging couldn’t find it within themselves to grant it a free pass. Adam McKay has attempted to refashion himself as a satirist since jettisoning former collaborator Will Ferrell, but as a Hollywood player and an inevitably socio-politically partisan one, he simply falls in line with the most obvious, fatuous propagandising.

Archimedes would split himself with envy.

Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger (1977) (SPOILERS) Generally, this seems to be the Ray Harryhausen Sinbad outing that gets the short straw in the appreciation stakes. Which is rather unfair. True, Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger lacks Tom Baker and his rich brown voice personifying evil incarnate – although Margaret Whiting more than holds her own in the wickedness stakes – and the structure follows the Harryhausen template perhaps over scrupulously (Beverly Cross previously collaborated with the stop-motion auteur on Jason and the Argonauts , and would again subsequently with Clash of the Titans ). But the storytelling is swift and sprightly, and the animation itself scores, achieving a degree of interaction frequently more proficient than its more lavishly praised peer group.

Captain, he who walks in fire will burn his feet.

The Golden Voyage of Sinbad (1973) (SPOILERS) Ray Harryhausen returns to the kind of unadulterated fantasy material that made Jason and the Argonauts such a success – swords & stop motion, if you like. In between, there were a couple of less successful efforts, HG Wells adaptation First Men in the Moon and The Valley of the Gwangi (which I considered the best thing ever as a kid: dinosaur walks into a cowboy movie). Harryhausen’s special-effects supremacy – in a for-hire capacity – had also been consummately eclipsed by Raquel Welch’s fur bikini in One Million Years B.C . The Golden Voyage of Sinbad follows the expected Dynamation template – blank-slate hero, memorable creatures, McGuffin quest – but in its considerable favour, it also boasts a villainous performance by nobody-at-the-time, on-the-cusp-of-greatness Tom Baker.