RW: What do you think it says about us as a culture that we don’t see films like this anymore? Are we too cynical to be entertained by a film with such a strong, singular point of view? Do we grow suspect when film makers try to advance a personal agenda? We still do it in the theatre - with plays like Tony Kushner’s ANGELS IN AMERICA or HOMEBODY/KABUL - but seldom to never do we see it anymore in film.

JB: I think there are two answers to that. The closest we get to something like this, where somebody has a message they want to make into a narrative film is Spike Lee. BAMBOOZLED is an excellent example, and I like it very much - at least up until the last half hour. He makes his point very well in that film but then, at least for me, goes well past it.

RW: I like that film a lot, too. But it does sort of turn into a needless parody of Peckenpah, doesn’t it?

JB: (Laughing) There’s also a simpler answer, and that’s that we’re a different society now, and that’s because we have different outlets for this sort of thing - television and the internet. And we get it in these other places. But VICTORY THROUGH AIR POWER is certainly unique in its day for being a political statement, a documentary and entertaining, too. Michael Moore is the other closest thing I can think of. His latest film even had animation in it. BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE is the closest thing to being lectured to like VICTORY THROUGH AIR POWER - in this case Michael Moore is explaining why guns are bad. So in a weird way you could almost say Disney was the Michael Moore of his day. The politics are not the same, but still… Even the networks know that if they put on a dry documentary about something political or any social issue that they’re in competition today more than ever. That’s why I mention Michael Moore. You need something loud and multimedia, and back in those days they made documentaries that were dry and dull. Disney did something different.

RW: Plus it’s very well structured.

JB: Yes, it’s very well structured. It starts with the history of aviation and ends with something dramatic and exciting. And the audience is enjoying what they’re watching which ultimately leads to this guy’s more serious and urgent point, later in the film.

RW: Do you think it’s still fresh?

JB: Yes, I do. It may not be contemporary, and I repeat that BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE can be seen as the contemporary equivalent of this film, but it’s still enjoyable to watch. I want people who come to see it to be aware of what to expect. It’s a very dark film. It’s not typical of anything else that you think of as Disney. It’s not very long, just over an hour. And that’s something else to remember when considering how people saw this. Our generation doesn’t even know, maybe I do and you do, but not many people remember how people went to the movies just forty or fifty years ago. The theatres - not the big downtown theatres, but the local theatres - ran double bills and changed those double bills every two days if not every day. And they showed newsreels and short subjects and cartoons between those films and the films ran continuously. Often times the lights didn’t even come up, they just kept projecting. When I was a kid it was not uncommon for our family to say “let’s go to the movies�? and just go, not to look in the paper for show times. You went and sat down and if you were in the middle of the picture you just sat and waited for it to start again and catch what you had missed. That’s where the phrase “this is where I came in�? comes from. The point of that is that Disney was making this film to fit in with the way films were shown back in those days. It’s a film that probably would have been playing with another “A�? picture, or this may very well have been a “B�? picture. That’s another reason to look into why it wasn’t part of Disney’s deal with RKO.

RW: And yet it was still innovative and not just typical fare.

JB: As was always the case with Disney. He kept a feeling going all throughout his career of “what else can we do? What else can animation do?�? And that’s something else you can say about VICTORY THROUGH AIR POWER was that it was another example of “let’s try this.�? It wasn’t the norm. It definitely strengthened the studio. Actually I think the War strengthened all the studios. Even the worst animation divisions at the smallest studios were strengthened by having the opportunity and being forced to experience drawing realistic tanks and the effects animation of explosions and bombs. It made them better animators, and it made animation better in general.

This last point of Beck’s is particularly important to keep in mind. Gaining knowledge through the experience and advancing more than just the bottom line is almost a lost notion. Of course there is a perfectly valid expectation for a film to turn a profit. After all, the first intention of show business is in the second half of the name - BUSINESS. But there’s no longer any real excitement for something more - for something beyond that. Disney, at least for now, appears to have lost sight of the idea that “there will be some lasting benefit to having done this. It will move us forward and advance us as a company.�? Over-milked franchises aren’t the same thing.

•  •  •

Jerry Beck is right to be excited about a live audience seeing this film again, even 60 years later. Here is a chance to see a bit of Disney that tells us not just about the times in which the film was made, but about the mindset of its maker during this critical point in American history. That’s why I’d like to make sure that some lucky LaughingPlace.com reader and their guest will be able to share that experience first hand as we’re giving away a pair of tickets for ANIMATION AT WAR. The evening begins at 8:00 p.m. Wednesday, October 22, 2003 at the AMPAS at 8949 Wilshire Boulevard in Beverly Hills. To enter you simply post your response on the discussion board for this article - by clicking below on “DISCUSS IT�? (don’t make the mistake of answering in the ‘feedback’ section, you must post to the discussion board) and answer both parts of the following: Part 1: “Gremlins�?, the uncompleted feature Jerry Beck cited in our interview, was based on a book by what well known author? Part 2: “Ajax the Stool Pigeon�?, an uncompleted Disney short about a military carrier pigeon who suffers from acrophobia that prevents him from continuing the family tradition of serving in war times, bears a striking resemblance to what upcoming animated feature being distributed and co-produced by Disney?

(All illustrations ©The Walt Disney Company)

Discuss It

• Discuss this article on the LaughingPlace.com Discussion Boards

Related Links

• List of all Rhett Wickham Columns

-- Rhett Wickham