El Barón Rojo

Despite an ending that can't help but make the viewer feel a little cheated, this film is a success on many levels. Only a little historical inaccuracy, which while certainly not a problem for most films but is almost demanded in a biopic, is a noticeable flaw.

Also, while perhaps not as "gritty" as one would like to see in a modern film, the ambiance of the film feels very "right." The viewer is seldom distracted by the realization that one is seeing CGI. The set decoration and costuming are rich and look accurate. The photography is excellent, although there is some mixing of exposure which is sometimes distracting. There is quite a bit of "floating" camera-work in establishing shots, which adds a little playful interest, almost as if one is watching from a small biplane buzzing through the scene.

The performances are understated, although the dialog does feel a little sparse at times.

Viewers who are hoping to experience another version of the exuberant athleticism of "Flyboys" from the German perspective may be underwhelmed by this film, but I found it most satisfying, especially in its restraint in delivering its anti-war message.

Few days ago I read an interview with Schweighöfer in which he's wondering why "The Red Baron" didn't get any subsidies. "Maybe they didn't like the script". They were right! And I don't think, the script was too controversial... I wish, it'd be. It's a pity that private financed productions like "As far as my feet will carry me" or even Vilsmaier's "Marlene" and now "The Red Baron" have producer's that are obviously willing to make the best movies they can, even without public money. they spent their budget on the cast, effects, good looks but they don't have a clue what to do with their values. They hire authors and directors who turn out to be just unable to cope with their projects. And most of the critics just complain about historical facts... I don't get it. It's a movie! But a badly told one. If you want to make a movie about a world war pilot who tries to be the best, then tell us, how he does it. And not in the main case, how he tries to win a nurse's heart! There are a lot of good love stories around, but THIS is the story of guy who liked to fly and shoot down enemies. If you pick it, stick to it. Don't be ashamed of your choice. It's quite funny to see a few quite impressing battle scenes, but the battles that mattered for the story are simply ignored. They get on the plane. Cut. Hospital. Everything that matters in the story is in the dialogs, not in actions. And even the important dialogs are filmed in cowardly undramatic distant shots... A waste of talent, chances and money.

Is funny how many film nerds take films literally and criticize them, narrow-minded and quick enough. Life is more than just obvious and literal things, so films usually try to show those things in a bit more exaggerate way so people realize how things are or at least, in order to express some idea or feeling. As books, movies sometimes tell about something else, and don't have to have taken literally. Is funny how many historian nerds claim faults in such film or other. Strictly historic accounts would take a unusual long movie to make. Always licenses are taken and some freedom, lyrically too, showed. Sometimes the faults are there, but sometimes too those faults are left aside for being uninteresting in a film making. I really failed to see or read the statement "this is a documentary film", or the like. On medics films, we hear the real medic persons complain about such drug or anesthetic. Come on, don't be so serious, films have to be dynamically paced, regardless its real pace speed. We have metaphors, remember? Boredom kills films more than anything on this world, perhaps.

I went sideways, I know... about the film:

With some lyric and historical licenses, this one adds something not shown before and with objectivity: man is being killed (as today) on both sides of the front, nothing else. Ideals are worthy as long as we keep them alive, even when gone with the idealist himself, or worthless when they die facing some majority "truth". The movie doesn't lack action and earthly brotherhood with your fellow man, or that should be. Has some romance without catchy parts, and have a strange flash in almost all scenes, like a private and intense sense in each of the chronologically arranged cuts. The hard-to-grasp feeling, as for today, of gentlemanly conduct, regarding human life in some circles, and at the same time, the brutal butchery developed along 4 years by both sides of the fence. I guess in ancient times was about same situation, but this time, and from then on, machinery came into scene and that allowed man to kill man quicker, from afar. Also leads us towards the fact that the man really got into flying, a dream long desired, and this flying was perfected through war, the great technology bringer. Enough said, this film worth the watch and have some good moments, as the ambiance is there, and that is more that we can say of many Hollywood, CA productions of late, or before. So long.

I consider this a fun and exciting movie. I knocked it down a little because of the historical inconsistencies, but the tale is well told, the movie does not drag and it was very easy to fall in love with this movie. I only want it released into the United States now. I saw it and fell in love with it.

I think they did a marvelous job of recreating the feel of aerial combat, the uniforms and planes of the time (not to mention the cool automobiles) and I thought the acting was quite good.

Til Schweiger is great as the role of Werner Voss. Lena Heady is a great nurse Kate and Mathias Schweighofer manages to give what I believe is a command performance as a young, idealistic Prussian lad called to war.

I also thought they did a good job of re-creating the Kaiser and his generals. It was so convincing that I almost thought I was seeing Von Hindenberg and the Kaiser in the bunker.

I would have liked to see Boelcke and others in the movie, but maybe you can only do so much in two hours. I watched this fine movie and felt a real kinship with these flying kids. As a part Prussian-American, it was easy to identify with them.

Well done and well worth watching.

The real Von Richthofen story is one which needed no embellishment or silly and false added padding to have the makings of a great movie. Sadly, the writers of this military melodrama had an agenda and used Von Richthofen's fame to try and sell it. A German written film, it clearly demonstrates just how far the Germans as a people have truly changed in their attitudes towards the military and war. To use Von Richthofen, one of their greatest national heroes, as a vessel to literally preach anti-war sentiment was a crime against the man, his ideals, his way of life and the legacy he left to history.

The film itself is visually pleasing and has some wonderful sets and scenes that are well choreographed, acted and filmed. To be honest, if one were to watch this film without any sound it would be much more enjoyable. It's really only the script that falls painfully and pathetically flat.

The mock-up aircraft and replicas used for the ground and airfield backgrounds are stunning and realistic (even if some are inaccurately painted). For any aviation or military history buff, they alone are well worth watching the movie for. Overall, the most interesting and pertinent aspects of Von Richthofen's flying career are glossed over in barely noticed passing or ignored entirely. Unless you are acquainted with his history in detail, some of those small nods to reality will be missed or misunderstood by the casual viewer. Major Lanoe Hawker screaming like a mad banshee in battle is an appalling treatment of that beloved and gentlemanly British officer. What were the writers and director thinking???

The CGI (Computer Generated Imagery) is solid, though the planes fly too fast and make many maneuvers which are far from the flight physics reality of the time. As is often the case with CGI, the artists/designers and CGI directors go way overboard in the number of objects depicted on the screen. Far too many planes and observation balloons are involved in the overly busy battle scenes. When will they learn that more is not better?

The acting is for the most part by relative unknowns, at least in the USA, Joseph Finnes being the lone exception. Regardless, most of the actors truly shine despite the dismal script they had to work from. Matthias Schweighofer, who plays Baron Manfred Von Richthofen, is literally perfect for the part and plays it very, very well, again despite the horrible script he was forced to impart. Regardless of that scripts bile and drivel, he does an outstanding job delivering it. What he could have done with a real script of Von Richthofen's life would have been a film masterpiece. Sadly, we'll never know. The other pilots of his Squadron (Jasta) also come through the awful script with flying colors (pun intended). Voss, Wolff and the others all give strong, if undeveloped, supporting performances. The character of nurse and Von Richtofen's movie love interest, Kate Otersdorf, is wildly over blown and is included only as another vessel for the writers to push their anti-war message. Very few Von Richtofen biographies give any women in his life more than a passing mention. Here she is simply a brutally abused and excessively used plot device. Once again, the writers fail the real and much more interesting story by inventing one to suit their agenda.

I was initially going to give this film 6 out of 10 stars. Then a later scene in which nurse Otersdorf lectures Von Richthofen in a field hospital on morals and class distinction assaulted my ears. Somebody please get an axe so this film can be edited properly... 10 Stars for appearance/cinematography, acting and the planes. Unfortunately, minus 6 Stars for the pretentious idiots who thought they were film writers.

In short, if your going to do a significant film about a historical figure and time period, use the social attitudes of the time. Use the facts and tell it as it was. Don't turn history inside out to prove some currently popular social attitude. That isn't history. It's a travesty and a tragic disservice to the truth and the memory of those who made that history.