Sons of Liberty (1939)

Did you people see the same film I saw?

I have absolutely never seen anything like this movie before. You have to see this movie.

Excellent characters with emotional depth. My wife, daughter and granddaughter all enjoyed it...and me, too! Very good movie! You won't be disappointed.

Unshakable, witty and deeply felt, the film will be paying emotional dividends for a long, long time.

In 1939, as the world perched on the brink of World War, "Sons of Liberty" served to remind the American public of the sacrifices necessary to preserve our freedoms, particularly freedom of religion. And its focus a Jewish patriot might be seen as an appeal to recognize the contributions of Jewish Americans during the American Revolution and to sympathize with Jews who were undergoing religious persecution in Germany and elsewhere.One has to wonder how much of the story of "Sons of Liberty" is true. It feels like a fabrication with only the most basic facts being true. The use of the breathless voice-over, sounding like an episode of Zorro, only serves to heighten the feeling that "facts" were embellished and even created.As a young student in the public school systems, I was familiar with the dramatized and sterilized versions of history--where the motives were so pure and the lines of conflict so clear. Such colorful but biased reconstructions of history only served as impediments in my later search for historical truth."Sons of Liberty" is so overly dramatized that its value as a revolutionary recounting is practically nil. It is understandable that Hollywood might produce such a piece in 1939 given the world situation. But now, its super-stylized, bombastic approach to story telling--with chronological events so condensed and orchestral flourishes for every scene--makes it only an interesting remnant of the run up to WWII.

Back in the days when a night at the movies meant a whole package of entertainment, the studios cranked out dozens of so-called "short subjects" as light filler material. They generally purported to be educational and many of them gave a potted history of some historical figure or process, with an emphasis on wholesome pop facts and just a cursory nod towards accuracy. They were usually rather cheap and cheerful affairs too. Sons of Liberty is an exception – a short subject which, despite its brevity, has been produced with all the lavishness of an A-grade feature.For its cast, Sons of Liberty does not utilize the front rank of Warner Brothers stars, but certainly picks from the cream of character players. The lead role is given great weight and dignity by Claude Rains, whose charisma stems not from forcefulness but from a calm, thoughtful composure. It's also nice to see this stock baddie in a heroic role for once. In this respect, it almost seems like a cheeky in-joke that perennial female villain Gale Sondergaard is cast as his wife, especially since her part is so small and doesn't really use her talents much. There are also brief appearances by Donald Crisp and Montagu Love, which like Sondergaard's are so short they seem to be more to add class than actual quality.The director is Michael Curtiz, at the time one of the most highly regarded of Warner's team. Curtiz always packed a lot of information into the frame in order to quickly establish meaning and context, so in many ways he is ideal for the whistle-stop pace of the short subject. There's a bit of typical Curtiz arty symbolism going on here with the Claude Rains character being repeatedly associated with flames. A bit superfluous perhaps, but the linking motif at least allows for a bit of smooth flow as Curtiz works a candle or a lantern into the beginning or end of a shot, which is often the only bit of vibrant colour in the scene.Ultimately however, Sons of Liberty cannot rise above its short subject roots. Its prime function is to inform rather than entertain, and so like all short subjects it crams in info rather than allowing scenes to play for drama or excitement. Just as one scene begins to build, we get a bit of voice-over narration skipping us on to something else. Pretty as it looks, and finely acted as it is, Sons of Liberty really looks a bit like a twenty-minute trailer for a full-length feature, which in no way makes it a substitute for the real thing.

Another Oscar-winning Technicolor short, a product this time of Warner Bros. rather than MGM; featuring the involvement of possibly their top director and such first-rate actors as Claude Rains and Gale Sondergaard, it is handled in the studio's recognizable style. The plot is a recreation of a historical incident from America's infancy, with various immigrants (led by a Jew, Haym Salomon) uniting into the titular 'resistance' group – that was also mentioned in D. W. Griffith's America (1924) – against the occupying British forces. With WWII looming, this clearly made for a stirring patriotic call to the masses: however, even when taken on its own merits, the film proves interesting (especially for the unenlightened) and entertaining.

A refreshing little short about a little known element of our Revolutionary History. Someone who almost single handedly financed the Revolution should have gained a larger place in our history books, but sadly, he was relegated to the footnotes section. This short began by showing the Jewish Congregation in Philadelphia - the oldest synagogue in America. I was perplexed by the previous user from England who felt it was made as a slap in the face of the British as they were about to go to war. Ironically, the British were not heavily represented in this short at all, unless the subject of the Revolution, merely by its existence, is an insult to the British. If that's the way they felt at the outset of war I'm surprised they didn't deny our help feeling the insult would be too great to allow yanks to come to their assistance...or should I say win the war.As Haym was represented gathering his funding and moving it around the country, it was ironically shown that his greatest antagonist was pursuit by the Hessian Soldiers...sure they were employed by the British...but if someone wanted to point out some pre-WWII propaganda elements in this film, you couldn't look any further than the brave little group of Jews being chased after by the Germans! I'm not a student of Haym Solomon history, but this element might even have been solely added for political effect and perhaps to cushion any anti-British sentiment in this subject. America has always been proud of its beginnings, and has made many movies/shorts in celebration. You also forget that even at this early point, it was a serious possibility that we could soon be entering a war. Patriotic symbolism in Hollywood was not aimed at the British, regardless of the British actors who obviously didn't think this was a slap.The production was fine, nice color, acting was fine...nothing out of the ordinary, but still very enjoyable and very valuable for pre-WWII American cultural studies.