July 1, 2007
From Superman to Übermensch Posted by Alexander Burns at 10:35 PM EST When the upcoming United Artists film Valkyrie was announced a few months back, I was thrilled. The subject matter, Claus von Stauffenberg’s plot to kill Hitler, has long struck me as the kind of cloak-and-dagger episode ripe for cinematic interpretation. Valkyrie’s director, Bryan Singer, has distinguished himself in recent years as one of the better architects of big-budget pictures, including The Usual Suspects, X-Men, and Superman Returns. There probably aren’t more than a few people capable of turning this fairly obscure bit of history into a major motion picture, but Singer is certainly one of them. But according to Saturday’s New York Times, he may have a bit of trouble doing so, thanks to his leading man’s religion, and larger disputes about the ownership of the past. Germany’s ministry of defense has been making things difficult for Singer and his crew, denying them filming permits at important locations like the site of Stauffenberg’s execution. The internal dynamics of the ministry’s decisions are a little unclear, but the basic gist of it seems to be that Tom Cruise is not exactly the person German central casting would have chosen to play Stauffenberg. Stauffenberg’s son, Berthold Graf von Stauffenberg, also opposes Cruise’s casting, and tells the Times why in no uncertain terms: “Scientology is a totalitarian ideology. The fact that an avowed Scientologist like Mr. Cruise is supposed to play the victim of a totalitarian regime is purely sick.” The opinion of Stauffenberg fils is expected to be influential with the government officials who will ultimately decide how to treat Singer’s project. This budding standoff over filming rights could be a good case study for a debate on religious freedom. One could discuss whether it is legitimate for Germans to object to Tom Cruise’s casting on the basis of his religion, since they feel his religion embodies politically objectionable ideas. More interesting, though, and more relevant to the subject of this blog, are the questions this situation raises about the artistic representation of history, and about who can rightly try to control that representation. Is it acceptable for the German government to influence Singer’s film in the interests of protecting Stauffenberg’s status as a national hero? How seriously should Valkyrie’s director take Berthold Graf von Stauffenberg’s objections to his casting choices? Should his preferences, as Colonel Stauffenberg’s son, be treated with special sensitivity? Speaking instinctively, my answers to these questions would probably be no, not very much, and no, in that order. While I would personally love to see Tom Cruise booted from this project and replaced by a more talented actor (say, Clive Owen), a director portraying a historical figure of Stauffenberg’s stature has a larger obligation than the one to the character’s family, or even to his country. If Singer thinks Tom Cruise is the actor most able to truthfully portray his protagonist, and the man most capable of participating in an effective assessment of Stauffenberg’s place in history, that should be his decision to make. If Cruise’s acting skills fall short, or if his religious affiliation compromises his effectiveness as an artist, there’s an easy solution to the problem: Make another movie. This whole affair sort of reminds me of the 2003 controversy over CBS’s miniseries The Reagans, in which James Brolin, Barbra Streisand’s husband, was selected to play the Gipper. Conservative outcry over the casting choice, as well as other aspects of the series, led Viacom to relegate it to the premium cable netherworld of Showtime. The objections people raised back in 2003 are similar in some ways to the ones being raised in Germany now: The hero of this film is a national icon, the actor’s beliefs make him unsuitable for the role, the script might compromise this person’s revered place in history, etc. But with Stauffenberg, as with Reagan, these objections are self-defeating. If Stauffenberg, like Reagan, is such a cherished national figure, couldn’t he hypothetically withstand one mediocre portrayal? And in a free country like the United States, or present-day Germany, wouldn’t it be a better demonstration of anti-totalitarianism to support artists you find distasteful, while also producing other art more in line with your own tastes? I hope Valkyrie is a worthwhile movie—but if it isn’t, I expect I won’t have to wait more than a decade or two for a better version.
|
