The Last Train from Madrid

Why Hollywood placed a story amid the Spanish Civil War is beyond me. They couldn't commit to either side; consequently, we don't know who is on whose side or what the sides are. Pathetic.

The Loyalists occupy Madrid, but you won't get that from the movie. They surrendered Madrid and the Nationalists won. You won't get that either

The Last Train From Madrid concerns the last train leaving the city before the tracks are destroyed. You need a pass in order to board. And people are desperate to get them.

An incredibly young Anthony Quinn plays Alvarez, who helps a friend, de Soto, to escape capture. De Soto is apparently on the opposite side that Alvarez is supposed to be on. Alvarez is then accused of being a traitor by his superior, Col. Vigo (Lionel Atwill).

De Soto runs to the home of his former lover Carmelita (Dorothy Lamour), only to learn that she is otherwise engaged and not leaving Madrid alone. He then has to find another way to escape.

Cummings plays a young soldier, Ramos, who can't bring himself to execute a man; when he is transferred to the front line, he deserts. Lew Ayres plays a newspaperman who gives a female hitchhiker, Maria (Olympe Bradna) a ride - she's also a deserter. De Soto's pass finally comes from a woman (Karen Morley) who pays a high price for getting him one.

Someone compared this to Grand Hotel. In a way, yes, with a war as the background, albeit a confusing one.

The 56 year old Cecil B. DeMille appeared as an extra in a crowd scene in this film. There were no big names to draw audiences to this film which means that the quick glimpse of DeMille was the only thing to watch in this film. Apart from that, I thought it was a waste of money.

Seeing this film over 75 years after it came out you had to wonder about how Hollywood treated this film as history. During the time we cannot tell who's occupying Madrid and who's being a traitor to who. That word is flung about in The Last Train To Madrid. But if you know nothing about the Spanish Civil War you would not know it was the Loyalists that occupied Madrid. Loyalists/Republicans held the Spanish capital and two years later the surrender of Madrid signaled the end of the War in a Nationalist triumph. Two years after this film was seen by our movie-going public.

In 1936 the war started as a revolt of the army against the duly elected Republican government. It is discussed by historians to this day as to whether they were justified. But they did it and when Lionel Atwill calls Anthony Quinn a traitor I'm not sure who was betraying what. Part of the plot calls for Quinn to aid his old friend Gilbert Roland who's with the other side escape Madrid. But I can only guest that Atwill is part of the army Nationalist Revolt and Quinn has betrayed it and Roland even more so by being loyal to the Spanish Republic.

The Last Train From Madrid has the city besieged and there will be a last train going out before the tracks are destroyed. Passes will be issued on a limited basis and they become as valued as those famous Letters of Transit in Casablanca. The film is the story of those trying to leave Madrid and how successful they are.

A bit of Grand Hotel, a bit of Shanghai Express is the best way to describe this film. It would rate higher with me if it was more explicit.

Before America's involvement in the Second World War, Hollywood's attitudes towards events in Europe were, to say the least, ambiguous… Greed (the fear of losing foreign markets), and the threat of backlash from powerful isolationist groups within the country meant that the films tended to avoid the controversial issues of fascism… Hollywood as a whole – though there were a few dedicated anti-fascists – prided itself on not taking sides…

Two films claiming to be about the Spanish Civil War somehow managed to evade mentioning who the combatants were and what the fighting was about…

'The Last Train From Madrid' is a conventional melodrama about the plight of a group of people waiting to board the last train out of a besieged Madrid… The war has no other function here than to provide the element of suspense… More serious is 'Blockade,'1938 directed by William Dieterle… The film stars Henry Fonda as a Spanish peasant who reluctantly takes arms to defend his country

....who by all accounts was very much like Courtney. According to her daughter, brilliant writer Paula Fox, and her granddaughter writer and therapist Linda Carroll Elsie was a horrible sociopath like person.

With genes like that, add Marlon Brando's peculiar brand of insanity (Love's rumored grandfather) and it explains a lot about the Courtney Love mythology (her mother's memoir describes a surreal Pattry McCormack (The Bad Seed) type of kid.

So am most eager to see if the lead character played by Lamour, offers insights into her psyche.

Okay just saw it and is fascinating. It uses the Raymond Carver (Robert Altman's Short Cuts) utilized tool of inter woven story lines. Very Ship of Fools, Grand Hotel..

Robert Cummings (Love That Bob) as Juan Ramos? Was he Latino?

Many panned this over the years (Graham Greene "The worst movie ever made) but the premise is great and provides fertile ground for exploration of the characters. However it is true the war is simply a plot device and could be any war any time.

I wonder watching it how much Elsie Fox wrote or how much her screenwriter husband, Paul Hervey Fox, contributed. Maybe he did the bulk of it and as Love did what she allegedly did with Cobain's work-- she simply took writing credit. At least he survived the relationship.

Then again, with this literary pedigree (Paula Fox is a genius) maybe Love is more of a heavyweight than I thought.