A Besta de Berlim

Despite the Nazis being horrid monsters, this side of Nazi Germany went unnoticed in American films until about 1939. This was for two reasons: Most Americans couldn't have cared less about conditions in Europe and the US Congress enacted legislation to force film studios to remain neutral about the brewing war. Eventually, in 1939 a few studios bravely made anti-Nazi films...but most of the American studios still said nothing--even after the Germans invaded Poland. In fact, American propaganda films on the Nazis really were a very rare thing until the US entered the war in late 1941. So, while "Beast of Berlin" is a pretty cheap little film, it has the distinction of being one of the first anti-Nazi films from the US. And, sadly, the man responsible for the film, according to IMDb, was soon forced out of the studio due to lousy box office returns on this film.

"Beast of Berlin" is based on the assumption that an anti-Hitler underground was alive and well in the country. While this might have been true around 1933-34 when the party took control, soon opposition to the regime virtually disappeared. So, the film centering on the opposition was, in a way, a bit of a myth--there unfortunately wasn't much opposition to him as the film would contend existed in 1938-39.

Among the man folks who work for the underground who eventually are caught and imprisoned is a young Alan Ladd. While he's really not the leading man in the film, he's emblazoned on posters of the film and gets top billing during its re-release due to Ladd becoming a big star in 1942. So, while you'll certainly get a lot of Ladd in the movie, it isn't really a starring vehicle.

In many ways, the film is interesting and worth seeing. Sure, the acting is occasionally uneven and the film could have been better, for Neufeld Productions, it was actually a bit better than usual for them! Certainly, it's not nearly as watchable and well made as other similar contemporary films like "Mortal Storm" and "Confessions of a Nazi Spy". Worth seeing nonetheless.

Alan Ladd heads the players' list, and although his part is minor in the context, he is the one worth following in this film, a bold early effort to sound an alert of things to come by the accelerating threat of Nazi Germany. There were quite a few films like this made for urgent warnings of the rearmament of Germany, and this was one of the first and in many ways prophetic. It clearly states for instance that Hitler's frenzy in rearming Germany and building up an invincible revenge army actually cost Germany its main resources for economical rehabilitation, where the reinforcement should have been, while Hitler instead put it into army force, perhaps his greatest mistake. The script is poor, the characters are all rather stereotypical, while only Alan Ladd adds some interest by his reluctance and hesitation, which he feels will lead him astray which it does. The main character is. Roland Drew as Hans Memling, a communist leading an underground resistance movement mainly by publishing and spreading pamphlets, who's wife is expecting a child. The main story is about them. The Nazis are grossly exaggerated as monstrous bullies long before even the war had begun, but that's the main interest of the film: it was released in America in October 1939 long before there was any general awareness of the coming war, which the film repetitively predicts, or of what Hitler's Germany really was all about. The main credit of this film is the early effort to cry wolf long before anyone in America could even suspect any such thing.

There were films about Hitler later, after this one: HITLER GANG for instance, from director John Farrow, where the Führer's life was shown as a Chicago gang leader story...But it was in 1944, not long before the end of the war. This one is made in 1939, so very early, long before the USA were involved in the conflict. This is surprising to see such a movie speaking of the Nazi regime so strongly and especially the existence of concentration camps; and not EXTERMINATION, which began only in 1942.... But from a poverty row company, PRC, it is even more mind blowing. If it was Warner, or Paramount, I could understand...But a lousy director as Sam Newfield, I still can't believe it. And an early Alan Ladd's character. A real little gem.

Although there had been anti-Nazi propaganda films released before this, all the way back to LITTLE MAN WHAT NOW, this set new records for anti-Nazi propaganda, so much so that it was banned in New York and recut.

How is it as a movie? Well, it's a PRC production, which means that it's done on the cheap and lacks any signs of subtlety. It's of interest these days as an early example of propaganda and an early credited role for Alan Ladd.