Logan G (25 May 2012)

Tom Cruise a Nazi?

Tom Cruise a Nazi? In this film Tom Cruise plays Colonel Claus VonStauffenberg as a member of the Nazi party who tries to kill Hitler andend World War II with his fellow conspirators. Obviously he failsbecause we all know Hitler didn't get assassinated but during the wholemovie you are pondering how he fails and that is the only reason whythis film is somewhat interesting. This is the only film that you mayknow nothing about but still know how it's going to end. Bryan Singer,who made the only good "X-Men" films, does a good job by making a filmseem like there is a lot of action in it but realistically it's just abunch of close-ups of Tom Cruise looking constipated. Mr. Singer didn'tcast Mr. Cruise for his acting ability but rather for his presence orquite simply his star power. This was supposed to be Tom Cruise'scomeback movie after the commercial failure of "Mission Impossible 3".At best, this movie achieved lukewarm reviews from critics to audiencealike. Watching this movie you realize why Tom Cruise is an action starand not known for his dramatic performances even though he had a few.Tom Cruise may look just like the person he is playing but you got towonder if this film could have been better if anyone else played hisrole, for example Leo? The whole supporting cast effortlessly out actsMr. Cruise and it's almost embarrassing for him because he seems to betrying so hard. All in all it' s a decent film if there is nothing elseat the video store and I feel lucky that I didn't spend more than 3dollars on it by going to the theater. 3 out of 5 starsCool factor: NazisLame Factor: Hardly any action in what appeared to be an action movie.

Ram Logan (25 May 2012)

Engrossing political thriller

It was heartening to know that this was based on a True Story. Good toknow even under Hitler's rule, people had the courage to stand up forwhat was right. So thanks to Tom Cruise and Bryan Singer for lettingthe world know about such people and their efforts.The movie was well made and had some great acting. As mentioned by theother IMDb reviewers, the supporting cast had done their job toperfection.But on the flip side, there were just too many characters in the movieand all with some significance. So you had to stay alert at all timesin the movie and not miss a single sequence. The other drawback I hadwas that the very essence of the movie (suspense) was lost even beforeit began. Since everyone knows its a failed assassination plot, whatwas I waiting for in the Climax? So while I empathized with them Icouldn't root for the protagonists.But all in all, it was a good drama and should find something in theAcademy awards this year! 8/10

galahad58-1 (21 May 2012)

Nicely Done

Valkyrie is a very good movie. The acting is beyond what the audienceusually gets in today's movies, the direction is well done, and thescript is well written. Tom Cruise is surprisingly very good in themovie. He is very convincing and actually has a strong screen presence.Valkyrie is a movie that he was made to be in. Kenneth Branagh also hasa strong presence, but he is used very sparingly. Bill Nighy is as goodas he usually is in every role he takes. Terence Stamp is marvelous.Tom Wilkinson is extremely good. The entire movie is well done andworth watching. It is an interesting story about true events that iswell told.

(21 May 2012)

Operation Walkyrie

"This motion picture is based on actual historical events and public records. Certain dialogue, events and characters were created or combined for the purpose of dramatization. Similarly, the chronology of some events has been compressed and/or edited for the purpose of clarity."The scene of the German 10th Panzer Division was shot in Victorville California, in the high desert near the U.S. NTC (National Training Center.) I was a tank mechanic there for a while in the Reserves.We all know that Tom Cruise is in the film but it is interesting to see how many other actors you recognize. See if you can spot Halina Reijn when she is all buttoned up. You will also notice that the music pays a character in the film. Occasionally the sound drowned out the dialog (a common movie mistake.)Lots of color and no lame ersatz German accents.Basic story is this is the last of a series of attempts on Hitler by Germans. Each character has a different reason and idea on why. However the bottom line is this is a suspense action movie with the end results of dispatching Hitler.Adolf Hitler, "The Valkyrie; handmaidens of the gods, choosing who will live and who will die, sparing the most heroic from an agonizing death. One cannot understand National Socialism if one does not understand Wagner."Only saw this on Blu-ray so I cannot compare to other presentations.Homemade C-4 A Recipe For Survival

Bill Goodykoontz (20 May 2012)

Director Bryan Singer keeps the pace fast, and although we know the ultimate outcome, it's easy to get caught up in the excitement of what-if thinking.

Cinema_Fan (19 May 2012)

I will give them this: They certainly knew how to (over) throw a party.

We all know that film, in general, has its target audience to appealto, but what I really do find interesting concerning Valkyrie is thatwith the twenty or so people in this particular cinema screening alarge proportion here were aged above sixty-five years of age. It seemsthat this, Valkyrie, appeals to a larger spectrum of age, albeit forreasons known to only the individual cinemagoer: Star-name, action,drama, historical value et al. It seems apparent that this movie hasfar more reaching appeal than first appears. Here we have a film thatcentres on the attempted murder of Adolf Hitler during the latter partof WWII by his own Officers'. While Bryan Singers's film takes its partin this niche of German history, this film does not really carry itselfin the manner of a war film but gives an air of historical drama.This too would apply to the supporting cast. With the internationalfeel of an American Cruise (Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg), theBritish Branagh (Major-General Henning von Tresckow), Nighy (GeneralFriedrich Olbricht), Wilkinson (General Friedrich Fromm), Stamp (LudwigBeck) and Izzard (General Erich Fellgiebel) then there is the GermanDemocratic Republican Kretschmann (Major Otto Ernst Remer), who, whencalled upon, give fine, strong and respectable performances'. Even withthis flavour, the focal point is strongly on the resistance of theseGerman Officers'. The Soldier takes on the might of the domestic germof Hitler's right hand men, repelling Hitler's German NationalSocialist Party black shirted members': the Nazis and his S.S. personalbodyguards' (the paramilitary organization founded in 1925 whoadministrated the use of the Death Camp) and their dishonourableactions which have brought upon the face of Germany through theirgenocides and methods of control shame, disgust and revulsion.Here we have Germanys best, Germanys fighting men, men who have knownat first hand the honour of the battlefield and what it is to makesacrifice for a willing cause, Bryan Singer has given us aninterpretation into the birth, life and death of the 20 July plot of1944. Putting names to faces, even those faces and locations here seenonly for a brief, but important, moment, such as Berlins Police ChiefWolf-Heinrich von Helldorfq and the actual Bendlerstrasse(Bendlerblock) building, used as place of execution of theconspirators.Both Mr. Singer and Mr. Newton Thomas Sigel (cinematographer) givesOperation Walküre (the use of Germanys Reserve Army (Heer), who at atime of national unrest, of any description, would be awoken to quashany sign of rebellion or unrest) an arena of a keen sense of drama andtension. Plotting the death of Adolf Hitler is no after thought. We seea tight band of top ranking Officers believing in a just course, anydoubt, and fear, here is reflected in the eyes of those who try tobetter Germany, and visualising this is only second best to the fraughtrealities and dangers that we see these men re- enact. There is simplyno room for complacency. The risk is too high. Failure is not anoption. The pace is set.The authenticity of its environment in which we are given a firsthandaccount is both charming in its uses of deep focus and a feeling ofdepth and perspective for the eye to muster gives the particularsubjects' here the demeanour of what these men symbolises in bothprestige and heritage and the scope and goals for all concerned.Valkyrie is a tale of pride and honour. We shall possibly never knowthe real men involved here: their politics, their beliefs, their traitsand as the parting of the wave of time may have been distorted or lostforever, it feels and looks all the part an historical document thatmay be taken with a light pinch of salt and enjoyed for what it is. Anexposé of the men who once tried and failed in their part to target, toslay the beast and to finally bring peace to Europe. A fitting stancethat, seemingly, appeals to all spectrum's' ages to appreciate,understand and respect.

Philip French (15 May 2012)

The subject demands to be made as a documentary or in a form more imaginative than a linear narrative.

J Charles (15 May 2012)

much better than expected

I didn't pay much attention when this came out in theatres. Theentertainment media kept calling it a 'troubled' production and therewas the usual skewering of Tom Cruise because of his religion, erraticbehaviour, etc. But if you just put all that nonsense aside and watchthe movie you'll see a well crafted, well acted film.Based on the true story of the German resistance and their lastrecorded attempt to assassinate Adolf Hitler it proves to be quitethrilling. At first the movie seems to be a Tom Cruise vehicle withevery shot highlighting the star's ever move. But as the filmprogresses it becomes more about the plot, the various things that'could' go wrong and did.Kenneth Branagh is hardly in the film but he gets shown in thepromotional posters. He plays his tiny part really well. Watch hisfacial expressions as he sits uncomfortably in the military office,wondering whether or not his secret has been revealed. It's an awesomepiece of acting.Cruise is a lot more limited in his range. You can recognize hisvarious looks from far away including his 'determined' face, his'giving orders' face, and his 'struggling with something' face. Therole allows him to show all that. His performance is adequate but palesnext to his costars.Great pacing, decent plot (surprisingly much of it really happened asit appears in the film) and great performances by all the supportingcast along with a decent performance by Tom Cruise.8/10

(08 May 2012)

Absolutely One of the Worst Movies about the Third Reich Ever!!

I love WWII movies and was looking forward to this one. The supporting cast seemed to be worth the price of admission, but then I hadn't figured on Tom Cruise's performance being one of his worst. He is dreadfully miscast, although I'm sure concessions were made when he came on board. This is a boring, foolish movie: poor script, no direction and incredibly misused talent.Steer clear of Valkyrie and buy Downfall or Conspiracy or even Night of the Generals. There is no excuse for such poor film-making in this day and time.

ruiresende84 (07 May 2012)

illustrations

I didn't find anything here that i wasn't expecting, and nothing iexpected to be here was absent. This is a bad premise to commenting ona movie. The thing is, i don't expect much of Bryan Singer. Yes, hegave us "usual suspects" which has some narrative interest in how theflashbacks are used and in how we redefine all that we'd seen with thefinal twist. But even there the direction was stylish, which means hechose effect over meaning, appearance over flesh. But clearly he is oneof those guys who gets carried away by his immense enthusiasm, but thandoesn't have the brain to bend his emotions to a coherent structure.Like him, so do think most of the common film goers, especially thosewho would flock to a movie like this. So, we have a box office success.But if you want to go further, you'll find very little to interest youhere. The one thing that matters is the story itself. What these guystried to make was big, not because of the act in itself (certainly manyGermans would want to do the same if they could) but because they wereprivileged Germans, who could just play the Nazi game. Of course bythan the end of the war was close and they felt that, so killing Hitlermight also be a way to protect the future of those who were around him.In any case, it was a brave attempt. But that can be told by a simpledocumentary, like the one in the extras of this DVD. The film is a mereillustration of the events. It's like those re enactments of historicalfacts in the History channel docs, with a (much) higher budget. Butapart from that it is pretty useless, except for a minor entertainmentvalue.Well, the writers tried to build on the tension by not allowing us tounderstand or check Hitler after the bomb exploded. That tension ismildly well done, because it elects a narrator, it makes us live thelives of the dissidents. But we knew what had happened, so even thatfails.After the incredible participation of Cruise in Tropic Thunder, i wouldexpect he would keep redeeming his career, but here he goes back to hisusual numb thing. Pity.If you go for "realistic" sets and good illustrations, i think thiswill do it perfectly for you. If not, i think you can skip it.My opinion: 2/5 http://www.7eyes.wordpress.com

tom1111 (05 May 2012)

Solid, simple and precise movie

Having read about this plot in Wikipedia, this is a solid movie. Peoplehave been writing saying this is not good (especially the newspapers)but this is one precise, near shocking, surprising and sometimes sadmovie. This is why I like Bryan Singer in X men and X2, because of hisquality of scenes, simplicity of the scenes and excellent timing.This is a good movie. It doesn't preach, talk a lot, describe, it justgives it to you plainly. It doesn't have a lot of shooting, blood, goreand other propaganda style themes. It is mostly about action, emotionsand just plain despair and horrible realization of the end.This is a great movie. I wouldn't rank it with Saving Private Ryan interms of realism and action, but this is solid work on the coup.Watch it and you may learn something.

Erin Free (04 May 2012)

It's a testament to Christopher McQuarrie's cogent, keenly observed script and Singer's tightly controlled direction that the film remains so utterly compelling.

(01 May 2012)

An Audiophile Viewer

Wonderful film about WW2. Like to see this film with those actors as marshalls from previous film BRIDGE OF REMAGEN, etc. Hope to see more WW2 war scenes as the ace of Tiger Tank commanders should be worth to put on movies.

classicalsteve (01 May 2012)

Failed Heros Recognized: A Tour-de-Force Film About Fallen Heros -- The Film Is Its Own Valkyries, Raising Fallen Heros

The word "Walküre" (aka Valkyrie in English) comes from German composerRichard Wagner's opera "Die Walküre", the third installment of hisfantasy cycle "The Ring of the Nibelung". In Wagner's "The Ring", theValkyries were winged maidens who fly to battlefields to raise fallenheroes and take them to the great sanctuary of Valhalla. Walküre wasalso the code-name for a military operation created by the German-Naziregime to be enacted if Adolf Hitler suddenly died. Although the filmitself refers to the word in the latter sense as a military-coupoperation, the film is also a referendum on the fallen heroes who losttheir lives trying to save Germany. "Valkyrie" the film becomes theValkyries of these fallen heroes.Certainly, when we think of the heroes of World War II, our mindsconjure images of Roosevelt, Churchill, Patton, Eisenhower andMontgomery. But aside from the political leaders and militarycommanders, many civilians and lower-ranking military officers wereinvolved in resistance movements in both France and Germany who wantedHitler stopped. These people, many whose names have been lost tohistory, risked their lives to undermine the German-Nazi Regime thatnot only occupied many European countries but began persecuting andexecuting innocent people. "Valkyrie", starring Tom Cruise in his bestrole since "Jerry Maguire", Kenneth Branaugh ("Henry V" byShakespeare), and a host of notable supporting talent including TerenceStamp (General Zod of "Superman" I and II), and Tom Wilkinson ("MichaelClayton"), documents the last but most elaborate plot to assassinateHitler before Germany and Austria would be devastated by the alliedforces. And also save the remaining lives of people dying inconcentration camps. They wanted to demonstrate that not all Germancitizens, both military and civilian, approved of Hitler's vision ofGermany that included such inhumane intolerance.The assassination and coup attempt was headed by Colonel Claus vonStauffenberg (Cruise), a decorated military officer who was loyal toGermany but detested Hitler's strategy and ultimately his "finalsolution" persecution of innocent civilians. Many of the events asportrayed in the movie actually occurred. When Stauffenberg loses a fewlimbs and an eye after one of his last military campaigns, he isseduced into joining a band of conspirators made up of high-rankingmilitary and civilian personnel. The conspirators simply want toassassinate Hitler, but Stauffenberg points out that an assassinationis not enough. A detailed military coup needs to be enacted, otherwisethe highest-ranking members of the SS would simply take over thegovernment where Hitler left off and continue the dictatorship.Among the many detailed plans in the German Government is an operationknown as Walküre (aka Valkyrie in English), a detailed militarystrategy that outlines how the government would continue in the eventof the death of Adolf Hitler. Since Hitler was absolute dictator duringthe Nazi Regime, there were no constitutional guidelines for successionand/or transfer of power. The conspirators who want to oust Hitlerthrough assassination decide to use the military's own plan to takecontrol of the the government before the SS.The film chronicles the debates between the conspirators, theassassination plan, and then the plan itself. The only minor criticismof the film is occasionally the conspirators are shown discussing theirplots, sometimes only a room away from the Führer himself! Knowing thatconspirators were often plotting, the German-Nazi regime wouldconstantly watch and survey anyone and everyone for even the slightestinkling of disloyalty. Even those who were innocent but did not reportsuspicions quickly enough to authorities could find themselves underarrest. However, at other moments, the conspirators use coded languageto indicate their intentions which seem much more realistic.Overall an outstanding and compelling film that keeps you on the edgeof your seat. One of the best films in recent memory, a tragic buthonorable subject. The film details relatively accurately the actionsof a small group of people willing to risk their lives to stand up toHitler and show the world that not everyone in Germany would kill or bekilled without question or pause. This film is for those people outsidethe allied forces who tried to right a terrible wrong. They lost thecoup and their lives, but ultimately they won.

Mike Dott (30 April 2012)

"Operation Valkyrie Is In Affect"

This movie was entertaining, to say the least. What I've noticed aboutIMDb, is that people are either very harsh, or very easy0going. Itseither a vote of ten, or one. So I'm going to try and tell it as I sawit.The movie's scenes are very pleasing to watch, the Africa scene is pureeye candy, and helps explain Tom Cruises's injuries. Of course, Cruiseplays Claus Von Stauffenberg, a com miter of high traitor. The goodthing about the movie is that, despite the fact you know the ending,your attention is kept, and the suspension is always high!The other night, I was watching a German production called "OperationWalkury". Valkyrie seems to have taken whole chunks of script andscenes from this German production. This was disappointing to see thatHollywood is running out of ideas!All in all, a good movie, suspenseful, and very well acted. Highlyrecommended!

Turfseer (30 April 2012)

Better off as a "Made for TV" movie

First off, I agree with those critics who found Tom Cruise utilizing anAmerican accent while the other actors are all speaking in polishedBritish accents, a big mistake. The film's verisimilitude iscompromised quite a bit by Cruise's inability to convince us that he'struly Klaus von Stauffenberg, a sophisticated Army officer from anaristocratic German family.That said, Valkyrie wasn't as bad as I expected it to be. It'sbasically a by-the-numbers recreation of the last plot to kill Hitler.While it lacks suspense (since the film's climax is a forgoneconclusion) it does ably depict who the players were and how theyconcocted and carried out the failed assassination plot.Valkyrie fails in the area of character development. We never get toknow any of these characters as multi-dimensional human beings.Director Bryan Singer chose to tell his story purely as anaction-adventure movie. On the plus side, the movie looks like it wasfilmed at some of the actual locations especially the scenes shot atthe "Wolf's Lair" which looked pretty realistic.The most objectionable aspect of 'Valkyrie' is elevating vonStauffenberg to hero status. While certainly he was courageous, he wasno hero. Had Germany been winning the war, it's not likely there wouldhave been as many assassination attempts as there were. I find itdifficult to believe that most of the conspirators were primarilymotivated by a moral imperative.Daniel Goldhagen, in his brilliant book "Hitler's WillingExecutioneers--Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust", informs that vonStauffenberg's own brother admitted that in the sphere of internalpolitics, "we had welcomed the basic tenets of National Socialism forthe most part...The concept of race seemed sound and very promising."Their objection was merely that its "implementation was exaggerated andcarried too far". Stauffenberg's uncle, Count Uxkull, stated "We shouldhold on to the concept of race as far as possible." According to Goldhagen, one of the central documents of the resistanceto Hitler, prepared at the beginning of 1943 by leading Protestanttheologians and university professors, explicitly condemned genocidebut still argued that Jews caused trouble for Germany, that a "JewishProblem" existed, that the Jews had harmed Germany and that a"solution" was necessary that would prevent future harm to Germans.Valkyrie might have been better as a 'Made for TV' special. Instead ofspending all that money about a minor footnote in the history of theThird Reich, wouldn't it have been better to focus on the complicity ofthe overwhelming majority of the German people who eitherenthusiastically embraced Hitler or looked the other way as hesuccessfully carried out his nefarious plan of genocide and attempt atworld domination?

rhinocerosfive-1 (28 April 2012)

Bad History Makes Bad Movie. Again.

The British stage raped of its finest performers for a by-the-numbersAmerican film: nothing new, and nothing particularly wrong with iteither. It's nice to see Tom Wilkinson or Tom Hollander or TerenceStamp or Kenneth Cranham or Bill Nighy do anything, and I don't see asmuch London theater as I'd like. And you can't even say that Tom Cruiseis bad in this thing, exactly, since he wisely does absolutely nothingexcept put on a uniform. While I suspect that he did this because hethought wearing jackboots might make him look taller (the scuttlebuttthat he was attracted to the role because he thought he looked likeStauffenberg is amusing, in the sense that one devoted monomaniac wouldprobably recognize himself in another), it is not a self-indulgent orincompetent performance that is the problem this time.It's that the movie has no point. To entertain, a story must must mustbe about something more than its plot. Event has to illustrate theme. Ihave to learn something. JAWS isn't about a shark eating people, it'sabout people taking responsibility for their lives. VALKYRIE is aboutsome Hollywood bigshots hearing a story about people facingresponsibility, then turning it into an episode of MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE.In this movie I learn nothing except a lesson I already learned severalmovies ago: don't let Chris McQuarrie write your movie, and if you do,don't let Bryan Singer direct it. Because you'll end up with, at best,a twisty-turny thrill ride with clever dialog that winds up as empty asa bottle of Bud at a tractor pull; at worst, a straight-aheadsnoozeathon just as meaningless.If I told you the story of Claus von Stauffenberg going from idealisticpatriot to disillusioned warrior to outraged mutineer, you would have achance at seeing a grown-up's vision of the German experience of WorldWar II, a people coming to grips with its own capacity for evil. If yousaw a thriller about a man who tried to assassinate Hitler and failed,losing his life in the process, you would have a chance at beingentertained. But if you see this movie, all you'll get is a series ofopportunities for very good actors to wring their hands and shout, inscenes whose only connection is that they may have happened in reallife in more or less this order. There's nothing new here, norevelation, no greater truth: it's just a thrill machine that neverstarts because the finger that should be pushing the buttons is busydialing room service. I've seen more drama in an hour at thelaundromat.Besides all that is the central bullshit factor. The movie presents itsprotagonist as an anti-barbarian, pro-Semitic, gentleman superpatriotwhose outspoken criticism of Third Reich policies got him relegated toTunisia. The record suggests otherwise. Claus von Stauffenberg had noproblem annexing the Sudetenland and crushing Poland, and hisattachment to the 10th Panzer division was in fact a promotion. Heseems to have believed in Hitler as a positive force for Germany untilGermany began to lose the war, and was repeatedly asked to take part incoup attempts and refused, until his own career was derailed byinjuries.Not that I'm saying the inclusion of any of this would have made abetter movie. That would have required certain directors of comic bookmovies to hire writers who weren't their buddies, and for everybody toface his responsibilities in the manner that Stauffenberg finally did.

(28 April 2012)

Sloppy

This movie was created with a great disregard to historical facts. The acting is horrible. The movie felt like it was made in a matter of days. If you want to learn history, read books. This movie is a farce.

Stefan (25 April 2012)

What is that movie actually about?

I understand, a lot of work has been done on the details, the setting,costumes and props of that movie. Now, attention to all this finedetail is fine and recommendable, but not at the expense of the story.The actual Stauffenberg (and in fact all of the resistance) is notshown here. There is just no representation of the development of theactual resistance in Germany of that time. If you wanted to treat thataccurately, you'd have to look at the broader developments from evenbefore the coup that brought Hitler to power. You'd look at theconspirators of (and at) Kreisau, the White Rose's operations inGermany and parts of the complicated Prussian military.Presenting the case of Stauffenberg without that context - even withall the attention to detail in the setting - is but shallow andmisleading. Is it maybe the very idea of entertainment (and the funnyinfotainment) that gets in the way of actually dealing with seriousquestions?!

dusan-22 (25 April 2012)

Pale

This is a dry and sterile feature filming on one of most interestingevents in WWII and in history of warfare behind the front line. Baddrama composition is worst about this film as plot on killing Hitlersuppose to be pretty dramatic event. There is no character developmentat all and idea that Tom Cruise suppose to play a high rank commanderthat questions his deepest inner thoughts on patriotism and treason iscompletely insane. I believe that Mister Bin would play it better.Generally speaking, film pretty much looks as a cheep copy of goodGerman TV movie "Stauffenberg" from 2004, but can't get close to thatfilm regarding any movie aspect whatsoever. However, movie obviouslygets its financial goal with pop-corn audience that cherishes Hollywoodfast-mood blood and shallow art values.