MovieChat Forums > The Blue Max (1966) Discussion > George Peppard's Performance

George Peppard's Performance


How did other people feel about Peppard's performance? I felt he played his character without dimension or depth, as alternately a naif and a cad, but with nothing emotional that really connected to me. Yet I conversely enjoyed his anti-heroic performance in the film. I just found myself stymied as to whether I thought it was the script or him that gave him that edge.

I like Peppard's later work, especially his Hannibal Smith on "The A-Team", but feel in his early days he was able to coast too much on his good looks, a tough blond bombshell like Peter O'Toole and a cool cucumber like Steve McQueen, but lacking the ability of the former and the ease of the later. Later on, ironically after his parts dried up, he became a better actor, with a stronger sense of humor that made his innate cockiness more of an asset. I just found him weaker than expected here, and wanted to see what others thought.

reply

I've seen this film any number of times and have always enjoyed it. I don't think Peppard's performance was bad at all, and certainly didn't hurt the movie. He's of course surrounded by first rate international stars such as James Mason, Jeremy Kemp, Karl Michael Vogler and yes, Ursula Andress who copensate for any deficiences from him. As such, it helps emphasize the class differences that are central to the film. All in all, I thought this played out pretty well.

reply

If you think about it: Stachel (Peppard's) character changed throughout the entire movie. He was pretty easy going when he threw that bottle to that old soldier on his way to the squadron. Comfortable with his "own kind". Stiff later, especially when he was asked "Why are you so touchy about it?" by the commanding officer Heidemann (Vogler)during the first interview. He doesn't even have a response!
He loosens up more when Countess Kaeti von Klugermann (Andress) comes into his room by mistake and she pulls her glass away while he is still pouring the schnapps. You see him look down and smile as to acknowledge "this" is how "they" can be(his betters).
After he spends time in Berlin with Andress...abit more self confident.
When he volunteers to cover the photographic plane with Willi von Klugermann (Kemp), he has a superior grin on his face and only knods. He doesn't even speak to acknowledge his superior officer's request!
I think its a great film. Great story. Great aerial photography and a great score by Jerry Goldsmith and its available on CD on Ebay!

reply

If George Peppard seemed wooden, that's probably exactly how a lower class soldier would act around the aristocratic upper class officers in Imperial Germany. He would be afraid of any social faux pas, but as time went on and he saw how degenerate some of the upper classes were, he realized he was the better man. After not being accepted, he decided to stick his own arrogant superiority up their nose by beating them at their own game by winning the one medal only a very few of the upper class ever won. They might still look down on him socially, but he, and they, knew who it was that had the "right stuff" every time he showed up with that medal.

reply

I would not agree that Stachel was afraid of committing any social faux pas.

His is an abrasive character, hardened by years in the trenches with the horror that brought. In the book he is an alcoholic but that does not come through in the film. I actually think his was the sort of character which would actually challenge the social mores of the era and that is exactly what he does which is why he ends up in competition with Willy and conflict with Heidemann.

Peppard's rendition of the character is, to my mind, quite good. I think though he is just too American for the part and sometimes it just doesn't work for me. I'm not sure I could recommend anyone else for the role and Peppard did it well enough. I give him a 7/10, about level with James Mason who I thought was not the best choice for Von Klugermann. Karl-Michael Vogler shaded everyone else though. I give him a 9.

reply

by - jd-276 on Thu Oct 8 2009 03:06:17
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would not agree that Stachel was afraid of committing any social faux pas.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You disagree with me? Then, you're wrong. You obviously missed the significance of Bruno's 1st interview with Heidemann where Bruno is acutely uncomfortable with his father's station in life. You also missed the part where Heidemann expresses surprise about Bruno being in the trenches as a common soldier, you missed the part where they are getting on the transport and one of the officers is talking to Willie about his uncle being in the hotel business, but the hotel had 500 beds and his uncle was a Baron "but you can see the position this puts me in", you missed the pointed quietness when no one would volunteer to fly with Stachel, you missed the part when James Mason said "Stachel is common as dirt" and you mis....... Say, just what was it you didn't miss?

reply

In the film I think it was Stachel's father who owned a small inn. I don't think it had "500 beds". Your probably meant to say "50" but I think it was even less than that (though I could not remember the number). In any case, it was true that both Stachel and the other pilots were aware of Stachel's lower social position compared to theirs.

But no one wanted to fly with Stachel not because of his lower social position, but rather because Stachel was more concerned about confirming his first kill rather than Fabian's death. Fabian was the one who was rather nice to him at the beginning and offered him a cigarette. He was shot down by the British scout after they destroyed the observation balloon.

reply

Stachel's father worked at an Inn which had 5 beds. It was the officer in the truck who was talking to Willie, not Bruno Stachel, who said he (the officer)had a uncle who was a Baron and owned a hotel with 500 beds.
The other fliers looked down on Stachel at the beginning because he was a common soldier in the trenches and they were aristocratic officers who were in the flying corps because of their connections.

reply

Stachel said his father WORKED in a small hotel, 5 bedrooms. He didn't even say he owned it!

I think Heidemann's remark "You should hope you get to like us" was very out-of-character. He doesn't seem like a snob for the rest of the movie, but that's what that line said.... making Stachel think he is out of place instead of trying to help him fit in, which is what a C.O. should do.

reply

You disagree with me? Then, you're wrong. You obviously missed the significance of Bruno's 1st interview with Heidemann where Bruno is acutely uncomfortable with his father's station in life.


You're entitled to your opinion.

It's not a faux pas on Stachels' part. Stachel doesn't care for the unwritten laws of gentlemanly behavior and he makes this abundantly clear when they set up the funeral party to bury the two British aviators Stachel has shot down.He is embarrassed not by the lowly status of his father but the fact that Heidemann chose to make it very public. He makes this clear in the office later. Discussing someone's private life that way is very likely to cause offence. If anyone committed a faux pas there it would have been Heidemann.

reply

Your opinion is also wrong.

reply

You don't know what you're talking about, do you?

reply

[deleted]

I read the book AND it's sequel. Have you? Can you even read? Is your guardian/keeper reading this to you now? Go back and watch the movie (with an intelligent person to explain it to you, any random 9 year old should be able to help you) and take note of the scenes I've mentioned in earlier posts. The 9 year old will explain the scenes to you S-L-O-W-L-Y and in a LOUD voice and you will understand. Maybe. Buy the 9 year old some popcorn. You are NOT to molest the child under any circumstances.


Why do you feel the need to be so abusive? If you want an intelligent conversation, I'll oblige but I'm not interested in any of this nonsense.

I own a copy of Jack Hunter's book and have read it, though it's hardly a classic. You might recall the scene where Heidemann says "I'm sorry if it bothers you what your family does" and Stachel says "It doesn't bother me Herr Hauptmann". Subtext: "Go to hell". Stachel is not concerned about committing any faux pas and while he's accutely aware of his relative social position, trench warfare has hardened him to a point where he regards the German officer corps with contempt. He is there to prove that he's not just their equal but their superior.

You are assuming that because I don't agree with you, I must be wrong. Is that because you are always right? Since you have accused me of being a child molester I can only assume that your intention is to take this matter to its lowest possible ebb. I have comfortably proved my point and your post has been reported.

Done with you.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

He plays the role of a total butthole really well.

reply

[deleted]

Yeah I wasn't wild about his character. Maybe he was supposed to act like that, but everyone else had thick accents and strong voices while he was soft spoken and sounded very american. It also seemed like he didn't really take anything seriously, he had that sense of humor and cockiness but displayed no fear or remorse during the film. Was his character faithful to the book? Maybe I am partly judging him on the fact that i didn't like his character as a person as well. Also, was the addition of Ursalya just the studio's attempt to add a love story?

The Aerial footage and action is first rate but the drama parts are fairly dull in my opinion. I was pretty tired when I watched it though, and fell a sleep a few times. But I would have loved if they cut out the love story and showed the camraderie or lack of and also discussed the missions more. That and maybe swap out peppard for lee marvin or someone like him.

reply

For me Peppard was spot on in The Blue Max.
Very much like Bernard Corwell's Sharpe, Stachel has come up from the gutter and finds himself in a world he has not been brought up to understand or respect, the officer class. He is quiet and cold, but that is the whole point. After he brings in the British 2 seater and destroys it to the disgust of his fellow pilots, he reminds them that in the trenches there was just no time for honour, the bodies just piled up. Later in the film he lies and takes credit for two SE5s that Willy shot down, he doesn't care about the dishonour because all that matters is that their dead.
As he settles into being an officer, he abuses all the luxuries on offer, and forgets the squalor he has come from. Look at the scene when he's being driven through Berlin and he sees all the riots, he's been there and suffered, but he got out and now he doesn't care.
Compare him in the earlier scenes when he first arrives at the airfield to when he flies the monoplane at the end. He has truly fulfilled his destiny, Peppard even flew the plane himself!
However, like his rival, Willy, he dies not in combat, but while showing off.
I think Peppard's performance totally brings alive the pride, greed, ambition and tragedy of Stachel. It's a character study worthy of Macbeth.
I totally disagree that the 'drama parts' are dull in this film. The flying scenes are the greatest ever filmed, but on their own they do not constitute a great war epic, it's the drama.

reply

[deleted]

Yeah, Peppard's somewhat stilted and wooden performance actually helps the idea of showing Stachel as a tragic, flawed figure that never comes to grips with how shallow and meaningless his ambitions and desires truly are. He's a skilled pilot but never fits in with the rest of his comrades. It works well enough in a movie that has some truly superb cinematography, music, and action sequences.

I'm not really sure there would be anyone that would have been a better choice for Stachel back in 1966 and never heard of anyone else being in the running for the role. It would be interesting to know who else was considered or some ideas who might have given a better performance.

reply

It would be interesting to know who else was considered or some ideas who might have given a better performance. "

Maybe Steve McQueen?



reply

I agree with your synopsis completely.... I thought Pepard and the rest of the cast were superb...one of my favorite films...his character of a prior infantrymen is spot on...the aerial photography and soundtrack were fantastic...can't say enough good things about this film..

reply

I'd agree. But the role is better under played rather than over played. My guess is that the studio needed an American, and he fit the bill well enough. How much depth in character can there be in a young pilot? I liked the drum playing bit. A surprise, and it looked like he could play some of the basic rudiments OK. So I'd say he wasn't badly cast, but could have been better. Perhaps it was the expert direction that got him over the top. And as others have said, the rest of the cast is superb.

My accountant says, "1 + 1, 40% of the time, equals divorce".

reply

I liked Peppard. Blue Max was at the end of his Big Picture Run that started with Breakfast at Tiffanys. He was drinking too much, and the pictures he was in were ensemble pieces that didn't allow him much range. His character is a bit wooden. He doesn't use a German accent. His role is underplayed, which is probably best for Peppard to do. The script just doesn't give him that much for character development.

reply

His acting was just wooden. I have to give the director and screenwriter some of the blame here - Bruno never seems to have any emotional reaction to any of the combat he endures or the people who he is killing or the other pilots who fly and die in his Jasta. His naked ambition for the medal is all that we really ever get. About halfway through the movie we see that he also wants to "stick it to the upper class" by sleeping with Ursula Andress' character and then flaunting that around. He is basically an ass and after a while I watched the movie hoping he would get shot already so it could be over.

As for the areal stunts, they are pretty good, but the close ups are very poor - you can totally tell that it's blue screen and the action does not often match the real footage of the planes as it is edited back in. Not to mention, if you are an aviation buff, there are just a number of goofs in this movie that I found very distracting (the handle that they had to reach up and pull to fire the guns(!); the distance at which the dog fights took place; the fact that the Fokker DVII was used and referred to as an out of date plane; the fact that these single seat Pfalz' were dropping bombs from their wings...

I have to give this movie pretty low marks. A big disappointment to me.

reply

His acting was just wooden. I have to give the director and screenwriter some of the blame here - Bruno never seems to have any emotional reaction to any of the combat he endures or the people who he is killing or the other pilots who fly and die in his Jasta.


In a lot of ways this was the crux of the film. He's so hardened by trench warfare that he doesn't care for what happens to a bunch of upper class flyboys. He's not there long enough - or they are not there long enough - for him to form any meaningful associations. Even if he wanted to, he despises the upper class anyway.

I agree with you: it makes him an ass. On the other hand, he's seen a lot more than any of them. Or maybe it's that he's seen so much more but in a different light.

reply

I thought his performance was fine. The film was nothing like the book though. He was meant to be a cold and callous character which was partly caused by the time he had spent in the trenches prior to becoming a pilot. He had become used to death as an everyday event and, therefore, it meant nothing to him. He wanted to prove that he could better himself and show the conceited officer class that he was as good as them, at least as a pilot. Peppard was good at playing such arrogant and pompous characters as he later proved in Banacek. I thought Karl Michael Vogler was also very good.

reply

[deleted]

I said to him I wondered why so many others got roles at MGM his home studio that he should have ... Peppard replied "True" and walked off. He died not much later.


That's quite a poignant anecdote. Thanks for sharing.



"I told you it was off." The Jackal

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

The stress and casualties of World War I meant that people were becoming officers who would not have reached that status at the start. I think Peppard conveys this in his performance, as somebody who has risen in status but cannot fit in with the aristocratic or at least upper middle class officers.
This process was also repeated in WW2, with combat casualties and promotion from the ranks resulting in working-class Germans becoming army officers. They were often considered socially awkward by the more upper class ones, and there was an acronym for them - VOMAG (Volksoffizier mit Arbeitergesicht) which can be translated as "people's officer with a working class face". They had a reputation for courting popularity with NCOs and other ranks, which most of them had been previously, and for taking dangerous risks in an attempt to prove themselves. Peppard's character is a good example of a VOMAG.

"Chicken soup - with a *beep* straw."

reply