The World War I aerial-combat drama Von Richtofen and Brown was supposed to
elevate cult-favorite director Roger Corman from the exploitation-flick ghetto
into the mainstream, since it was centered around respectable subject matter and made for a major studio.
Instead, the film completely derailed his directing career, because Corman
walked away from the wreckage of Von
Richtofen and Brown to focus on producing. (In the intervening years, he
has helmed only one more movie, the 1990 dud Frankenstein Unboand.) The parsimonious Corman has admitted he
found the corporate decision-making and economic wastefulness of studio
filmmaking distasteful, but it’s also plain watching Von Richtofen and Brown that Corman was a filmmaker who thrived on
limitations. His best directorial efforts—the funky black-and-white
horror/comedy hybrids of the ’50s, the stylish Edgar Allen Poe adaptations of
the ’60s—excel because small budgets forced Corman to substitute ingenuity and
wit for spectacle.
Throughout Von
Richtofen and Brown, Corman showcases impressive aerial footage of biplanes
engaging in dogfights, but the material doesn’t cut together particularly well.
Breaking his own cardinal rule of collecting only as much footage as is
necessary, Corman accumulated reels upon reels of similar-looking shots that,
when assembled, comprise repetitive and hard-to-follow combat scenes. Worse,
sequences set on terra firma are no better. The movie’s exceedingly weak script
tries to explain how legendary German pilot Baron Manfred von Richtofen (John
Philip Law), better known as “The Red Baron,” rose to prominence and
eventually clashed, fatally, with Canadian pilot Roy Brown (Don Stroud).
Excepting terrific production values, nearly everything in the movie works
against the efficacy of the narrative. Characters are underdeveloped. Key
milestones, such as the awarding of medals, are repeated ad nauseam. Subplots
are abandoned capriciously. And the attempt at contrasting the two main
characters (Brown the crude humanist, von Richtofen the aristocratic hunter)
never gels. Compounding these problems are threadbare performances. Law, the
tall stud from Barbarella (1968)
flattens lines and renders stoic facial expressions. Stroud, a salty character
actor, seems adrift in every scene, as if he received no guidance whatsoever about
the nature of his role.
So, while the movie’s not a disaster by any
stretch—it’s one of Corman’s best-looking films, and every so often a moment
connects the way it should—one can easily see why Von Richtofen and Brown failed to generate any excitement for a new
phase of Corman’s career. Still, it’s hard to call this turn of events a shame,
since Corman had already accomplished so much, and since he spent the ’70s and
’80s training important new directors who made their first movies for Corman’s
New World Pictures. Like von Richtofen, Corman was brought down from the
stratosphere to the earth with his legacy intact.
Von
Richtofen and Brown: FUNKY
3 comments:
Roger Corman's first film for a major studio was The Saint Valentine's Day Massacre, released by 20th Century-Fox in 1967. Here's Roger Ebert's review:
http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-st-valentine-s-day-massacre-1967
Thanks for catching the error, Peter. I'm embarrassed to have let that one slip by, especially since I read Corman's autobiography not that long ago...
A terrible shame that this movie wasted the chance to tell one of the greatest true stories of WWI.
It was the right time for the film to be made, many directors were still adept at handling a large scale war epic, but had more freedom to explore the deeper issues involved. I would have loved a Red Baron movie directed by a true maverick such as Pekinpah, especially if it starred Robert Duvall, who I think would have been perfect for the role.
Post a Comment