B
* Andrei COJOC : Keywords Moscow”. NorthStar”myattention direct important most “e ones: three will on I 1947: 80). Although some 20 movies with a clear pro-Soviet message were produced betw (Committee ghting” them keep to back, the on pat a “givingalliance, forced ing movie scripts, and major the studios (MGM, Warner Brothers, RKO) intentions to capitalize on new the evelt’sof “so!anduse the granddesign power”, OWI oftothe (Oce War Infor demonstrate that pro-Soviet the attitudes found on big the screens were factors: amixof several from Roos- perio interwar attitude the towards the illustratinghowin communism evolved n the concerning notice give to World also of Warbutyears II, rst the during Hol pro-communist behind process the present to only not is paper this of aim e Abstract 3KLORVRSK\,QWHUQDWLRQDO5HODWLRQV'RFWRUDO6FKRRO “Palmer Raids” (Heale, 1990:72). the called now are what in aliens, 10000 of deportation and rounding-up the ordering Attorneyshoulders“redofwere put General the on radicals” US Mitch bythe mai andunrests public ese coast, leaders. industrial and East ocials government eighteen the of bombings over all riots race ourishing workers), million 4 over with The on-screen portrayal of the communist the on-screen The of portrayal 1942 before MissionMoscow to – II moviespro-Soviet during World War messageAmericanThe of Bolshevik Revolution, and fueled by such events as the “greatstrikes the as events such by fueled and Revolution, Bolshevik (7:((1 $1' OWI, Mission to Moscow, World War Propaganda II, Roosevelt, The North Star, Song of Russia,North of The Song Star, LV3KG&DQGLGDWHDW%DEHś%RO\DL8QLYHUVLW\IURP& 1920, e US witnessed its rst Red Scare, ignited by the 1917 the by ignited Scare, Red rst its witnessed US e 1920, HPDLO DQGUHLFRMRF#FHQWUXOGHGLFUR of Muscovites the through his wringer, and have they comed Rotarians, Brother and Elks, 33rd Mason” Degree out shaved, washed, sober, to families, their good „War has put Hollywood’s traditional conception OXM1DSRFD)DFXOW\RI+LVWRU\DQG ,”Russia”,ofSong “Missionand to mation)directives concern- ature of the visual message, visual the of ature d. Moreover,d. will paper this of Un-American Activities, Un-American of Variety, 1942 28October lywood lm-making lm-making lywood AndreiCOJOC een een 1942 and 1944, ” (3600 strikes strikes (3600 ” ell Palmer ell © The Author(s) 2013 l * 1(1) 91–104
91 J G P C D 92 J G P C D a steady zone. e membership of the communist party was at its highest peak, and peak, highest itsat was communist party the membershipof e zone.steady a the breakthrough recognition of the Soviet Union seemed to put the bilatera ers were identied as responsible for mismanagement the that to crash. led the Now, the villain stereotype has a more individualistic characteristic: Ba foreig of consequence a portrayed were injustice and poverty crashed, Street market crashed. What changed a!er that is the portrayal of the nature stock the when 1929, until systemcapitalist the of critique Soviet the diminished 1920s th of prosperity the addition, In Hungary,an. and Germany like countries in succeed t failed movements le!ist that considering unrealistic, seemed revolution worldwide distribution of such material (Ross, 1999:141). for support their gave legislators state and Governors Senators, them. 1% of adult the population of (Ross, America 1999:141). than less 118.000, PartyCommunistfeared the and members, 40000 had Party Socialist the US were disintegrating either by government harassment, or by internal division: ganizationsof either groupscommunist, radical In orthese fact, socialists. Bolsheviks US steel was strike ignited by Trotskyists. showed the mail bombings as the work of andBolsheviks Undercurrent exp andviolentmob. choreographedweremore being angry an Volcalike seem to worker of crowds wages: low and ination postwar of consequence a as not and viks, worksBo well-trainedof by the ignited being as 1919-1920 of strikes the portrayed nature).good Russian one (which has no chance of overthrowing the American government, due t government) bad a overthrew (which Revolution French the compares later the th basis socialist a with utopistsettlement an with dealt movie rst the While released. were (1922) Storm the of Orphans and (1919) happiness to Right e unions, corruption, were strikes put aside, considered dangerous too (Shaw, 2007:13). Moreover,screens. bigwit dealt the thatpicturesreach to ti-communistpictures f context perfect the o"ered Hays, H Will ocial Church Presbyterian the tors), Dis and Producers Picture (MotionMPPDA the of head appointed newly the by Moreover,of election the a of danger the 1920s, early the in climax prewar its had Scare Red the Although to accustomed were lms anti-radical many endorsements, governmental for As e irony is, as Steven Ross points out, that the labor unions were seen as str as seen wereunions labor the thatout,points Ross Steven as ironyis, e Hours) Dangerous and Shadow Great e Men, (Virtuous lms of group Another is, together with a conservatory approach on Hollywood’s movie themes ha Hollywood’sapproachonthemes movie conservatory a with together is, It is in hostile this environment that motion pictures likeon Bolshevism Tri FranklinDelanoRoosevelt ANDREI COJOC ANDREI (FDR) as president in 1933, and 1933, presidentin as (FDR) of evil: Before Wall nkers and manag- at destroys itself,destroys at the creation and creation the l relations on lains that the no (1919) no n threats. n al (1919), al ong or-ong h labor h or an- or tribu- ndled ndled o the the o to its lshe- the the in o e e s dreds of editorials) (Shaw, 2007:23). donemore Unionone Soviet in todebunk linethe thanwehunhaveable in todo been Garbo YorkTribune(GretaNew and papers) funny the never but Marx read who gotexcellentfromNew York reviews humor-sidedhumoristicof the a Times ( view lm Poland), the ofinvasion Army Red the and Nazi-communist pact (the 1939 late of polit the Normallyhumantoreluctant dueface.movies, praising of political communist the givinganti-communist byother fromicks, apart itself sets movie the all DespiteParry, 149). and(McLaughlin 2006: capitalistaround virtue by turned states that an average Soviet citizen, far from being an rationed.ideologist, given is the chan food censored, is information outside where place a as portrayed Union, which Soviet the to deported is Ninothkacapitalism, to her converts he A!er (Mel Leon lawyer,witty,capitalist the and Garbo) (Greta work-obsessed, It’sinterwar period. lovethe woman, new Soviet-style the between story toug cumulatedanti-communismwhole illustrates Ninothka the (1939) cosmetics the and of j on money spending of way irresponsible and foolish her for character lead the icaturist; Ernst Lubitsch’s Trouble in Paradise (1932) depicts the communist as criticizing Spanish War started. anti-communistbefore transforming to seen be seemed into anti-fascism, once Civ the released between 1942andreleased between 1945. between this agency and Hollywood can help shed light relationshi the objectives the UnderstandingInformation).War of (Oce OWI the of back the on for entering the war on the Soviet Union’s side. e responsibility for such a ta Union Soviet the shapedovernight thatbe to hadFDR receive could so popular ance between the two opposite systems was a necessity. So, the American’s percep when Hitler began sending his Panzers towards Moscow, and a!er December ’41 the alli- was in charge of overseeing the message of the wartime movies (Koppes and Bl support the war e"ort. Mellet established a Hollywood m oce ran by Nelson the about Hollywood advising of charge in was Mellet, Lowell New-Dealer, liberal (Bureaua MotionbyprewarofinformationBMP Pictures) headed eagencies. The war and war OWIThe Nevertheless, even with all that, the portrayal of the communist continued to e United States’ attitude towards the Soviet Union shi!ed on 22on shi!ed Union Soviet the towards attitudeStates’ United e e OWI was formed by an executive order on 12 WORLD WAR II – WORLD II WAR THE MESSAGETHE DURING MOVIES PRO-SOVIET OF AMERICAN THE NORTH STAR,THE SONG RUSSIA,OF MISSION MOSCOW TO th of June 1942 consolidating several of pro-Soviet lms nd of June 1941, June of vin Douglas). Douglas). vin Poynter, who ical context ical h, cold and sk was put ack, 1977: ce, will be e plot e be be a car- support tions of eans to eans ewelry ewelry these, these, folk has is il il p a - 93 J G P C D 94 J G P C D Star, Song of Russia and Mission to Moscow. N importantmostpro-Soviete ofpropaganda pillarsthree 1943: e in emerged Days of Glory (1944), Columbia’s Boy from Stalingrad (1943) and Counter Attack (1945). RKO’sWarner’s(1943), (1943), Moscow Girlsto Artist’sRussianUnited Mission ree Goldwin’sSamuelmovies: (1943), MGM’s pro-SovietRussia (1943), of StarSong North Warner,Harry or Samuel Goldstein could capitalize. L where areas into lms the of distribution the direct could bureau tional reality. ey would announce BMP of the themes of the productions, so that th denyin simply war,by on capitalize to way a found RKO,Paramount,it Brothers, ner ght of the heroic villagers, portrayed by an all American cast: WalterH cast: American all an by portrayed villagers, heroic the of ght of blood to provide plasma for their wounded. e highlight of the movie is the mans in June 1941 who, besides wanting to erase the village, have been draining children b the byattacked under being is village, American an as shaped border), sian Bessarab the on somewhere Hellmanlocates (which farm collective small A ple: stotransformedandepiece.Hollywoodpure-blood intoit lm, a the direct Milestone Lewis army, born the Ukrainian in hired SamuelGoldsteindra!ed was ler none-other that Viaceslav Molotov (Koppes and Black, 2000: 209). But a!er director Wy lig green a given wasproduction the documentary,thaton-sceneand andoing for Roosevelt’s,ofH protégée a byapproached was Hellman claim, Black ory licited Hellman to write a pro-Soviet movie. As lm historians Clayton Kop Hellman’s ocial biographer, William Wright was that ocials from the Whit Soviet Union (Westbrook, 1990: 168). e other side of the pre-production, according to documentarbassador,a approvalLitvinov,shootingMaximget a for toorder in nism, but we donot our reject Russian (United ally’ States, 1942). co reject Americans ‘we that out nd we manner surprising most a In Russians. ght the unity lies about Russia (..), emphasize the might and heroism, of the victory Town” is advised to learn more about the their former enemy, e Soviet Unio guidelines united in“Manual for Motion the Picture Industry” 89). To help the Hollywood raise awareness of the nature of WWII, Poynter wro The North StarNorth The It is in contextthis major that every studio (except Paramount) submitted its sha In 1942, screenwriter Lillian Hellman and director Wyler met with the Soviet am Soviet the with met Wyler director and Hellman Lillian screenwriter 1942, In Although OWI clashed several times with the heads of the Big Studios, MGM, War-MGM,Studios, Big the of heads the with times several clashed OWI Although In a comprehensive third chapter of the handbook, called “Who are our al ANDREI COJOC ANDREI pes pes and Greg- ouis B Mayer,B ouis ouston, Dana ouston, arry Hopkins arry lies”, “Tinsel e House so- n: We must rutal Ger- rutal resistance e interna- ry is sim- is ry te a set of y in the the in y ia-Rus- mmu- ht byht re of orth orth the the to g - - people ght and die” (Life Magazine 1943:119). t how showing document a (..) poem tone“an eloquent it called magazine Life tone, without any political pondering at all (..) lyric and savage” (Crowther, 1943a). In “apicturemovie the called 1950s), early the anti-communistin propagandaof nent up inspiring itself from Russian popular music (Pollack, 2000:381). b folk,Ukrainian be Aaronbyto composedsupposed andCopland,was which stayed at ocials’ Soviet houses, beneting from an NKVD escort. Mos visited she Whenever villages. aboutmention to not people, Russian its to the Soviet Union, as it turns out, she didn’t know anything at all about t accurate of future inview the planned by Stalin for world. the belongs to us. If we ght for it. And we will ght for it’. In a strangee way men. all for world free a ‘We’llcome:make to days of judgmentpronounce Ukrainian people, a!er of decades oppression. weapo loaded giving men their accept would authorityRussian any that likely Moreover,village. whole the onlight do feudalistic itgovernment, a shedding loca any of or regime, communist the of mentioned is Nothing westerns). American thems governed that assemblies ad-hoc the (resemblinghomeland their protect h governmental or military of trace a without and guerillas into themselves nize picturesquethe roo!ops, Iowa could this be or Oklahoma (Koppes and Black, 2000). an room, dining the in icon the brought-up;forproperexcept all arechildren the and a"ectionateare wives e picnics. dances, with paradise, a resembles peace of times in Ukrainilittle the ones: American classic like justfamily soviet regular the trays faceless,shallow, wouldmen godless have todisappear. In order that,todo the can see thatcan are see both ghting for same the goals. script emphasizes the fact that, by diminishing di"erences between the two cultures, one NegroSoldier,Hele project,previous her Union.in Just likeSoviet the to next peasants welcoming troops German (Dick, 1996:160).Ukrainian depicting photos are there when especially ghters, resistance as 32-33) of wint the in ever worstfamine the su"ered (who Ukrainians the portray to inaccuracy it’sit,histor puts a Dick K Walter Bernard Baxter,and AsAnneBrennan. Andrews, As for the reviews, Bosley Crowther, the New York Times critic (a vehement oppo vehement (a Yorkcritic New Times Crowther, the Bosley reviews, the for As score, musical best including Oscars, six for nominated being up ended lm e Even though Lillian Hellman, the screenwriter, stated that she was insp A!er the village is seized again by the villagers-turned-guerilla ghters, the n t peasants the of ability the in seen is movies the behind propaganda e Tobuildup sympathy for dramacommon Soviet the the notion thatw Soviets the movieintendseprovide to Unitesexplanation anwhy the to as States shou WORLD WAR II – WORLD II WAR THE MESSAGETHE DURING MOVIES PRO-SOVIET OF AMERICAN THE NORTH STAR,THE SONG RUSSIA,OF MISSION MOSCOW TO the the line would be ired by her vis- cow,Hellman he common esn’t seem lm por- lm ns to the the to ns ut ended ended ut the the same an town,an elves in elves o orga- o ld ght ld al al lines lman’s elp to elp Earth Earth ical ical ere (..) he er d - l 95 J G P C D 96 J G P C D ton reporting that played lm the house inTomsk, with afull Novosibirsk and Stalinsk. 1979: 63). (Shind it directed Stalin if worse been have not could lm the that admitting Times o"er to John. t Nadyahad that Pact, Nazi-Soviet the explanationof anPetrov), to became (Frumkin “moreRussiof use the wagon, car,a nota driving role lead intelligentsia, the includingRusfrompoints: 8 of list a made Embassy,return the in of who Secretary First the Bazikin, Vladimir ofopinion the asked also and lm, the for guidelines of ber a set it directly didn’tinterfere Bureau the though even that OWI, archives the ican Activities, 1947). Mellet, head of the BMP, was a common presence at t the studioout (Committee nd ofTaylor’s Un-Amer-wefrom anddeposition it, accepted only OWI that and idea the came people his that testied WarMeyerof Informationapproached them. Oce t fact the denied Un-AmericanCommitteeoffront both the in of Activities, they RichardTaylor,man producer,leading Mayer the the andB both Louis testied though EvenHays Oce. e from or advices, OWI from either comingelements with ghtthe for humanity” all (Whiteld, 1996:128). summarized by John when he tells his countrymen that “we are all soldiers side by side mess wartime e America. in back resistance Russian the of word the spread to and decides to ght next to his wife against the Nazis, but the villagers wisely ad housesminentandlands.downJohn burntheir to danger decides returns tourfromhis villager,who Star Nadya’s North in the peasantsresembles the village a ghter.e virtuous a into Star) North e in villagers the (as transforming the over all Molotovcocktails throwing resistance, the joins Nadyainvasion. t by interrupted is honeymoon their butmarry, twoconviviality. e Russian Nadya Stepanova (Susan Peters), who charms him with her typical America in falls war.He the before Russia Soviet touring is who symphonyconductor Song of Russia of Song e North Star proved itself a success even in Russia, the Soviet embassy in Washin Sunday e propaganda, communist as it condemned Press Hearst the Opposite, In his extensive studies of the movie, Robert Meyhew reveals from what rema what from reveals Meyhew Robert movie, the of studies extensive his In Before the movie reached the audiences, its script wastimes several cut and rene American famous a Meredith, John as Taylor Robert stars movie MGM 1943 e ANDREI COJOC ANDREI he brutal German German brutal he , aware of the im- the of aware , an names”an place and place vise vise them ttitude of ttitude love with love in 1947 in hat the ins of ins age is age num- n girl with wed sian hat ler, g- in o present: two the lovers are orthodox by priest married local (Mayhew, the 2002).i religion of freedom the States; United the in raising hay a more resembles nity JohnNadya’sto when goes ag; Soviet the h collectivizationbyvillage, the Banner Spangled Star “e anthem, American the playing orchestra American 217). (Sayre,1979: souls their in music laughter,with and music on dependent race, cheerful ofAf portrayal Russians the of the withportrayal identical almost the is an American composer is heard playing. Cold War lm critic, Nora Sayre, points Moreovpeople. Russian the of cheerfulness the of surprised is John (!), “averagehabitsanandof ities Joe”. Moscownig atmospherea the in seeing When ocial reveals intent the of picture. the Soviet a or government the of opinion the consider least at would studio the that fact reviewer, almost like ocial aSoviet speaking says: sa war,the imminentRussia’s the Concerning unreliable.for preparedness is Union Soviet the that audiences the to prove could Pact Nazi-Soviet the that concerned were and aprosper of respect Russians’ the ght war’ inthe (Crowther, 1944). humor,only‘ait rare in good with Crowther sees lled topical musicallm, r e New York Times turns a blind eye on the movies obvious pro-Soviet message a the conducting is John inaccuracies: historical with lled are scenes movie Many Like in e North Star, the idea is to reveal that Russians have in fact m recommendationsversionscript, Even not all nal ofthe though the werein met 1942 inMayhew, 2004:345). December Reviewer’s28 given,f.2928–29). notJarrico-Collins’ name(MHL ofscript ysis andextending herfrontiers a!er soon Germany’s invasion of Poland anal- (Film 1939]. in manyso things about Russia that are not well understood, such as her war a Ru of part the Germany.byattackedonxation isbe would she day some Hereagain isan opportunity to show that Russia hadfelt that it wasalmos In the nal script no mention of the Nazi-Soviet Pact ever exists. Even OWI reviewers ren Pierce (deputy to Nelson Poynter), 9January 1943,inMayhew, 2004:346). rather than the explanation given in the present script.( Letter from Lowell oth against aggressor be to not guarantee give to willing is and country aggression to opposed is Russia country,thatany with pact non-aggression would Russia Germany,that with pact non-aggression a signed Russia course Of WORLD WAR II – WORLD II WAR THE MESSAGETHE DURING MOVIES PRO-SOVIET OF AMERICAN THE NORTH STAR,THE SONG RUSSIA,OF MISSION MOSCOW TO er country. is country. er t inevitablet that Mellett to War- gainst Finland ro-Americans:a er, a piece from piece er,a any of the qual- by any other any by ssia explains ssia appycommu- ich vitalityich sign a sign ”,under out that htclub s also also s the the me nd
97 J G P C D 98 J G P C D communist counterparts. though that didn’t happened, he succeeded in establishing a rapport between him an proposedMoscowtogoisto andimprove counttwo the bilateralbetween ties Worldsince Warfriends he (close I), President Roosevelt with meeting his A!er 1943). Mos to (Mission wars’ world the between years critical those during Government Soviet the in those as misunderstood so been have nation a of leaders ‘No experience. it’ssincepar question, under put be cannon information the of authenticity the on suspicion of trying to subvert the government (history tells us that in that us tells (history government the subvert to trying of suspicion on court, Moscow a of front in NKVD the by brought are others and men three the days next the Over 1928). and 1925 between Army Red the of leader Tukhachevski(former Mar and Radek Izvestia), the and Pravda, of editor (chief Bukharin meets he that cha, where ocials from England, France, Italy, Japan and Germany are to Moscow, 1943). covered that feminine beauty is not a luxury (…) we have so much in common” (Mission “Wedi replies: she cosmetics, of fond were Russians the that doubtDavies’ Margaret wife, Polina, is the manager of a Cosmetic Factory in Moscow, and when confronte built by Russians the transformed can be into ghting tanks. preparedness of war also comes into discussion, when Davies nds out that most t UnitedS the in beforeworkedhave engineers head most that andwomen, are o 1/3 thatRussiansociety. informedMoreover, velopment the ofalso is he (from the tractor factories of Kharkov, to the oil elds of Baku), and is am Unionind Soviet of points high several of factories the visitsLitvinov, he meeting A progress. their people’sand the cheerfulness by astounded remainingUnion, viet t to goes then He FDR. by guaranteed plan disbarment a of benets the of Bank Nat the of head the persuade to tries he Hitler with meeting a denied is he though where Germany Nazi to rst travels Davies States,United the leaving A!er light. his visit, and ocials. meeting Soviet the to in1942. writedecided abook AmbassadorUnion, Soviet tothe Joseph Davies,andE visit his toMoscow, h on which MissionMoscow to e plot of is full historical distortions in order to put the Soviet Union in a f of portrayal the was e"ort war Warner the eBrothers’ tocontribution e plot thickens when Davies is invited to an ocial banquet held at a RussianD a at held banquet ocial an invitedto is Davies when thickensplot e Molotov’women. American from di"erent so not are told, are we women, Russian vie the telling ambassador,former real the with starts Moscow to Mission following Soviets the about beliefs and experiences Davies’own on relies movie e ANDREI COJOC ANDREI invited. It is here azed azed of the de- fact, Marshall fact, f the workers the f ormer US ormer ries. Even ries. tates. e tates. favorable wer that wer t of his of t ractors he So- he d with , even , ustry ustry ional d the shall shall cow, !er a- s- e s Bennett reveals that Roosevelt met Davies three times in 1942 to be informed on t on informed be to 1942 in times three Davies met Roosevelt that reveals Bennett wartime pro-Soviet motion picture.a producing in together worked studios the and OWI the Roosevelt, how of of Mannheim refused, Stalin didn’t have any other choice. fascist the but Finland,when of territory defensiveoccupy the positionson tried Russia Finland: invasionof 1940 the explain to tries also He American. over all Barbarossadeliveringa!er German operation taking the portraysspe him lm the pact pact of 1939). Assisting at the 1 fut the people Americanattempt an the isto explain obvious tothis that protecto takes itwhatever do Union Soviet will the fails, security tive andOcean, Germany received Ukraine). territories given be to were Japanese the help their (for ocials Japanese German included also which conspiracy a Trotsky,in Leon from orders followed ca they that admitting them of one each when accused, the of guiltiness the on Tukhachevki was shot in the withouthead a public a year before).trial policy. A!er 1A!er policy. ofnecessity the of an withalliance Russia, but is confronted by non-in their Nazi-Soviet is pun pact on shoulders the of Western democracies’ passiveness). sian soldier. If not, he informs Churchill, Russia will sign a pact with German progressimmense industry, the in military, the andbravereyof the of the United States than toward any other nation. governmentoward the friendlier feel weWe that people: realize can to youwant ab kind speaks he Neverthelesssystem. security collective the of distrust ma he conquered, is Czechoslovakia Germany,if with ally not would he that don’tpeople”,admittin Moscow,Although representthe to 1943). (Mission Stalin says Englan and France of governments the opinion, my “In again. itself arm to Germany there forces Reactionary England’sFrance’sfault. and only is situation common enemy. aga Union China Soviet and the with alliance an of necessity the convincedof is Dav soldiers. Japanese the by cities, Chinese other and Shanghai in committed ities tive techniques military of the Russian Army, but hours later he is informe From his extensive study of governmental involvement in Mission to Moscow,governmentalinvolvementto Missionofstudy extensive in Todd From his examp an is picture the that, than more even and examples, two other the Like A!er a talk with Litvinov,with talk inevitable,anisa thatinformedwarA!er is Davies Returning home, Davies tries to convincetoReturninghome, senatorsDaviestries the ofwar, immanency of the a Talking to Churchill about an alliance with the Soviet Union, he informs him o the that him informs who Stalin, meet to privileged is he least, not but Last WORLD WAR II – WORLD II WAR st of September 1939 Davies was the promoter of a lend-lease pact, and pact, lend-lease a of promoter the was Davies 1939 September of THE MESSAGETHE DURING MOVIES PRO-SOVIET OF AMERICAN THE NORTH STAR,THE SONG RUSSIA,OF MISSION MOSCOW TO st of May parade in 1938, Davies is stunned by the innova- t its boarders (it is (itboarders its t ure Nazi-Sovieture have permitted have out the Ameri- the out e movie insists d if the collec- the if d commonRus- d of the atroc- in the Pacic the in terventionist government y (again, the intains his intains inst the the inst current t of the the of t refully f their eches and nd ies he to le d g 99 J G P C D 100 J G P C D (Bennet, 2001:495).(Bennet, ca in neighbor good a itself prove would Union Soviet the that told is people standard,livingan high havea and fed wellare people both peace, sired show that no major di"erences two existedthe people worked: between de- leaders both Politburo and by V.I.Stalin (Kenez, 1995:157). before being distributed, lm of every the late 1930’s was watched by the mem cul the diplomacy,“so!ofmeans of power”. a as historian, Peterpart n Kenez, lm Soviet e became movie 1943 the that context this in is It Allies. the divide cow” found former the to ambassador explain to Stalin that trying no di"erences should M “secondto missionA cooperation. for path the smooth to again Davies to up was motivated the Soviets, FDR felt that a state of hadtrust to builtbe betw o".he thought Because but that thinking, state the not social on int clearemisunderstandings be would these all then Stalin, to face to face talk could he if failure of opening a second front in Western Europe. Roosevelt maintained t movie as rst the “totalitarian propaganda for mass consumption” (Dewey, 2008:353). YorkNewe toletter a the denes AgainTimesAttacked],[Moscowhe Film which in 1943). John Dewey, who led the commission for the investigations of Soviet purges, wro the movie, besides entertainment, is to sell the USSR to American citizens (Life Magazine, red-baiting to red-praising, both turning out ignorant. Life notes that the on change sudden the notices Republic New e pedantic. and dull it ndsmonweal “shamefula Nation,asrot”, ite Jamesrefers to in ick:Agee, the criticized Fortunately,reviewer (Crowther,1943b). most could else one no when Europe, in ger d the identify to able were Soviets the that fact the emphasizingand Russia, of view 2001: 495). over Mission to Moscow, ensuring that it promotes the “united nations” them lm’sprogress. “Byandscriptsprints, reviewing OWI propagandists exerciseda ace. PaKremlin the privateatcinema “Mission the Moscow” in before),viewed to weeks 4 andambassadorUS the at time, the Standley (although he had presented his Voroshilov,Marshall togeth and Committee) Defense State the of tative (Ambassador to the United States), (Head Beria of NKVD), Mikoyan (Special Represen- grunt or two, he approvedmovie’stwo,heon Union,or the being gruntSoviet the in release e New York Times praised the lm for showing sharply and frankly the the frankly and sharply showing for lm the praisedYork TimesNew e So, on the 20 the on So, th relationsdeterioratingfollowingslowlyAmerican-Soviet saw 1943 of spring e e"ort the Warthrilled; ofInformation was Oce the script nal the seeing A!er Although the movie didn’t manage to get a positive reaction from of Stalin, ex Stalin, of from reaction positive didn’ta movie get the to manageAlthough th of May 1943, Stalin, Molotov (Minister of Foreign A"airs), Litvinov A"airs), Foreign of (MinisterMolotov Stalin, 1943, May of ANDREI COJOC ANDREI ernational insecurity een een the leaders. It d the American the d er with Davies with er ly purpose of he belief that e of the rst the of e e.” (Bennet, resignation bers bers of the and Com- and se of re of se otes thatotes uthority point of point cept a cept from tural an- os- to te l- d e s the war,the ocials. Soviet began to worry en Union,towards the that,numbers Soviet the topictures motion 70 and newsreel America’svisit, apgrew, the deliveringpower of distribution result a as fro second a for approval their give would States United the before time in Teheran), the movie was considered as a token of good will, and managed to b onlyAlaska, to keep putting o" and meeting, the eventually meeting FDR a in meeting a FDRpromising (Stalin wasn’tsuccessMoscow” toa “secondmissionvies’ Da- although And 509). 2001: (Bennet, powers two the between understandingmutual the Soviet’s press. Pravda and Izvestia noted that the intention of the prai being decade, a thanmore in distributionrights receive to movies American pro-Soviet pictures. tures were held by HUAC in 1947, and the main targets were the contributors to war HearingsecommunistRegarding Communist Inltrationbeliefs. Motion e ofPic- infamous blacklists of people presumed to members be of the Communist Party, tion Picture Alliance, the Alliance for Preservation American Values, put up t (House of Un-American A"airs Committee), e Catholic League for Decency, e Mo- in Washington, in the wake of War.the Cold Such governmental organization, as HUAC because itbecause is propaganda’. presentation of that kind of happy existence in a country of slavery and hor declar novelist,AydfamousRussian-born who was Rand, lm the about ing tes Also joke. a as Russians portray which X, Comrade and Ninotchka like movies al he Union,thatreminding Soviet the of portrait realistic a than musical, a do in committeehethat the of fronthead Parnellofomas,in the said MGMof White House to appear in the lm, although he retracted it later. Louis B M New Dealers), although, as he states, ‘I have never seen a communist, and I wouldn know one ifIsawI one’ (Committee ofand Un-American Activities,communist, 1947:11). a seen never have ‘I states, he as although, Dealers), New t of most there, worked who everyone meant practically (that studio the in andliberal believer le!-wing communistHea 259). namedas glung,1979: every almost (Ceplair movies’gangsterstudios’ the of one from villain cornered a like have The AftermathThe Robert Taylorby persuaded Robert was thatheRussia)of Songtestied rolein lead (the e so-called on-screen friendship between America and Russia was deeply criticized JackWarner, producer the of Mission toMoscow, ofhearings,‘ the terried being Director Lewis Milestone (e North Star) was part of the group of the the of group the of part was Star) North (e Milestone Lewis Director WORLD WAR II – WORLD II WAR THE MESSAGETHE DURING MOVIES PRO-SOVIET OF AMERICAN THE NORTH STAR,THE SONG RUSSIA,OF MISSION MOSCOW TO lm was to promote proximately150 nt. Moreover,nt. ayer, the head ror is terrible ndChurchill ogether the ed that ‘thethat ed Hollywood hem being being hem tended to tended so made so uy more and En- and or have sed by sed time time tify- d of d be- the the ’t 101 J G P C D 102 J G P C D on of of history the 1950’s. the American the society continuumhuntfollowed the thatle! anduncertaintyparanoiastate andof withoutgreat prejudice, andatlookedof necessityshould time wara asin be the two.between But if the cost of the wartime propaganda could consideredbe lo of anti-communist,ber anti-Soviet pictures that would emphasize starling the mismatc num- a produced HUAC’sstudios to most response inquiries, in superpowers, two the between di"erences the blindfold to studios the convincedOWI’s pressures the which lywood’s major studios. as blacklistedforcedchairmeninto result,was doinghersheso. the Asa of quest year’s the this Hellman,1952), t – tofashion conscience my cut not will and cann (I else one no and herself concerning were questions the all the if amendment, th invoking not declared HUACshe to sent letter a in although and committee, a!er subsequently being red from Warner the Brothers Studios, a!er war. the Purges, and each of sentenced tried being them for contempt of Court. the Ten,HollywoodrestAs the offor the t of victims mainremained the they together with other seven directors and screenwritersH Party.nally managed Communistto the with involvement their for Commission the by summoned t ) amendment rst the invoked who witnesses, unfriendly of group (the Nineteen public meant to trying sell a new lost friend: communism was misunderstood, the So transformed into a misunderstood brother. Trying to a sell new alliance t inltrating branch every of the economy, the communist image was put in a wring c destroy to sought that beasts vicious From attack. Harbor Pearl the a!er formation evolved for over 70years. i and screen, big the onportrayed be to foreignenemyever a of images rst the would have found the formula.perfect e image of the communism menace was one public fear, and in the same time acting like the voice of the government, then capita between balance a ndIf onecouldproducersalike.gures political and Hollywoo of imagination the up lighted Scare Red rst the communism, Regarding Conclusions e Pro-Soviet attitude turned again into Soviet demonization; in the same way in way same the in demonization; Soviet into again turned attitude Pro-Soviet e t by 1952 in summoned Star,was North e of screenwriter the Hellman, Lillian 1951, in blacklisted himself was Moscow) to (Mission Koch Howard Screenwriter But no mutation has been so abrupt and ironical than in the lms produced lms the in than ironical andabrupt so been mutationhas no But Hollywood’s attitude towards political issues was, and is nowadays a sensit ANDREI COJOC ANDREI avoid testifying. o the American he Hollywoodhe apitalism by apitalism well byHol-well a great scar greatscar a , the witch- the , ive subject. both both sides lizing onlizing ts trans- ts shortly er and w and e !h !h e o be be o ions viet viet he ot of h d e Books portraying enemies than friends. United the all, StatesonceA!eragain;always be balance has the shi! toand a!er opinion public shape to men other of task the was War;it Cold the during thatfortha many history of pieceAmericans remainspage,anda black a analyzed by special commissions until communists came out clean. It is a piece of hi and magnier a under putcharacter,of was trait line,action Every friend. a intoenemy capitalize again on public fear. s producers, Hollywood and Pictures Motion of Bureau the and Information the like agencies, established Roosevelt’s political between collaboration fr a of product the the were to lms the warinexactitudes, historical defensiveof Full Nazism. against a fought that people heroic a as presented be to were ey Russians the spokedressed,and plowed thought talked, earth, the simi lea notbut Last coin. same the of side anotherjust was all a!er Communism US. the f di"erent no fact in was counterpart Soviet the motivation: and pattern same the Union was misunderstood, and it was up to Hollywood balance straight. the to set Indiana University Press. University Indiana Enterta and “The Culture War(1995), (ed.), Peter Stites Kenez, Richard in Film”, on (1994), The Age of McCarthyism: A Brief History with Documents, Boston: Bedford Books of St. M &RPPXQLVW,Q¿OWUDWLRQRIWKH+ROO\ZRRG0RWLRQ3LFWXUH,QGXVWU\QG&RQJUHVV0D\ LQ(OOH Un-American on Committee 1952”, 19, May HUAC, to “Letter (1952), Lillian Hellman, M.J. (1990), Heale, American JHU P 1830-1970,Baltimore: within: enemy the Combating Anticommunism: of Kentucky World The American Film, Screen: War II Spangled Star The (1996), K Bernard Dick, Revie Essays, Miscellany,1948, SIU Press.- 1942 1953: - 1925 Volume15, Dewey, John of Works Later The (2008), John Dewey, With Robert Taylor New Capitol”, the Opens Susan Peters, at and York Times, 1 February Crowther Bosley (1944), Movie Review: ”Song of Russia (1943). THE SCREEN; ‘Song of Russia’, Rich M Davies’s Book,Stars Walter Huston, Hollywood”, Ann at Harding The New York Times, Apri Crowther Bosley (1943b), Movie Review: “Mission to Moscow (1943).’ Mission to Moscow,’ Dram Invasion Star,’ North ‘The Huston, Opens in Two (1943). -‘Claudia’ Here Theatres Hall”, Music New at York Star Times, N North “The Review: Movie (1943a), Bosley Crowther Press. ofCalifornia University Angeles &HSODLU/DUU\ (QJOXQG6WHYH 7KH,QTXLVLWLRQLQ+ROO\ZRRG 3ROLWLFVLQWKH¿O References: e analysis above sought to demonstrate the particular process of transf of process particular the demonstrateto sought above analysis e Mission to Moscow, e North Star, Song of Russia and some other twenty WORLD WAR II – WORLD II WAR THE MESSAGETHE DURING MOVIES PRO-SOVIET OF AMERICAN THE NORTH STAR,THE SONG RUSSIA,OF MISSION MOSCOW TO ovember 5.ovember inment in in Wartime inment Indiana: Russia, Kentucky, The University Press University Kentucky, The PFRPPXQLW\ /RV Activities, Hearings Regarding Regarding Hearings Activities, 1. l 30.l Based Based on Ex-Ambassador lar tolarAmericans. t was forgottenwas t artin’s Press, 201–2. Oce of Warof Oce en better in better en , ih Walter With a, lms share orming an orming usical usical Picture, eeking to eeking Q6FKUHFNHU ress. wards ws, and and ws, uitful uitful story story rom end st, 103 J G P C D 104 J G P C D Documents Articles 0DQXDOIRUWKH0RWLRQ3LFWXUH,QGXVWU\:DVKLQJWRQ'& 2I¿FHRI:DU,QIRUPDWLRQ 8QLWHG6WDWHV 2I¿FHRI:DU,QIRUPDWLRQ'RPHVWLF%UDQFK%XUHDXRI0RWLRQ3LFWXUH *RYHUQPHQW,QIRUPDWLRQ0DQXDOIRUWKH0RWLRQ3LFWXUH,QGXVWU\:DVKLQJWRQ'&2I¿FHRI:DU,QIRUPDWLRQ 6HVVLRQ8QLWHG6WDWHV*RYHUQPHQW3ULQWLQJ2I¿FH:DVKLQJWRQ RPWHR8PUFQ FLLLV +DLJUJULJ KFPXLW LQ¿O FRPPXQLVW industry. Hearings before the WKH Committee of Un-American Activities, House of Re UHJDUGLQJ +HDULQJV $FWLYLWLHV 8Q$PHULFDQ RI &RPPLWWHH 24, 217 (1979),February p. The Nation 118-125 1, (1943), pp. November Magazine Life History, Film Star”, The North Vol. IV. Lillia in Propaganda of Strategies good: what’s for “Fighting (1990) Westbrook, Brett Mayhew, History, Film ofSong ofRussia”, Making (2004),“The Robert Vol. 334-357. 16, pp. 1, No 1,pp.91-103. Mayhew, in “MGM’s Russia” (2002), of Robert Song in Religion Church: America Potemkin 29. Issue. March Russia, (1943),USSR Special Magazine Life 1942-1945”, of Journal The History,American 64, vol. 1.No. .RSSHV&OD\WRQ5%ODFN*UHJRU\' ³:KDWWR6KRZWKH:RUOG 7KH2I¿FHRI:DU,QIRUPDW of Journal History,American Vol. 88, No.2 Bennet, Todd, (2001) “Culture, Power and Mission to Moscow: Film and Soviet-American re 1930-1950”, totalitarianism The Review, Historical American 7, vol. 4.No. Sovi and Germany Nazi of Merger “The (1970), G. Thomas Patterson ; K. Les Adler :KLW¿HOG6WHSKHQ- in Entertainment and (1995),Culture Richard Stites, Wartime Press. University Indiana Indiana, Russia, Shindler, and cinema crisis: (1996),Hollywoodin Colin 1929-1939,Routledge. society: American Shindler, (1979),HollywoodGoes to Colin War: and Films Society,American Routledge. 1939-1952,London, Shaw, Tony (2007)Hollywood’s Cold War, Edinburgh, Edinburgh Press. University JRoss, and (2002),Movies Steven Society,American Publishing. Blackwell Press. 5RVV6WHYHQ- :RUNLQJ&ODVV+ROO\ZRRG VLOHQW¿OPDQGWKHVKDSLQJRIFODVV Howard (2000), Pollack, Press. ofIllinois University Illinois, man, work uncommon and ofan life the Aaron Coplan: Buckner, Moscow Robert Mission to (1943), by produced 123minutes, Warner Howard Koch. by screenplay Brothers, Kentucky, Press ofKentucky. University A movies: the have We’ll always (2006), E. Sally Parry, L; Robert McLaughlin, Press. ofCalifornia .University WWII, .RSSHV&OD\WRQ5 %ODFN*UHJRU\' +ROO\ZRRGJRHVWR:DU +RZSROLWLFVSUR¿WVDQGSURSD The Culture War Cold the of ANDREI COJOC ANDREI , JHU Press. presentatives, presentatives, Eighteenth Congress, 1 merican cinema during WorldWarII, during cinema merican LQ$PHULFD3ULQFHWRQ8QLYHUVLW\ n Hellman’s [Negro picture] and and picture] [Negro Hellman’s n et Russia in American Image of Image American in Russia et UWRRWH RLQ SLFWXUH PRWLRQ WKH RI WUDWLRQ lations lations during WWII” in The V*RYHUQPHQW,QIRUPDWLRQ n Communist History, Communist n Vol. LRQDQG+ROO\ZRRG JDQGDVKDSHG ST