The American Spectator : There Be Dragons

Text Size

There Be Dragons

By James Bowman on 6.3.11 @ 6:02AM

Fiction and melodrama undermine the respectfully treated real-life story of Opus Dei’s founder amid the Spanish Civil War.

Some people will like There Be Dragons by Roland Joffe (The Killing Fields, The Mission) because it is something of a throwback to the Hollywood epics of old in which a (usually) tragic romance is set against the background of real world-historical events like wars and revolutions. The individuals’ experience of these events, as in Gone With the Wind or David Lean’s Dr. Zhivago, is supposed to cast dry historical narrative in a new and more thrillingly human light. As an example of this kind of movie, however, I think Mr. Joffe’s film is less than completely successful. What I liked about it was that it was a different kind of throwback: to a time when Hollywood, if only out of its own self-interest in trying to attract an audience largely made up of Christian believers, had to be at least respectful to religion and sometimes produced movies that were themselves quasi-iconic aids to Christian devotion.

Xavier Beauvois’s Of Gods and Men is that kind of movie, but it owes little or nothing to Hollywood. Mr. Joffe’s picture, by contrast, is Hollywood through and through, and that’s its weakness. Half of it is about St. Josemaría Escrivá (Charlie Cox), the founder of Opus Dei, but his story, set against the background of the Spanish Civil War, has to compete with that of a fictional rivalry with his childhood friend, Manolo (Wes Bentley). We learn of Manolo’s joining the Republican side as an agent of the fascists, of his unrequited passion for a Beautiful Hungarian Communist (Olga Kurylenko), of the BHC’s spurning him for love of the Communist leader, Oriol (Rodrigo Santoro), of Manolo’s crises of conscience with regard to (a) the BHC and his rival and (b) his ex-friend, the priest — and, as if all this weren’t enough, of the dying Manolo’s complicated relationship nearly 50 years later with his son, Robert (Dougray Scott), who happens to be writing a biography of Josemaría Escrivá and is only now discovering his father’s relationship with his subject.

This, the chronologically latest part of the story, is set in 1982 and serves as a framing device for the rest of the picture, as old Manolo’s memories of his early life and the Civil War, put on tape for his son the biographer, are the ostensible occasion of their realization on the screen. But of course the son also has to learn the hitherto unknown and shocking details of his own history and come to some kind of terms with his father before the latter dies — and that in such a way as to affirm the message and meaning of Father Escrivá’s ministry. It should be readily apparent that Mr. Joffe is unwilling to allow what he regards as the less-interesting saint’s life to assume the center stage but must constantly be distracting us with either the romance or the family drama in such a way as to defeat his own purpose in trying to put the two stories together.

The movie’s tag line, taken from Oscar Wilde — “Every saint has a past, and every sinner has a future” — really has nothing to do with the stories it has to tell but, like the romance stuff, is there to make the viewers think they’re getting something more steamy than they really are. All that having been said, however, the movie does have some of the visual splendor of the old time epic and rather more of the saintliness of Father Escrivá than we could reasonably have expected. It does a good job of evoking the time and place of its setting and, almost as remarkable as its sympathy for the saint’s Christian piety, it avoids any glamorization of the Republicans — or, for that matter, of the Fascists. The murderous hatred towards the clergy of these storied and often-glamorized “anti-fascists,” both the communists and the anarchists, is well-documented but a story seldom if ever told in the movies before.

Indeed, I’d have thought there would be quite enough real-life excitement in an account of Father Escrivá’s hair’s-breadth escapes from the killer-commies and therefore no necessity to weigh it down with the rather clunky fictional romance, but here, too, Mr. Joffe must have felt the danger of being seen inadvertently to glamorize the fascists if he had too freely portrayed the republicans as the bad guys that they so often were. The best parts of the film are those in which the priest is called upon to put his priestly duty to others ahead of his own safety, but it doesn’t do, I guess, to show too many of these. Likewise, his idea for Opus Dei — “Everyone and everything for your glory” — together with the Catholic establishment’s view that “It all sounds rather Protestant: that God is to be found in the vanities of daily life” — could have done with a lot more explication but was presumably thought too boring. Or else too politically risky. Still, what there is of a recognizable portrait of piety and holiness makes this a movie worth seeing.

About the Author

James Bowman, our movie and culture critic, is a resident scholar at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. He is the author of Honor: A History and Media Madness: The Corruption of Our Political Culture, both published by Encounter Books.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (35) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Holkden Cowan| 6.3.11 @ 6:38AM

It is more than unfortunate that this review slanders the Nationalist side in Spain as "The Fascists." They did receive some help from Fascist Italy but were for the most part Christians anf patriotic conservatives. To call them "fascists" is to play the Reds' game and adopt the enemy's terminology and stereotyping. Shame!

Stuart Koehl| 6.3.11 @ 7:14AM

You seem to have left out rather extensive assistance from Hitler's Germany, including some 30,000 "volunteers", several hundred early Panzer I tanks, and the invaluable Condor Legion, without which the Nationalists would not have achieved the air superiority that ensured their victory.

The Soviets, Germans and Italians all used Spain as a laboratory for their latest weapons and tactics. If the Germans entered World War II with an operational advantage, it was because they made close observation of the war in Spain and drew the proper conclusions. For instance, tanks, used in petty packets in poor tank country, did not perform well. Stalin concluded tanks were overrated. The Germans concluded tanks had to be used en masse in conjunction with infantry, artillery and air support. The Luftwaffe also came out of the Spanish war with the most modern set of aircraft and air combat tactics in the world, while Italy and Russia continued to use technology and tactics evolved in World War I.

As is the case in the Balkans today, there were no good guys in Spain in the 1930s, only slighly less bad guys. Had the "Republicans" won the civil war, there is no doubt Spain would have fallen under the control of the Soviet Union, which had thoroughly subverted the Republican leadership. But's let's not pretend that Franco was anything other than what he was--a Fascist thug and dictator, who ruled with a brutal hand. And a majority of Spaniards approved of his rule, which of course, makes them Franco's willing executioners to the same extent that Germans approving of Nazi rule were Hitler's willing executioners. The difference is merely one of degree, not of type.

Holkden Cowan| 6.3.11 @ 9:54AM

Hitler was not a fascist. Hitler was a National Socialist.

Stuart Koehl| 6.3.11 @ 10:29AM

Six of one, half a dozen of the other. Fascist, Nazi, Stalinist, Maoist--all just variations on the same totalitarian theme.

RCV| 6.3.11 @ 12:47PM

Sorry, Holkden, but Franco was indeed a Fascist by any definition of the term.

Seek| 6.3.11 @ 1:03PM

English historian Paul Preston, author of several books about Franco and Spain, often called him a "semi-fascist." That is, while Franco's beliefs and behavior highly resembled those of fascism, they weren't rooted in True Believer dogma in the way that Mussolini or Hitler were. He was a real prize all the same; his Falangists took the lives of about 180,000 fellow Spaniards during the after the Civil War of 1936-39.

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 6.4.11 @ 3:22PM

I don't bother with silly being a pathetic and despicable and unintelligent and dishonest asswipe, as my AmSpec posts constantly prove, as I sanctimoniously opine on fascism, while numerous posts prove I believe naziism and Hitler were ultra right on the political scale, when in fact the unalienable truth is that the freedom to enjoy social and political and economic rights is self-evidently what liberty is in reality, while the opposite of liberty is tyranny, which is the oppression of the freedom to enjoy social and political and economic rights, which in a society is represented in a form of government known as fascism, whether that fascism is naziism or communism or socialism, all of which are ultra left on the political scale, on this representing just one of the multitude of posts I've vomited all over these threads, proving what a pathetic and despicable and unintelligent and dishonest asswipe I am, oh yeah, speaking of tyranny and fascism and socialism, I constantly guarantee the socialist fascist tyrant dithering idiot liar in chief will be reelected, which is a good thing, as the abhorrent tea party is wholly lacking in intelligence, and is without a shred of real Christian love and compassion, and only espouses policies dangerous and damaging to America, and I don't sign silly petitions on being a pathetic and despciable and unintelligent and dishonest asswipe matters.

obadiah| 6.5.11 @ 1:31PM

The foregoing is a single sentence that begins and ends with "asswipe." The character of the sentence can be deduced from this fact.

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 6.6.11 @ 12:18AM

I don't bother with silly old testament prophets that are not able to devine the foreforegoing was mockery of the posts by the pathetic despicable unintelligent dishonest asswipe RCV on attempting to clarify deducible facts matters.

Juan Jose Morales-Castillo| 6.3.11 @ 7:40AM

In 1975, when Franco died, many expected--wanted!--a second Spanish Civil War; more than 35 years later, Spain is still in one piece.
In 1980, when Tito--a Loyalist veteran--died, Yugoslavia was at peace; whatever became of Yugoslavia?

Stuart Koehl| 6.3.11 @ 9:45AM

Spain was and is a real country, Yugoslavia was an artifact of international diplomacy held together only by Tito's iron hand. Put another way, all the ethnic groups hated Tito just slightly more than they hated each other, which was sufficient to make Tito the focus of unity. With his demise, the Balkans reverted to their normal state of all against all.

Spain is not entirely out of the woods, given continuing Basque separatist activities, including Etarra terrorism, and increasing Catalan devolutionary agitation, which could lead to a real separatist movement in the future. Add to this impending financial and economic collapse, and you may see violence yet again.

RCV| 6.3.11 @ 12:48PM

Your analysis, Stuart, is dead on.

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 6.4.11 @ 3:31PM

I don't bother with silly parallels of Spanish impending financial and economic collapse to the situation in the United States of America on guaranteeing the reelection of the socialist fascist tyrant dithering idiot liar in chief as a means to prevent the abhorrent tea party wholly lacking in intelligence without a shred of real Christian love and compassion from espousing dangerous and damaging policies to the United States of America matters.

Tony in Central PA| 6.3.11 @ 3:04PM

With a fertlity rate trending below 1.2, Spain may collapse on its own, according to some demography experts.

dee see| 6.3.11 @ 8:49AM

----And the centuries infiltrated, compromised
Catholic Church, and Spanish Civil War have,
today, as the GREATEST treason op, and
GREATEST halocaust in history are being
censored---------to do with-------what?

MEANWHILE, the 61st Anniversary of the
cosmically relevant KOREAN WAR this Monday
isn't even marked--------------------------------------

Cpm| 6.3.11 @ 10:39AM

I'd like a sample of your brain.

Stuart Koehl| 6.3.11 @ 8:06PM

The jar labeled "Abby"-something.

Dan| 6.4.11 @ 6:42PM

"Abby-normal. I'm almost sure that was the name." Great movie.

C Smith| 6.3.11 @ 9:41AM

http://martyrsmirror.blogspot......-1573.html

tonyo| 6.3.11 @ 11:01AM

Actually, there were many "good guys" in Spain during the Civil War -- the thousands of Catholic priests, religious, and laity who were slaughtered for their faith in Christ and His Church (and many of whom are justly venerated today as martyrs).

Franco may have been a "thug," but he kept Spain out of WWII, he helped to prevent Spain from becoming another Soviet slave state, and he preserved the Church from Stalinist destruction.

Stuart Koehl| 6.3.11 @ 3:00PM

And that's why the Church has such a high reputation in Spain today. Actually, anti-clericalism has deep roots in Spain, and the traditional portrait of the Spaniard is someone who loves the Church but hates priests with a passion. If only the Church had not so closely aligned itself with the most virulently reactionary forces in Spanish society, it might have been another story. But in Spain, as in Mexico, the Church reaped what it sowed.

Sardonikus| 6.3.11 @ 12:01PM

Having read Antony Beevor's "The Battle for Spain", I have to concur with Mr. Koehl that this truly was a war without a "good guy". Especially damning was Mr. Beevor's account of Ernest Hemingway's activities as a "war tourist", whose mere proximity to events in his mind and in those of his gullible admirers made him some sort of heroic participant.

I do agree that the Franquist victory and Spain's subsequent neutrality essentially helped preserve the British hold on Gibraltar from a massed German land attack during WWII, although Hitler & Co. drew up a plan to invade Spain anyway (Operation Ilona), which was obviously never executed.

Objective works about the Spanish Civil War are very, very hard to come by, given the widespread left-wing taint in academia over the years. Beevor's work, along with George Orwell's "Homage to Catalonia" are must-reads for those hungering for a pretty accurate depiction of events.

RCV| 6.3.11 @ 12:50PM

Agree. "Homage to Catalonia" is brilliant, moving and insightful. Well worth anyone's read.

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 6.4.11 @ 3:37PM

I don't bother with silly endorsements of homage to California for its brilliant moving insightful governance on brilliant moving insightful liberalism matters.

Reagan Loyalist| 6.3.11 @ 3:58PM

This movie was an opportunity missed, a failed cinematic effort. The real story was by far more riveting than this anemic waste of a screen. I paid a matinée discounted $6 and still felt bilked. Loved the man - the movie not.

Roughcoat| 6.3.11 @ 5:50PM

Paul Johnson's views on Franco in Modern Times are quite insightful. If I read Johnson correctly, Franco was not a fascist but rather a Spanish exceptionalist with a pre-modern, almost medieval sensibility. He wanted to keep Spain free and pure of the totalitarian ideologies that were polluting Europe. He used the fascists (i.e., the Falange) but was never himself a Falangist; and the troops he sent to fight on the Eastern Front with the Wehrmacht were mostly Falangists whom Franco had dispatched to that theater for the express purpose of decimating their ranks and thus diminishing their influence. Beevor's book is okay, but it doesn't hold a candle to Hugh Thomas's magesterial history of the Spanish Civil War, a book that makes it clear that the Spanish left was corrupt, incompetent, illiberal, and, if left to its own devices, would have ultimately to imposed a leftist totalitarian regime on Spain. Franco was bound and determined to prevent that from happening and he was not ideological about it. I understand and to a degree believe that Franco did what he could and had to do in dealing with extraordinarily difficult challenges of the sort that bedeviled Pinochet in Chile. I'm not an apologist for Franco; nonetheless, I'm glad his side won the civil war in Spain.

Dan| 6.4.11 @ 6:54PM

I remember reading in Leftism Revisited that Franco was a policeman. When he first met Hitler that Franco knew that Hilter was a thug. Cop instinct.

Michael| 6.3.11 @ 7:49PM

To Everyone: Franco was not a fascist, or a Nazi, or any kind of "ist" for that matter. He was Spanish and Catholic. He wasn't going to fight the Communists just to surrender to Hitler!! Why did he accept help from the Germans and Italians? Because the British and US wouldn't help him. Note that Catholic Ireland send 700 volunteers to help Franco. Is Ireland a Nazi country? No. FDR helped Stalin in WW 2. Was he a communist? No. Franco only said, "My house is your house", to Hitler and Hitler was dumb enough to believe him. Franco was on only one side: Spain.

Stuart Koehl| 6.3.11 @ 8:11PM

"Is Ireland a Nazi country?"

Of course, de Valera behavior in World War II was scandalous and gave material aid to the Axis by refusing to open Irish ports and airfields to the Allies. And, as a neutral state, the Republic maintained diplomatic relations with Germany and allowed German diplomatic personnel free run of the country.

One thing Dev couldn't do, though, is stop Irishmen with clearer moral vision from crossing over into Belfast to sign up with the British forces. Their contribution was significant, both numerically and operationally.

Roughcoat| 6.3.11 @ 9:31PM

Michael: Precisely. Paul Johnson makes the same point.

As for "Their contribution was significant, both numerically and operationally." No, Stuart, you're wrong: it wasn't significant either numerically or operationally. At the time Ireland had a population of about 3 million--men, women, and children. The number of male adults of military age was correspondingly quite small; the number who actually served in the British armed forces, smaller still. In fact the number of Irishmen who served was insignificant and unimportant. The Irish promote the myth that large numbers of their young men took part in the conflict, perhaps because they know, deep down--or not so deep down--that they stayed on the sidelines during history's greatest conflict, when the fate of the free world hung in the balance. I say this as an Irish-American, an ethnic cohort that actually did make hugely significant--even vital--contributions to the war effort.

Stuart Koehl| 6.3.11 @ 10:26PM

Approximately 39,000 Irish citizens served in the British army, with other significant contingents serving in the RAF and especially the British Merchant Navy. Other Irish citizens went to Belfast and to Britain proper to work in the war industries.

The numbers may not seem great, but one must understand that, by Autumn of 1944, Britain was effectively scraping the bottom of the manpower battle, forcing them to disband a number of divisions to provide replacements for the remainder. Without the contribution of Irish manpower both in the military as well as the Merchant Navy and war industries, the situation would have been much more grave, as their places would have had to be taken by British subjects.

JP| 6.4.11 @ 11:15AM

If I am not mistaken, it was the Irish Guard (2nd Batallion motorized infantry) that led Horrocks XXX Corps across the Netherlands during Operation Market Garden.

dee see| 6.4.11 @ 9:55AM

To the 50,000 American servicemen killed, over 5000
STILL missing, the tens of thousands of allied
casualties, and the MILLIONS of KOREANS
who have died commencing on June 6th 1950
---and continuing even now -------------WE REMEMBER.

The rest of you can follow your
usual Tavistock/Frankfuhrt School programming
for the day ----under those CHEM-trail and
Fukishima fallout skies that don't exist.

Michael L. Hauschild| 6.4.11 @ 9:19PM

This just in, Franco is still dead.

john dubose| 6.5.11 @ 8:43AM

Excuse me. But I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. If there was some spin in it fine. Never saw a claim that it was pure history.

Latest Headlines

Real Immigration Reform Requires Free Markets

Ross Kaminsky|37 comments

Enough With the Bipartisanship

Matt Purple|27 comments

The United States of El Norte

Larry Thornberry|22 comments

Vodka = Vodka = Vodka

Daniel J. Flynn|33 comments

Laying Down My Pen

Quin Hillyer

Tornado Chasers

Claire Healey|13 comments

We Will Remember

Roger Kaplan|5 comments

The Chinese Waltz

George H. Wittman|1 comment

The Spectacle Blog

Stein on IRS Scandal

Patrick Ryan | 10:29AM

The Restricted Engine

Yogi Love | 6:00AM

Muslim, Er, Youth Riots in Sweden

Aaron Goldstein | 12:41AM

Good Luck Quin

Aaron Goldstein | 12:13AM

One of The London Soldier Beheading Suspects British Born

Aaron Goldstein | 5.23.13

Lois Lerner Now on Administrative Leave

Kaylin Bugos | 5.23.13

Crisis Looms, and Kevin Williamson Can Hardly Wait

Luca Gattoni-Celli | 5.23.13

Dismantling Networks, Preventing Footholds

Ross Kaminsky | 5.23.13

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Pope Culture

By George Sim Johnston

A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck

By P.J. O'Rourke

Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
Dames at Sea

By John Corry
In the Absence of Guns

By Mark Steyn

In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The Metaphysical Martini

By Werner J. Dannhauser
Counting the Costs of Clintonism

By Robert H. Bork

The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
Chuck McHagel

By George Neumayr

It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted

By Douglas Bartholomew
It’s the Best Time of the Year

By Mark Steyn

The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
The Bush Crack-Up

By Brit Hume

Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?

Clip of the Day

H/T to National Review Online

The American Spectator