'Secondløitnanten' takes on the moral question about what to do when the enemy attacks your country.
Should one surrender in order to minimize the number of deaths in the country or should one fight for independence against the aggressors, probably leading to a lot of suffering and many deaths?
If surrendering, can one be sure that this leads to less deaths and is dying the worst consequences from an invasion like this or is it to be sent to concentration or working camps, being humiliated, having the daily life being governed by a dictatorial regime?
If one fight against the enemy, there are no guarantees for a succesful end to that fight but is that the most important factor or is it the moral questions about not submitting to foreign powers and to slavery?
These questions are implicit and explicit discussed in this film, an œuvre more important for the Swedes than for the Norwegians, as the former surrendered unconditionally by letting the Germans use our country for their operations, not least the so called 'transit(orial) trafic' through Sweden.
The film circles around Thor Espedal (Espen Skjønberg) an old sea captain and 'second lieutenant', a title that didn't exist during the Second World War but the First.
When Germany invades Norway the 9th of April 1940 Espedal enrols himself in the army, in spite of being a pensioner (in the film born in 1874 if I remember right).
He though becomes disappointed when he finds that the military leadership and the king, obviously are inclined to surrender instead of fighting the invaders.
He then creates a sort of guerilla warfare with men and women willing to follow him in his fight against the Germans.
At first people laugh at him and his outdated uniform. Seeing an elderly man taking up the fight when they themselves try to flee or surrender, also evokes a lot of bad conscience, making it easier to depict Thor as an old scatterbrain than to realize that he actually is doing what they should do or should have done.
One of the officers discussing the surrender and opposing it - Kerlow (Bjørn Floberg) - tries to support Thor and his guerilla soldiers and in the beginning they succeed in fighting back some German troops but in the end the preponderance becomes to great and one by one, his brave men and women have to surrender.
The story is loosely built on the true events around the officer of the reserve, Thor Olaf Hannevig and his improvised resistance against the Germans using his infantry regiment "IR-3" around Vinje in the inner parts of Telemark, April and May 1940.
The events are not correctly depicted but gives an idea of the chaotic fight that took place in many towns in the southern parts of Norway, April 1940.
The film does not depict Thor as a 'war hero à la Americaine' but gives a more credible image of the often very scared and frustrated men and women trying to fight this militarily superior enemy, with Thor in the middle as a tough but on the same time sensitive and sensible man, filled with a patriotic spirit, prepared to die for his country and his countrymen- and women.
Parenthetically, when mentioning 'Telemark', I recall the first film I (Gunnar) saw about the Norwegian resistance during World War II: 'The Heroes of Telemark' (1965) with, among others, Kirk Douglas.
Should one surrender in order to minimize the number of deaths in the country or should one fight for independence against the aggressors, probably leading to a lot of suffering and many deaths?
If surrendering, can one be sure that this leads to less deaths and is dying the worst consequences from an invasion like this or is it to be sent to concentration or working camps, being humiliated, having the daily life being governed by a dictatorial regime?
If one fight against the enemy, there are no guarantees for a succesful end to that fight but is that the most important factor or is it the moral questions about not submitting to foreign powers and to slavery?
These questions are implicit and explicit discussed in this film, an œuvre more important for the Swedes than for the Norwegians, as the former surrendered unconditionally by letting the Germans use our country for their operations, not least the so called 'transit(orial) trafic' through Sweden.
The film circles around Thor Espedal (Espen Skjønberg) an old sea captain and 'second lieutenant', a title that didn't exist during the Second World War but the First.
When Germany invades Norway the 9th of April 1940 Espedal enrols himself in the army, in spite of being a pensioner (in the film born in 1874 if I remember right).
He though becomes disappointed when he finds that the military leadership and the king, obviously are inclined to surrender instead of fighting the invaders.
He then creates a sort of guerilla warfare with men and women willing to follow him in his fight against the Germans.
At first people laugh at him and his outdated uniform. Seeing an elderly man taking up the fight when they themselves try to flee or surrender, also evokes a lot of bad conscience, making it easier to depict Thor as an old scatterbrain than to realize that he actually is doing what they should do or should have done.
One of the officers discussing the surrender and opposing it - Kerlow (Bjørn Floberg) - tries to support Thor and his guerilla soldiers and in the beginning they succeed in fighting back some German troops but in the end the preponderance becomes to great and one by one, his brave men and women have to surrender.
The story is loosely built on the true events around the officer of the reserve, Thor Olaf Hannevig and his improvised resistance against the Germans using his infantry regiment "IR-3" around Vinje in the inner parts of Telemark, April and May 1940.
The events are not correctly depicted but gives an idea of the chaotic fight that took place in many towns in the southern parts of Norway, April 1940.
The film does not depict Thor as a 'war hero à la Americaine' but gives a more credible image of the often very scared and frustrated men and women trying to fight this militarily superior enemy, with Thor in the middle as a tough but on the same time sensitive and sensible man, filled with a patriotic spirit, prepared to die for his country and his countrymen- and women.
Parenthetically, when mentioning 'Telemark', I recall the first film I (Gunnar) saw about the Norwegian resistance during World War II: 'The Heroes of Telemark' (1965) with, among others, Kirk Douglas.
No comments:
Post a Comment