The Hoaxters (1952) User Reviews

At times, a bit heavy-handed, but still a fascinating film

[planktonrules · 7/10 · 12 December 2007]

This is an interesting propaganda film from Hollywood in the early 1950s. While in the early 1940s, Hollywood had experienced a short love affair with the Russians (mostly thanks to the US becoming allies with the Russians against the Axis), this film represents a different era--one where fear of spreading Communism and Stalinism gripped much of the world. This film is a far from subtle and occasionally heavy-handed short film about the menace of international Communism and was narrated by many of the biggest Red-haters in Hollywood (such as Robert Taylor). While nowadays, many in Hollywood have a bit of nostalgia for the old Soviet Union (or at least use moral relativism to make the Western nations seem somehow comparable to it), this was a time when there was great dread of Communism spreading everywhere--thanks to statements by Stalin himself that they would do so.

From a historical point of view, this is an amazing look back into the scary days of the nuclear arms race, though as I said above it's all very heavy-handed. While the basic message is true, the silly way that Communism was passed off as comparable to a "snake oil salesman" was a bit goofy and this comparison probably caused more laughs than anything else. Still, an important little film and interesting history lesson from an era that seems so very long ago.

"Beware of the Phony Patriot"

[BrianN · 7/10 · 23 January 2000]

This is a nifty little piece of American Cold War propaganda. Much time is spent comparing the methods of the USSR to those of the WWII Axis powers.

Deeper than that, though, is the ending, which draws a clear comparison of the "medicine-man" tactics used by all those aforementioned enemies and the McCarthyites, who at the time of this film's release were in full swing.

Snake oil

[nickenchuggets · 7/10 · 4 May 2022]

In the 1950s, the word "communist" was essentially used to describe anything americans didn't like. The USSR's previously friendly attitude towards the United States was gone by this point, although you could argue they never liked us to begin with. In this half hour film from the 50s, we learn how Soviet Russia was really not much different from Germany under Hitler, and was even worse than him in many respects. The early part of the film shows a snake oil salesman, meant to represent people like Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin. The salesman claims what he's selling is like magic and will make all your problems go away, strikingly similar to what dictators in the 30s and 40s were telling their citizens in regards to their policies. The film argues that despite Hitler saying Communism was his regime's ultimate nemesis, there's very little difference between the two ideologies. Nazis believe that everyone should work together for the betterment of the whole country (just like communists), and both parties had offshoot organizations in the USA, such as the German American Bund. These people were living in America under its protection but were still preaching about how Hitler will make things right. It's also worth pointing out that many people in Hollywood in the 30s were actual communists, as they wanted to take a stance against Hitler. Both communists and nazis were treated with equal disdain by the FBI, who shut down many of their meetings and arrested their members. The film then goes on to draw comparisons between Nazi Germany and the USSR, saying how both countries banned free speech and people voting in elections had their choice of only one person: Hitler or Stalin respectively. The most interesting part of the film comes when the narrator says the Soviet Union changed its attitude towards America 7 whole times in the 30s and 40s. He says they hated America at first because they viewed us as dirty capitalists, but then changed their attitude when they noticed Germany becoming more and more powerful. Later, Stalin changes his mind again and accepts a peace deal with the Nazis, hoping to bide his time long enough until his country can achieve military parity with Germany. Once Hitler invades the USSR, they have no choice but to once again change their thoughts on America, as they desperately need vehicles and weapons. Finally, after the war is over, the Soviets decide to be hostile to the US since they see them as an adversary with a different, non-socialist mindset. Russia is once again America's enemy, but during ww2, we put our differences aside to defeat the common threat of national socialism. I thought this film was interesting, but it didn't tell me much I didn't know already. Anyone with a brain in their head should be aware of the fact that Stalin was more evil than Hitler, but for whatever reason he is still widely venerated in Russia, alongside other human garbage like Trotsky and Lenin. Even the biggest mass murderer in history Mao Zedong, whose industrial and agricultural policies killed around 70 million Chinese, is held in high esteem today. Every single chinese bank note has his face on it. It's a good example of the winners writing history, since if Stalin lost world war 2 (or if Mao lost china's civil war), they would probably be just as hated as Hitler is now. The USSR was also a horrible place to live for much of its existence, and only started to improve towards the very end of its life in the mid 1980s. Even then, saying anything bad about the government was liable to get you in prison. Overall, this short brings up some good points about how the Soviet Union used many of the same tactics the nazis did, such as crushing free speech, getting rid of political adversaries, and silently disposing of troublemakers via a secret police force. It goes to show that most dictators are all the same, despite their differing beliefs.

Sickening Propaganda Piece

[reader4 · 4/10 · 30 November 2007]

The Hoaxters only rates a four out of ten. The production value is very high, and it has big-name stars doing the narration, but the subject is so repugnant that it is almost nauseating to watch.

I'm glad it wasn't listed as a Documentary, because it is certainly anything but. Its purpose is indoctrination, pure and simple. It is sort of the American version of a Leni Riefenstahl film, except that her films are a lot more upbeat and enjoyable to watch.

It starts out equating Hitler, Mussolini and Hirohito. Then, the first banner headline word zooms across the screen: "COMMUNISM" Almost immediately, Stalin is equated with the first three. "All dictators are the same," is chanted throughout the film at intervals in between segments of the narration.

The film is a classic example of what George Orwell termed "double-think." It rails against "The Big Lie" while at the same moment spouting some of the most incredible whoppers I have ever heard! Just a minor example is J. Edgar Hoover, the King of Blackmail, stating that he would never want to see anyone publicly embarrassed as a result of his investigations.

At one point, it is railing against dictators and the one-party system, and in the same breath has the nerve to show film footage of Senator Joseph McCarthy!

The thing I personally found most offensive was its presentation that all the anti-war protests at the White House were engineered and funded by the International Communist Party, and that as soon as Stalin and Hitler had a falling out, the demonstrations instantly evaporated.

The film kept my interest. In fact, it is fascinating. But rather in the same morbid way as I imagine watching a train wreck taking place would be.

At the very least, "The Hoaxters" is worth watching as a lesson in history, and also as a textbook example of propaganda techniques which are still widely used and very effective today.

Amusing and Scary

[aimless-46 · 2 December 2007]

To really appreciate the amusement value of this pseudo-documentary (and the truly scary nature of this sort of propaganda) it is necessary to understand the political situation of Europe and North America during the middle years of the 20th century. While isolationism (America First Committee) was generally favored by much of the population; both Europe and America had seen a growth of antiliberalism (a mix of fascism and interventionist sentiment). This surge in antiliberalism was part of a gradual evolution over the preceding six decades.

It expressed violent opposition to liberalism and social democracy; but reserved its most vitriolic rants for Marxism (later communism and Bolshevism-Hitler termed it Judeo-Bolshevism). In Germany before the war and in America after the war, it included an extreme brand of nationalism. "The Hoaxters" even spends a moment at the grave site of Karl Marx; branding him the greatest evil of the world.

The irony of "The Hoaxters" (and the quality Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels would have found most amusing) is its basic premise of equating Nazi antiliberalism (an ideology much closer to that of this film's makers and backers) with the perceived ideology of America's enemy-of-the-decade; the Soviet Union.

Indeed Hitler nicely summed up his core belief and social Darwinist attitude as: "In this struggle the stronger, the more able, win, while the less able, the weak, lose. Struggle is the father of all things ... It is not by the principles of humanity that man lives or is able to preserve himself above the animal world, but solely by means of the most brutal struggle". Which is much closer to free market capitalism than to Marxism's: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need".

Flush from their triumphs over Germany and Japan; both America and the Soviets were in need of a credible enemy. They served each other well in this capacity; with fear routinely employed by both countries to prevent a return to isolationism.

But the documentary does not limit itself to traditional saber rattling. It evokes the snake oil salesman analogy to discredit and dismiss any new fangled notions of government. It even anticipates that the socio-economic situation of blue-collar workers, women, and minorities back in 1952 might make them less receptive to simplistic arguments about freedom and democracy. Jackie Robinson and Walter Reuther appear briefly to proclaim that their respective races and classes are solidly behind America (something to the effect that they would rather be discriminated and exploited here; than have to live in the Soviet Union).

The documentary is professionally made and narrated.

Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.

Cold War Relic

[bkoganbing · 5/10 · 25 July 2019]

This documentary film cobbled together from a lot of old newsreel sources is MGM's attempt at affirming American values circa 1952 without going over too far to the right. Note the non-presence of such folks as Joe McCarthy and Huey Long. Note the presence of George Marshall out selling the Marshall Plan and he was a target for the extreme right and some not so extreme.

The comparison of the response to the Nazi threat or lack thereof for some time is made to how we respond to the Soviet Union.

The passage of time has really dated this film. Issues were and are a lot more complex than the us versus them message of The Hoaxters.

It was made at MGM and a lot of MGM stars contributed to the narration.

Look at this one as a piece of history.

old school propaganda

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 12 May 2023]

"People who are not governed by God Will be ruled by tyrants." William Penn

This is an anti-communist propaganda. It starts with a carnival hustler selling snake oil. He morphs into Hitler preaching to massive adoring crowds. It's now after WWII. The fascists have lost. The new form of snake oil salesman is the communists. They are on the march and very much like the old fascists. Both are against the Christian faith and in fact all three Abrahamic religions. Both endeavor to enslave the world. Before the war, Hitler gained vast support within America. The communists are now trying to do the same. It's the same playbook as America's enemies try to corrupt it from the inside. Now, communism is spreading across the globe. Then, the movie goes through the communist attempts at taking over America round by round. It's an old fashion propaganda film.

A Curiously Acceptable Anti - Soviet Short Subject

[theowinthrop · 8/10 · 21 September 2006]

I caught this short film on the Turner Classic network on Wednesday, September 20, 2006 from 7:30 - 8:00 P.M.

Coming out in 1952, I was figuring out that it would be far from positive about the Soviet Union or it's policies. This turned out to be quite true, but it's attack is a fair one. The opportunism of the Soviet Union in the 1920s and 1930s and 1940s into the 1950s is an open historical record. Each switch of policy (mirrored in the Communist Parties of the United States and Europe and Asia as well) is called a "round" (like in a boxing match. Round four is pro-Western, as Stalin tries (supposedly) to link up with the United States, England, and France against Nazi aggression. Round five is the Soviet about face in their aligning with the Nazis in the Non-Aggression Pact of 1939. Round six is when Russia is attacked by Germany and reaches out to Britain and America again. Round seven is when the Second World War ends, and Russia becomes a threat to Western democracy. It turned out that of the first 48 vetoes of the Security Council of the U.N. from 1945 to 1953, 47 were from the Soviet Union.

No doubt someone can make a case that British and French (and to a lesser extent, American) diplomatic blundering made Stalin and Molotov swallow their bile and sign that infamous 1939 non-aggression pact with Hitler and Von Ribbentrop. But the argument about safety and buying time to rearm, while plausible to an extent, does not explain the Soviet Union's willingness to grab the eastern portion of neighboring Poland while Germany grabbed the Western portion, nor using this to eventually attack the Baltic states of Latvia, Lithuania, and Esthonia, and Finland.

What is curious about this is the even-handedness of the attack on enemies of democracy. The narration warns about believing "snake oil" salesmen of totalitarian ideas, of all stripes (Fascist, Nazi, Communist). But this even goes against people spreading hate towards people who are "suspect" (intellectuals, or foreign born types). This was made in 1952, the height of the McCarthy period - and yet it makes a case that might almost be aimed at the Senator himself. It never hints at the Senator, mind you, but it is an odd point of view in an age of the Hollywood blacklist.

Interestingly enough two of the narrators were Robert Taylor and George Murphy, both conservative types: Murphy eventually becoming a Republican U.S. Senator in the 1960s, and Taylor a "friendly witness" against Communist influences in the movie industry (Taylor had been in a controversial film, THE NORTH STAR, which painted Soviet Union life too positively). But neither says anything that one can actually find really far right in political position.

With narratives also by Walter Pigeon (interestingly he deals with American foreign policy - under General George Marshall (sort of anathema to McCarthyites in 1952) - and quite favorably), Barry Sullivan, Dore Schare, Howard Keel, and James Whitmore. I suspect that Schare may have been behind the project, but I really don't know. It was actually quite well worth watching

An interesting historical piece that is reflective of it's era

[grasshopper54 · 8/10 · 30 November 2007]

I first had the privilege of watching The Hoaxters in 1974. My roommate in college actually had a 16mm print of this one reeler and I was captivated by it's effectiveness in propaganda. This is an interesting historical relic that is reflective of the era that it came out of. This film was produced during the height of the McCarthy "Red Scare" years and was a fitting example of Hollywood's fear of the House on Unamerican Committee "witch hunts". 1952 was a completely different world in contrast to how we live in this country today. People were more reverent then; their moral scruples were more intact and we must remember that we just emerged victorious from the Second World War and were then fighting the Korean War, so nationalism was more prevalent; respect for the flag and country was almost an anticipated action; no flag burning then! There is so much to comment on the mentality of the early 1950's.

If we were to become suddenly sucked into some time vortex and transported back to this era, we would probably go mad because of stricter standards demanded of us not only by government, be it local, State or Federal, but by our respective religious beliefs as well as the people around us who would demand that we conform to their thinking. Morals were stronger, religion had a firmer, influential hold and most people respected the authorities. This film demonstrates this and more. It also demonstrated fear; the fear of Communism was real; people felt that World War III would break out at any moment; the fear was valid; the fear was reflective in our leaders as well as the common man. And it was in this fear-driven time that Joseph McCarthy made a name for himself by using this fear to ruin many innocent lives.

MGM did a marvelous job producing this film. The voices of Walter Pidgeon and George Murphy are easily recognized; the animation is quite entertaining, especially when it showed the Swastika turning into a map of Germany or the dragon changing into the Japanese islands. Remember, these images were stronger in the minds of those who saw this film in 1952, because it was just seven years after these totalitarian regimes were defeated. Korea further exacerbated these feelings; it was the duty of every God-fearing American to struggle against those who wanted to enslave the free world.

The Hoaxters didn't just reflect the mentality of the times, but it also permitted those in Hollywood to pledge their allegiance (to a lesser degree compared to World War II) against a foe. This was partly due to nationalism, but mainly due to the fear of blacklisting by the HUAC. All in all, a great historical chestnut.

Excellent summary of the history of Communism up to 1953

[dafyddabhugh · 10/10 · 3 November 2008]

Some commenters on the left side of the aisle call this film "propaganda;" but being propagandistic doesn't make it false. In fact, the Hoaxters' historical sketch of the rise and various phases of Communism, and its continuing danger to liberty and freedom (as we just saw in Georgia under brutal Soviet -- sorry, Russian occupation), is remarkably accurate, given the constraints of a movie short.

Definitely worth the viewing time for anybody not utterly besotted with the anti-anti-communist propaganda routinely taught in school these days, where kids are told that Joe McCarthy was a greater threat to world peace and liberty than Josef Stalin.

Very prescient warning from Hollywood past about a real threat of today

[BigJohnPilgrim · 10/10 · 20 May 2012]

I guess if you are a progressive, if you actually believe that our U.S. Constitution is some kind of 'living' document that is outdated and needs to change to adapt to the times and therefore you are against the very Constitution itself and a traitor to it, then you might scoff at this film and dismiss it.

But if you believe in the principles of limited government and strong military to protect us against threats from abroad, and freedom and liberty as laid out in our Constitution, and that as our Constitution states our liberty and rights are granted by God alone and not man, as man can take them away but God won't, then you will know that this prescient warning from Hollywood's past, from a time when Hollywood was still honest and populated with patriots who had fought and defended our great country from external threats, this warning is more relevant today than at any time in our history. Just as this film describes the past attempts of socialist dictators who believe they know better than we do what is good for us, dictators who believe that the limitations placed on our federal government by a wise body of men who understood governmental tyranny more than any others before or since are obsolete, so the past attempts of those traitors to our Constitution to overthrow us both from without and within are mirrored in today's events. Taking advantage of turmoil and disaster to sneak into power and change the rules out from under us.

Yes, this film is practically a precognition of todays' events, with the efforts to destroy all public acknowledgment of God as this film warns against, and the loss of God-given liberty in favor of man-granted privileges. This film could not be more relevant, and the patriots narrating it should be granted Medals of Freedom for their part in this warning. Wake up, America.

The Left Hates It Because They Don't Want To Admit They Were Wrong

[mskaggs-97924 · 10/10 · 30 January 2022]

I watched this film after watching "Gandhi", which was very ironic because he would have been one of the first ones taken by the KGB and never seen again had the Reds overrun India. History has proven this 1952 documentary to be right all along. With the release of the Verona wiretaps of USSR diplomatic codes and post-Cold War interviews of Russian officials, we learned that spies, traitors, dupes, and clueless puppets were there all along. Watergate reporter Carl Bernstein wrote that both of his parents were American Communist Party members. When he did that, his parents were outraged over being named as party members. When he asked them why they didn't want it to be known his mother said, "We don't want people to realize Joe McCarthy was right!" On the downside it gave too much credit to George C. Marshall who was known to look the other way when it came to the Soviets, and to the United Nations, a place for spies and terrorists from it's founding in 1945 to this day. Other than those it's worth the 10 stars I'm giving it.

Poor

[Michael_Elliott · 28 February 2008]

Hoaxters, The (1952)

* 1/2 (out of 4)

MGM short is pure propaganda, which ranks right down there with Triumph of the Will and various other films. The film tries to show claims that Communist and anyone wanting to make money are no different than Nazis. This film runs just over 30-minutes and I'm sure at the time it had its heart in the right place but it's very dated today and some of the films claims are just downright silly. Howard Keel, George Murphy, Walter Pidgeon, Barry Sullivan, Robert Taylor and James Whitmore narrate various parts of the film. Technically speaking the film is very well made but that doesn't add to the entertainment value.