I was just wondering if anyone knows how historically accurate this film really is. Like where the sources of information are taken from. Based on my knowledge, it seemed accurate enough for me. What I mainly wasn't sure about was the portrayal of Runstedt. Did the film make him more against Hitler than he actually was or is that just me? Any help would be appreciated, thanks.
shareIts innaccurate. Von Runstedt wanted to sue for peace after the successful invasion of Normandy by the allies but was most definately PRO Hitler. He was personally outraged by the bomb plot and presided over tribunals to weed out likely sympathisers, many of which were executed.
He was accused of war crimes after the war but never stood trial due to 'ill health'
Rundstedt privately complained about Hitler, referring to him as "the Bohemian Corporal" (referring to Hitler's WWI service), but was publicly staunchly loyal to him to the point of condemning the assassination attempt and sitting on a military tribunal afterwards which expelled hundreds of officers accused of disloyalty. Many of the ones expelled by Rundstedt and his fellow judges were next handed over to the so-called "People's Court", a complete Nazi kangaroo court, and executed, including Berthold von Stauffenberg, the would-be assassin's brother.
After the war, Stauffenberg's other brother and von Rundstedt were held in the same building by American soldiers, and Stauffenberg insisted he could not sit at the same table as Rundstedt, because Rundstedt had basically handed his brother over to the lynch mob.
Rundstedt was also the speaker, representing Hitler, at Rommel's state funeral.
So Rundstedt personally detested Hitler but was unwilling to actually do anything beyond grumble. At least from all I've read.
my movie review website: http://www.angelfire.com/blog/jester_1/
Runstedt's dislike of Hitler was typical of the professional army officer caste. However it must be recalled that all members of the German armed forces have taken a sworn oath of personal loyalty to the Fuhrer. Adolf Hitler was commander-in-chief to all German military personnel and of course it would be considered treason in time of war to assasinate your own leader. Most German soldiers in the field generally held this belief.
Rundstedt did not hand over von Stauffenberg over to the lynch mob as the colonel was executed by firing squad on Gen. Fromme's orders -- in order to cover-up Fromme's own complicity in the plot.
As long as Hitler was on a winning streak, the professional officers could generally stifle their discontent with the Bohemian Corporal. But when the war went downhill, the grumbling only turned into botched action.
Sounds like our officers during the first and second Gulf War. Of course, Bush, Sr., Bush Jr., and Dick Cheney didn't tolerate any dissent from the American generals for the way the situation doing downhill after overthrowing Hussein and liberating Kuwait. Then again, American generals always view Republican Presidents in high regard whether or not they serve in the military and whether they were incompetent or not, because almost all officers and NCOs are right wing conservatives. Also they hold all Democratic presidents in contempt even though some of them in serve in the military and were competent.
shareRundstedt did not hand over von Stauffenberg over to the lynch mob as the colonel was executed by firing squad on Gen. Fromme's orders -- in order to cover-up Fromme's own complicity in the plot.