Exclusive“The Red Danube” (1949): Freedom, Faith, and a Choice That Could Change Everything

Can't believe it's been two years already. Two years since what? Since Vladimir Shklyarov died. You mean the famous Russian ballet dancer? Yes. He died? But wasn't he young? Just 39. Well, what happened? Well, shortly before he was scheduled to have back surgery, he fell from the fifth-story balcony of his apartment building. Oh, how awful! But how did that happen? Well, the story is that he was on pain medication and he got dizzy. What do you mean, the story? Don't you think that's what happened? Well, he was very outspokenly against Putin's invasion of Ukraine, and he's not the first Russian person to take a mysterious fall after speaking out against the government recently. You mean things like that still happen? I'm afraid so. Although it's sad to think that things have changed so little since the time of the Red Danube. I'm Tiffany Brannan. I'm Rebecca Brannan. Welcome to Real Thoughts on Cinema. The term the Cold War is most often associated with the tension between the United States and Russia between the 1960s and the 1980s. But it truly started right after World War II. During the late 1940s, Hollywood made several anti-communist pictures as Americans began to be a bit suspicious of Soviet Russia. After the Nazi atrocities of the war, a new hostile movement began with the forced repatriation of Russian citizens. This brutal topic was the subject of the 1949 film The Red Danube. In the days shortly following World War II, British officer Colonel Nicobar, known as Hookie, is assigned to work in Vienna. As the city is divided into several different zones, divided amongst the Allies, it's his job and that of his fellow officers to work in the Russian zone and to help cooperate with the Soviets in their repatriation of their citizens. His right-hand man is his good friend Twingo. And he also has a female officer, Audrey, and the three of them have been a very close team in several cities throughout the war. Hookie is bitter and a bit soured on life. He's a stubborn atheist who lost his arm in the First World War and lost his beloved son in the Second World War, so it's hard for him to believe that there's any kind of merciful higher power. This makes it rather uncomfortable when he and his colleagues are billeted in a convent. There he meets the very strong-minded but passionate Mother Superior. Her faith does little to challenge his disbelief, but gradually their conversations begin to make an impression on his stubborn heart. Meanwhile, Twingo, who is an incurable ladies' man, meets a lovely young Viennese ballerina, Maria. Things become complicated when he realizes she's actually a famous Russian dancer whom the Soviets have asked them repeatedly to return to Russia. The British officers must confront their moral dilemma as they begin to realize that many of these Russian citizens would rather die than return to their homeland. This film was made by MGM. It was produced by Carrie Wilson and directed by George Sidney, and it stars Walter Pidgeon, Peter Lawford, Janet Leigh, Angela Lansbury, and Ethel Barrymore. Now, this movie began as a 1947 book called Vespers in Vienna, and at one point that was the working title of the film. Among about four or five others. They had a lot of options before coming up with The Red Danube, which I think is a good title. Yeah, as a matter of fact, the book was re-released as The Red Danube following the film. True. It was written by Bruce Marshall, and it's really interesting to study a bit about him. He was a very successful writer over the course of several decades, but he put a lot of himself into his books, particularly this one. He also had served in World War I. He was British, and he had lost a limb too, much like Hooky. But he also had been stationed in Vienna during the repatriation, so he had experienced this firsthand. The religious themes came from a place of personal faith for him because he was a Catholic convert as an adult. So that's why he put in these important characters of these nuns. And I think it's really interesting to see how much of himself he put into all of his books. And it took this movie a while to get to the screen because they started it in 1947 with a different cast. Spencer Tracy was in the movie at one point. And St. Charisse was supposed to play the ballerina. That makes a lot of sense. There were several different casts. There were a lot more Americans in some of the earlier versions. But they ended up... Deborah Carr was in the production at one point. But I think the cast they ended up having was really excellent. And it's good that most of the British characters are played by British actors. Of course, Walter Pidgeon was American, but he does a good British accent. Yes. And it really is an all-star cast, comparable to Grand Hotel, if you will. That kind of a bunch of different actors. It's hard to say who the leads are. Perhaps more comparable to Weekend at the Waldorf, which starred Walter Pidgeon. But Janet Leigh is definitely not the first person that would come to mind when thinking of a ballerina. That's right. She's not really known as a dancer. But she does actually dance on point, and she does a good job. This movie is interesting because I think it really challenges your ideas of how early America was suspicious of Russia. Absolutely. Like we were saying, the Cold War is something people talk about a lot. But that was later on, or people like to talk about the McCarthy era in Hollywood, specifically. And this was right at the beginning of that time period. But it was an interesting transition for Hollywood because during the war, when Russia was very actively our ally, there were some pro-Russian films made. Yes, there were. And that became kind of taboo afterwards. And they were like, quick, make some anti-Russian movies. And this one, I think, is very powerful because, like you said, it was taken from a place of this man's real experiences. And I find, across the board, the most powerful stories and the stories that have the most lasting impact usually come from real life. Even if it's not technically non-fiction, if it is a fiction work, it's taken from some kind of personal experience. Right. Now, this is interesting because the officers in it, who are the sympathetic officers, aren't American. They're British. Yes. Which maybe made it a little more palatable to Americans because it's disturbing to see how these very Western officers are helping the Russians with this very cruel repatriation. And this was a real thing that happened. It was called Operation Keelhaul. And it was very controversial and there was a lot of investigation into it. Is this a decent thing to be doing or is it basically just like what the Nazis were doing, forcing people to go where they don't want to go? And one thing that I understood much better after reading about the book than even from watching the movie is exactly what the Russian citizens feared because they don't really tell you in the movie. It's like, why don't they want to go back? Apparently, they believed that they would either be tortured, killed, or put in the gulag, the Russian prison, for life. Sort of like forced labor camps, right? Yes. You get that idea, but they don't explicitly say it. Which I think further is to create the idea that they don't really know what's going to happen. The British people don't know what the Russians are going to do with their citizens. But the point is that they shouldn't be forced to do anything. If they want to stay in Vienna, they should be free to do so. I think it's particularly interesting that MGM made this film because MGM is noted for making brighter, more cheerful movies. The feel-good studio. Yeah, Louis B. Mayer didn't like things to be really dark. And it's interesting because he was of Russian descent himself. Really? But I think he may have been sensitive to that because Jewish people had experienced persecution in Russia for years. It's true. So he was probably very concerned, as many Americans were, that communism rising in Russia would be very un-American and a great human rights issue, just as Nazism had been. So I appreciate that this movie really gets into some things that people may think Hollywood was afraid to discuss in the late 1940s. Yes. And I'd say the three points you really could discuss about this movie are the code, communism, and Catholicism. First, the code. This, right here in 1949, is in the middle of the motion picture production code's heyday from 1934 to 1954, when Joseph I. Breen was the head of the production code administration. There's a lot of talk, particularly from critics of the code, about how Catholicism was ruling Hollywood. And I think even at the time, there was some concern about not making it too vocally Catholic, because then a lot of the Protestant groups didn't like that. That's true. It was always done in a subtle way, and I think really tried to approach religion from an approachable platform, not necessarily one denomination. But then every once in a while, there is a film like this, where it is very decidedly a Catholic influence, but the principles discussed are just the basic principles of Christianity. I don't think you really could say that this was, like, from Mr. Breen. Clearly, the book was written by a man who was a Catholic, and it was Hollywood's choice to make it. The PCA wasn't telling them to. And in fact, the production code administration would advise Hollywood to be very cautious, because it's very easy to make an offensive depiction of a religion. Sometimes it's better to not touch on it at all. So they knew when embarking on such a project that they had to do it carefully and respectfully. But the important thing here is about faith in something larger than yourself, and how that gives you the courage to keep going in cruel circumstances. And then, of course, there's also communism. The PCA was not intended to really further any political cause, but to protect the ideas of Americanism, and only to be against anything that was a direct threat to it. And again, it's not Joseph Breen who wrote any of these scripts. He merely helped them make them into movies that would be reasonably acceptable to reasonable people, as he liked to say. To be, of course, clean and wholesome, but unafraid to show some very disturbing topics. There are the issues of a couple of suicides in this movie, a lot of cruelty, torture. These things aren't shown on screen, but it's intense. You know what's happening, and it's dark. But this reality had been in Europe for a long time. And there are some movies made before World War II where you see that Hollywood already knew that communism had existed in Russia for a good 20 years. And they weren't a good 20 years, so we knew it was problematic. And also the lack of religion, which is present in all communist countries. That was a real concern to America, which was predominantly a Christian country at the point, or at least Judeo-Christian, having a faith in a higher being. And the anti-religious feeling of Russia was very concerning. Lewis Calhoun plays the main Russian officer, and he does a great job of creating this sort of smiling, urbane, but not overly evil character. Yes, that's a really good point. He's not like a cartoon villain. He acts like a reasonable person, and he does refer to it. He is taking orders. Yeah, ultimately, he's basically what Walter Pigeon is. He's taking orders from superior officers. He obviously has some cruelty in his nature, but he's not necessarily the one making the decisions. But the way that we see the difference between them is that Walter Pigeon and Walter Pigeon's character, Hooky and Twingo, observe that there is something wrong happening, even in their own side, and they risk losing their military careers to challenge. We're doing the wrong thing. We're being party to something that is cruel. So they're willing to challenge something that's evil, and that is what shows the higher nature and this importance. And similarly, we see many Russian citizens also acknowledge that the wrong thing is happening. So it's not about Russians are bad and British people are good. It's showing that anyone has the opportunity to be selfless, to be brave, to follow orders, and suddenly realize, I can't do this anymore. This is no longer the right thing to do. Yes. It's interesting how this movie was not successful at all during his time. It lost a lot of money. And some critics said like, oh, it's propaganda. People always say that. But looking at it now, from all these years later, I think it's more powerful now than it was then. Because we see now, Russia was a threat. And what the Soviets and communism did, not only to Russia, but to basically all of Eastern Europe in the next several decades. Largely because, I don't want to say we let them do it, but we were too friendly with them during World War II and afterwards, too friendly with communism. Again, nothing inherently evil about Russia. But with the idea of communism, if you're friendly with it before long, it destroys a lot of things. And although the McCarthy era was controversial in its own way, that's sort of a different topic. But I find this particularly impacting as we're seeing Vladimir Shklyarov, this Russian ballet dancer, not to give spoilers, but you know, there's a Russian dancer in this movie who perhaps prefers death to communist oppression. And it's to show that this seems like something from a far off distant time. But today, in both Russia and China, it still isn't safe to say anything against the government or to disagree. And I think that's why movies like this are powerful. They're showing that it doesn't matter whether it was in 1917, 1947, or 2024, 26, you know, any year. It shows that if you don't have the freedom to say that, what the government is doing might be wrong, you don't really have much freedom at all. I find it fascinating from sort of a literary standpoint, that this story, although it is set in Vienna, it's very Russian focused, does have these very strong Christian themes. I find it to have sort of echoes of Dostoyevsky's writing in it. Yes. The idea of this man who is so horrified by the cruelty he sees around him, he sees in such a cruel and heartless world, how can there be a God? That's very much a theme that is touched on. In the Brothers Karamazov. Yes. And I think this film kind of breaks that down into a more palatable, if you will, way. Yeah, this is the two-hour version if you don't want to delve into the huge part. Yes, it's not quite as lofty as in Dostoyevsky's writing. But that same theme, and particularly the character of the Mother Superior after she speaks with the Pope, she just kind of breaks it down for him in a five-minute conversation in a way that's quite striking. And I think, again, talking about the realism of it, Ethel Barrymore, although not actually Viennese, she does a good accent though, she's very sincere and believable in that character because she was a devout Catholic. So it was important to her. She wasn't just playing a role. Of course, she wasn't actually a nun. But you can tell that she's just perfect for that part. She has that bit of a wry smile, a bit comparable to the Mother Superior in The Sound of Music. Yes. Someone who isn't afraid to break the rules to do what she believes is the right thing to do. This movie's striking because of its realism. They really did a good job of capturing the bleakness of Vienna in the post-war days. It has very much a European feel. And they did do some establishing footage in Europe to capture some exterior shots and to create this atmosphere. And I think you see it in the costumes too. My outfit is inspired by the first costume worn by Janet Leigh's character, Maria. It is a very simple blouse with full sleeves, a plain black skirt, and she has a scarf over her head because she is praying in the chapel. My outfit is based on the one costume which Audrey, Angela Lansbury, wears when she's not in uniform. It's on the night of Christmas Eve. It's a rather fancy gown in the 1940s style with some sparkly jewelry and a little wrap because it's definitely cold in Vienna in the winter. Part of the stirring realism is some of the scenes of the extras. They actually found it hard to find people who looked sickly and malnourished enough to play the extras. They looked for war refugees first but they found that they were all too healthy-looking by this point, which I'm glad. So they had to get just some... In 1949, it was quite a few years before. They had to just find some extras who looked undernourished for the scenes of the refugees. They'd just been at Central Casting too long waiting for a job. Yeah. So that creates sort of that feeling. And I think you really could say the star of this movie is Walter Pidgeon. It's a really striking role for him but it is such an all-star cast that everybody's a bit of a star. And for creating the atmosphere, some credit has to be given to Miklos Rosa who wrote this beautiful symphonic score. He was Hungarian and he really brought that old world feel to it. And I'm sure it was a very poignant theme for him because like most Hollywood composers, he was a Jewish immigrant who escaped the persecution of the Nazis and no doubt felt that oppression of his own people in Hungary. But he never lost his classical flair. So he really brought that, like you said, that symphonic style. The scene where it really stood out to me was when Twingo and Maria are out on this kind of snowy hillside and there's this beautiful... I assume maybe they did this in front of a screen or something. Or maybe they filmed it somewhere. I know they did do some filming in some mountainous areas of California. Wherever it is, it's absolutely gorgeous. They're on the snow and she's in this fur coat and it's sort of a simplistic love scene. Not a lot of dialogue and the music in the background is just so gorgeous. And there are a lot of classic movies which really featured classical artists like opera singers, musicians. There are comparatively few about ballet. So this movie does deserve a place of recognition on the list of ballet movies. There's only really one ballet sequence when you see the girls who are supposed to be from the Vienna opera practicing their ballet in basically a converted garage. And you see the style of 1940s dancing with their costumes, the way their pointe shoes look, and a bit of the choreography. But although there isn't a lot of real dancing, I think you see that spirit which continued for decades to come as dancers like Rudolf Nuryev and Mikhail Baryshnikov had to defect, to try to get away from communism and to be able to share their art. But how Russia really didn't want them to leave. They wanted them to stay in Russia and have their art there. And as recent as the unfortunate Vladimir Shklyarov realizing that just being talented isn't always enough to give you a place of honor in a country like that. And I think it also, it's sort of a lesson for the way we Western countries relate to dancers. Like Maria Koreva is one of the most famous Russian ballerinas today. Famous largely because of her YouTube channel. Right, she's sort of an influence. She is. And she's a very intelligent young woman. She talks about Dostoevsky and nutrition. She's very interesting. But after the war broke out, some of her performances in the United States were canceled because she's Russian. And she did not speak out against Putin because she doesn't want to get thrown out of a window, which is understandable. So I think while we as Americans should not be afraid to call out the cruelty of other countries, we shouldn't hold it against the artists who are just trying to stay alive. The citizens are never really to blame in the situation like that. Any more than there were a lot of, not a lot, some movies made during World War II which showed German citizens who were suffering under the same oppression as the places that the German government was invading. I think that this movie is a very poignant and timely one in any year. I think it's one that's very important as it shows a less covered chapter in American history, which is the post-World War II era in Europe, showing how the Allies continued to work there. There are only a couple of American characters, they're mainly British, but to just see this atmosphere. And it's created with all the brilliance of Hollywood filmmaking while having a very European feeling. It has strong political messages, but not from a political standpoint, from just a point of justice and faith. And I think it's something that people of any nationality and any faith who believe in justice and mercy can appreciate. And of course, it's brought to life by the brilliance of Hollywood during the golden era under the code. So highly recommended for people who believe that classic films were just on the light side. This one is very serious. If you really like intense, dramatic, even dark movies, you'll be impressed by how intense this film is. And going against the claims, even at the time that it was a propaganda film, I think films that could fall more into that category, I don't like to call anything a propaganda film, but we're often very much about like, this will be the last time and we're victorious. And this one deals with the kind of messy sort of, he keeps saying like, well, the next war. Especially Hook, he has this very cynical attitude. So he's not just that absolutely definite, there's not going to be another world war. No, he's a career military man, and he knows there's a war that's never going to go away. The war is over, but there's still conflict. And part of the reason he's afraid to cross the Russians is like, we could start another war. We just finished one. So it deals with that kind of hard topic that you might think like Hollywood did not want to touch at all during this period. But I think during the war, obviously we wanted, people needed to be encouraged. But in the years following, we were willing to look at some of the hard truths. Yeah. Not we, but Hollywood, I should say. Yes. This movie is available to rent or to purchase on Amazon Prime Video and other streaming platforms like YouTube in a clear black and white copy. You also can buy it on DVD from Amazon, Walmart, and Barnes and Noble. There are many contenders for the title of the great American novel. However, one of them has had such an indelible impact on society that its very title is a byword for an entire era. This tale has been adapted countless times in plays, operas, ballets, musicals, and of course, films. Join us next time as we discuss the second of four movie adaptations of this story, which is now the earliest surviving film version. Thank you for watching. Goodbye.