Flight for Freedom (1943)The life of air pioneer Amelia Earhart is here given a fictionalized treatment, with a speculative conclusion. Director:Lothar Mendes |
|
| 0Share... |
Flight for Freedom (1943)The life of air pioneer Amelia Earhart is here given a fictionalized treatment, with a speculative conclusion. Director:Lothar Mendes |
|
| 0Share... |
| Complete credited cast: | |||
| Rosalind Russell | ... |
Tonie Carter
|
|
| Fred MacMurray | ... |
Randy Britton
|
|
|
|
Herbert Marshall | ... |
Paul Turner
|
|
|
Eduardo Ciannelli | ... |
Johnny Salvini
|
|
|
Walter Kingsford | ... |
Admiral Graves
|
Fictionalized biography of Amelia Earhart (here called Tonie Carter). First, a flagwaving preface about air warfare in the Pacific; then flashing back to her first solo flight in 1932; whirlwind romance with sexist ace pilot Randy Britton; advanced training; a transcontinental race; world fame; first, aborted round-the-world flight; and her famous disappearance. This film popularized the theory that Earhart's disappearance was connected with secret work for the U.S. Navy. Written by Rod Crawford <puffinus@u.washington.edu>
The film is badly directed and acted propaganda but all this is put in the shade by an extraordinary scene towards the end.
I don't want to spoil the plot, so I will just say:
The pilot heroine of the film Tonie Carter finds herself on a remote pacific island with a strange mission ahead of her, over the course of one night on the island, a lot changes in her life, both in considering her past and her present situation, and she decides on her course of action for when she leaves the island the next morning.
This scene is mysterious and evocative, there is very little detail and almost everything we see is significant so the island takes on the quality of a dream. The various characters which come her way seem like ghosts; their significance is in what they whisper to her, reminds her of her responsibilities and memories.
Now comes the ending of the film but with an unforseen direction born of the night on the island, this leads to some bitter sweet ironies which undercut in a way the propaganda of the film.
So this is another one to add to the class of awful films which emerge with the most imaginative visions, but by some who-knows-how accident, its certainly not due to the director or actors. In this respect its much like 'The Eye of the Beholder '(1999 )by Stephan Elliot.
If Lothar Mendes was aware of what he created I wonder how he felt, pleased but perhaps also a little guilty and frustrated.