Review: Valkyrie (2008)

Valkyrie
2008
120 minutes
Rated PG-13

Films that are based on true stories of failure and/or disaster can often make superior suspense yarns than those whose outcome is theoretically unknown. If the film can trick the audience into forgetting that they know the story already, it is a sure sign that all is well. Furthermore, tension can be explicitly built into the foreknowledge of doom, where the suspense comes not from "will it all go wrong?" but rather "how will it all go wrong?"

A bit of plot: Bryan Singer's period suspense tale Valkyrie concerns the last of over a dozen separate plots to assassinate Adolf Hitler during the reign of the Third Reich. The plot that is presented here is unique because it was the only one that specifically dealt with what to do after Der Führer had been killed. Colonel Stauffenberg (Tom Cruise) has just been seriously wounded on the battlefield in Africa near the end of the war. Fed up with Hitler's various tyrannical misdeeds, at the expense of Germany's honor, Stauffenberg soon finds himself aligned with an elite inner circle of trusted Nazi officers who seek a common goal and a common ideology. Together, they hatch a scheme to not only kill Adolph Hitler, but to use an existing contingency plan ('project Valkyrie') to take complete political power in Germany and negotiate an end to the war.

Singer takes this little known piece of history and turns it into a tense, ensemble caper picture. As the plan unfolds, the picture begins to resemble a 1940s version of Mission: Impossible. Like the feature film variation, Tom Cruise plays the 'point man' of sorts, while the supporting cast nervously does their part to ensure the successful treason at work. Since the failure of said plot is a historical given, writers Nathan Alexander and Christopher McQuarrie (the latter teaming with Bryan Singer for the first time since The Usual Suspects) smartly concentrate as much on the aftermath of said plot as the build-up.

While this is certainly a star vehicle for Tom Cruise, the supporting cast of elders gets their moments to shine as well. Kenneth Branagh's initial scene, involving Bill Nighy and a duplicitous case of wine, is a true armrest grabber. Tom Wilkinson shines as a power-hungry commander whose loyalties shift per the given occasion. Terence Stamp has a weary, beaten down sense of foreboding defeat, almost cursing himself for resorting to treason and murder. Carice van Houten appears briefly as Stauffenberg's wife; apparently because Tom Cruise and Bryan Singer liked Paul Verehoeven's Black Book as much as I did. It should be noted that each actor is permitted to speak in his or her natural accent, but it works surprisingly well as you stop noticing after the first five minutes (A la- The Hunt For Red October, Tom Cruise speaks his first several lines in German and then slowly segues into English).

Whether this will be 'Tom Cruise's comeback vehicle' is irrelevant. It is every bit as good as most commercially-minded Tom Cruise pictures (think The Last Samurai or Minority Report) and reminds viewers that, personal issues aside, Cruise is one of the biggest movie stars of the last fifty years for a reason. He is a solid actor, has uncommonly good taste in material, and continues to work with the very best directors possible. It's cool to do so now, but the young Cruise using his star power to work with challenging filmmakers like Martin Scorsese and Oliver Stone was a new or reemerging idea in the 1980s. That he surrounds himself with veteran actors like Stamp and Branagh shows respect for the film as a whole, rather than merely his own screen image (just as casting Phillip Seymour Hoffman as the villain in Mission: Impossible 3, knowing full well that Hoffman would easily steal the movie and the critical huzzahs, shows a certain courage).

Valkyrie just misses out on being a great film (it's no Black Book), but it easily merits mention as a good one. The third act has far too many scenes of nameless troops racing around to apprehend other nameless troops, and the scenes with Cruise and van Houten drag the pace of what should be a tight procedural thriller (more emotional impact is gained from fleeting glimpse of family photos than from any family bonding scenes). But the set pieces are tense and logical, and the story allows Singer to literally use the 'bomb under the table' bit that Hitchcock discussed as an archetypal suspense scenario. Singer and Cruise have made a fine historical pulse racer that is surprisingly satisfying and tense. Before Cruise's 2005 couch-jumping antics, it was taken for granted that a Tom Cruise thriller would be at least this good. Valkyrie is every bit as good as you remember a Tom Cruise movie being, back when you still liked Tom Cruise.

Grade: B

Comments

[Wickowitz]

The problem with the movie is that while Tom Cruise " American down to his tighty whities " and a bunch of Brits do credible jobs in a panoply of high tension roles, its kinda like "The Boot" when it should be "Das Boot". Cruise and his fellow producers clearly figured that British and German accents are equally European to dumb American audiences, especially when the foreigners are led by a Hollywood idol. Sadly it doesn"t work, as the ethos of German militarism and German military honor that animates the story simply rings false when articulated in British and American accents.

Rest of my review at http://www.wikpik.com/movie_reviews/1585-valkyrie

[Melizzy]

I can't watch anything Cruise does without shuddering. What Scientology has done to ruin so many lives is unbelievable. xenu dot net - look for comments by a poster named "blownforgood"

You will shudder too. Scientology is even worse than you think. It's not just alien nonsense. They ruin people. After re-mortgaging their homes, having them get as many credit cards as they can and maxing them out and then paying them less than $2 an hour for slave work so they can "earn" the cost for Scientology courses. And Cruise is the front man. Despicable.

[dtrobert]

What if I've always hated Cruise? Even "Born on the Fourth of July" (Can stand the overacting)? I mean, Tom Cruise has not made a single watchable movie; he even managed to make Stanley Kubrick look bad.

[newdreams]

Tom Cruise has cornered the market on homogenization of mediocre.

[drewziGNY]

His "religion" aside, I've heard mostly mixed reviews about "Valkyrie", it will probably do better at the box office than his last one "Lions and Lambs", but not as good as say...."all the Right Moves", or "Born on the 4th of July" which did good but not blockbuster like his other films

[MagisterLudi]

The movie should've been called "Too Little, Too Late."

[RButler]

I never liked Tom Cruise yet I've watched and enjoyed "A Few Good Men" and "The Firm" many times as they were well done movies. In the last week he's been on Oprah, Letterman and other talk shows and I noticed how uncomfortable and uneasy I was watching the interviews and eventually had to change the channel. There is something not quite right about him. It looks like his interviews require more 'acting' than his movies.

[peachesmahoney]

Not a fan of Cruise or WWII films but this review was insightful and well written. Actually made me kinda want to see it on cable. I said kinda.

[MagisterLudi]

"Not a fan of WWII films"
Maybe because you've never seen "Das Boot" and/or "Ivan's Childhood."

[libbygirl]

Never was a big fan of Tom's but became even less so the last few years. I think this "mind-controling" group (not a religion) he belongs to is dangerous to independent thinking and those who talk out against it. Read "A Piece of Blue Sky".

[lisakaz2]

Maybe there are pinheads who don't actually know the outcome? I dunno. I would be very disgusted but not surprised.

[EngineerBill]

I never stopped liking Tom Cruise. I don't care that he is a Scientologist. I don't care that he had two train wreck TV appearances. Unlike Mel Gibson, he has never (or I should say I haver never heard him) say anything remotely anti-semitic, sexist, anti-gay or racist. A lot of faiths have parts or beliefs that others find objectionable. His religion is his business. I like his movies. He is a good actor. I will look at this movie with an open mind. Why should anybody do otherwise?

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Because his "religion" is a ponzi scheme that has long been destructive of people's lives.

Because the money he makes off of the movie tickets people buy SUPPORT than "religion."

[ThinkForYourself2]

I'm assuming that there are Scientologists who are policemen, firemen, teachers, grocery store clerks etc.. So what's the gameplan on that boycott?

[OrganOfThought]

all religions are ponzi schemes

[josephiatron]

These men were not from 'an elite inner circle of Nozi officers". They were elite army (Wermacht) officers. They may or may not have been members of the Nazi party.

[blindjester]

I need to understand.

Millions used to adore Tom Cruise because he was cool and attractive.

Now millions loathe him because he's hyper and belongs to an unpopular religion.

Same man. Same actor.

Are we Americans the shallowest people on earth?

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Yes we are, but that doesn't mean people don't have good cause to spurn Scientology and their spokesmodels.

[Decipherer]

The noodly goodness of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) commands that we spurn Scientology and their spokesmodels. That's all we need to know.

[losangelian1]

I think a lot of people always disliked Tom Cruise (myself included). I don't find his acting very believable, find his choice of movies safe and boring, and never got the attractive thing.

[Decipherer]

The fact that there is even a discussion of the relative merits or demerits of a person like Tom Cruise, and we've stopped doing other things to consider them, is proof of that premise.

[alsoJonathan]

The answer is in the events of the last few years.

For some, his arrogant and manic actions dispelled that aura of good feeling that had previously made them go out of their way to watch his movies (you could perhaps label those Americans as shallow).

For others, he made himself the poster child for a sinster and harmful organization (whether or not you think that assesment unjustified, those motivations run deeper).

Same actor (which becomes more and more apparent the more movies he does, including this one) but not the same man (or at least the public got to know the one that was already there).

In evaluating his current public standing, here's a litmus test -- do you see anyone protesting John Travolta movies?

[QueenOfViolets]

I don't like Tom Cruise for a very specific reason -- his religion does damage to public health by advising mentally ill people to reject psychiatry and go off their medication.

This advice might work for some mentally ill people, such as people with mild to moderate depression or bipolar disorder -- probably the kind of people who feel helped by Scientology.

The problem is -- Scientology does not limit this advice to those people. People with serious mental illness such as schizophrenia are also hearing his message to go off their meds and see their psychiatrists as abusers rather than caregivers.

When a seriously mentally ill person starts believing Scientology literature, and rejects his or her medication, it can cause terrible tragedies in the families that take care of these people.

The Scientologists are absolutely insensitive to this issue. They do not care. They continue in their efforts to "liberate" all mentally ill people in America from their psychiatric treatment.

Many many people have been affected negatively by this campaign of theirs.

So we are not shallow. We are caring people and we care about the negative influence this religion is having on our ability to care for the seriously mentally ill.

It's ruined Tom's appeal to all Americans who have to deal with mental illness in their families.

And he's never going to get those people back in his corner ever again.

[tomas0808]

Sorry, not buying it. My new criteria for judging movies that has NEVER failed me is if Pete Hammond (dunno who he is, but his name is everywhere) gives a movie a good review you can forget about it. He is clearly a corrupt hack hired by the film makers to give good reviews to movies that otherwise wouldn't get any.

[motoGpifupleez]

I applaud anything that gets todays American to take even the slightest interest in history. Sometimes these movies take pains to be accurate, though more often they totally miss the mark (I'm talking to you Ben Affleck and Pearl Harbor), but at least they put a thought in our heads and maybe, just maybe, a few will become interested enough to dig a little deeper. Everything that happened in our past led us to where we are now and a little understanding of that past allows you to better understand where we are going, that's why so much of the last 20 years has not been as not been such a shock to me. As the great philosopher Sideous once said "Everything is going exactly as I have foreseen".

[Scottydontknow]

Yeah, anyone ever heard of Saving Private Ryan?

[bugsbonzai]

Tom Cruise is an affable, likable, altogether professional guy. He's also the figurehead for a cult that steals tens of thousands of dollars from people in a vicious pyramid scheme and destroys the lives of those who dare blow the whistle on them. So no matter how sweet and charming he is, no matter what he does for charities, no matter the quality of his work, he is tainted by the despicable organization he serves as the de facto public spokesman for. Cruise chooses whom he affiliates with; he has chosen liars and fiends.