Skip to main content

Tea without milk is so uncivilised.

The Great Escape
(1963)

(SPOILERS) Anyone minded to suggest Hollywood blockbuster filmmaking took hold in the 1980s needs to take a good hard look at The Great Escape, with its prototypical starry cast, engineered set pieces and bloated running time. It’s a dazzling entertainment machine, from Elmer Bernstein’s signature theme on in. If it’s far from a masterpiece, John Sturges movie stands the test of time for a very good reason; WWII as a boys’-own (exclusively boys’ own) fantasy romp. Even the few (quite a few, offscreen) deaths can’t get in the way of its indomitable, rousing, can-do joie de vivre.

Sturges set the scene for this kind of ensemble with The Magnificent Seven three years earlier (not such a success in the US on original release, however), but it had taken him eight years to get a studio to bite on the material, Paul Brickhill’s 1950 book. Brickhill was a former POW whose The Dambusters and Reach for the Sky were previously adapted in 1954 and 1956 respectively. He was a digger in the tunnel depicted in the movie (“Tom”), and the Charles Bronson claustrophobia subplot was a personal one. The adaptation came courtesy James Clavell and WR Burnett (and an uncredited Walter Newman, who took his name off the picture over disagreements with Sturges about how things turned out).

The Great Escape is something of a self-conscious epic; it boasts a substantial three-hour running time, all of it built on the call to action. There’s little appetite for reflection or deliberation on the ethics of war and the realities thereof. We see Angus Lennie’s flying officer Ives breaking after his escape hopes are dashed, shot as he attempts to get over the fence. And there’s Bronson’s Polish tunneller, overcome with anxiety over the confined spaces after one too many cave-ins.

There’s also an attempt to delineate the SS from the Luftwaffe in charge of the camp; the Kommandant (Hanes Messemer) is a decided moderate, lax about Heiling Hitler in response to his Gestapo fellows and duly relieved of his command at the end; Squadron Leader Barlett (“Big X”, Sir Dickie) vows to “cause a terrible stink in his Third Reich of theirs” and is unimpressed at the distinctions made by the SBO (James Donald) between the Nazis and their captors (“We’re fighting the bloody lot”). Likewise, we’re made to feel sympathy for guard Werner (Robert Graf), even if he does discover the tunnel.

The more deliberate pose is the stiff upper lip of the likes of Bartlett and, in his own uncomplicated way, Steve McQueen’s Cooler King. Too much interrogation of the subject matter would entirely defeat the purpose of the picture, which is, by its nature, functional, planned, calculated and effective. The last hour is all about the escape, the first all about the introductions and planning. If it loses a little momentum in between, well, it’s only a little.

Sturges masterstroke is assembling the cast. The Magnificent Seven transitioned McQueen from TV to movie star, and it was also instrumental in establishing or repositioning Charles Bronson, Robert Vaughn and James Coburn too (following suit, Escape would be James Garner’s first movie after Maverick’s TV success). The Great Escape would make McQueen an icon, an actor so cool he seemed oblivious to the trappings of the period he was supposed to be in, and it didn’t really matter (is Hilts even wearing a costume, or just something McQueen decided on that morning?) The movie is unapologetically built on American stars McQueen and Garner (who apparently became friends during the picture, bonding over a shared love of vroom vrooms).

Perhaps because I was more familiar with him when I first saw it (The Rockford Files), I always preferred Garner’s scrounger character to McQueen’s cool Cooler King. Both have their little British pal to humanise them (McQueen has Lennie, joining him in escape bids until the latter is pushed to the edge), but the relationship between Hendley and Blythe the forger (Donald Pleasance) is easily the most affecting aspect of the picture, with the former taking responsibility for aiding the escape of the latter, who is going blind. Both have the most fantastical of escape bids – Hilts on a bike, Hendley in a plane – even if Hilts’ is the one that goes down in the movie history books.

Unlike some star-heavy vehicles, this blend works seamlessly. On screen at least. Sir Dickie apparently found McQueen very difficult, and the latter caused trouble with his demands for more screen time (the push-pull of aloofness and lack-of-involvement in respect of the character exposing his insecurities). But McQueen requested the motorcycle sequence, and it’s a genius inclusion, both in concept and execution. What’s interesting is realising these are TV guys – McQueen, Bronson, Garner – effectively filling the big screen. Garner would never really take (hence a return to TV) while McQueen and Bronson would still have to wait a few more years before they found their niches. In some respects, outlier Coburn would have a more prolific decade, hipper to the prevailing vibe, man.

It has to be admitted though – and I’m a huge Coburn fan – that Flying Officer Sedgwick is an atrocity, an unspeakable crime to mangled accents murdered in the name of the performing arts. He’s supposed to be an Australian, but his vandalised verbiage makes Dick van Dyke in Mary Poppins sound as if he was genuinely born within the sound of bow bells. Coburn’s escapee was based on a Dutchman, and it’s probably as easy to imagine his accent as Dutch as it is Australian. As it is, though, he gets probably the actual coolest escape attempt, casually thieving a bicycle and making himself much less conspicuous and low-key than his co-star utilising a motorised model.

It’s amazing too how likeable Bronson is here; I’m as much not a fan of Bronson as I am one of Coburn, but Tunnel King Welinski couldn’t be more antithetical to his later gimlet-eyed, cash-grab, gun-wielding vigilantes for Cannon. Also of note: pre-The Man from U.N.C.L.E. David McCallum; pre-The Ipcress File Gordon Jackson; pre-Watson and Number Six Nigel Stock (being a rotund old duffer, it’s Cavendish who manages to stumble and alert the guards); pre-Doctor Who companion William Russell (but only just). Sir Dickie might just be the standout, though, in a role earmarked for Richard Harris (who was waylaid on This Sporting Life). The young Sir Dickie roles were now exiting fast (I’m All Right Jack might count as the last of them) and in came his more patrician ones, still often with a military bias. He’s the driving force behind the escape, instilling the urgency and fuelling the fervour.

Brandishing the “legitimate fiction” cards of “composites” and “compression”, the opening titles informs us “every detail of the escape is the way it really happened”. No one seriously believes it’s other than a fantasy, though and “largely fictional” (Wiki). There was willing help from Germans in the escape (including several guards), for example, making some of the more inexplicable incidents (the wallet theft is straight out of Hogan’s Heroes), much more explicable. 

The Great Escape was released on July 4, and would sneak in at No 10 for the US year (it has outshone most of the others in the ranking since, one that includes such truly bloated affairs as Cleopatra, How the West was Won and It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World). In a way, this type of Hollywood war fare – along with the likes of Where Eagles Dare – is more honest than the celebrated Oscar fuel Spielberg has since delivered. Because it’s offering no real pretence about its artifice, or presumption of importance and pomp. It’s pretty much irresistible.



Popular posts from this blog

What’s so bad about being small? You’re not going to be small forever.

Innerspace (1987) There’s no doubt that Innerspace is a flawed movie. Joe Dante finds himself pulling in different directions, his instincts for comic subversion tempered by the need to play the romance plot straight. He tacitly acknowledges this on the DVD commentary for the film, where he notes Pauline Kael’s criticism that he was attempting to make a mainstream movie; and he was. But, as ever with Dante, it never quite turns out that way. Whereas his kids’ movies treat their protagonists earnestly, this doesn’t come so naturally with adults. I’m a bona fide devotee of Innerspace , but I can’t help but be conscious of its problems. For the most part Dante papers over the cracks; the movie hits certain keynotes of standard Hollywood prescription scripting. But his sensibility inevitably suffuses it. That, and human cartoon Martin Short (an ideal “leading man” for the director) ensure what is, at first glance just another “ Steven Spielberg Presents ” sci-fi/fantas

The Illumi-what-i?

Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022) (SPOILERS) In which Sam Raimi proves that he can stand proudly with the best – or worst – of them as a good little foot soldier of the woke apocalypse. You’d expect the wilfully anarchic – and Republican – Raimi to choke on the woke, but instead, he’s sucked it up, grinned and bore it. Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is so slavishly a production-line Marvel movie, both in plotting and character, and in nu-Feige progressive sensibilities, there was no chance of Sam staggering out from beneath its suffocating demands with anything more than a few scraps of stylistic flourish intact.

This risotto is shmackin’, dude.

Stranger Things Season 4: Part I (SPOILERS) I haven’t had cause, or the urge, to revisit earlier seasons of Stranger Things , but I’m fairly certain my (relatively) positive takes on the first two sequel seasons would adjust down somewhat if I did (a Soviet base under Hawkins? DUMB soft disclosure or not, it’s pretty dumb). In my Season Three review, I called the show “ Netflix’s best-packaged junk food. It knows not to outstay its welcome, doesn’t cause bloat and is disposable in mostly good ways ” I fairly certain the Duffer’s weren’t reading, but it’s as if they decided, as a rebuke, that bloat was the only way to go for Season Four. Hence episodes approaching (or exceeding) twice the standard length. So while the other points – that it wouldn’t stray from its cosy identity and seasons tend to merge in the memory – hold fast, you can feel the ambition of an expansive canvas faltering at the hurdle of Stranger Things ’ essential, curated, nostalgia-appeal inconsequentiality.

Is this supposed to be me? It’s grotesque.

The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent (2022) (SPOILERS) I didn’t hold out much hope for The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent being more than moderately tolerable. Not so much because its relatively untested director and his co-writer are mostly known in the TV sphere (and not so much for anything anyone is raving about). Although, it has to be admitted, the finished movie flourishes a degree of digital flatness typical of small-screen productions (it’s fine, but nothing more). Rather, due to the already over-tapped meta-strain of celebs showing they’re good sports about themselves. When Spike Jonze did it with John Malkovich, it was weird and different. By the time we had JCVD , not so much. And both of them are pre-dated by Arnie in Last Action Hero (“ You brought me nothing but pain ” he is told by Jack Slater). Plus, it isn’t as if Tom Gormican and Kevin Etten have much in the way of an angle on Nic; the movie’s basically there to glorify “him”, give or take a few foibles, do

Whacking. I'm hell at whacking.

Witness (1985) (SPOILERS) Witness saw the advent of a relatively brief period – just over half a decade –during which Harrison Ford was willing to use his star power in an attempt to branch out. The results were mixed, and abruptly concluded when his typically too late to go where Daniel Day Lewis, Dustin Hoffman and Robert De Niro had gone before (with at bare minimum Oscar-nominated results) – but not “ full retard ” – ended in derision with Regarding Henry . He retreated to the world of Tom Clancy, and it’s the point where his cachet began to crumble. There had always been a stolid quality beneath even his more colourful characters, but now it came to the fore. You can see something of that as John Book in Witness – despite his sole Oscar nom, it might be one of Ford’s least interesting performances of the 80s – but it scarcely matters, or that the screenplay (which won) is by turns nostalgic, reactionary, wistful and formulaic, as director Peter Weir, in his Hollywood debu

Are you telling me that I should take my daughter to a witch doctor?

The Exorcist (1973) (SPOILERS) Vast swathes have been written on The Exorcist , duly reflective of its cultural impact. In a significant respect, it’s the first blockbuster – forget Jaws – and also the first of a new kind of special-effects movie. It provoked controversy across all levels of the socio-political spectrum, for explicit content and religious content, both hailed and denounced for the same. William Friedkin, director of William Peter Blatty’s screenplay based on Blatty’s 1971 novel, would have us believe The Exorcist is “ a film about the mystery of faith ”, but it’s evidently much more – and less – than that. There’s a strong argument to be made that movies having the kind of seismic shock on the landscape this one did aren’t simply designed to provoke rumination (or exultation); they’re there to profoundly influence society, even if largely by osmosis, and when one looks at this picture’s architects, such an assessment only gains in credibility.

That, my lad, was a dragon.

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013) (SPOILERS) It’s alarming how quickly Peter Jackson sabotaged all the goodwill he amassed in the wake of The Lord of the Rings trilogy. A guy who started out directing deliciously deranged homemade horror movies ended up taking home the Oscar for a fantasy movie, of all genres. And then he blew it. He went from a filmmaker whose naysayers were the exception to one whose remaining cheerleaders are considered slightly maladjusted. The Desolation of Smaug recovers some of the territory Jackson has lost over the last decade, but he may be too far-gone to ever regain his crown. Perhaps in years to come The Lord of the Rings trilogy will be seen as an aberration in his filmography. There’s a cartoonishness to the gleeful, twisted anarchy on display in his earlierr work that may be more attuned to the less verimilitudinous aspects of King Kong and The Hobbit s. The exceptions are his female-centric character dramas, Heavenly Creat

Gizmo caca!

Gremlins (1984) I didn’t get to see Gremlins at the cinema. I wanted to, as I had worked myself into a state of great anticipation. There was a six-month gap between its (unseasonal) US release and arrival in the UK, so I had plenty of time to devour clips of cute Gizmo on Film ’84 (the only reason ever to catch Barry Norman was a tantalising glimpse of a much awaited movie, rather than his drab, colourless, reviews) and Gremlins trading cards that came with bubble gum attached (or was it the other way round?). But Gremlins ’ immediate fate for many an eager youngster in Britain was sealed when, after much deliberation, the BBFC granted it a 15 certificate. I had just turned 12, and at that time an attempt to sneak in to see it wouldn’t even have crossed my mind. I’d just have to wait for the video. I didn’t realise it then (because I didn’t know who he was as a filmmaker), but Joe Dante’s irrepressible anarchic wit would have a far stronger effect on me than the un

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls… dyin’ time’s here!

Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985) Time was kind to Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome . As in, it was such a long time since I’d seen the “final chapter” of the trilogy, it had dwindled in my memory to the status of an “alright but not great” sequel. I’d half-expected to have positive things to say along the lines of it being misunderstood, or being able to see what it was trying for but perhaps failing to quite achieve. Instead, I re-discovered a massive turkey that is really a Mad Max movie in name only (appropriately, since Max was an afterthought). This is the kind of picture fans of beloved series tend to loathe; when a favourite character returns but without the qualities or tone that made them adored in the first place (see Indiana Jones in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull , or John McClane in the last two Die Hard s). Thunderdome stinks even more than the methane fuelling Bartertown. I hadn’t been aware of the origins of Thunderdome until recently, mainly because I was