Mission to Moscow
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Mission to Moscow | |
|---|---|
| Directed by | Michael Curtiz |
| Produced by | Robert Buckner Jack L. Warner (exec.) |
| Written by | Joseph E. Davies (book) Howard Koch (screenplay) |
| Starring | Walter Huston Ann Harding Oskar Homolka |
| Music by | Max Steiner |
| Cinematography | Bert Glennon |
| Distributed by | Warner Brothers |
| Release date(s) |  United States May 22, 1943 |
| Running time | 124 minutes |
| Country | United States |
| Language | English |
| IMDb profile | |
Mission to Moscow is a 1943 war film directed by Michael Curtiz from a screen play by Howard Koch based on a book by Ambassador Joseph E. Davies. The movie, starring Walter Huston, was one of the movies famously blacklisted by the House Un-American Activities Committee. It chronicles the experiences of an American ambassador to the Soviet Union.
Contents |
[edit] Production
Mission to Moscow was scored by Max Steiner, with cinematography by Bert Glennon. The picture was produced and distributed by Warner Brothers. Ambassador Davies introduces the film; his part is played by Walter Huston. Ann Harding plays Marjorie Davies, Gene Lockhart is Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov, Henry Daniell his German counterpart, Joachim von Ribbentrop, and Dudley Field Malone plays British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. Most parts, bar those of Davies' family, are taken by character actors who look like the famous politicians they are representing.
[edit] Plot
The movie chronicles Ambassador Davies' impressions of the Soviet Union, his meetings with Stalin, and his overall opinion of the Soviet Union and its ties with the United States. It is made in faux-documentary style, beginning with Davies meeting with President Franklin D. Roosevelt to discuss his new appointment as United States ambassador to the Soviet Union. It continues to show the Davies' family's trip by boat to Moscow, with stops in Europe. While in Moscow, the movie alternates between Davies' interpretations with Russian politics and communism and his family's impressions of Russian life. It includes a memorable scene with Mrs. Davies at a Russian department store. The movie gives Davies' perspective on various points in Soviet history. It begins with the real Ambassador Davies stating, while seated in an armchair “No leaders of a nation have been so misrepresented and misunderstood as those in the Soviet government during those critical years between the two world wars.”[1] The film then cuts to the film Davies and begins its narrative. The voice-overs continue throughout the film, interspersing storyline with Davies' opinions. The basis of the film's narrative focuses on the journey of Davies and his family. First, their physical journey from the United States to the Soviet Union. And, second, their less tangible journey from skeptics of communism and the Soviet Union into converts and enthusiasts. The narrative of the movie and the book are almost identical.
[edit] The Book
Joseph E. Davies, a supporter of Franklin D. Roosevelt and the husband of heiress Majorie Merriweather Post, was rewarded for his campaign contributions with a post as the United States ambassador to the Soviet Union (1936-1938). It was commonly believed that his rich wife's fascination with Catherine the Great motivated this appointment. Davies wrote a memoir about his stint as ambassador in 1941. This book is the basis for the film Mission to Moscow. The storylines of both the book and movie are practically identical. This said, the movie uses cinematic techniques to overstate and even change some controversial points from the book.
[edit] American-Soviet Relations (1917-1942)
Americans of the early 20th century saw socialism as a threat to democracy.The bloody Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 and the news of Stalin’s purges in the late 1930s ensured that Americans maintained an attitude of distrust towards the Soviet Union in the time leading up to World War II. In June of 1942, only 41% of Americans thought that the Soviet Union would be trustworthy after victory. This was drastically lower than the percentages of those who trusted Great Britain and China: 72% and 88% respectively.[2]
Although the United States officially recognized the post-revolution Soviet Union in 1933, Americans of the early 20th century still saw socialism as a threat to democracy. The bloody Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 and the news of Stalin’s purges in the late 1930s ensured that Americans maintained an attitude of distrust towards the Soviet Union in the time leading up to World War II. Although there was little actual animosity between the United States and the Soviet Union, there was a mutual distrust and fear between the two. Moreover, Stalin’s non-aggression pact with the Nazis in August of 1939 and with the Japanese in April 1941 aggravated the deteriorating relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union. While Nazi Germany was the primary target of American anger and fear because of their attempts at world conquest, the Soviet Union was not far behind.
This historical animosity became a problem when, in June of 1941, American and Soviet interests merged with Hitler’s attack on Russia. The United States was a staunch ally of Great Britain and their international interests were often similar.[3] Thus, the United States benefited from and supported any fight distracting Hitler from Britain. President Roosevelt, voicing a common opinion of the time, predicted that the Russo-German conflict would, “mean the liberation of Europe from Nazi domination.”[4] Although this did not happen, Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor quickly forced the United States to abandon any thoughts of continued isolationism. Roosevelt’s declaration of war on Japan on December 8, 1941, closely followed by Hitler declaration of war on the United States on December 11, 1941, allied the Soviet Union and the United States. Both were now fighting against the Germans. The United States was about to go to war and popular support for an alliance with the Soviet Union was essential yet elusive. It was at this time that Warner Brothers decided to turn Mission to Moscow, a best-selling memoir of Davies’, into a film.
[edit] Pro-Soviet Film Propaganda and the OWI
It was this time, the early 1940s, when FDR and the United States government developed a policy of alliance with the USSR. However, it was necessary to persuade the American public that the Soviet Union and Stalin were benign. American film producers readily capitalized on the American public's interest in the Soviet Union and the government's desire for pro-Soviet media, with several films describing the Soviet Union favorably. These films included: MGM’s Song of Russia (1944), United Artists’ Three Russian Girls (1943), Columbia’s Boy from Stalingrad (1943) and, of course, Mission to Moscow (1943).
Mission to Moscow was unique. It was the first pro-Soviet film of its time and set the precedent for the others. Additionally, it was created with unprecedented involvement from FDR. FDR generally left propaganda to his propaganda office, the OWI (Office of Wartime Information). Yet, because of his friendship with Davies and the importance of having the American people back an alliance with the Soviet Union, it was FDR himself who was involved in approving the creation of Mission to Moscow, the film. FDR and Davies even met several times (Jul, Oct, and Nov of 1942 and March of 1943) during production and had discussed the progress of the film.[5]
[edit] FDR and the Historical Accuracy of Mission to Moscow
Roosevelt’s involvement in Mission to Moscow is also telling given the falsification of history present in the movie. The representations in the film of Stalin’s purges, of the Nazi-Soviet non-aggression pact, and of Stalin’s invasion of Finland were all carefully considered to promote and explain the United States war effort. The portrayals of such events, specifically the guilt of those involved in the purges, were ambiguous in the book Mission to Moscow. Yet the final screenplay of Mission to Moscow painted the defendants as undeniably guilty. It also showed the purges as an attempt by Stalin to rid his country of pro-German fifth columnists, as opposed to the annihilation of political competition by Stalin that they are now acknowledged to have been. The cinematic Davies confidently proclaims at the end of the trail scene: “Based on twenty years’ trial practice, I’d be inclined to believe these confessions.”[6]
[edit] Reception:United States
Mission to Moscow was not a commercial success. Although Warner Brothers spent $250,000 advertising the film before its release on April 30, 1943, the company lost around $600,000 on the film.[7] A complete critical failure as well, Mission to Moscow aroused anger in a public that, although wanting to win the war, was not ready to accept a glorification of Stalin.
Interestingly, the book, which was remarkably pro-Soviet for its time, was a critical and commercial success; 700,000 copies were sold and it was translated into thirteen different languages.[8] Just as overly didactic World War I propaganda had produced a backlash from the American people, Mission to Moscow, the film, irked critics and intellectuals who saw the films as an attack on, “the very foundations of freedom.”[9]
[edit] Awards
Mission to Moscow was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Art Direction-Interior Decoration in a Black-and-White film.
[edit] Reception:Soviet Union
Just as the citizens of the United States of America were not ready to let go of their distrust of the Soviet Union and the rather elusive difference between Hitler’s fascist totalitarianism and Stalin’s communism, Stalin was not ready to trust America as an ally. Although cooperation made sense, given that both countries were fighting the Germans, Stalin had to be convinced that allying himself with the Big Three would be beneficial to his country. Mission to Moscow seemed to be a perfect means of persuasion. Stalin had a predisposition towards film, especially pro-Soviet propaganda.[10] Therefore, the knowledge that Mission to Moscow was being shown across America would, Roosevelt hoped, convince Stalin of the Big Three’s newly minted pro-Soviet attitude. Thus began Davies' second mission to Moscow; in May of 1943 he was ordered by Roosevelt to show the film to Stalin. This marks one of the first instances of the use of film as a means of diplomatic soft power.
The first Hollywood film shown to the Soviet public, Mission to Moscow was perhaps most influential there. While serving as an explanation for and approval of Stalin’s policies to the Soviet people, Mission to Moscow also exposed Russians to life beyond the Soviet Union. It showed the glitz and glam of America and, in its obviously false portrayal of a delightful, department store-filled Moscow, highlighted the reality most Russians were living in. Although pro-communist and pro-Stalin, Mission to Moscow provided Russians with a view of capitalism and democracy.
[edit] Beyond World War II
The House Un-American Activities Committee would later cite Mission to Moscow as one of the three noted examples of pro-Soviet films made by Hollywood, the other two being RKO's The North Star and MGM's Song of Russia. It was largely responsible for screenwriter Howard Koch being blacklisted by Hollywood studios.[11] At one point Warner Brothers even attempted to destroy all copies of the film.
Although it may currently be difficult to find copies of this film sold in stores, it is still occasionally shown on television channels such as Turner Classic Movies, and is available various places online. Warner Brothers has published its screenplay and Davies' book is easily found.
[edit] References
- ^ Mission to Moscow, produced by Robert Buckner, 123 minutes, Warner Brothers, screenplay by Howard Koch.
- ^ OWI Bureau of Intelligence poll, December 1942, Mission to Moscow files, Warner Brothers Production Files, USC; OWI Bureau of Intelligence, “The American Public Views of Our Russian Ally,” June 10, 1943, box 6, Philleo Nash Papers, Harry S. Truman Library, Independence, Mo, as quoted in Koppes and Black, 193.
- ^ This is not to say that Great Britain and the United States agreed on everything. Colonization was one issue among those on which they differed. However, one can argue that the United States’ interests were more in line with those of Great Britain than those of any other European nation.
- ^ Roosevelt to William D. Leahy, June 26, 1941, FDR: Personal Letters, 1177 as quoted in John Lewis Gaddis, The United States and Origins of the Cold War: 1941-1947 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1972), 5.
- ^ Todd Bennett, “Culture, Power, and Mission to Moscow: Film and Soviet-American Relations during World War II,” The Journal of American History, Vol. 88, No. 2. (Sept., 2001): 495.
- ^ Mission to Moscow, produced by Robert Buckner, 123 minutes, Warner Brothers, screenplay by Howard Koch.
- ^ Todd Bennett, “Culture, Power, and Mission to Moscow: Film and Soviet-American Relations during World War II,” The Journal of American History, Vol. 88, No. 2. (Sept., 2001): 500.
- ^ As cited in Clayton R. Koppes and Gregory D. Black, Hollywood Goes to War: How Politics, Profits and Propaganda Shaped World War II Movies (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987), 190.
- ^ As cited in Clayton R. Koppes and Gregory D. Black, Hollywood Goes to War: How Politics, Profits and Propaganda Shaped World War II Movies (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987), 209.
- ^ Todd Bennett, “Culture, Power, and Mission to Moscow: Film and Soviet-American Relations during World War II,” The Journal of American History, Vol. 88, No. 2. (Sept., 2001): 504-505.
- ^ Mission to Moscow (1943) - Trivia
