The Lion Has Wings

1939 "The Film Hitler Doesn't Want You To See!"
The Lion Has Wings
5.7| 1h16m| en| More Info
Released: 03 November 1939 Released
Producted By: London Films Productions
Country: United Kingdom
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

This early, influential propaganda film blends documentary and studio footage to show the valiant efforts of the Royal Air Force to defend the British people against the Nazis.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

London Films Productions

Trailers & Images

Reviews

blanche-2 I really wasn't expecting to see a documentary when I saw the names Merle Oberon and Ralph Richardson, but a documentary it was. "The Lion Has Wings" is a propaganda film produced by Alexander Korda, showing the world as the Nazis begin to take over Europe.If you know about England at this time in history, and I do, you perhaps won't be as interested in this as others. The British really wanted to fight, but they were afraid that America wouldn't join them, and they really didn't know how they could stave off the Germans without the U.S.Whether they could withstand the Germans or not, the Brits wanted to show that they were ready to fight. Some interesting actual footage. Oberon and Richardson were just there to get people into the theaters. This is pretty dry stuff, although back then, a film of this type was important for morale.
James Hitchcock Made in the autumn of 1939, "The Lion Has Wings" was the first British propaganda film made after the outbreak of the Second World War. It was made in a documentary rather than a narrative style, and consists of three "chapters" with a linking story revolving around a senior RAF officer and his family. It opens with a section comparing the relaxed- easygoing lifestyle of the British people with the goose-stepping militarism of Nazi Germany, which gives the impression that the citizens of the Third Reich spent their entire lives taking part in one military parade or Nuremberg Rally after another. The second chapter recreates an actual bombing raid on German warships in the Kiel Canal and the third shows how an attack by Luftwaffe bombers is repelled by the RAF. There are also scenes inserted from an earlier film, "Fire Over England", about the defeat of the Spanish Armada. The implication, of course, is that the Nazis will be defeated, just as the Spaniards were.Propaganda documentaries like this one may be of historic interest in the light they shed on social attitudes at the time. From a modern perspective we can see that some of the preoccupations of democracies in the thirties were not as different from those of the dictatorships as people liked to believe at the time. Some of the scenes in the film's opening section- idyllic countryside, healthy young men exercising or taking part in sport, happy children playing outside new social housing complexes provided by a benevolent government- would not have seemed out of place in a German propaganda film. Although presumably the Germans would have had to find local equivalents for such things as oasthouses and rugby matches, and it is difficult to imagine Hitler playing "Neath the Spreading Chestnut Tree" as King George VI does here.Perhaps what most strikes a modern audience about the film is its tone of smug patriotic confidence, a confidence that was to be sorely tested in the next few months after it was made. The assumption that the British Army was at least the equal of the Wehrmacht was one that did not hold up well during the disasters of 1940. Rather surprisingly, the film makes absolutely no reference to our French allies. Perhaps that is just as well. If it had done so, it would no doubt have reassured viewers that the French Army was an invincible war machine and the Maginot Line an impregnable fortification. The assurance that the RAF, unlike the Nazis, would only bomb military, not civilian, targets must have looked very hollow several years on, especially after the destruction of cities like Dresden.One thing the film did get right was the importance of air power in the coming war, and in this context at least its assurances were to be proved correct when the RAF did indeed defeat the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain, although preventing night-time bombing raids was to prove more difficult than is shown here. The documentary scenes of the war in the air, however, are full of errors, largely because these were put together using newsreel footage and at this stage of the war no such footage existed of German military equipment. Thus a German "bomber" is actually a civilian airliner, and the image has been reversed, which means that its tailfin bears an anti-clockwise swastika, a symbol never used by the Nazis, who always used the clockwise version. Many of the British aircraft shown are biplane fighters, which were already obsolete by 1939. If you look carefully you will notice that one of the "German" ships bombed by the RAF is actually flying the White Ensign! My DVD of the film was one given away in a newspaper promotion as part of a series of "Great British War Films". The series did indeed include some great films, such as "Went the Day Well?", "The Dam Busters", "Forty-Ninth Parallel" and "Ice Cold in Alex", but I cannot really see that "The Lion Has Wings" merits inclusion in such distinguished company. Propaganda documentaries, especially when seen seventy years after the events they describe, are rarely as entertaining as fictional narratives. This film may have played its part in keeping up morale during the "Phoney War", but today it is of interest to historians only. 5/10
chrisart7 One can understand why Alexander Korda and his entourage interrupted their work on the marvellous fantasy film "Thief of Bagdad" to construct this patriotic, morale-boosting quickie, "The Lion Has Wings." It's somewhat amusing to see the lovely June Duprez still with her 'vulcan' pointed eyebrows (to make her look more exotic for her princess role in "Thief of Bagdad"). Ralph Richardson and several other officers from "The Four Feathers" are also on hand here, but in then-contemporary uniforms. This is not an 'art' film by any stretch, but it fulfills its purpose and is certainly of interest to anyone who has seen the other two films (aforementioned) as a minor footnote.
lorenellroy This is by no means a good movie but it does have substantial curiosity value being the first British movie to be wholly completed after the start of the Second World War .It was completed in 5 weeks and released to cinemas in November 1939 . Costing just £ 30,000 it was financed by its producer ,the renowned Alexander Korda , cashing in his life insurance policy and is a flag waving slice of patriotism aimed at stiffening British resolve in the early days of the war .It was shot in 12 days and is a curious hybrid of a picture .It opens with an illustrated lecture ,delivered by the newsreel commentator ,E V H Emmett charting the rise of Nazism and contrasting the militaristic stance of Germany with the more sporting and pacifist pursuits of the British .This is simple stuff but true -and those morons carping at action in Iraq would be well advised to study this period of history to learn (always assuming their blinkered minds are capable of learning ) what appeasement leads to .It makes copious use of footage from the Elizabethan themed Fire Over England ,with Flora Robson as Queen Bess rallying the troops before they sailed out to deal with the Spanish Armada . Its main theme is the contrast between militarism and the virtues it deems England stands for -virtues articulated by Merle Oberon in a scene with Ralph Richardson " We must keep our land ,darling ..we must keep our freedom .We must fight for the things we believe in ...Truth and Beauty ..and Kindness "One especially compelling piece of documentary footage contrasts the bombastic Nuremeberg rallies with shots of the shy and diffident King George at a Boy Scout rally singing "Under the Spreading Chestnut Tree"The staged scenes of the attack on the Kiel canal are a bit phoney but overall the movie does a neat job of pointing out the contrast between militarism and democracyThe emphasis is too socially restricted with scenes of English life being confined to suburbia and the landed gentry but as a social document this has value .As a movie drama it is negligible