The Train (1965)

Sadly Over-hyped

Don't Believe the Hype

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Not being a general fan of war movies, this vintage treasure grabbed me as very special. There's a true story as the backbone but this goes way beyond a procedural recounting of the history, and the drama and acting performances take the centre stage. Lancaster is tough, gritty, embodying the character as the Resistance leader. There as so many great characters and actors and with the astounding special effects of rail yard bombs and screaming steam trains it's all crammed in to this lavish production. The human cost of standing up to the Nazi's is made clear and the heroism of the lowly foot soldiers like station masters and engineers is evident. The writing is impeccable, and there is even a relatively sympathetic characterisation of the nonetheless still brutal German officer. There's jeopardy and death left right and centre, and what I found the crowning achievement is that it's an intelligent film, which even poses the question as to what the point of all the suffering was for, for Art? For French national glory? Indeed what was the point of the war at all, with a poetic final scene.

In August 1944, with Allied forces closing in on Paris, the German forces seize a number of art masterpieces from the Musee du Jeu de Paume and attempt to move them by train to Germany. The officer in charge of the operation, Colonel Franz von Waldheim, orders Paul Labiche, a French railway official, to arrange the shipment. Unknown to the Germans, Labiche is also a member of the Resistance, and Mademoiselle Villard, the curator of the Museum, asks him and his cell to delay the train until Paris has been liberated. At first Labiche is unwilling to help her as this will mean putting human lives at risk for the sake of what he considers "mere paintings", but later changes his mind after Papa Boule, an elderly engine driver, is executed for attempting his own private act of sabotage. (This story is, very loosely, based upon true events).It would appear that the film's original director, Arthur Penn, was sacked and replaced by John Frankenheimer at the behest of by its star Burt Lancaster, who wanted to turn it into more of an action movie, which he felt would do better at the box-office. (Lancaster and Frankenheimer had earlier worked together on "The Birdman of Alcatraz" and "Seven Days in May). As a result, the script was also rewritten. I would not generally approve of this sort of ego-driven string-pulling by movie stars, especially when a director as gifted as Penn is one of its victims, but have to admit that in this particular case it had some interesting consequences. Lancaster certainly got his action sequences, and some of them are spectacular. A train crash was staged using real trains, and an Allied air raid on a rail yard was filmed by blowing up a real rail yard. (The French railway authorities had long wanted to demolish it but had lacked the funds to do so before the film company did the job for them).In the film as originally conceived, Labiche was to have been an art lover, risking his life to save his country's artistic heritage. In the film as actually made he is not particularly interested in art and has never visited the museum to see the pictures which he is now trying to save. He is motivated by, at most, a patriotic view that the Germans should not be allowed to steal anything belonging to the French state. It is Waldheim who is the art lover. This does not mean that he is a "good German". In many ways, especially his cruelty and disregard for human life, he is a typical Nazi. In one respect, however, he is very untypical of the Nazis indeed. The looted art works are all by Impressionist or Post-Impressionist artists like Renoir, Monet, Van Gogh and Cezanne, whom the Nazis despised as degenerate. Waldheim does not despise these artists at all- he loves them with a passion. Although he tries to justify his operation to his superiors in terms of the financial value of the paintings, suggesting that the Germans might use them as a bargaining-chip in peace negotiations, it is clear that he is driven more by his private obsession than by any political or military considerations. His attitude becomes clear in his final arrogant speech to Labiche: "A painting means as much to you as a string of pearls to an ape..... The paintings are mine. They always will be. Beauty belongs to the man who can appreciate it".It seems odd that a film about art should have been made in black-and-white (something fast falling into disuse in the mid-sixties), but I think that Frankenheimer's choice was the right one. We only see the pictures themselves for short periods, and the gritty monochrome photography seems appropriate to the railway stations, marshalling yards, industrial premises and working-class neighbourhoods which form the backdrop to much of the film. One could almost describe it as a kitchen-sink action movie.We cannot know how Penn's projected film might have turned out, but Frankenheimer's is certainly a very good one. At its heart are two excellent performances from Lancaster as Labiche and Paul Scofield as Waldheim. The increase in the number of action sequences does not detract from the film's central moral question; can the preservation of a work of art, however, valuable, justify the loss of a single human life? (This is a question which has once again taken on relevance with the recent deliberate destruction by ISIS and other militant Islamic groups of artworks deemed offensive or un-Islamic). The film also raises a second question: can any moral value be ascribed to the appreciation of great art when a knowledgeable connoisseur like Waldheim can also be an amoral brute? These two questions are probably unanswerable- certainly no definitive answer could ever be given- but that does not mean we should not ask them. "The Train" is a rare example of a wartime adventure which combines action not just with kitchen-sink realism but also with philosophical depth. 8/10 An odd coincidence. I doubt if the use of the name "Waldheim" for the film's villain seemed in any way remarkable in 1964. After, however, subsequent revelations about the wartime career of Kurt Waldheim, the former UN Secretary-General and Austrian President, the scriptwriter seems to have been strangely prescient in choosing that particular surname.

John Frankenheimer directed this masterpiece about the french resistance trying to stop a train loaded with art from leaving. Paris is about to fall probably in only 3 or 4 days. But the Germans have loaded all the best Art on a train bound for Germany. The resistance is asked to stop it.Labiche (Burt Lancaster) is the leader of the resistance at the train yard. He is reluctant to act to save a bunch of pictures. They started out with 18 members, had 4 members in the morning, but is down to 3. Could he really risk the rest on a scheme to save some paintings? The plans and schemes need to be mapped out much better. They need to do some better explanations. But it's Labiche's evolution that's important. Burt Lancaster is a powerful presence, and his acting is top-notched.

Let me begin by saying that I thought this was a very good and interesting film. However, I thought all the train movements in the early part of the film were confusing and didn't add to one understanding the plot. Once the old train engineer is murdered, the plot becomes much more clear, but that's about 40 minutes into the film.I'm not a particular fan of Burt Lancaster...just sort of neutral toward him, but every once in a while one of his films comes along when I can see that he was an extremely talented actor. This is one of those films! None of the other actors stand out, though all do their jobs. It's just that Lancaster's role here is paramount. I should mention, however, Paul Scofield as the German Colonel who is determined to take the paintings to Germany. And Jeanne Moreau as the innkeeper who provides Lancaster with an alibi when they suspect him...although her role is important, but has little screen time. And, Michel Simon as an old train engineer is interesting...although I wondered why so much of his dialog was clearly dubbed.I found the detail in how trains work to be fascinating...and very realistic. It added a great deal to the film. And, usually by the 1960s i say, "Black and white? Why?" But that was quite effective here.Whenever I think of this film, I can't help but also think of Fran Sinatra's "Von Ryan's Express", which came out just one year later. I think it's the better of the two "train-Nazi Germany" pics, in part because Frank Sinatra is so restrained in it. But this film is great in its own right, and despite both films being about trains and Nazi Germany, the plots are completely different.Recommended!