Fascinating, bizarro variation on Grand Illusion

Rating: 9/10 (15 January 2010)

Whatever liberties the filmmakers took with the actual incident, it seems they were also inspired by a desire to critique - and not pay tribute to - Renoir's classic prison-camp drama. The elements of Grand Illusion are all here: two tradition-bound officers gradually forming a bond of mutual respect; a somewhat earthier group of prisoners bent on escape; one of the officers (SPOILER) ultimately sacrificing himself for the cause he put on a uniform to serve; and the close-up view of the pecking order and odd arrangements between the prisoners and their guards.
There's even a cabaret performed by the prisoners, some of them in drag, much like the one staged in Grand Illusion. (In Bridge, of course, the prisoners cap it by singing God Save the King rather than La Marseillaise, of course.) But what Lean and his screenwriters do with the material is quite different. The bridge itself is a giant folly, and whether it's the prisoners or their captors who are the biggest fools is debatable. Different characters on several occasions refer to the Japanese and British commanders - either one or both - as insane. Guinness's sacrifice at the end is accidental, almost farcical; Hayakawa, the Japanese commander, is clearly prepared to kill himself if anything goes wrong. No one comes off well. Even Jack Hawkins, the commando leader, (SPOILER) leaves the scene in disgrace at the end, having shot two of his men for fear they would be captured and talk.
The last words we hear, from the medical officer who all along has been a sort of moral center of the story, are "Madness! Madness!" It's unclear, deliberately so, whether he's referring to something specific, or the whole episode: the bridge, the commando raid, the war itself. An unbelievably bleak ending for a '50s WWII pic, only rivaled by Robert Aldrich's Attack! What Lean has done is drain the romanticism and hopefulness out of Renoir's story, and the gallantry out the prisoner-of-war genre that was already quite familiar by the time Bridge came out. The reason it works is that the filmmakers pitch their story so perfectly. None of the characters is ever condescended to, even Guinness's officer, who is clearly quite brave and wins a victory over his captors early on. If there's madness here, we have to detect it in the general situation as it develops, not in anything specific the characters do.
This was the beginning of Lean's career directing blockbusters; over the years, he became the Great White Explorer of the film world, each of his films a bit more romantically overwrought than the last. But that process hadn't started yet when he made Bridge. As to the cast, the only clinker is Holden, clearly injected to appeal to American audiences but given little more to do than utter cynical zingers and show off his bare chest. Guinness is perfect, always keeping his character just the right side of Col. Blimp parody. Hayakawa does the same, matching him note for note.
Bridge was a huge hit, and it makes sense. It's one of those films that subverts a genre while delivering all the emotional and visceral thrills people love in such stories. The back-and-forth transitions between the POW work camp and the preparation and execution of the commando operation are beautiful, building exquisite tension. The let-down - the "What was it all for?" moment - only kicks in right at the end, as it should. "A first-rate job" indeed.