La battaglia di Russia

Seven stars. With a little round-up. Because the stuff-blowing-up montages went on too long. Because the stock footage that purported to be of happy workers in Leningrad should have been showing us skeletal stick figures. Because Capra just couldn't help being Capra in those scenes of the people either viewing their destroyed homes and families, or reveling in a faux return to normalcy during Christmas 1943. And because the film so carefully ignored things like the Soviet attacks on Poland and Finland in 1939-40. But worth the round-up because the tactical footage was fantastic. And because the film really did do a good job of showing the "average American" why we were spending so much to arm the Russians. I also liked the dissection of the strategies of the two armies on the Eastern front. These WW2 Hollywood propaganda films are fascinating artifacts. Capra made a bunch of them, without ever getting his hands dirty. I'm happy that a bunch of them have become available for streaming. I hardly ever find anything I want to watch on N3tfl!x's streaming site. So I have to give them props for this film.

2 November 2020.

Comparing it to Capra's Prelude to War, The Battle of Russia doesn't feel quite so in-your-face as a propaganda movie. Some of the same techniques are there, but it feels a little more like it's trying to inform. There is informing and persuasion going on here for sure, but the way it slightly backs off the latter does probably make it a "better" documentary, while also making it feel a little less interesting to try and unpack.

But when considered as something that wanted to look at what had been happening in Russia during World War II, and made while World War II was still going on, it's certainly interesting. It's doubly fascinating to hear an American documentary talk about Soviet Russia in such a positive light (something something, the enemy of my enemy is my friend).

For some reason, I always felt that this front of WWII was always the most horrendous, and this two-parter goes some way to poignantly illustrating that. Using a combination of animated maps and plenty of wartime newsreel, it takes us into the heart of the Soviet Union as the encroaching Nazis crushed all before them. It's striking that though much of Western Europe was industrialised, the population facing this onslaught was a largely agrarian one still using scythes, horse-drawn ploughs and with little access to electricity. Initially, this looks like it's going to be a cake-walk for the invaders, but when they arrive at Stalingrad they find that the population have regrouped and doubled their efforts, in spite of the sub-zero conditions and lack of supplies and ordnance, and together with supplies from the British and the Americans are now starting to make their own presence felt. The second part of this documentary focuses a little more on the fight back and leaves us with some degree of optimism that there might be light at the end of this very, very, long winter. The actuality here is really potent and augmented by a narration that avoids jingoism and sentiment and let's the imagery speak for itself. Sure, it does have a propagandist function to an extent, but when you see the starved bodies of young children, or the raped ones of young women alive and dead, then you don't really need anyone in a sound booth to describe what you can see or what to think about it. It's clearly intended for an American audience and effectively extols that principle that the enemy of my enemy is my friend - regardless of doctrine.

This is the fifth of seven films in the "Why We Fight" series that was directed by Frank Capra. These pictures are documentaries as well as propaganda...with a strong emphasis on propaganda in order to bolster support for the war effort. Of the seven films, perhaps "The Battle of Russia" is the one which emphases propaganda much more than facts. Using selective information, the film makes a strong message--our friends, the Russians, are plucky and will NOT roll over for the invading Germans...and they need our help. To make message, the film strongly emphasizes some facts while ignoring the many bad things about Stalinist Russia...such as repression, the Russia-Germany non-aggression pact and Stalin himself. This isn't too surprising, as Hollywood did an about face with Russia during the war. While pre- war films, such as "Comrad X", made fun of the Soviets and mocked their system, now that they were allies in the war, a new and ridiculously idealistic view of the USSR made its way into movies such as "The North Star". After all...they were now the American's new strange bedfellow. And, it's because of the combinations of truths and many half truths and omissions that the film is only fair despite its strong message.

First of all, this is not a history lesson. This is a film made during the wartime to garner public support for war effort and so whatever propaganda people might complain about is acceptable. Enemy of your enemy is your friend and during WW2, Russia became an ally of allied powers.

The movie talks in details about Russia's rich resources and what would happen to the world of Nazi power got control of it. After that they have taken few big events and given real footage of the battle. The scale of the allied support is captured correctly. The movie takes 50 mins to go over entire 2 and a half year of great struggle so instead of going over every important detail, the director decided to go with the human element of the war. It's more appealing because of it. I hope to see many such movies of how allies worked with each other to dethrone largest military force in human history.