Blockade

John Howard Lawson joined the CPUSA in 1934 and announced that he would try to "present the Communist position" in his scripts. On the face of it, he didn't get far in "Blockade", a notoriously timid Spanish Civil War pic released while it was still being fought. Publicity promised that "the story does not attempt to favour any cause"; even the uniforms were ambiguous.

The factions are referred to only as "Them" (invaders) and "Us" (invaded). The casus belli is no more than Their attempt to purloin Our land, a valley near Granada. What ensues is personalised, studio-bound melodrama. Heroic amateur soldier Henry Fonda stiffens his fellow peasants' backs to resist the grab. He woos blonde White Russian adventuress Madeleine Carroll and finally demands foreign intervention in a Chaplinesque harangue to camera: "Where's the conscience of the world?"

It all savours of Hays Office intervention and the anxiety of Lawson's "progressive" producer, Walter Wanger, not to provoke the US public by charging them for a liberal sermon. But "Blockade" may be subtler agitprop than it seems.

By 1938 anybody who read a paper or watched "The March of Time" would infer that Fonda stands for the Republic fending off General Franco's Nazi- and Fascist-backed Nationalists-- not the other way round. And Lawson's emphasis on small farmers guarding their ancestral acreage is just what Stalin ordered. In reality the country round Granada was a hotbed of anarchist schemes for collectivising agriculture, but the Communist line was that the Republic's left-front government, including democratic socialists and liberals, must be sustained till the rebel generals were routed. Only then could land reform be considered; reform under the aegis of a Communist-dominated regime subservient to Moscow, which would nationalise the land, not parcel it out to dubious anarchic types.

Moreover, Lawson must have relished making Carroll's character an exiled daughter of Russia with a crooked anti-Red father, who sees the light in Fonda's arms.

We laugh at movies such as this and "Last Train from Madrid" for their superficial, sentimental view of a burning issue. But what right has today's supposedly more liberated Hollwood to laugh? Where were Vietnam films during the conflict, apart from John Wayne's "Green Berets"? How many Gulf War or Enduring Freedom stories have we seen? How many portrayals of radical Islam, pro or anti? Hollywood is more gutlessly evasive than ever during our dangerous times. Well, export markets provide more of its profit margin than 60 years ago...

Although Blockade managed to get two Academy Award nominations for Best Music Score and Best Original Screenplay, time has not dealt well with the film. For Whom The Bells Toll is a great Hemingway novel and great film made from that novel and it is a far better interpretation of the Spanish Civil War.

Which was still going on when Blockade was made by Walter Wanger in 1938 and released by United Artists. Wanger had under personal contract at the time Henry Fonda whom he had brought to Hollywood to recreate his Broadway starring role in The Farmer Takes A Wife. After that during the Thirties he mostly rented Fonda's services out to the studios until Fonda signed a contract with 20th Century Fox to get to play Tom Joad in The Grapes Of Wrath.

One of the big problems is the casting of Henry Fonda as a Spanish peasant who joins the Republican Army and is the voice of the Spanish proletariat on screen. Fonda is just way too American in his speech to ever be convincing as anything else. As the voice of an American worker, Tom Joad in The Grapes Of Wrath, Fonda was perfect. As a Spaniard he just doesn't cut it. But he was certainly a bigger box office than the guy who should have played the part, Gilbert Roland.

While still just a peasant working his fields before war comes, Fonda meets up with Madeleine Carroll who is a Russian expatriate traveling through Spain to meet her father Vladimir Sokoloff and another family friend John Halliday. She doesn't know it, but the two of them are spies. And she gets roped into their espionage game as well.

The story of the Spanish Civil War is a complex one, but one of the failures of Blockade is that we never get any kind of background. Roughly speaking the bulk of the military staged a coup against the Republic of Spain and in the end which came in 1939, Francisco Franco emerged as a fascist dictator of Spain out of all the generals in revolt. But none of that is explained here in Blockade. All we know is that it's an amorphous 'them' out there making it tough on the peasants who are in fact supporting the constitutional and elected Republic of Spain.

Although the wholesale bombing of civilians had first been done in Ethiopia by the Italians, civilian bombing targets were first done in Europe in the Spanish Civil War. It was new and frightening and widely covered in the domestic and foreign press. The story of Blockade centers around a coastal town in which a relief ship cannot get through. The port may have to be surrendered and with it the whole province. It's what the Nationalists are working for and the Republicans like Fonda trying to prevent, though the names Nationalist and Republican are never used.

John Howard Lawson wrote the original script that got the Academy nod and he was one of the later Hollywood Ten and one who in fact made no bones about his Marxist sympathies. But this film has been so drained of politics that it's almost antiseptic.

I'd say Blockade is one for fans of the leads and an interesting if mediocre way showing how Hollywood handled a burning issue of the time.

The Fonda/Caroll romance is one of the weakest you can see in a thirties film.He seems to appear haphazardly at the most awkward moments.That leads us to a Corneille-like situation:Fonda has killed his love's father.

Politically,the film remains vague,always referring to the enemy as "they" like in Borzage 's 'three comrades" (but that was a great film though).The war was over on the first of March 1939;thus the film ,made in 1938,warns us ,in a clumsy way,that it's only the beginning:propaganda movies can be great,but it takes a strong screenplay (best example:"the mortal storm" Frank Borzage) and not a cat and mouse play between spies ,corrupt officers and profiteers of war.

In consequence ,the best scenes ,IMHO,are those which deal with the masses;the starving faces ,watching the ship sinking down are reminiscent of Eisenstein,whose influence was huge at the time.

I live in Spain now and have nurtured an interest in twentieth century Spanish history, in particular the Spanish Civil War and the rise of the dictator Franco. I was completely unaware of this vintage Hollywood feature made while the war was still raging, starring an emergent Henry Fonda and the already established Madeleine Carroll.

The screenplay, as if you couldn't guess, is by one of the blacklisted Hollywood Ten, John Howard Lawson, who wrote a number of left-leaning works for both the theatre and cinema at this time and I must admit I was surprised to learn that this one was nominated for an Academy Award this particular year.

The story is both simple and contrived. A lowly, young Spanish farmer, Fonda, with his oafish chum encounters Carroll after she crashes her car at breakneck speed on the road where they're walking their cattle. Just as you wouldn't guess Fonda was a native Spaniard from his accent, Carroll we later learn despite her cut-glass English accent is actually a Russian whose father, we learn is aiding the fascist Nationalist forces, presumably at the behest of Stalin.

Then, of a sudden, the Spanish Civil War kicks off with Fonda's character seemingly unaware that it was even in the wind. Sure enough, he enlists on the underdog Republican side, although these descriptive terms are never used in the film and when he discovers Carroll's father's treachery to his country, shoots him dead. You might think that this would be enough to turn her forever against him but you'd be wrong, although initially she of course has to see the error of her ways, even if she seems to have betrayed the starving native Spaniards by passing on intelligence which enables the oppressors to sink each relief ship, bringing in essential food and supplies, attempting to break the imposed blockade.

It sort of all ends up all right in the end thanks to a cunning piece of duplicity by the resistance with Fonda and Carroll now firmly committed to fighting for their poor countrymen, women and children with the last word going to Fonda making a rallying call directly to the viewer for other countries to help his beleaguered nation as they will surely be next to be threatened by the rise of fascism in the west.

I'm all for the political motivations behind the movie which must have taken some bravery for the cast and crew to produce but really it's very heavy-handed in its writing, seems to be directed in a very-slapdash fashion by William Dieterle and is acted over-earnestly by Carroll and in particular Fonda.

I kind of wished the production had instead made the trip to Spain to film at first-hand in documentary fashion the horrors of this terrible war, but lame and stilted as this movie was, its heart at least was in the right place so I'll forgive some of its all too apparent flaws and give it a tacit nod of approval.

To paraphrase the late great Father Coughlin's jibe at the Roosevelt government's provision of "relief that failed to relieve", this inept film on the Spanish Civil War provided propaganda that failed to propagandize. That, at least to this viewer, is the only thought that lingered after suffering through almost 90 minutes of Blockade. I say this with a great deal of reluctance because I have always considered myself a great fan of both the principals of this film, Madeleine Carroll and Henry Fonda, but, alas, not even these two cinematic greats could salvage this bummer. In my quest to apportion blame I suppose the the script writer, a certain John Henry Lawson, is as good a place as any to start. The clunky lines he puts in the mouth of Fonda, a peasant hero of the so-called "republican" cause--particularly his closing monologue--are grounds for confinement in the most austere of labor camps courtesy of his obvious favorite, Comrade Joseph Stalin. I was especially struck by the tepidity of the romantic interludes with the beautiful Carroll, suggesting that a proletarian partisan like Mr. Lawson has little feeling for the more sublime side of human emotions. All of this I could excuse if Blockade offered anything approaching effective political propaganda if that was what it offered; but, at the risk of being tedious, that was precisely where it failed the most.

For political propaganda that both entertains and persuades, let me suggest Casablanca. For political propaganda that offers only a few glimpses of the radiant Madeleine Carroll and nothing more, I recommend Blockade. That, unfortunately, is not enough to salvage this less than scintillating 1930s leftist pap.