Popular Culture Review Vol. 10, No. 2, August 1999 | Page 68

62

Popular Culture Review

It is the American approach, strong yet humane, that seems to represent the best
way forward for post-war Germany. There are close parallels between the action
and attitudes expressed in the film and those which were current in America in the
1940s. In the post-war period there was the understandable desire for revenge
against the Axis powers (although there was more resentment against the Japanese
who had bombed Pearl Harbor, than against the Germans). Yet the actions taken
by the Allies after the war were not simply knee-jerk ones. There was a belief that
Allied control would have to be extended into Germany for a long period. This
control was not only asserted through the occupation of Germany by Allied troops,
but also by economic aid, in the form of the Marshall Plan which gave America a
socio-economic and moral foothold in Germany. There was a belief that the Ger
man people were not all evil Nazis. The perception was that the German people
had been mislead by Hitler and his supporters. This perception can also be seen in
Carol Reed’s The Man Between (1953, GB, British Lion/London films) and
Rossellini’s Germany Year Zero, thus proving that this sentiment was not unique
to American filmmaking.
National character plays a key role in Berlin Express's representation of
each Allied force’s approach to controlling their respective zones. The film fea
tures representatives of each Allied force, and these characters are delineated as
national archetypes. The Soviet soldier, Lt. Maxim (Roman Toporow) is, broadly
speaking, seen to be dry and strict, more concerned with following orders than
attempting to understand the Germans, or even the other Allies. The Englishman,
James Sterling (Robert Coote) is seen to be blustering and indecisive, presumably
representative of a nation that needed American help to win “their” war. Similarly,
the problematic Frenchman, Henri Perrot (Charles Korvin) is seen to be charming,
but rather obsequious in front of the “might” of the American, Robert Lindley
(Robert Ryan). In a sinister turn the “archetypal Frenchman” turns out to be an
undercover Nazi, perhaps a sly comment on what the Americans perceived as the
“weakness” of the French national character, as revealed during the war. Finally
the American, Lindley, is an idealized version of the post-war G.I. a little bitter (he
shudders when the train passes over the German border), but with some remaining
idealism. This idealism manifests itself in his admiration for Dr. Bernhardt and his
later participation in the search for him. The film’s liberal message concludes that
not all Germans are evil: this is evident in its privileging of the character of Dr.
Bernhardt. He clearly represents a liberal German conscience, as well as echoes
some of the sentiments expressed by Americans involved in the Marshall Plan
program. The representation of him is problematic in the sense that the film’s
“message” is expressed through him. Just as Days o f Glory was a propaganda film
whose message is evident in the watered down (American) sentiments mouthed by
Russian guerrillas, so the message of Berlin Express (liberal, pro-American, pro-