Kattiera Nana I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Steineded How sad is this?

MusicChat It's complicated... I really like the directing, acting and writing but, there are issues with the way it's shot that I just can't deny. As much as I love the storytelling and the fantastic performance but, there are also certain scenes that didn't need to exist.

Sameer Callahan It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

Mike Beranek Not being a general fan of war movies, this vintage treasure grabbed me as very special. There's a true story as the backbone but this goes way beyond a procedural recounting of the history, and the drama and acting performances take the centre stage. Lancaster is tough, gritty, embodying the character as the Resistance leader. There as so many great characters and actors and with the astounding special effects of rail yard bombs and screaming steam trains it's all crammed in to this lavish production. The human cost of standing up to the Nazi's is made clear and the heroism of the lowly foot soldiers like station masters and engineers is evident. The writing is impeccable, and there is even a relatively sympathetic characterisation of the nonetheless still brutal German officer. There's jeopardy and death left right and centre, and what I found the crowning achievement is that it's an intelligent film, which even poses the question as to what the point of all the suffering was for, for Art? For French national glory? Indeed what was the point of the war at all, with a poetic final scene.

James Hitchcock In August 1944, with Allied forces closing in on Paris, the German forces seize a number of art masterpieces from the Musee du Jeu de Paume and attempt to move them by train to Germany. The officer in charge of the operation, Colonel Franz von Waldheim, orders Paul Labiche, a French railway official, to arrange the shipment. Unknown to the Germans, Labiche is also a member of the Resistance, and Mademoiselle Villard, the curator of the Museum, asks him and his cell to delay the train until Paris has been liberated. At first Labiche is unwilling to help her as this will mean putting human lives at risk for the sake of what he considers "mere paintings", but later changes his mind after Papa Boule, an elderly engine driver, is executed for attempting his own private act of sabotage. (This story is, very loosely, based upon true events).It would appear that the film's original director, Arthur Penn, was sacked and replaced by John Frankenheimer at the behest of by its star Burt Lancaster, who wanted to turn it into more of an action movie, which he felt would do better at the box-office. (Lancaster and Frankenheimer had earlier worked together on "The Birdman of Alcatraz" and "Seven Days in May). As a result, the script was also rewritten. I would not generally approve of this sort of ego-driven string-pulling by movie stars, especially when a director as gifted as Penn is one of its victims, but have to admit that in this particular case it had some interesting consequences. Lancaster certainly got his action sequences, and some of them are spectacular. A train crash was staged using real trains, and an Allied air raid on a rail yard was filmed by blowing up a real rail yard. (The French railway authorities had long wanted to demolish it but had lacked the funds to do so before the film company did the job for them).In the film as originally conceived, Labiche was to have been an art lover, risking his life to save his country's artistic heritage. In the film as actually made he is not particularly interested in art and has never visited the museum to see the pictures which he is now trying to save. He is motivated by, at most, a patriotic view that the Germans should not be allowed to steal anything belonging to the French state. It is Waldheim who is the art lover. This does not mean that he is a "good German". In many ways, especially his cruelty and disregard for human life, he is a typical Nazi. In one respect, however, he is very untypical of the Nazis indeed. The looted art works are all by Impressionist or Post-Impressionist artists like Renoir, Monet, Van Gogh and Cezanne, whom the Nazis despised as degenerate. Waldheim does not despise these artists at all- he loves them with a passion. Although he tries to justify his operation to his superiors in terms of the financial value of the paintings, suggesting that the Germans might use them as a bargaining-chip in peace negotiations, it is clear that he is driven more by his private obsession than by any political or military considerations. His attitude becomes clear in his final arrogant speech to Labiche: "A painting means as much to you as a string of pearls to an ape..... The paintings are mine. They always will be. Beauty belongs to the man who can appreciate it".It seems odd that a film about art should have been made in black-and-white (something fast falling into disuse in the mid-sixties), but I think that Frankenheimer's choice was the right one. We only see the pictures themselves for short periods, and the gritty monochrome photography seems appropriate to the railway stations, marshalling yards, industrial premises and working-class neighbourhoods which form the backdrop to much of the film. One could almost describe it as a kitchen-sink action movie.We cannot know how Penn's projected film might have turned out, but Frankenheimer's is certainly a very good one. At its heart are two excellent performances from Lancaster as Labiche and Paul Scofield as Waldheim. The increase in the number of action sequences does not detract from the film's central moral question; can the preservation of a work of art, however, valuable, justify the loss of a single human life? (This is a question which has once again taken on relevance with the recent deliberate destruction by ISIS and other militant Islamic groups of artworks deemed offensive or un-Islamic). The film also raises a second question: can any moral value be ascribed to the appreciation of great art when a knowledgeable connoisseur like Waldheim can also be an amoral brute? These two questions are probably unanswerable- certainly no definitive answer could ever be given- but that does not mean we should not ask them. "The Train" is a rare example of a wartime adventure which combines action not just with kitchen-sink realism but also with philosophical depth. 8/10 An odd coincidence. I doubt if the use of the name "Waldheim" for the film's villain seemed in any way remarkable in 1964. After, however, subsequent revelations about the wartime career of Kurt Waldheim, the former UN Secretary-General and Austrian President, the scriptwriter seems to have been strangely prescient in choosing that particular surname.

SnoopyStyle John Frankenheimer directed this masterpiece about the french resistance trying to stop a train loaded with art from leaving. Paris is about to fall probably in only 3 or 4 days. But the Germans have loaded all the best Art on a train bound for Germany. The resistance is asked to stop it.Labiche (Burt Lancaster) is the leader of the resistance at the train yard. He is reluctant to act to save a bunch of pictures. They started out with 18 members, had 4 members in the morning, but is down to 3. Could he really risk the rest on a scheme to save some paintings? The plans and schemes need to be mapped out much better. They need to do some better explanations. But it's Labiche's evolution that's important. Burt Lancaster is a powerful presence, and his acting is top-notched.

basilisksamuk I'd never come across this film before but I wish I had. In one sense this is yet another movie about WWII but in many other respects it stands out as being quite different. It poses some difficult questions without ever telling you what the answers should be though you'll no doubt find yourself pondering on them long after the movie ends. Impressively it manages to do this within the confines of a very exciting adventure movie which will have you on the edge of your seat right to the end.From what I've subsequently read about filming it appears that nearly all the train crashes, explosions and destruction shown in the film were done for real and the same is true of the stunts, many of them performed by Burt Lancaster. I can think of no better example of how CGI work cannot begin to match real action. This film is nearly fifty years old and puts most modern action movies to shame.Burt Lancaster, the star of the film, is someone I've never warmed to though he is always watchable. Here he is perfectly cast and uses his athletic skills to excellent effect. You realise that he is even more perfectly cast when you see the final scene of the film. There are no easy answers in this film and there's probably no better expression of existentialism outside of literature.