The film Valkyrie - how close to the truth?

Chat Forum

[closed]

The film Valkyrie - how close to the truth?

63 posts & 28 voices | Started 2 years ago by mastiles_fanylion | Latest reply from hora

Tags:

No tags yet.

Pages: 12 Next »

mastiles_fanylion - Member

Just watched the film and quite enjoyed it (once I got over 'Ze Germans' with English accents). I have quite an active interest in the two World Wars and have read quite a few books about them, but they generally are front-line diaries etc. I am also nearly at the end of Stalingrad by Antony Beevor which I want to finish before starting Berlin (which may answer some of my questions).

But - can anyone tell me if what happened in the film had any bearing on reality and whether they really did nearly overthrow the regime?

Posted 2 years ago #
Jammy111 - Member

they did manage to set a bomb off, hitler was hurt and i think a few generals were killed. not sure if they show it in the film but apparently hitler was only saved due to the placement of the bomb- in relation to him it was behind one of the thick wooden legs of the table, hence he didn't get the full effect of the blast.

Posted 2 years ago #
mastiles_fanylion - Member

not sure if they show it in the film but apparently hitler was only saved due to the placement of the bomb-

They explain it in the film that the meeting was meant to be in a closed room in the Wolf's Liar Bunker, but it was moved to above ground with open windows due to the hot weather so the energy of the blast was dissipated through the windows. They do also show the bag being moved but it isn't clear that was meant to have an effect on the blast.

Posted 2 years ago #
anokdale - Member

Must be some truth in the tale as Hilter was treated for shrapnel wounds to his legs, unfortunately they knew how to build table legs in those days !! Bet he still Sh@t himself though.

Posted 2 years ago #
mcboo - Member

I thought they made a meal of the end, dragged it all out for dramatic effect as you would expect. Apart from that, as per above, they got the details of the plan right as far as I know.

Posted 2 years ago #
mastiles_fanylion - Member

dragged it all out for dramatic effect as you would expect.

Well yeah - that was why I was wondering how close they came to success. A better film than I expected overall.

Posted 2 years ago #
Tiger6791 - Member

Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg didn't sgree with the way Hitler was running the war. (it was starting to look like they may loose) I think had they suceeded they would have carried on with the war. I don't think this come out well in the film and is missed a bit to make them a bit more heroic / appealing to US watchers

Posted 2 years ago #
mcboo - Member

+1 Tiger

The conspiritors were perfectly happy to charge around Europe and N.Africa on tanks as long as the war was going well, proper Nazi's some of them.

Posted 2 years ago #
Practical Matt - Member

This book explains in detail the alternative germany that had been tightly plotted by the generals and it is well worth a read.

http://www.amazon.ca/If-Chance-Military-Turning-Changed/dp/0330492454

Pop fact- the table shielded the blast which was then directed out the windows but it was still benough to blow the Furer's trousers off and out the window

Posted 2 years ago #
Mr Woppit - Member

Plus, of course, he only had one bollock to worry about, apparently...

Posted 2 years ago #
mastiles_fanylion - Member

Is the other in the Albert Hall?

(I always wondered how that song came about)

Posted 2 years ago #
SaxonRider - Member

According to William Shirer in his magesterial 'Rise and Fall of the Third Reich', the case that contained the bomb was moved from the top of the table to underneath, which ended up shielding the Fuhrer.

On a separate note...

To the credit of many of the generals and field marshals, of course some may have wanted to continue with the war. Remember that there were military and political reasons for its origins apart from the Nazi purpose. And besides, they had a noble military tradition to uphold. We might not appreciate militarism, but many would have been appalled to see their country disgraced militarily.

Posted 2 years ago #
Kuco - Member

I watched a documentary on this a few years ago as mentioned above the placement of the bomb and iirc the table was a big thick heavy oak table that took a lot of the blast.

Posted 2 years ago #
nickc - Member

they had a noble military tradition to uphold

Hmmmm, massive slaughter, grief, trauma, horrific injuries, the utter destruction of cities and countries doesn't appear in my dictionary under the word; Noble

Posted 2 years ago #
hora - Member

I must admit. None of them can claim to be noble. As stated in the Fall of Berlin. The Russians noted that there was no German Resistance to national socialism.

I havent seen the film but I hope it doesn't imply that the conspirators found out about the horrors of what the German military were doing and decided to end it?

The nearest to a national 'hero' should be Rudolph Hess surely? and thats tenuous to say the least.

Saying this- there should be distinction between 'hero and bravery'. On the front line there were many brave men on the German side.

Posted 2 years ago #
duckman - Member

The Prussians wanted rid of the "Bohemian Corporal" so they could allow the military elite to run the country again.The bomb was deflected by the table,thought the room was still some mess!

Hitler had the perceived plotters hung by their tiptoes on piano wire,all filmed for his viewing

Posted 2 years ago #
DickBarton - Member

It's got Tom Cruise in it so I reckon it would be safe to say that the fact Germany is at war with the world is correct but the rest of it is done for effect and to make the film 'interesting'...my wife watched it and thought it was good but I can't stomach Cruise so didn't watch it.

Posted 2 years ago #
mastiles_fanylion - Member

the utter destruction of cities

I think 'Bomber' Harris on 'our side' can claim the title for mass destruction of entire (non-campaign specific) cities.

Posted 2 years ago #
tracknicko - Member

it was also featured a bit in Red Dwarf. thus must be true.

Posted 2 years ago #
Geronimo - Member

Beevor's books should be compulsory reading:

"Stalingrad" Is an epic account of a truly horrendous battle.

"Berlin" is quite unpleasant, due to the accounts of atrocity after atrocity carried out by both the Germans and the Red Army in revenge. Heavy going. If anything is going to persuade you that war is futile, this is it.

"D-day" is Fascinating. What stood out to me was the fanaticism of the SS. It sounds trite, but so much destruction could have been avoided if they'd just given up earlier.

Posted 2 years ago #
mastiles_fanylion - Member

This is, for me, the best account of the war I have read...

Posted 2 years ago #
Mr Woppit - Member

The Russians noted that there was no German Resistance to national socialism.

Just for the record...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Rose

Posted 2 years ago #
Pook - Member

I think 'Bomber' Harris on 'our side' can claim the title for mass destruction of entire (non-campaign specific) cities.

You must be referring to Dresden - still one of the most controversial Allied acts of WWII

Posted 2 years ago #
hora - Member

Mr Woppit - Member

The Russians noted that there was no German Resistance to national socialism.

Just for the record...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Rose

Exactly. **** all use.

Posted 2 years ago #
mastiles_fanylion - Member

You must be referring to Dresden - still one of the most controversial Allied acts of WWII

Yes He did like his carpet bombing unfortunately.

Posted 2 years ago #
cranberry - Member

Pook - not just Dresden. as the saying goes "we might have been on the side of the angels, but we were prepared to use the tools of the devil to win".

Hora - there was resistance to the Nazi Party in Germany both within the military and amongst civilians. If you wish to educate yourself I would suggest you read Mr Whoppit's link or watch Sophie Scoll - The Final Days

For the Russians to complain of the lack of resistance in Germany given parallels with their totalitarian state might seem a touch hypocritical.

Posted 2 years ago #
hora - Member

cranberry. It was passive resistance.

If you educate yourself on the days before Hitler took power you will see there was a active cross section of parties (including communist/leftwing parties).

The key word is before.

For all the fault of the Russians. If it wasnt for their involvement we would all be living under a very strange and cruel world now.

Posted 2 years ago #
mtbfix - Member

"D-day" is Fascinating. What stood out to me was the fanaticism of the SS. It sounds trite, but so much destruction could have been avoided if they'd just given up earlier.

It also picks out Monty as a really quite poor military commander who could not make a decision to save his life mainly due to his unwillingness to lose face.

Posted 2 years ago #
AndyP - Member

If it wasnt for their involvement we would all be living under a very strange and cruel world now.

Oh christ. Another Horaism.

Posted 2 years ago #
hora - Member

AndyP. Do you beg to differ? Thought not.

A while ago I found a few Ukrainian film videos on youtube of german remains found in marsh/wetlands. Alot of material in almost complete condition

Posted 2 years ago #
AndyP - Member

yes, I do beg to differ.
Do you have much of a brain? thought not...

Posted 2 years ago #
hora - Member

Explain, how you differ

Posted 2 years ago #
AndyP - Member

Because it's simple logic that you cannot apply what happened in some countries 60+ years ago and assume that nothing would have changed since had one thing been a bit different.

simples. (squeak).

Posted 2 years ago #
hora - Member

Its simplifying: The Russians pinned down and destroyed division after division. Just at the battle for Seelow Heights there are estimates of over 100,000 German dead and they are still finding bones now.

I remember one line(from Stalingrad?) that the Russians fired multiple airburst shells into the trees over the fleeing Germans.

If Hitler had never broken his pact with Stalin he would have had a great deal more manpower etc. Mind you he was crackers for not invading Britain.

Posted 2 years ago #
matthewjb - Member

It also picks out Monty as a really quite poor military commander

Interesting. I've read criticism of him elsewhere (in a fiction book) that mentioned his unwillingness to use the data from Bletchley Park.

Posted 2 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Pages: 12 Next »

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.

Singletrack Mountain Bike Magazine

Chat Forum

The film Valkyrie - how close to the truth?

Topic Closed

Don't miss…

Singletrack

Website & Forums

Exits