MovieChat Forums > Watch on the Rhine (1943) Discussion > Amazing

Amazing

posted 13 years ago by dmnemaine
16 replies | jump to latest

I saw this film for the first time tonight, and I'm amazed that so many had such negative things to say about it. Have Americans really gotten to the point where a film that relies on a strong plot, strong dialogue, and strong conflict (in the the theatrical sense of the word) rather than "action", "beautiful people", or special effects can't hold one's attention? This is a great film, and one of Davis's best performances. In fact, the entire cast was wonderful. Yes, it comes across more like a stage play than the average Hollywood film, but so what? So you have to actually pay attention to what the characters are saying. It's called using your brain for thinking rather than having everything handed to you on a silver platter.

[–] todflet 12 years ago

Hear, hear! I just watched the film last night for the first time. It is indeed a very fine one, with wonderful performances by Davis and Lukas. Too bad people like this are so rare in the real world. We're in the same situation.

[–] jim_schmitt 12 years ago

Just watched it tonight for the first time. There are a number of movies that 'feel' like they were plays, and a lesser number that don't feel that way at all. I can say at times it felt like it, but mostly, especially when Paul Lukas was the center, it did not. I liked it a lot.

[–] AirForceVet 12 years ago

No, Americans have NOT gotten to the point that "Action" films will ever replace strong plot, strong dialogue, or strong conflict!
Action films are NOT nominated for Oscars.
But there are still good movies to see, None as good as The Classics, though...so, thank goodness for TCM!

But we in it shall be remembered;
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers

[–] dmnemaine 12 years ago

I just hope people like us aren't a dying breed, AirForceVet. I'd hate to see films like "Watch On The Rhine" fade away because the short attention span internet generation can't sit still long enough for a plot-driven film.

[–] entertainme5 11 years ago

I'm in my very early twenties.. and I loved this movie. It a dark themed movie but also a family film. Great perfromances. I grew up watching Bette Davis films. It's the anticipation of the film is what makes it. Watched it all the way through!!

[–] USAFmedicVET 10 years ago

Posted by:dmnemaine replied Feb 25, 2012
"I just hope people like us aren't a dying breed, AirForceVet. I'd hate to see films like "Watch On The Rhine" fade away because the short attention span internet generation can't sit still long enough for a plot-driven film."

So sorry for very late delay in replying to your post. Hope you're still around to see it.
With TCM celebrating its 20th anniversary, I don't think Classic Movie lovers are a dying breed.
TCM is making sure of THAT! They are bringing on people like Cher, and other celebrities as guest programmers. I think Drew Barrymore is introducing a younger demographic to 'The Essentials' and they are programming special movies on Friday nights specifically for children.
TCM has done an excellent job promoting the quality of commercial-free Classic Movies since your original reply post and there is a lot more discussion of them on the Message Boards, than even the last year alone.
And also the TCM cruise and Special Tours in LA and NY help to promote Classics and provide a venue of sorts for those of us who love them.
I'm not one for cruises, but it would be great to spend days at sea with people who ALL love the Classics!
So, definitely not a dying breed!

"We in it shall be remembered;
We few, we happy few,
We Band of Brothers" ~ W.S.

[–] giverny98 11 years ago

I just watched it again and couldn't agree with you more. I rather liked the pacing (some would call it slow; I call it deliberate). And it's a refresher course in the insidiousness of totalitarianism, which can come in many forms, and in our own back yard.

[–] npaxton-3 10 years ago

I saw this for first time. Now I understand why Paul Lukas won the Oscar that year even though I love Humphrey Bogart's portrayal of Rick Blaine. Lukas' performance was phenomenal. Spoilers here: I don't weep a lot during movies, but the last part of the film when Kurt Muller says goodby to his children telling them to remember that killing is wrong whoever does it (after he killed the Count) was heartbreaking.

[–] giverny98 10 years ago

I enjoy Humphrey Bogart and he was wonderful in Casablanca. But he always plays variations on Humphrey Bogart. Paul Lukas, on the other hand, melted into the role.

And for once, Bette Davis didn't chew up the scenery, and gave a memorable performance that struck just the right balance.

There is a lot to respect about this film. It's one that I'll always stop and watch when I see it during the channel flip. And always have a box of tissues handy.

[–] belgol5671 10 years ago

Amazing ... NOT! The movie was a giant bore. No 'watch', no 'Rhine", just a bunch of actors reading lines about an all-too familiar story. The kids were ridiculously cartoonish and the adults were a bunch of chatty Elizabethian morons. I've seen hundreds of movies with Nazi themes, and this one is one of the worst. A big waste of time with zero action and a soap opera story.

[–] giverny98 10 years ago

Different strokes for different folks, I suppose. I don't need a lot of bang 'em up to make a movie interesting.

[–] gonemoab 10 years ago

belgol, It seems you thought maybe you were in for an action/war flick. The title of this one was only used as metaphor. In this case, the idea suggested was that fascism demands vigilance and when it presents whether militarily or politically, it's up to free people to be willing to fight. That's where Paul Lukas' character was anyway.

If one day you chance to live in a country where freedom and safety is suddenly turned upside down by toxic military power and you are an enemy within your own home (such as present Syria), this film will mean so much more to you.

If the direction of the kids' behavior seemed odd to you I can see why. It was really a legitimate attempt at realism for that period, representing an approximation of the formality of the particular German tradition they had been raised in, perhaps a little coarse in typical Hollywood style.

The comments about soap operas and the Elizabethan period don't seem relevant to anything.

Beer--now there's a temporary solution ~ Homer Simpson

[–] mark-1589 10 years ago

Before just viewing Watch on the Rhine, I had seen only one other film with Paul Lukas - The Lady Vanishes - and he was great in that film, a thoroughly convincing and vile villian. Well, in the film, he is nothing short of magnificent. I am simply bowled over by his performance. He richly deserved his Oscar (and I had always wondered why Humphrey Bogart was passed over).

[–] franzkabuki 9 years ago

But it doesn't have a "strong plot" - basically all that happens is that a "professional anti-fascist" arrives at a manor that also houses a sniveling Nazi sympathizer who, upon hearing that a major resistance figure has been arrested in Europe, proceeds to try and blackmail our upstanding anti-fascist. The rest of the film consists of overwrought melodrama delivered with some really broad and often stilted acting as well as incessant, tiresome propagandistic speechmaking where pretty much everything is indeed handed to you on a silver platter (and which, in OP's mind, probably counts for "strong dialogue"). Yes, the ultimate conflict is rather powerful, but that only goes so far.

"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan

[–] shelemm 9 years ago

"Yes, the ultimate conflict is rather powerful"

An ultimate conflict that is powerful is a major accomplishment, an it doesn't happen by magic. It takes a couple of hours of riveting acting and insightful script writing to get the audience to that point. I cry like a baby every time I see this film, and that happens because of the film's intellectual and emotional depth.

[–] butaneggbert 8 years ago

... tiresome propagandistic speechmaking where pretty much everything is indeed handed to you on a silver platter (and which, in OP's mind, probably counts for "strong dialogue").

And you were doing so well up to that point, voicing just your own take on the film. Too bad you had to stoop to snarking on someone else. I was pretty interested in what you had to say for a moment there.

_______________

Nothing to see here, move along.