Code Breakers is a historical drama which premiered on US television (ESPN) in 2005.
It is based on a true story: the cheating scandal at West Point Military Academy, one of the most prestigious institutions in the US, which was announced to the public in August 1951:
90 cadets, including 37 members of the famous football team, were ousted for violating the honor-code which says:
“A cadet will not lie, cheat, steal,
or tolerate those who do.”
Here is some basic information about this drama:
** Directed by Rod Holcomb
** Written by G. Ross Parker
** Based on a book by Bill McWilliams
** Run time: 87 minutes
The cast includes the following:
** Cadet Brian Nolan played by Zachery Bryan
** Cadet George Holbrook played by Jeff Roop
** Cadet Straub played by Jake Busey
** Cadet DeSantis played by Theo Rossi
** Cadet Trager played by Robin Dunne
** Cadet Culpepper played by Adam Grimes
** Cadet Bob Blaik (son of coach Blaik) played by Corey Sevier
** Coach Earl “Red” Blaik (1897-1989) played by Scott Glenn
** Assistant Coach Vince Lombardi (1913-1970) played by Richard Zeppiery
** Commandant Paul D. Harkins (1904-1984) played by Jude Ciccolella
** General Douglas MacArthur (1880-1964) played by Jeremy Akerman
Since this drama is based on a true story, the basic facts are part of the public record. They are not a secret. This is why I feel free to mention some of them here.
While this drama is based on a true story, it is not a documentary film. It is a dramatized version of events. Not everything happened exactly as shown here. But the basic story is true.
Part one
The topic of this film is American football. It was first aired on the sports channel ESPN. It is, in fact, an ESPN original movie. But it is much more than that.
It is about the honor-code of the academy: what it means and what happens if it is broken. In other words: this film is not only about football, it is also about moral issues such as truth, honor and loyalty.
You are not supposed to cheat. You must be honest. You are also supposed to be loyal to your friends. What if your friend cheats and you know about it? What will you do? Go for truth and honor and report him, or go for loyalty and stay silent? There is a dilemma here.
But if you follow the honor-code of West Point, there is no dilemma: you must report him, even if he is your friend, because you cannot tolerate those who lie, cheat, or steal.
West Point is one of the most prestigious institutions in the US. Notable alumni include two US presidents, several US generals, several US astronauts, and three winners of the Heisman Trophy, which is awarded annually to the most outstanding player in college football in the United States.
How and why did the cheating begin at West Point? The answer is connected with the football team, known as Army or the Black Knights. Every year Army would play against Navy. And of course, they hoped to win.
Some cadets were members of the football team, but football players are not always good at other things such as math, physics or foreign languages.
If they could not keep up their grades, they would be kicked off the team and out of the school. And if this happened, the team might lose to Navy, and this would make the school look bad.
This is why some cadets decided to help the players get better grades, so they could stay on the team and win and thereby make the school look good.
How could they help the players get better grades? The answer is connected with the system of exams that was used at the time. The same test was used for different classes on different days.
As soon as one cadet had taken a test, he would write down the questions and perhaps also the answers and pass the information on to another cadet, who had to take the same test the next day.
This method is known as cribbing.
Some students were not involved in this activity, but they knew about it and stayed silent. This was not done for personal gain. It was for the good of the team, for the good of the school. How could it be wrong? Well, the simple answer is: it was a violation of the honor-code.
Part two
In the film, we see cadets, sometimes members of the football team, who are struggling in the academy. They worry about their grades. We see how a cadet who has poor grades can get help if he joins the operation.
Cadet George Holbrook is in trouble, because of poor grades, but he finds out how to get help. Later, his roommate Brian Nolan is in trouble, also because of poor grades, and Holbrook tells him that there is a way to get help. Nolan says he will think about it.
After a while, Nolan decides to report the case to the administration. He becomes a whistle-blower. He goes to the top, to Commandant Harkins, who asks him to go under-cover for the school.
This means: join the operation and find out who is doing this, so the school can get some evidence against them.
Nolan goes under-cover and finds more information. Armed with this evidence, the school starts an investigation.
It turns out that this is a big operation, which includes Bob Blaik, the son of Coach Blaik. Bob was a member of the football team. He had good grades. He did not need any help, but he had offered to help others, so they could stay on the team.
In the end, 90 cadets - including 37 members of the football team - were found to be involved, directly or indirectly. They were asked to resign, which they did.
When the story was announced to the public in August 1951, it was a huge shock:
West Point was supposed to set the highest standard in the land. How could cadets of this famous school be involved in something like this?
Part three
What do reviewers say about this drama?
Here are some results:
** 38 percent = Rotten Tomatoes (the audience)
** 61 percent = IMDb
On Amazon there are at the moment 38 ratings of this product, 19 with reviews.
The average rating is 4.6 stars which corresponds to a rating of 92 percent.
As you can see, the ratings are mixed, from a low point of 38 percent to a high point of 92 percent.
In my opinion, the low point is too harsh, while the high point is too generous.
The rating on IMDb is very appropriate. In the following I will explain why I feel this way.
Part four
As stated above, the film is based on a book by Bill McWilliams, which was published in 2000.
His account covers not only the scandal of 1951, but also the rehabilitation of the academy and the football team in the following years. The title is:
A Return to Glory:
The untold story of
honor, dishonor and triumph at
the United States Military Academy,
1950-1953
The cheating scandal of 1951 is an important story, which deserves to be told, but in this film, it is not done very well. There are several problems here. Some are more important than others. Here is a list:
# 1. The story is set at West Point, but it is shot in Toronto, Canada. It seems the producers never even asked if they could get permission to shoot the film on the real location. They simply choose another location in another country.
# 2. There is too much football in the film and not enough focus on the moral issues connected with the case. Perhaps this is because the film is produced by a sports channel?
# 3. There are some technical mistakes:
(a) One reviewer points out that the military ribbons of Commandant Harkins are arranged in an incorrect manner.
(b) A second reviewer points out that the players are wearing the wrong type of helmet in the Army-Navy game that is set in 1950.
(c) A third reviewer points out that the name of the Navy Quarterback, who helped Navy beat Army in 1950, was Robert “Zug” Zastrow (1929-1989), but in this film he is called Marlowe.
# 4. The cheating system is not explained very well, and when we see the system in operation, it is too obvious what is going on: one cadet passes a note to another cadet in a public place (for instance the cafeteria) where everyone can see what they are doing. This is not realistic. This would have been done more discreetly.
# 5. All cadets look the same. They are the same age and have the same haircut. When they wear a uniform (including a cap) it is impossible to tell them apart, because they all look exactly the same.
This is why uniforms are used: to erase any individuality. You make sure that everybody looks the same. But in this case, in a historical drama, this approach is a disaster.
The viewer needs to know who is who, in order to understand what is happening, but it is hard to tell.
Before watching this drama, I knew Brian Nolan was going to report the cheating. I also knew Bob Blaik was the son of the coach. But even though I was prepared in this way, it took me a long time to identify these characters.
The producers could and should have dealt with this problem. Two solutions are obvious:
(A) They could have used the dialogue. When cadet A talks to cadet B, cadet A can say the name of cadet B. Not every time, but at least the first time, so the viewer can understand who is who.
(B) They could have used on-screen messages. When a cadet is seen, his name can appear on the screen. Not every time, but at least the first time, so the viewer can understand who is who.
Since the producers did not want to help the viewer with this, you may have to watch the movie more than once in order to figure out who is who.
While items # 1-3 are not so important, items # 4 and 5 are crucial. I have to remove two stars because of these two items. This is why I think this drama deserves a rating of three stars (60 percent).
Brian Lowry mentions item # 5 in his review of the film in Variety (8 December 2005):
“Both the Toronto locations and the fresh-faced cast lend period authenticity to the production, though at times it’s difficult to distinguish one young cadet from another.”
Lowry also complains about the title of the film. He says it is “a terrible title that sounds more like a World War II espionage thriller.”
He is right about that as well. Unfortunately, the title of the film is misspelled in his review. He writes the title in one word:
Codebreakers
But it should be written in two words:
Code Breakers.
A better title could be:
West Point: The Scandal of 1951
Or perhaps a bit longer:
West Point Military Academy and
the 1951 Violation of the Honor-Code
In spite of these critical remarks, Lowry seems to like the film. At the end of his review, he says:
“a good movie’s always welcome, and ‘Codebreakers’ cracks that code.”
I am afraid I cannot agree with him about this.
Conclusion
Who is to blame for the scandal? Obviously, the cadets who broke the honor-code must be blamed. But the academy must also share some of the blame.
For two reasons:
In the first place, the academy used a system that encouraged and invited students to cheat. Using the same test several times makes it easy and tempting to cheat. The teachers of the academy were simply too lazy.
Every good teacher knows that one way to avoid cheating is to make sure that each test is only used once. For the next exam you must use another test. Once a test has been used for an exam, other students may use it to prepare for their own exam.
Secondly, some members of the academy made football seem too important. It was all about winning. Beating the Navy team made the academy look good. But football is just a game; not a matter of life and death.
If West Point wanted to impress the public, the leaders of the academy should have focused not on football but on academic excellence.
Using this approach, we can see that the academy is to blame for creating an environment that encouraged and invited students to cheat.
The responsibility of the academy could and should have been discussed in the film, but it is not. This omission is one more flaw (in addition to those mentioned above), which says I am right when I offer this drama a rating of three stars (60 percent).
PS # 1. For more information, see the following books:
On Brave Old Army Team -
The Cheating Scandal that Rocked the Country:
West Point, 1951
by James Blackwell
(1996)
When Pride Still Mattered:
A Life of Vince Lombardi
by David Maraniss
(1999) (2000)
PS # 2. The following items are available online:
“90 West Point cadets ousted for cribbing,”
Chicago Daily Tribune,
4 August 1951
Christian Swezey,
“Dark Days for the Black Knights,”
Washington Post,
10 December 2005
Dick Heller,
“Shame, blame at West Point,”
Washington Times,
3 August 2009
PS # 3. According to Bill McWilliams, the name Brian Nolan (which is used in the book as well as in the film) is a pseudonym.
Even today, more than fifty years after the event, the person behind the pseudonym, does not want the public to know his real name.
PS # 4. West Point Military Academy has experienced other scandals since the case which happened in 1951.
In 1976, more than 150 cadets were accused of cheating on an electrical engineering exam.
Following an investigation, more than 90 cadets were reinstated and allowed to graduate, while the rest were expelled or chose to resign.
Reference:
Military Times, 14 July 2021
"New book pulls back curtain on 1976 West Point cheating scandal"
In 2020, more than 70 cadets were accused of cheating on an exam, which was conducted online because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Following an investigation, eight cadets were expelled for cheating, while over 50 cadets were set back one year.
References:
USA Today, 21 December 2020
USA Today, 16 April 2021
*****
Code Breakers
A historical drama which
premiered on US television (ESPN)
in 2005
*****
A Return to Glory:
The untold story of
honor, dishonor and triumph at
the United States Military Academy
1950-1953
By Bill McWilliams
(2000)
The cover chosen for this book is odd.
The reason is that the author also covers
the history of the Korean War (1950-1953)
*****
No comments:
Post a Comment