Skip to main content

The Winds Of War--My Thoughts

 Much like the two notable works of le Carre in the so-called "Karla Trilogy," Herman Wouk's "The Winds Of War" and "War And Remembrance" were made into celebrated miniseries that aired on TV. Also like the George Smiley stories, Wouk's televised adaptations are now barely distinguishable from the books he wrote.

Robert Mitchum gives a masterclass in minimalist acting that perfectly captures "Pug" Henry as written. Polly Bergen must have understood the frivolous and irritable Rhoda Henry, because she's expertly unlikable. There was a lot of criticism of the casting choices, because the actors were much older than their characters in general. However, I think it works, because young people of these generations were more mature than people of 1983, or of young people today.

I actively dislike Natalie Jastrow, but this testifies to how good Ali MacGraw was. On the one hand, Byron Henry is a loafer and a bum, so he deserves Natalie, good and bad. But Jan-Michael Vincent was also able to convey his imperfect but real similarity to the heroic Pug, with the internal conflict of admiration and resentment. Ben Murphy's portrayal of Warren Henry is spot-on, with the only weakness that it was impossible to show the character's sexual incontinence on network TV.

And then there's FDR, played by Ralph Bellamy. He's shown more likable and downright heroic than the president probably deserves, but beating back the gravest tyrannies the world has ever known will gain some free passes with most people.

I have to turn to Wouk's portrayal of The Holocaust/Shoah. Many interviews establish that these horrific crimes of the Third Reich inspired Wouk to tell the story. He believed that his primary task as a writer was to tell the true story of Hitler's Germany. He does it well, without it being didactic, cloying, or manipulative. Other more famous films can't say this. To be frank, I saw Schindler's List once, and I have no desire to see it again.

I don't agree that Wouk's characters only exist to serve the history; they seem real enough to me. The characters aren't swallowed by the events through which they live. The things they say and do might be things we'd say and do, if we lived during World War 2.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Dear Alyse

 Today, you’re 35. Or at least you would be, in this place. You probably know this, but we’re OK. Not great, but OK. We know you wouldn’t want us moping around and weeping all the time. We try not to. Actually, I guess part of the problem is that you didn’t know how much we loved you. And that you didn’t know how to love yourself. I hope you have gotten to Love by now. Not a place, but fills everything in every way. I’m not Him, but he probably said, “Dear daughter/sister, you have been terribly hard on yourself. Rest now, and be at peace.” Anyway, teaching is going well, and I tell the kids all about you. They all say you are pretty. I usually can keep the boys from saying something gross for a few seconds. Mom and I are going to the game tonight. And like 6 more times, before I go back to South Carolina. I have seen Nicky twice, but I myself haven’t seen your younger kids. Bob took pictures of the day we said goodbye, and we did a family picture at the Abbey. I literally almost a...
Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

A Friend I Once Had, And The Dogmatic Principle

 I once had a friend, a dear friend, who helped me with personal care needs in college. Reformed Presbyterian to the core. When I was a Reformed Presbyterian, I visited their church many times. We were close. I still consider his siblings my friends. (And siblings in the Lord.) Nevertheless, when I began to consider the claims of the Catholic Church to be the Church Christ founded, he took me out to breakfast. He implied--but never quite stated--that we would not be brothers, if I sought full communion with the Catholic Church. That came true; a couple years later, I called him on his birthday, as I'd done every year for close to ten of them. He didn't recognize my number, and it was the most strained, awkward phone call I have ever had. We haven't spoken since. We were close enough that I attended the rehearsal dinner for his wedding. His wife's uncle is a Catholic priest. I remember reading a blog post of theirs, that early in their relationship, she told him of the p...