IS "G.M." TENDER-HEARTED?

New Zealand Listener, Volume 6, Issue 155, 12 June 1942, Page 16

IS "G.M." TENDER-HEARTED?

Treo Letters On "49th Paratlel"’

To the Editor, Sir,-* G.M.’s" film reviews have been a great joy to me for many months -but just occasionally one makes me bound with rage. This happened with The Little Foxes-I thought his criticism of that was sentimental and childish, and to class one of the best films that have appeared in years as "B" was lousy. I nearly wrote about that but refrained; but now I can’t refrain any longer, having just read the criticism of 49th Parallel. May I say at once that I think it’s the only decent propaganda film I have ever seen and, for once, I felt quite proud of belonging to a country that could produce such an adult and intelligent piece of war propaganda? As for all that idea of being in sympathy with the six hunted, I don’t think it would ever occur to nine people out of ten. Why shouldn’t the Nazis be shown as fanatical, courageous, selfless, and devoted to a cause? They are so, many of them, although their cause is an unworthy one. The film also showed them as being completely nitwitted, impervious to ideas, boorish, and wantonly cruel-the attack on the Eskimo and the devilish shooting of the backsliding boy in the German settlement were surely enough to show this. Surely the contrast between the two types of Germans and Anton Walbrook’s speech to the Nazi lieutenant in front of the whole assembly of Hutterites was first-class propaganda of exactly the right kind-true and noble and unmarred by any kind of ranting or chauvinism. The whole episode of the Hutterites was, to my mind, faultless. Then the other episodes-surely the showing of the intellectual was correct? Such types do go into action when they are sufficiently moved, as witness the type of man who fought in Spain----I mean certain of the volunteers from England, America, and other countries. Men like André Malraux, Stephen Spender, David Hayden-Guest. They would not find it odd to go camping with favourite books and a picture or two — the choosing of Picasso and Thomas Mann was surely deliberate, as ‘these two have been especially the victims of the Nazi anti-culture witch hunt. At a time when the Nazi contempt for art and the intellect has spread to other countries outside of Germany, and is in especially great danger in the Anglo-Saxon countries (always inclined to Philistinism), this episode should have very great value indeed. The French Canadian and Raymond Massey episodes also gave good propa-ganda-Raymond Massey’s little speech defining just what he understood by a democratic government — one you could curse at as much as you liked — was surely a gem and would find an echo in thousands of "man in the street" hearts. I agree with "G.M." entirely about the ending — the last survivor should have been allowed to get away (may I say in the true British sporting spiriteasy to laugh at but with much underlying good in it). That was a flaw. Also one might criticise the scene where the sheriff incites everyone in the crowd at Banff to look at his neighbour and see |if the Germans were not among the

crowd, This might rouse people to suspicion of their neighbours, and people are already too easily aroused in this direction. But these are small flaws in an excellent whole. If people do, as "G.M." suggests, find their sympathies on the side of the Nazis ~-I mean their real sympathies, not just a passing feeling of pity for their long tramp, and so on-then all I can say is that such people have mentalities which secretly worship violence, brute forcemen more like trained beasts than rational thinking human beings-after all, animals can also show ruthless courage, fanatical devotion, and what not. I submit that the contrast between this kind of blind, unworthy courage and the kind of courage that is based on understanding and reason came out very well in this film — Laurence Olivier’s action, for instance, and Leslie Howard who, after all, did go after his man unarmed (a bit unrealistic that, perhaps, but still he did). Contrast that with the action of those two men who stayed to help a man put a tyre on his car and cold-bloodedly biffed him on the headkilled him probably. I feel very strongly about propaganda in general and propaganda films in particular, and I was so agreeably surprised at the quality of the propaganda in this particular film that I am dismayed. at your review. For once I think a British propaganda film should have had a real 100 per- cent leg-up — and you have given it a good slating! Well, it can’t be helped-forgive this long letter and thank you very much for a series of interesting, well-worth-read-ing film reviews.

MRS. R.

S.

(Auckland).