Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Victory111

It was a very historically accurate and well-done movie. Cruise was the film’s weakest link, but if his star power gets more people to watch an important movie, then so be it.

Stauffenberg was no doubt a hero, though one would have to acknowledge that, by July, 1944, anyone from the Prussian aristocracy like Stauffenberg would have a huge personal stake in Germany working out some kind of peace arrangement with the USSR. At that time, the Soviet’s Operation Bagration was chewing up German divisions and spitting them out in Poland. The writing was very much on the wall at that point, and it was clear that any Prussian aristocrats wouldn’t fare very well under Soviet rule.


2 posted on 12/29/2008 12:42:33 PM PST by MittFan08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: MittFan08

Stauffenberg was Bavarian, not Prussian.


3 posted on 12/29/2008 12:43:33 PM PST by Philo-Junius (One precedent creates another. They soon accumulate and constitute law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: MittFan08

Overall, I thought the film was tautly paced and well done, and as historically accurate as anything to come out of Hollywood. They even included the fact that Lt von Haeften threw himself in front of Stauffenberg to take the bullets of the firing squad. My biggest gripe with the flick is that they wholly neglected the fact that Stauffenberg’s belief in his Catholic faith was a significant factor in his opposition to Hitler. But I suppose it is asking too much of Hollywood to give ANY credit to a religion that implacably opposes the Holocaust of the unborn.


12 posted on 12/29/2008 4:43:54 PM PST by DMZFrank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson