Il Barone Rosso

it is not exactly the expected historical film. maybe a documentary. far by patriotic enthusiasm - so familiar from American films- , without emotional twists - the tone is almost blank, giving the portrait of a legendary German hero in precise lines. a cold sketch. about the Red Baron and his comrades, his girl friend, humor and passion for its duty. the historical accuracy is far to be the best point but the film gives a realistic portrait . and this is a real precious virtue.

I had the opportunity to see this film yesterday during a pre-screening in hamburg. Technically not yet perfect (in terms of grading, sound design and some effects) we saw the final cut. And I am truly pleasantly surprised. The film being a German production, the lead roles Germans, mixed with an international cast, made me extremely skeptical because - apart from the perfume - I haven't seen a truly convincing German project for a "big film" yet. BUT, this film was really well done. Good performances by all actors throughout, an amazing production design, and - best of all - really astonishing and eye catching visual effects and cgi. The effects were very subtle all over and never really recognizable. That makes good VFX!

The film itself is not a flat action/history flick, it has a message to tell and that comes across really well. The relationship between the baron and his girl is told in a very subtle way, no cheesy romance-scenes. It all happens during WW1, there was simply no time for big emotions. So we don't see a "Pearl Harbour" Hollywood flick, but a picture that shows how it really might have been - flying a plane during war. There are no clichés, just a portrait of a hero that did not even want to be one. And the cruelty and absurdity of war itself, as even the main protagonist has to learn. The ending is also well done and not cheesy or over the top. Apart from that the film did not really grab me, I enjoyed watching but was seldomly thrilled or emotionally moved. Maybe some of the characters were simply a little too flat. Also the film jumps at times and leaves out some interesting battle scenes, I had the impression they did it to keep the VFX work down.. Overall I give it a 6.5/10.

Being a pilot, aviation enthusiast & someone who reads everything I can about the Red Baron and WWI flying in general, I was very excited to hear there was a movie on the cards about him. For 2 years I felt like a child on Christmass eve. I couldn't wait to get my hands on this movie. In spite of the negative reviews I imported the DVD to South Africa at great cost. I was going to see it come hell or high water. I picked it up from the post office, rushed home, popped it in the DVD player and I couldn't believe my eyes. I feel robbed. Utterly robbed! I feel like going to the film makers and forcing them to do it over. I WANT MY RED BARON MOVIE!

All this movie is, is a jump from one dramatic speech to another. And if you want to make a movie with just long dramatic dialog, you need actors who can pull it off. The acting in this movie is as bad as it gets. And the award for worst actor in the movie goes to... (drumroll) Volker Bruch for playing Lothar Von Richthofen! Basically everyone was bad. Mathias Schweighofer, Volker Bruch and Lena Headey tries too hard. They act as if they are acting. Even Joseph Fiennes, who I have a great deal of respect for, couldn't pull it off. Especially the Canadian accent. The only actor who didn't look like he was acting was Til Schweiger, but a 46 year old playing a 20 year old? More on that later.

Acting aside, lets look at the real Manfred Von Richthofen vs the movie one. The real one didn't dream of becoming a pilot as it is told in the movie. He joined the air service, because the cavalry(where he started the war) was fast becoming obsolete. He only wanted to do his part in the war effort. In the movie he loves flying, in real life his aircraft was just a platform for his guns. He didn't do aerobatics and frowned upon pilots(like his brother) who did. He always looked respectable and made other officers button up their tunics if they were undone. In the movie he walks around with unbuttoned tunics and stretched jerseys. He didn't go to whorehouses like in the movie, he didn't shoot down Roy Brown twice, there is no evidence of a relationship between Manfred & Kate Otersdorf that here is the basis of the movie. In the movie Lanoe hawker flies a Bristol fighter, in real life he flew a DH2 in his last dogfight(a machine obsolete by then). And the list goes on.

CG effects. Nicely done, but unrealistic. Af Albatrosses could fly like that they would be shooting down F22's over Afganistan. Those planes were built from wood and fabric and would disintegrate if they were flown like in the move. And it seems the movie makers didn't have the money to do complete dogfight scenes, because a fight just starts, then they jump to a speech again.

The movie also jumps from scene to scene so much, that no one who doesn't know the basic history of the Red Baron would understand what is going on.

What market did they aim for when making this movie? Its not a family movie, its too boring and complicated. Action movie? Not much action. Aviation movie? Not much flying. Biographical film? Too much fiction. Drama? Love story? Yes, but why use the Red Baron to make a love story? Why not cowboys talking to horses or poor coal miners?

What should they have done? They should have told his story. He was a soldier, who wanted to do his part in the war. He was the highest scoring ace of WW1, who awarded himself cups for his victories until Germany ran out of silver.He wanted to be the best. His career was greatly influencedby Oswald Boelce, who is mentioned twice in the movie only. He was there when Boelce died. They should have shown the Boelce/Von Richtoven relationship. Werner Voss a 20 year old pilot(not 46), was his main rival for top ace(and good friend), who died in one of the most impressive dogfights of the war. They should have shown the dogfight. They should have shown the Baron's last flight. They basically took all that was interesting about this man and made sure that it was left out of the movie.

All in all, the writers would have a great career in Soap operas as well as the actors.

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.

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.