MovieChat Forums > 49th Parallel (1942) Discussion > The binoculars and the hot dogs

The binoculars and the hot dogs

posted 13 years ago by hobnob53
30 replies | jump to latest

There are two curious things about the scene in downtown Winnipeg, where the Nazis sell off their bincoluars to raise money for food.

We learn that Lohrmann sold the group's binoculars at a pawn shop for $7 (Canadian). First, even in 1941, $7 for a pair of what must be first-class binoculars is pretty cheap, even taking into account that a pawn shop doesn't pay retail prices. Binoculars are not cheap, and the type they must have had would certainly be costlier than the usual. I think the Germans were ripped off for a mere seven bucks (about $11 US at that time).

Second, the binoculars would certainly have carried some identifying marks -- where they were manufactured (surely) and, very probably, whose property they were: in this case, the German Kriegsmarine. Wouldn't the pawnbroker have been suspicious? Surely he'd have looked them over to determine their provenance and worth. Point being, a good (or honest) broker should have seen something on the binoculars that would have identified them as foreign in origin -- almost certainly German -- which in turn should have alerted him to the possibility, at least, that these glasses were being sold by one of the crew of the by-then famous U 37.

A more amusing side to this comes in the scene where the three men are eating their hot dogs (dare I say frankfurters?) they bought with some of the cash they got for the binoculars. Notice how Hirth (Eric Portman) eats his: instead of starting at an end and eating his way along the bun and dog, he turns the dog sideways and eats it lengthwise, munching on the bun but little on the wiener itself. Since no one eats a hot dog in this manner, I don't know whether this was deliberate, or a reflection of Portman's own unfamiliarity with the hot dog, then virtually unknown in Britain but already a Canadian treat from across the 49th parallel.

This reminds me of the picnic President Roosevelt held for the visiting King and Queen of Great Britain in the summer of 1939 on the hillside of his Hudson River estate, Hyde Park. Ever the natural aristocrat, and with the American love of puncturing stuffy traditions and democratizing situations, FDR served George and Elizabeth hot dogs, with which they were thoroughly unfamiliar. When the Queen asked Eleanor Roosevelt how "one" ate them, Mrs. R. replied, "You just start at one end and shove." Evidently the two, particularly the King, enjoyed the experience. (This was the occasion on which Roosevelt stayed up late with the King, discussing the world situation, until 2 in the morning, when he patted the royal on the knee and told him, "Young man, it's time you went to bed," all of which caused the King to remark, "I wish my own ministers would speak to me this way.") Anyway, obviously by 1941 hot dog etiquette had not yet penetrated to the UK, and poor Eric Portman had to wing it.

Speaking of which, I wonder how he'd have done with Buffalo wings?

[–] Steve Crook 13 years ago

Maybe the pawn-shop owner wasn't very honest

Maybe they did see the markings that identified them as being from the German navy and maybe they guessed that they had come from the by-then famous U 37. But maybe they were used to fencing things and didn't care.

Speaking of which, I wonder how he'd have done with Buffalo wings?

The same as me, asked if anyone had ever seen a flying Buffalo

Steve

[–] hobnob53 13 years ago

What??! A dishonest pawnbroker? How dare you slur such a scurrilous profession. (Oh, God: now I'll hear from all the pawnbrokers.)

Of course, greed might be a motivation; but on the other hand, all the Canadians in 49th Parallel were portrayed as honest blokes, fair and just and democrats to a man, so clearly, no Canadian hock shop would ever have treated even a fleeing Nazi less than scrupulously.

I'd assume Powell had researched the going rate for field glasses in Canada before shooting the scene, but even so, I think the Germans got ripped. But perhaps this was the pawnbroker getting his revenge on them, so that instead of being confrontational and risk getting shot and robbed, he simply fobbed them off with 7 bucks. Still, he should have notified the authorities, if for no other reason than to keep Powell's faith in Canadian honesty alive.

(Closest thing to a pair of binoculars I could find.)

Which blond Hollywood nincompoop was it who, a few years ago, allegedly said, when asked about Buffalo wings, that she didn't know buffaloes had wings? I want to say Lindsay Lohan but I think it was someone even stupider. Didn't mean to step on your joke there, Steve.

(Closest thing to a flying buffalo I could find.)

[–] ksf-2 12 years ago

yup, a plot-hole, but its possible there was more to it that ended up on the cutting room floor...or maybe its just one of those things you just have to say "oh well".. and buy into it. it DID win an Oscar for best writing, prob due to war sentiment when it was released in 1942...

big timers in this one - L Howard, L Olivier, R Massey. Even early footage of Niagara Falls.

[–] hobnob53 12 years ago

Well, I didn't mean it so much as a plot hole as just something amusing. But, you're right..."Oh, well."

Interestingly, in the edited American version of this film (released in the U.S. in 1942 as The Invaders), virtually the entire segment in Winnipeg is cut out. The only portion left is the small one at the very beginning of the sequence, with Hirth standing in the rain by the news office, where people are reading the latest war bulletins. From there, it cuts to the men plodding along on foot -- westward.

The big, big problem here, of course, is that by cutting all the remaining Winnipeg scenes -- the men standing around looking at the restaurant signs, Hirth entering the Canadian Pacific office, hocking the binoculars, and their discussion while eating their hot dogs -- American audiences were left baffled by the Nazis' abrupt shift from working their way south to the American border, to suddenly walking parallel [sic] to that border, traveling west. By cutting the discussion about changing their plans from getting to the neutral United States to going instead to Vancouver to catch a Japanese freighter, U.S. audiences were left wondering what the Germans were up to, and why, having been so desperate to cross the U.S. border, they're suddenly walking westward just a few miles north of it, and not moving the short distance south to safety.

Of course, by the time the film came out in America in 1942, the U.S. was in the war, and Canada as well as the United States were now at war with Japan, neither of which had been the case when the original film was released. Clearly, Columbia Pictures, which distributed the film in the States, wanted to omit any reference to catching a Japanese freighter in Vancouver, as by 1942 this was no longer possible. (Though it also made no sense by then to have the Germans trying to reach safety in America. But then they couldn't edit out the entire movie.) But it caused a lot of confusion that lingered until the complete, original film was finally shown in the U.S. around 1980. That was also the first time Americans saw the other footage removed from the original for the U.S. release. The American version (which was the one honored by the Academy Awards, which also nominated it, as The Invaders, for Best Picture of 1942) seems to have disappeared entirely, unseen now for over three decades, which is in its way too bad.

[–] Steve Crook 12 years ago

They also had to cut the part about the Catholic missionary who was really a Nazi spy & map maker and the attack on the motorist

Steve

[–] hobnob53 12 years ago

You and I had a discussion about this subject about five years ago, Steve, on the board of another P/P film (I can't remember which). In response to your interest I listed all the differences between the two versions, which you planned to put on your P/P website. I hope it was useful.

Besides the missionary-spy business, much more of the early portion of the scenes between the captive Olivier and Currie and the Germans was axed for US release: all the dialogue referring to Eskimos being semi-apes like the Negroes, only one step above the Jews, and all that racist claptrap. Clearly this exchange was cut so as not to offend audiences who harbored similar racist sentiments, still widespread throughout much of the United States back then, especially in the South, in what was still a largely segregated America.

(As an American, this fact about my country always makes me wince a bit when I hear people from that era talking of fighting for freedom. But then, Britain had its vast colonial empire which deprived foreign peoples of their rights in their own lands; and of course there was Stalin's quaint gulag called the USSR. Yet we were all on the side of "freedom".)

The attack on the motorist was not cut from the US version, but if you recall I said it was altered in a curious fashion: just as the German was about to clunk the guy over the head, the scene went black. You heard the crash of the bottle on his head, heard him moan and hit the ground, but all of this on a picture-less screen. Actually, in its way this was quite effective, giving the audience an approximation of the man being knocked senseless, although the screen went dark just before he was hit. Still, it worked pretty well, and was certainly an offbeat way in which to alter the film. But it was the only change of any interest or value to the original, and while it was rather revolutionary in its own small way, it really served no purpose. The other edits ranged from silly to unfathomable.

[–] Steve Crook 12 years ago

Yes, see http://www.powell-pressburger.org/Reviews/41_49P/AmericanCuts.html

I have still yet to find a copy of this film as it was cut for the initial American release. Similarly with the cut version of Black Narcissus which had to be cut to satisfy the Catholic League of Decency - even though the nuns weren't Catholic. I have seen the initial American versions of A Canterbury Tale and Gone to Earth

But was Hirth's views on the Eskimos cut to avoid offending American racists or to avoid giving more fuel to their fiery views?

There's a lot in the history of most countries that makes us wince when viewed through modern eyes. "The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there."

Steve

[–] hobnob53 12 years ago

Thank you for the link, Steve.

Yes, the cuts of the racist comments might also have been made to keep some US audiences interested in the central plot, and not have them suddenly harbor resentment at being lectured to about racial equality by foreigners and liberals. (And maybe also so that they wouldn't realize an uncomfortable affinity between their own views and Nazi racial doctrines.)

I've been hoping Columbia might at some point bring out its edited version, The Invaders. But they didn't include it in the two-disc Powell set containing Stairway to Heaven (A Matter of Life and Death) and Age of Consent, and so far it isn't in sight from its MOD "Columbia Classics" line. I'd hoped Criterion might have included it in its 2007 release of 49th Parallel, but no go there either. I'd like to see it again, but I fear it's locked away forever. But if I ever hear anything, I'll be certain to let you know. (I hadn't forgotten!)

Same with Black Narcissus, whose edited US version also hasn't been around in the past 30 years. I suspect all these versions have simply been stowed away to be forgotten. The originals today have complete currency in the US, so I suppose there's no need in any distributor's eyes for a somewhat edited version. (Although Columbia did put out a dual dic set of the 1957 horror classic, Night of the Demon, featuring that UK original as well as its edited US variant, Curse of the Demon. There's a small handful of other such examples, so you never know.)

[–] Steve Crook 12 years ago

Yes, I doubt that anyone will ever do a commercial release of any of the cut versions that were originally released in the States. They're only really of interest to a few P&P obsessives like me and maybe to anyone interested in the censorship of films in the US in that period

The ones that I have seen have usually been at film festivals doing a special strand on P&P. The Criterion DVD of A Canterbury Tale includes some of the additional scenes shot for the initial American release. But the other changes were cuts with John Sweet doing a bit more narration to cover the gaps. It's difficult to include cuts as an extra feature

Steve

[–] hobnob53 12 years ago

Oh, I don't know. Cuts have been included as extras on some DVDs. The DVD of It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World, for instance, has scenes cut after its initial release included in its extras...though in the version shown on television, these cut scenes are incorporated back into the film, which is obviouly preferable.

Of course, there's a difference between scenes that were initially shown in a film, then cut later, vs. outright out-takes, scenes filmed but never included in any release print. The latter, in my view, should never be seen except as extras (which is usually the case). But the former should, I think, be put back in and the film presented as originally, actually shown in theaters.

Anyway, since some edited versions of films have been issued as well as the complete originals, it's not altogether impossible that some day The Invaders may show up in some format. In fact, I wonder whether it's available on some internet site, such as YouTube or some streaming service?

[–] Steve Crook 12 years ago

Yes, but in these cases, or most of them, the full film as is generally available includes all of the cut scenes. The extras would have to show the bits that aren't there in the initial American release. How could they do that? Show the scenes that were cut? It's really how the film was left that is more important, as you said about the blanking of the screen when they actually attacked the motorist in 49th Parallel.

I don't give up hope that some day these cut versions may be found, like I am still hoping to see some of Powell's early films that are still missing, believed lost. A few have turned up over the decades and are often remarkably good.

There's also one that Emeric wrote, Squadron Leader X (1943). That's been on the missing list for some time. But with a script by Emeric and starring Eric Portman as a Nazi I would love to see it. I found the "complete story" in an old fan magazine (http://www.powell-pressburger.org/Reviews/43_SqnLdrX/PictureShow.html) and it looks like it would have been a great film.

Steve

[–] hobnob53 12 years ago

I've heard of, but never seen, Squadron Leader X. Hard to believe a 1943 film of that provenance is missing, or lost. Many silents are gone, but for a World War II-era film to be altogether lost is pretty unusual.

What are some of the early Powell films believed lost, and dating from when?

[–] Steve Crook 12 years ago

When Powell was doing his apprenticeship as a director he made a series of films from 1931 to 1936. These were low budget films, often what are known as "Quota films" to meet the requirements of the Cinematograph Films Act 1927 (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinematograph_Films_Act_1927).

These were usually made quickly and on a low budget. They had to be shown in cinemas - it was the law - so the film-makers got a guaranteed return and often didn't bother to make much effort.

But Powell, being Powell, made good use of the opportunity to try out lots of different styles and techniques making comedies, murder mysteries, classic dramas, romances, even a musical. The ones that survive usually aren't great masterpieces, it shows that they were made quickly and cheaply. But they also often show a lot of skill and we see him using techniques that he was to use again later in his career (but doing them better).

The films are:
Two Crowded Hours (1931) *
C.O.D. (1932) *
His Lordship (1932)
Hotel Splendide (1932)
My Friend the King (1932) *
The Rasp (1932) *
Rynox (1932)
The Star Reporter (1932) *
Born Lucky (1933) *
The Fire Raisers (1934)
Red Ensign (1934)
Something Always Happens (1934)
The Girl in the Crowd (1935) *
Lazybones (1935)
The Love Test (1935)
The Night of the Party (1935)
The Phantom Light (1935)
The Price of a Song (1935) *
Someday (1935) *
The Brown Wallet (1936) *
Crown v. Stevens (1936)
Her Last Affaire (1936)
The Man Behind the Mask (1936) #

* Missing, believed lost
# Only a shorter US version has been found so far

Some of them have been released on DVD
Red Ensign (1934) + The Phantom Light (1935)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00177Y9WA/papas-20
The Fire Raisers (1934)
http://www.amazon.fr/gp/product/B002IWF18E/papas011-21
Fixed French subtitles but original English soundtrack

Various of the ones that do survive have been shown at various film festivals and special events over the years.

The Festival du Cinema de Brive specialises in medium length films, usually from 30 - 60 minutes long. They contacted us to see if we could help with an homage to Michael Powell that they were hoping to put on, showing some of the films he made through the 1930s while he was learning his craft.
http://www.powell-pressburger.org/Trips/Brive/20100422/index.html

Then, in 1937, he made The Edge of the World, his first really personal film. That got him noticed by Alexander Korda who hired him as a contract director to finish off The Spy in Black (1939). Korda also brought in another writer to tidy up the script of that film, a fellow Hungarian called Emeric Pressburger.

The rest, as they say, is history

Steve

[–] hobnob53 12 years ago

Even for so learned a man as you, Steve, I am quite taken aback by the rapidity of your response, principally in relation to its thoroughness. Very impressive!

I've long known about Britain's "quota quickies", of course, which probably did more to harm the country's film industry than improve it, but as you say they did have one benefit in that they provided a training ground for those real talents just beginning to labor in the cinematic vineyards.

I have a three-film DVD set released in the US a few years ago, containing Red Ensign and The Phantom Light. I've seen the names of some of the titles you provided, but given the cheap nature of quota quickies, and their expected popular longevity at the time of their production (weeks, at best, I would guess), it's not too surprising that they weren't taken care of and have been lost or destroyed, a fate that even befell many more prominent films (or parts of them).

Of course, if they had known in 1931 what Michael Powell would become....

Eh, maybe they still needed the old celluloid.

When I was in Britain just recently for several weeks over Christmas and New Year, they broadcast The Edge of the World, which I own but haven't seen in several years. It really is a remarkable bit of work. Not to mention a thin Niall MacGinnis, and the cameo by that 32-year-old gentleman playing the yachtsman!

[–] Steve Crook 12 years ago

Yes, that 32 year old gentleman, and his then girlfriend, later his wife, Frankie.

Sadly some old films were scrapped to recover the silver in the silver nitrate.

Powell once saw one of those old films which had been thought to have been long lost and said that he wasn't sure his reputation could stand many more similar rediscoveries. But a lot of the ones that do survive are well worth watching.

Red Ensign wasn't actually a quota film. It had a higher budget than most of them. The story of the problems in the British shipping can be read as applying to the problems in the film industry.

The Phantom Light has a lot of interesting location work. Notice how although people speak Welsh in it, there are no subtitles. In all of his major films we quite often have people speaking quite a lot in foreign languages, but he never used subtitles. He assumed a reasonably intelligent audience who would get the gist of what was being said by the body language and the reactions of other people in the scene. P&P both started work in silent films so they knew how to tell a story without words.

Some of the others that I particularly like are:
Something Always Happens: A caper/romance with a very clever plot and some fine performances - set in the exciting world of gas stations (as you would call them).

His Lordship: A plumber inherits a title and becomes a Lord. With a girlfriend called Lenina, two comedy Bolsheviks, musical numbers and a chorus line of housemaids - what's not to like?

The Love Test: Set in the laboratory of a chemical firm where they are trying to find a way to make fire-proof cellulose (compare to the problems with inflammable nitrate film). The best chemist in the lab is promoted - but she's a woman and has to battle the sexism of the other chemists

A great training for an aspiring director

Steve

[–] hobnob53 12 years ago

You know, something tells me I may have once seen Something Always Happens, or rather a portion of it. This was one of the titles I recognized but didn't think I'd seen, but your description rings a dim bell in my mind. But if I did, it was only a bit of it, years ago. I kind of suspect I'm mistaken, but in any case your synopsis intrigues me. (Thanks for translating the film's setting as a "gas station"! But when in Britain.... What would they have called them in the 30s?)

I think movie-making was a great deal more fun, more challenging, and relied much more on each individual's creative abilities, back then than today. Certainly you were still improvising and inventing much more as you went along, in a still relatively new and ever-developing medium. In this regard (as in some others), I think I missed my era.

Thanks also for reminding me that the lady on the yacht in Edge was the future Mrs. P. It must be curious to be able to see yourself in a motion picture, especially after the passage of many decades...and, best of all, in unbilled cameos!

[–] Steve Crook 12 years ago

They were (and still are) called "petrol stations" or "garages" when they also offer repair and engineering facilities

Movie-making always was (and still is) much more of a cottage industry in the UK run by a few enthusiastic amateurs. Despite some people's belief in it as a real industry, it has never quite reached those dizzying heights. But that's to our advantage because it means that more of the quirky or artistic films can get made here which the money men in Hollywoodland would never consider supporting

Steve

[–] hobnob53 12 years ago

Ah, but some of you would pronounce it "GAR-age", with a hard final g. In the States, it's "gar-AGE", with the final g pronounced as a "zh" sound (as in French). My English wife tells me the latter has well infiltrated the formerly pure British tongue.

That pronunciation is so (Lincoln) Continental of us.

I'd disagree that the people running the British film industry (certainly in its grandest years, from the 20s through the 60s) were amateurs. No more so than that same generation of Hollywood moguls, who began their careers in other fields as well. I'd also definitely call it an industry, regardless of its size.

But it's true it's traditionally been easier to make smaller, quirkier or more "artistic" films (aren't all films artistic? -- okay, I know what you mean) in smaller, more initmate and homogeneous markets, a function of a nation's size and cultural character, which in turn limit the built-in audience and degree of profitability of native films. With less money to spend, the temptation towards blockbusters of the gigantic Hollywood kind is pretty much eliminated, leaving the studios (or independents) to concentrate on smaller films that reflect their national character and their makers' personalities and interests. But this is due to financial constraints as much as if not more than any "artistic" preferences. (Over time the former factor may even breed the latter.) It also helps explain why even the most mindless, derivative Hollywood mega-movie does better than indigenous pictures in virtually every country in the world. Even Hollywood remakes of recent foreign films usually do better in the originals' native market than did those originals. I see that as a mixed commentary on people's tastes and preferences, but it helps explain why it is that, for a century, American films have always been the favorites of most people all over the world.

The Hollywood system has many drawbacks, but it's produced a great many superior films as well as overhyped junk. And smaller, quirkier and artistic does not necessarily equate with "good". Unfortunately, there's no sure means to success in the industry, anywhere. That's why it's such fun and so interesting to embrace it, with all its achievements and all its many flaws, as you do so well with your devotion to and scholarship on P & P.

[Note: One of Our Aircraft is Missing is about to start here (at 1:30 AM Eastern Standard Time), so I hope to catch a few moments of the first Archers film proper before bedtime beckons.]

[–] Steve Crook 12 years ago

American films have always been the favorites of most people all over the world

Favo[u]rite? Or those with the biggest audiences? They don't always mean the same thing

Hollywood may not spend as much on the blockbusters now but they know that if they spend twice as much advertising it as they did on making it then they can get enough suckers through the doors to make an overall profit. The trouble is, they're right. So they'll keep on doing it.

I had the misfortune to see the 2001 "re-imagining" of Brighton Rock. The makers claimed they went back to the original book and that it wasn't a remake of the 1947 classic. But they even included the scratched record ending that was in the 1947 film but not in the book.

But that's not to say that everything from the major studios is terrible. A few good ones sneak through the system occasionally. I also wouldn't say that all the old films were great, there were plenty of clunkers back then as well. Equally, a lot of modern independent films aren't worth the digital medium they were created on. But we have to allow people to learn from their mistakes

That's why we have to seek out and cherish the gems that do get made, back in the old days or nowadays. Encourage and support those who are still managing to make them and promote the older ones

Enjoy One of Our Aircraft is Missing. Did you notice that there's no music soundtrack? Any music heard is only that which would be heard by the characters like from the radio, records or the church organ. There's no theme music or incidental music

Steve

[–] hobnob53 12 years ago

Yes, I think it is a fair observation that, overall and over time, Hollywood films are both the favorite, and the ones with the widest audiences, around the world. (Regardless of whether the two factors mean the same or not.) They generally have the biggest impact on foreign filmmakers (by the admission of such people) and are the most familiar and talked about. Good, bad or indifferent, they wouldn't have attained such status -- let alone retained it -- had they not indeed been "favorites"...with or without the extraneous "u"!

I think this is perhaps because Americans are a conglomeration of many cultures, and therefore our somewhat synthesized cultural output appeals more broadly to more people. It has few expressly racial, ethnic or even national overtones, in contrast to most other lands and peoples.

I never saw the rehashed Brighton Rock, nor particularly care to. But I think you meant to say it was made in 2010, not 2001 -- no? Or did I miss another version?

But we're mainly on the same page, per your other statements.

Funny you mention the lack of a music score in Aircraft. I've seen it many times, and of course knew it had no score, but it was only last night that I suddenly took principle notice of this aspect, and began reflecting on it. I must have been anticipating your observation!

There are a few such films, and usually the absence of a score works pretty well. On the other hand, I could not imagine 49th Parallel without Vaughan Williams's magnificent score. I only wish the original soundtrack recording existed somewhere, but I've always understood it's lost. Is this true, do you know?

[–] Steve Crook 12 years ago

Extracts from the music from 49th Parallel have been released commercially in various forms at various times. See my page about "Music from the P&P films" at http://www.powell-pressburger.org/FAQ/FAQ28.html

Steve

[–] hobnob53 12 years ago

Thanks!

(Singing -- sort of.)

[–] just1Hitch 10 years ago

We learn that Lohrmann sold the group's binoculars at a pawn shop for $7 (Canadian). First, even in 1941, $7 for a pair of what must be first-class binoculars is pretty cheap, even taking into account that a pawn shop doesn't pay retail prices. Binoculars are not cheap, and the type they must have had would certainly be costlier than the usual. I think the Germans were ripped off for a mere seven bucks (about $11 US at that time).

Not necessarily. A pawn shop makes loans to its customers based on the estimated "street" value of an item and might pay 25%-50% on that. $7 in 1941 would be about $115 today so the binoculars' value would range from $230-$460. In any event, $115 would buy a lot of hot dogs.

Excuse me for talking while you're interrupting.

[–] hobnob53 10 years ago

Your dollar equivalencies are probably right, but even if so, something like precision binoculars would almost surely have cost more than $14-$28, even in 1941 Canadian dollars. Maybe the Germans had little idea of Canadian currency and its value, but I just think that $7 is very low, again, even by 1941 standards.

Of course, that leaves aside the question of why the pawnbroker didn't notice anything special (i.e., German military markings or manufacture) that might have made him suspicious of his customer -- especially one with an accent, eh?

And yes, $7 would buy a lot of hot dogs (which would probably have cost, what, 15¢ or 20¢ apiece?), but the problem is the Germans needed more cash than that. After dinner they'd have around $6 or so left over. That wasn't enough for much of anything, especially split three ways, even in 1941. A few meals at best. Better than nothing, but not much. On the other hand, by the time the money ran out, maybe Hirth would have had enough practice to have mastered the proper way to eat a hot dog.

[–] ndenton-1 10 years ago

The little things get you caught.

One of the things about eating the hot dog the wrong way was that slip-ups like that were VERY common amongst Spies on both sides. One of the easiest and most common goofs that got you caught were simple things like that, that only locals did and they noticed if you did it wrong.

In another picture "Commandos Attack at Dawn" the heads of the British Secret Service comment that their agents are "Too Perfect, they speak English like a Scot" and are being spotted by the Nazi's far too easily.

Another one was holding a cigarette between the outstetched fingers. A Hollywood fashion not used in Europe. (used in many movies)

In "Went The Day Well?" a Nazi spy leaves his German chocolate bar exposed on his bed where it is spotted by a English young child.

In "The Great Escape" two of the escapees are caught when a German officer adresses them in English and they reply in English.

And the most common one. A cop stops a ordinary guy and asks him if he's wanted. So what does our less than bright con do?? Run for the hills. DOH!!! Hmm? It seems the dimwitted German Sailor did the same thing when the Indian chief looked at him.

[–] hobnob53 10 years ago

Yes, it's the little things that often matter most.

Some of the plot points you cite are, if you will, "built-in" mistakes, in the sense that the spies think they're disguising their nature but are a bit too oblivious to realities to be credible: the too-perfect English and the manner of holding a cigarette. The other two are just flat-out lapses or screw-ups: carrying around a foreign chocolate bar, and the lapse into English. (In The Great Escape it was only Gordon Jackson who inadvertently replied in English, which was meant to be especially pointed because he was the one who kept hectoring the POWs about not making that very mistake!)

Other examples:

In OSS (1946) an American agent in occupied Europe is caught in a restaurant because after cutting his food he switches his fork from his left hand to his right, which is a typical style of eating for Americans but not Europeans, who keep the fork in their left hand to eat. (This was allegedly based on a real incident.)

A similar thing occurs in Inglorious Basterds (2010) when the Nazi officer conversing with three American agents disguised as German officers spots them for impostors because when ordering three beers one holds up his three middle fingers instead of the leftmost three, as is done among Germans.

In 36 Hours (1965), the Germans kidnap an American officer, change his appearance and put him in a false U.S. Army hospital to make him think it's five years later and the war is over, all so that they can learn the secrets of D-Day. But he tumbles to it when he feels the slit from a paper cut he had received just before he was drugged and kidnapped, which the German doctors had missed in giving him a physical exam while he was unconscious.

In 49th Parallel I still think the pawn shop owner (whom we never see) should have figured out this guy with an accent selling a pair of Kriegsmarine binoculars was suspicious -- especially since the men were the objects of a well-publicized manhunt!

[–] Chris398 9 years ago

Why does Portman say "What are you waiting for ? "

[–] hobnob53 9 years ago

Because the crewman who sold the binoculars told him he'd gotten $7 for them -- but he hadn't given Hirth, his commanding officer (Portman), the money. Hirth's question was actually a not-so-subtle order to hand over the cash to him.

[–] drystyx 9 years ago

I had never thought of that, but it obviously makes the most sense. Thanks, Hob, for a good bit of deduction. It was probably more obvious to audiences in 1941 than now, when audiences have been a bit schooled to think of the line in a more "movie line" way.

Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time!

[–] hobnob53 9 years ago

Hi drystyx -- do you mean Hirth's line about "Well -- what are you waiting for?"

I also wonder whether 1941 audiences realized that Hirth was mis-eating his hot dog. Probably not -- Britons didn't yet have hot dogs, though Canadians did and might have noticed his approaching it like corn on the cob.

It wouldn't have been a problem for Americans, however -- the entire sequence in Winnipeg (except for the opening of Hirth standing in the rain with the crowd reading the latest news bulletin) was cut from the US print of the film (retitled The Invaders)...which, among other things, left American audiences scratching their heads as to why the three Nazis, hitherto intent on getting across the American border, are abruptly seen walking 2000 miles westward to Vancouver, while the US border lies only a few dozen miles to the south.