The Bridge
3.5/4
Starring: Folker Bohnet, Fritz Wepper, Michael Hinz, Frank Glaubrecht, Karl Michael Balzer, Volker Lechtenbrink, Gunter Hoffmann, Cordula Trantow, Wolfgang Stumpf, Gunter Pfitzmann
Not Rated (probable R for A Scene of Graphic War Violence)
"The Bridge" hits you in the gut. That it, in broadest strokes, doesn't do anything new or that we haven't seen before does little to diminish its effectiveness. Then again, the film was made in 1959, when the horrors of WWII were still fresh in the minds of the world. Not least of all Germany. So. maybe I'm jaded in some sense. Either way, this film is a harrowing experience.
The film follows 7 boys in a small Bavarian town: Hans (Bohnet), Albert (Weooer), Walter (Hinz), Jurgen (Glaubrecht), Karl (Balzer), Klaus (Lechtenbrink), and Sigi (Hoffman). The war is nearing its end, although no one will admit this in public. They are all in school, but are eager to join the fight to varying degrees. That evening they all get their draft notices and are to report to the nearby barracks that next morning.
Watching this film is a mixture of growing horror and dread. Through bad luck, human error and carelessness, these boys are put in a situation that no one thinks they should be in but in which no one notices. Once "The Bridge" enters its final act, one keeps hoping that someone would intervene and wondering why no one does. Had someone bothered to pay attention, much of what happens could have been avoided.
One reason why this film works is because of the way its constructed. The seven boys are seen as a group, not individuals. An American film would have spent time giving each of them their own character arc complete with a problem they must solve by the end. This film doesn't do that. We see a bit of their home lives and get a sense of who they are, but not so much that anyone attains individuality. In most films that would be a detriment, but here it's an asset. By seeing them as a close-knit group rather than individual "characters," we understand two things: one, they are completely out of their element, and two, when something happens to one, it affects them all.
All the performances are effective. No one "acts" or "plays a character," but we see them as normal people. That draws us into the film in a way that just isn't possible with normal filmmaking. In fact, there is a voyeuristic quality to the film's first half that draws us into the film's world in a way that a conventional approach could not. We see a way of life where the war is so far removed that slogans and jingoism still hold sway. Where an unexploded bomb in the river is something to check out with excitement. Sure, the adults understand what war is and what is really going on in the world, but the kids don't.
There is one moment that doesn't work. It may seem like a small thing, but in context it's a big misstep. The actor playing an ill-fated American soldier doesn't do a good job. His big moment is so badly acted that it mutes what should be the film's most harrowing scene. The second, which comes in the film's final frames, also has less of an impact because an event that should have been in close-up is seen in long shot. Dividing the scene into two parts would not have limited its effectiveness. Then again, that's just my opinion and I can understand why director Bernhard Wicki filmed it like he did.
When the film ends, it offers no closure. Realistically speaking, how could there be? I liked that honesty (brutal as it is). It leaves us winded and without comfort. But the ending titles provide the real punch.
"The Bridge" is not easy to watch, but it's good for the soul.
Starring: Folker Bohnet, Fritz Wepper, Michael Hinz, Frank Glaubrecht, Karl Michael Balzer, Volker Lechtenbrink, Gunter Hoffmann, Cordula Trantow, Wolfgang Stumpf, Gunter Pfitzmann
Not Rated (probable R for A Scene of Graphic War Violence)
"The Bridge" hits you in the gut. That it, in broadest strokes, doesn't do anything new or that we haven't seen before does little to diminish its effectiveness. Then again, the film was made in 1959, when the horrors of WWII were still fresh in the minds of the world. Not least of all Germany. So. maybe I'm jaded in some sense. Either way, this film is a harrowing experience.
The film follows 7 boys in a small Bavarian town: Hans (Bohnet), Albert (Weooer), Walter (Hinz), Jurgen (Glaubrecht), Karl (Balzer), Klaus (Lechtenbrink), and Sigi (Hoffman). The war is nearing its end, although no one will admit this in public. They are all in school, but are eager to join the fight to varying degrees. That evening they all get their draft notices and are to report to the nearby barracks that next morning.
Watching this film is a mixture of growing horror and dread. Through bad luck, human error and carelessness, these boys are put in a situation that no one thinks they should be in but in which no one notices. Once "The Bridge" enters its final act, one keeps hoping that someone would intervene and wondering why no one does. Had someone bothered to pay attention, much of what happens could have been avoided.
One reason why this film works is because of the way its constructed. The seven boys are seen as a group, not individuals. An American film would have spent time giving each of them their own character arc complete with a problem they must solve by the end. This film doesn't do that. We see a bit of their home lives and get a sense of who they are, but not so much that anyone attains individuality. In most films that would be a detriment, but here it's an asset. By seeing them as a close-knit group rather than individual "characters," we understand two things: one, they are completely out of their element, and two, when something happens to one, it affects them all.
All the performances are effective. No one "acts" or "plays a character," but we see them as normal people. That draws us into the film in a way that just isn't possible with normal filmmaking. In fact, there is a voyeuristic quality to the film's first half that draws us into the film's world in a way that a conventional approach could not. We see a way of life where the war is so far removed that slogans and jingoism still hold sway. Where an unexploded bomb in the river is something to check out with excitement. Sure, the adults understand what war is and what is really going on in the world, but the kids don't.
There is one moment that doesn't work. It may seem like a small thing, but in context it's a big misstep. The actor playing an ill-fated American soldier doesn't do a good job. His big moment is so badly acted that it mutes what should be the film's most harrowing scene. The second, which comes in the film's final frames, also has less of an impact because an event that should have been in close-up is seen in long shot. Dividing the scene into two parts would not have limited its effectiveness. Then again, that's just my opinion and I can understand why director Bernhard Wicki filmed it like he did.
When the film ends, it offers no closure. Realistically speaking, how could there be? I liked that honesty (brutal as it is). It leaves us winded and without comfort. But the ending titles provide the real punch.
"The Bridge" is not easy to watch, but it's good for the soul.
Comments
Post a Comment