Cards on the table the French in World War Two are fascinating not least because they ended up fighting on both sides as well as themselves.
I don’t think any other nation got so twisted up by the global conflict.
And then there is the enduring link that ww2 war films tend to be about how the Americans won the war – not least because they provided the “means” plus they fund so many films but still go to the cinema.
Mind you the French audience failed to appear for this expensive double act. Well initially, in fact this film according to its Wikipedia entry managed the unusual feat of gradually becoming more popular as time passed.
My audience in dear old Blighty amounted to about six of us one lunchtime. It’s a long film – I skipped the Odyssey on that basis although I have no regrets about watching the super long Oppenheimer.
A film about a politician during ww2 is unlikely to gather many punters these days as most films have to be either sugar coated comedies, full on horror or have at least one superhero with powers in it.
De Gaulle is clearly a niche film. But then a niche within a niche?
The film was fine on content – what they left out versus what they chose to focus on. Characters and actors were all ok with me. And that’s the critics point – where’s the “wow” guys: we seriously need entertaining. Why didn’t de Gaulle grow wings or have eye lasers etc.
There were no action sequences calamities unlike Napoleon although no doubt “Frank” will be commenting on fire effectiveness and tank operations – my only real query was the use of a later war tank in the first sequence as we get introduced to de Gaulle who is really a military non entity in 1940 at the sharp end of the Blitzkrieg in northern France.
The pace of the film is constant with no let up but then again no dwelling either. Again probably not what critics like at the cinema – surely this is documentary posing as film they probably cry.
My starting point is I have read the books you see at the top of the post and shown above. Most important is the dull cover – the murder of Marshal Darlan. The author spends a lot of time framing the French North African events through American and to some extent British eyes. And it’s spot on for that.
Charles Whitings Kasserine quite simply is a very accessible read about the American forces first real engagement with the German military machine. It was painful.
De Gaulle obviously talks himself up in his memoirs – who wouldn’t! Yet it is because he is not British or an American that it’s worth the read – you get a different viewpoint.
The Vichy airforce book is a reminder that Vichy France was not a lame duck and carried potency even if it was fortunately not well used against the allies.
So you could say I didn’t need to see a film having read all those books. But a book is not a film nor are either a play. They all offer something different.
My verdict on de Gaulle is it’s a great war film and I look forward to part 2 which apparently already has better ratings.
The Wargaming Erratic 