View Full Version : Der Untergang/ The Downfall

Mac Seafraidh
Wednesday, August 25th, 2004, 11:39 AM
By Ernest Gill

Hamburg - A chillingly frank screen portrayal of Adolf Hitler's final hours in his Berlin bunker has spawned a national debate over whether Germans are prepared to view the Nazi dictator as a tragic human being rather than as a monster.

In a country where display of Nazi emblems is banned, Germans are long accustomed to being reminded by television and the movies that Hitler was the 20th Century's ultimate war criminal.

And in a country where the spectre of neo-Nazism is ever-present, any less than damning portrayal of Hitler in books, on TV or in movies is suspected of playing to radical rightwing sentiments.

Now, for the first time, Germany's best-known film producer has teamed up with the country's best-known 20th Century historian and a top-notch cast to risk resurrecting Hitler as never before.

Veteran actor Bruno Ganz stars as Hitler in producer Bernd Eichinger's film, made with the scholarly assistance of award-winning German historian Joachim Fest. Movie audiences will be taken inside the bunker for an eye-witness look at Hitler's final days in a biopic entitled Der Untergang - Hitler Und Das Ende Des Dritten Reiches (Downfall - Hitler And The End Of The Third Reich).

"Ganz IS Hitler," Fest said at a media screening of the $15m film, which is scheduled for release on September 16.

'Coming to terms with the past'

"I took one look at him in full make-up and a chill ran down my spin," said Fest, author of major Hitler biographies. We show him as a sickly shadow of his former self, knowing the end is near."

But Eichinger said the portrayal is entirely based on historical fact. "I sent my script to Herr Fest and if he had rejected it, my project would have immediately disappeared into a drawer," he said.

Fest, author of a best-selling biography of Hitler and former publisher of one of Germany's most prestigious daily newspapers, Frankfurter Allegemeine Zeitung, said he had long been puzzled as to why no other historian had taken up the last-days topic, "so I decided to do it myself".

Eichinger also drew upon the memoirs of the late Traudl Junge, Hitler's last stenographer, who published her memoirs in late 2002 after being diagnosed with terminal cancer. Her book, published only days before she died, contains hitherto unknown insights into life in the bunker in those fateful final days in the spring of 1945.

Eichinger insisted Germans are sophisticated enough to read between the lines and come to their own conclusions about Hitler. Nonetheless, the movie is hotly debated in the German press and on radio and television talk shows. While critics fear the film could pander to neo-Nazis, others welcome it as a refreshingly candid attempt at what Germans call "vergangenheitsbewaeltigung" - coming to terms with the past.

Source: http://www.news24.com/News24/Entert...1577930,00.html (http://forums.skadi.net/redirector.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.news 24.com%2FNews24%2FEntert...1577930%2C00. html)

Wednesday, August 25th, 2004, 01:55 PM
Any news on an International release for this film? Or at least a U.S. release?

Mac Seafraidh
Wednesday, August 25th, 2004, 05:17 PM
Any news on an International release for this film? Or at least a U.S. release?

No Comrade. It just has hit the news actually reguarding the announcement.

Mac Seafraidh
Wednesday, September 1st, 2004, 11:10 PM
Here is the official site: http://www.deruntergang-special.film.de/

Wednesday, September 1st, 2004, 11:29 PM
Hah, I wish I was fluent in German.

Mac Seafraidh
Thursday, September 2nd, 2004, 01:21 AM
I do too. A few years ago I was pretty close to fluent.

Thursday, September 2nd, 2004, 01:25 AM
Hah, I wish I was fluent in German.

And English, too. ;)

"I wish I were fluent in German."

Friday, September 3rd, 2004, 06:01 PM
Hah, I wish I was fluent in German.

And English, too. ;)

"I wish I were fluent in German."

Well, shit. :smt003

P.S. I broke up with the mastermind behind SB.

friedrich braun
Thursday, November 18th, 2004, 04:14 PM
TWILIGHT OF THE GODS: Review of 'Der Untergang'

by Constantin von Hoffmeister

17 November 2004

"Der Untergang" (2004) is in many ways a brilliant film. It is stylish and sumptuous in all the ways that the contemporary Federal German authorities do not like it. Although graphic in its depiction of the last days of the Third Reich, the fading glory of this Teutonic Empire is evident in nearly all the shots. One feels that the movie tries to capture the myth of the "Fall" with all the pathos and poetic melodrama that it deserves.

Surprisingly, the film is quite faithful to the book (by national conservative historian Joachim Fest) that it is based on. The epic narrative is tightly told and no moralizing scenes detract from the final struggle that the epic figures (eerily acted with attention to detail, especially obvious in the operatic speech pattern of Dr. Goebbels) of the collapsing National Socialist regime were engaged in.

The Volkssturm is portrayed as the last stand that it was. The blonde and blue-eyed boys and girls shooting shells at the advancing Soviets is shown not as acts of foolishness as one might expect in today's world of hero-denial, but as a desperate resolve to do to a last bid for the honor of Germany.

"Der Untergang" is the first German film that depicts an historical account of history from the perspective of National Socialists. For example, Dr. Goebbels in one scene hopefully exclaims that one day all the lies about National Socialism will be cleared while, in another scene, Adolf Hitler displays his disdain for the "decadent Western democracies." Both exclamations are, naturally, without comments from liberal historians. The film simply shows what the NS elite thought and said at the time.

The only negative point of the film is obviously an obligatory one (in these jewified times of ours). At the end of the film, it reads that World War II cost 50 million lives, and six million Jews died. Now, that is what I call exclusivity!


Mac Seafraidh
Monday, November 29th, 2004, 04:36 AM
Hitler Movie `Der Untergang' Draws Crowds, Criticism in Germany

Nov. 25 (Bloomberg) -- A film depicting Adolf Hitler's human side is attracting crowds and stirring debate in Germany. Oliver Hirschbiegel's film ``Der Untergang'' (The Downfall) portrays the final days of the Fuhrer's life in his Berlin bunker in 1945. Released in September, it has become one of the best- selling films in Germany, with 400 copies in circulation and attendance of more than 750,000. It has also stirred debate.

On Nov. 18, the film received Hamburg's ``Bambi'' prize as the best German film of the year. Former Chancellor Helmut Kohl handed the award to Swiss actor Bruno Ganz, who plays Hitler. ``Der Untergang'' has also been nominated for an Oscar as best foreign film. At the core of the controversy surrounding the film is its portrayal of Hitler as a human being, rather than a monster. While Berlin falls in an apocalyptic bloodbath outside his bunker's walls, the dictator is seen eating pasta, praising his cook, charming his secretary, patting his dog, crying and kissing Eva Braun. Should this be permitted?

German literary critic Marcel Reich-Ranicki praised ``Der Untergang'' on the television talk show ``Berlin Mitte'' as ``important, significant and very well made,'' and suggested that it ought to be shown in all German schools. Film director Wim Wenders, in the weekly newspaper ``Die Zeit,'' condemned the film as a trivialization of history. It didn't take a stance on Hitler or fascism and encouraged the viewer to sympathize with the dictator, he said.

Right-Wing Actors

Adding to the controversy, right-wing extremist Karl Richter revealed last month in the ``Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung'' newspaper that he and as many as 20 other neo-Nazis had acted in the film as SS officers, Wehrmacht soldiers and members of the bunker's inner circle. Richter, chief editor of a monthly far-right publication, who played the role of adjutant to General Field Marshall Keitel, lauded the film as ``the beginning of a shift in the historical perception of Hitler.''

A spokesman for Munich-based production company Constantin Film AG, Thomas Peter Friedl, confirmed that Richter and other neo-Nazis acted in the film. He said that kind of thing was unavoidable but that it didn't alter the film's basic message. Rainer Rother, head of the German Historical Museum's film department and author of a book on Nazi-era movie maker Leni Riefenstahl, told Bloomberg in an interview last week that debates over the humanization of Hitler's image were missing the point. In his cavernous room on the fourth floor of historic offices on Berlin's Museum Island, Rother spoke with quiet intensity to Bloomberg's Shirley Apthorp about his concerns over ``Der Untergang.''

Charm and Evil

Apthorp: What do you feel is the problem with the way that ``Der Untergang'' is being discussed in the German media?

Rother: What has really surprised me is that there has been no discussion about the fact that the time span of the film is limited to the final 12 days of Hitler's life. The film was made to present a portrait of Hitler with his human traits in the foreground. But Hitler backed into a corner, reduced to the world of the bunker, limited in his command options to only a few regiments -- that's not Hitler.

Hitler was the person who unleashed World War II. He was the person who decided how the war was to be lead. He was the person responsible for the murder of millions of people. Hitler had the ability to make choices. He was charming, as always. But he always chose, and wanted, evil.

Apthorp: Why do you think the film was set during the last 12 days of Hitler's life?

Rother: It was all about drama. The final days were a crisis situation. Plenty happens. Hitler kills himself, Magda Goebbels murders her children, and so on. Because there is so much action, it's good cinematic material. That's surely also the reason why it was made. A great deal of money was spent, and the film is running quite successfully.

But if their objective had really been to do what they claimed -- to portray Hitler as a human being -- they should have chosen a different period. Because the decisions which had to be made during those final days were no longer relevant. There are no more alternatives. There are no longer choices between good and evil. Hitler is portrayed almost as a victim of circumstance.

Victims or Criminals?

Apthorp: So, a situation of self-defense is one which sidesteps questions of morality?

Rother: It's a question of perspective. You can also see it in the way the defense of the bunker is portrayed. The German soldier who defends Berlin in the film is seen chiefly as a protector. In narrative terms, he's the person you sympathize with. The soldiers become victims of false decisions from above. Whereas, in fact, all those who organized the defense of Berlin were perpetrators, and some of them were criminals. In the film, we see the doctor selflessly caring for the wounded. What he did before -- probably carrying out culpable medical experiments on human beings -- no longer plays a role.

Apthorp: Bernd Eichinger, the film's producer and author, has said that questions about German collective guilt are silly.

New Image

Rother: Yes, I agree with him. It's not a question of German collective guilt. One should remain concrete. On the other hand, if the team reacts to the news that one of the actors is a right-wing extremist by saying that things like that happen, well, I think that's not good enough. Sure, things happen, but if you haven't thought about what you are doing, it tends to happen rather more often than if you have.

When a right-wing extremist reports happily that a new image of Hitler is being projected, it becomes clear that the team ought to have been more clear from the start about which image of Hitler they actually wanted to project. They should have been able to say why this image was incompatible with that of the right-wing extremists.

Apthorp: Do you think the film promotes a better image of Hitler?

Rother: I doubt that the German public will start to love Hitler because people have seen ``Der Untergang.'' They aren't that naive. Those who know something about National Socialism and condemn it will shrug their shoulders. The film doesn't say anything new about Nazism. On the other hand, those who are nostalgic for this era or who are so far right that they consider Hitler to have been an acceptable German politician suddenly have a palatable image of Hitler. That was not the case in the world of German film until now.

No Favor

Apthorp: Do you agree that such an intimate portrayal of Hitler is something new in the history of German cinema?

Rother: No. It has been done before. Not only in Hans-Jurgen Syberberg's film (``Hitler, A Film from Germany,'' 1977), but also in G.W. Pabst's film about the last 10 days of Hitler's life (``Der Letzte Akt,'' 1954). Obviously, the marketing department is counting on the fact that nobody has seen these films. What annoys me more is the fact that Eichinger and Hirschbiegel suggest that by portraying Hitler as a human being, they are acting on behalf of the people of Germany, and doing the nation a favor.

Apthorp: How could it have been done better?

Rother: If they had really wanted to present the general public with a new image of Hitler, then they could have chosen periods from Hitler's biography that presented the paradox of his humanity far better. Around the time of September 1939 and the Wannsee Conference, when the decision was made to exterminate the Jewish people, Hitler was probably also charming.

He was chivalrous to his secretaries, and entertaining. He had the charisma to persuade generals with better military insight that he was right. They could have chosen a time when he had the power to make decisions. He had the force of character to succeed in implementing his decisions, and he consistently chose to do evil.

Hitler's Criminal Side

Apthorp: Whether it should be permitted to portray Hitler as a human being is to ask the wrong question?

Rother: Of course, it should be permitted. Hitler was a human. It was the historian Arnold Toynbee who said that you need to be able to understand Hitler as a human being, because if you portray him only as a monster, you don't actually grasp the whole thing. You have to understand that what happened was the consequence of the actions of real human beings, with all the ambivalence that this entails. I don't believe the problem is that the film shows Hitler's human side. I think the real problem is that the film is not able to show Hitler's criminal side.

Apthorp: The film won a Bambi award. Does it deserve this?

Rother: The Hollywood Reporter called the massacre scene ``state-of-the-art.'' That's high praise for a German film, coming from Hollywood. People who are interested in that kind of spectacle will get their money's worth. In purely technical terms, the film is well-made. The acting is good. It's a big production. That's why it gets all these honors. It's not about ideology. It's about being impressive. And it is impressive.

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000102&sid=aKhqiKRF1nTk&refer=uk (http://forums.skadi.net/redirector.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bloo mberg.com%2Fapps%2Fnews%3Fpid%3D10000102 %26sid%3DaKhqiKRF1nTk%26refer%3Duk)

Mac Seafraidh
Thursday, January 6th, 2005, 10:17 PM
Downfall Wins Germany's Top Audience Award
By Ulf Stabe


Downfall ("Der Untergang") has won the Bavarian Film Prize's Audience Award for 2004, a campaign in the forefront of the official awards.
The film is based on the novel Inside Hitler's Bunker by Joachim Fest and follows the final weeks of the war, from the desperate battles that raged night and day in the ruins of Berlin, fought by boys and old men, to the growing paranoia that marked Hitler's mental state.

With his utter disregard for the well being of both soldiers and civilians-- to his suicide and the efforts of his loyal aides to destroy his body before the advancing Russian armies reached Berlin.

The vote was initiated by the German TV magazine "Kino Kino", the radio show "Bayern 3" and a Munich based newspaper "Abendzeitung München", and represents voting results from their audience.


Young boys and old men made up the last defenders of BerlinThe other nominees (for the audience award) were the other most successful movies of 2004 at the German Box Office, mostly comedies:

"7 Zwerge, Männer allein im Wald" ("The 7 Dwarves, Men alone in the Forest") A funny retelling of Snowhite, featuring the most popular German comedians, led by Otto.

"Traumschiff Surprise - Periode 1" ("Dreamship Surprise, Period 1") A parody of the Star Wars and Star Trek movies, made by Michael 'Bully' Herbig (director, producer and star of the movie) actor), also starring Til Schweiger. Traumschiff was a funny and technically superb movie, my favorite of last year.

Bully is known for his TV Series ‘BullyParade’. He also made "Der Schuh des Manitu", a Western parody, released 2001 and winner of the audience award in 2002, one of the most successful German movies ever.

Der Wixxer (A fake of the popular German Edgar Wallace movies in the 60s).

The last nominee was "Laura’s Stern" (Laura’s Star) a really beautiful animated children movie.

The official prize for best film will not be announced until Jan 14th. Overall the audience vote was not surprising given the lack of any serious competition for a epic movie like "Der Untergang" ("Downfall").


Bruno Ganz plays Adolf Hitler in Downfall

Downfall however has not gotten unanimously good reviews from critics in Germany. A great historical epos for sure, presenting an important period and an important person from younger German history in brilliant cinematography.

Other have said that it is a little shallow, that the German defenders in the final fight for Berlin are too heroic, mowed down by faceless Russian aggressors and that the great crimes of the Nazis, like the Holocaust, are hardly touched.

The movie is expected to have limited release in New York and Los Angeles next month, details when we get them.

Source: http://movies.monstersandcritics.com/news/article_3292.php/Downfall_Wins_Germany's_Top_Audience_Awa rd (http://forums.skadi.net/redirector.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmovies.m onstersandcritics.com%2Fnews%2Farticle_3 292.php%2FDownfall_Wins_Germany%26%2339% 3Bs_Top_Audience_Award)

Mac Seafraidh
Friday, January 14th, 2005, 07:51 AM
http://www.a-film.nl/deruntergang/ (http://www.a-film.nl/deruntergang/)

Monday, February 14th, 2005, 05:25 PM
Looks better than the reviews made it out to be. Better, in the sense of the quality of production, as well as special effects. As far as the portrayal of Hitler is concerned...well, see for yourself (http://www.movieweb.com/movies/video.php?id=2676&nv=1).

A review from the site.

When writer-producer Bernd Eichinger read the galleys of historian Joachim Fest's book "Der Untergang" ("The Downfall: Inside Hitler's Bunker, The Last Days of the Third Reich"), he knew he had found the dramatic key to a film he had wanted to make for decades, but never thought possible due to its scope. Fess' book focuses on the final days of the Reich, and Eichinger saw that the horrifying epic of Hitler and his people during his twelve years in power was reflected in those last twelve days in the bunker. "The final days tell us a lot about how the mass fanaticism functioned in the regime's earlier years and how it continued to reign until the bitter end," says Eichinger. Eichinger read another very important book around the same time he read Fest's; the memoirs of Traudl Junge, Hitler's private secretary ("Until the Final Hour: Hitler's Last Secretary".); which was later made into the documentary "Blind Spot: Hitler's Secretary." "Fest gave me the time frame, Traudl Junge gave me the character who could hold it all together." "Downfall" is the first German film to broach the subject of Hitler straight-on since G.W. Pabst's 1956 "Der Letste Akt" ("The Last Act") which was told from the point of view of an ordinary German soldier, played by Oskar Werner. Says director Oliver Hirschbiegel, "In terms of German film history, we are breaking new ground here, since there is no cinematic frame of reference. After reading the book, it was clear to me that if I committed myself, then it would have to be a total and complete commitment, meaning that I was going to spend two years of my life in the Third Reich, with all of those characters and that primitive ideology… My hair stood on end. My wife advised me against it. Yet I noticed that it just wouldn't leave me in peace, and in my heart, before accepting the project, I knew that I had already opened myself up to it."

Starring: Christian Berkel, Daniel Brühl, Fabian Busch, Heino Ferch, Bruno Ganz, Corinna Harfouch, André Hennicke, Juliane Köhler, Thomas Kretschmann, Ulrike Krumbiegel, Alexandra Maria Lara, Ulrich Matthes, Michael Mendl, Birgit Minichmayr, Ulrich Noethen, Götz Otto, Justus von Dohnanyi
Director: Oliver Hirschbiegel

Dr. Brandt
Tuesday, February 15th, 2005, 03:49 PM
How can you praise this film? Do you have any Ideas of how it was back then?
Doesn't it strike you as atrange that this film gets so many positive reviews - even from Hollywood?
Seeing the clips makes me want to kill all those actors, specialy that lil dwarf that plays Hitler like a rambling, screaming madman.
Nothing new about this film. Seen it all before. Anthony Hopkins played a better Hitler.

What a piece of sh*t!

Tuesday, February 15th, 2005, 10:06 PM
I never praised the film, I just said the production values/special effects were better than the review I read about them said they were. I found it very difficult to watch the scenes with Hitler, for one reason or another. I doubt I'll see this film.

BTW- what movie did Anthony Hopkins portray Hitler in? Is it worth watching?

Wednesday, February 16th, 2005, 02:17 AM
The actor Bruno Ganz who so badly portrays the Fuhrer is indeed very short! Seems like everyone else is looking down on him!
I don't see why there has been controversy over this film and its supposed 'sympathetic' portrayal of Hitler. If it has been nominated for an Academy award (best foreign film), then surely Hollywood's Jews don't disapprove of it.

For David Irving's review, visit http://www.fpp.co.uk/docs/Irving/RadDi/2005/010205.html

Perhaps some parts of this film will be good, in that it will sympathize with the plight of ordinary Berliners as their city is being conquered by the Soviets. For example, scenes showing the horrific Russian bombardment of the city, wounded German soldiers screaming as their limbs are amputated, courageous German boys being blown to bits whilst hunting Russian tanks with Panzerfausts, etc.

Plus it has German actress Alexandra Maria Lara playing Traudl Junge. I saw her playing Fredrick the Great's sister in the TV movie 'Trenck - Zwei Herzen gegen die Krone'. Very nice!

Dr. Brandt
Wednesday, February 16th, 2005, 05:02 PM

Eichinger and Hirschbiegl (both subhumans) think if they use a lot of special effects and some flashy battle-scenes, that it will make a film "authentic". Hopkins played Hitler much better, although in one scene in the staff room he also throws a fit and screams. But that is only once. In this film Hitler seems to be constantly screetching and rambling.
I will never expect decent workmanship from any "german" directors or producers. They top even the Jews in vileness and and falsehood. Everyone seems to think that if something comes from "Germany", it is somehow more "authentic" and honest. As if "Germans" have some sort of interest in getting their history straightend out again. On the contrary. There is nothing truly "German" in todays Germany anymore. They produce 100% poison. It's pure Judaism.

Found these while searching:

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0000646UC.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0000TQS84.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000096I8V.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0000646UJ.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Monday, March 28th, 2005, 09:12 AM
German information and trailer: http://www.deruntergang-special.film.de/
English information and trailer: http://www.downfallthefilm.com/
IMDB Info: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0363163/

Who has seen the film? Thoughts?

Death and the Sun
Monday, March 28th, 2005, 11:28 AM
I wrote a review of this film in Finnish in tNP Suomi.

I'll summarize it here:

Just so you know where I'm coming from, I'm not a National Socialist, and do not admire Hitler -- although I recognize that he was a very talented and exceptional individual.

The Swiss actor Bruno Gatz, who plays Hitler, overdoes it pretty badly. He seems more like a bad parody of Hitler than an actual person. And he looks too old.

Goebbels is portrayed as a psychopath, which he never was. A coldblooded fanatic, yes, but not crazy -- not even at the very end. His political testament, which he dictated to Hitler's secretary before his suicide (and which the film tries to ridicule) proves this.

Most of the other top Nazis are shown rather accurately, as far as I know. Albert Speer is shown in a surprisingly positive light.

The main character is Hitler's secretary, Traudl Jung. She is played by Alexandra Maria Lara, a very beautiful and talented young woman whose work I expect to see more of in the future. :viking1:

As for the holoholopropaganda, there isn't any more of it than absolutely necessary. The "six million" figure tacked on at the end seems copypasted just to avoid unnecessary controversy with Zionist groups.

Possibly the most irrititating thing about this film to me was the fact that the production team shies away from showing the barbaric behaviour of the Soviet troops toward German civilians and POW's, and instead shows them as merry, happy-go-lucky fellow who like dancing and giving the vanquished Germans shots of Vodka. :rolleyes:

Monday, March 28th, 2005, 12:50 PM
The Swiss actor Bruno Gatz, who plays Hitler, overdoes it pretty badly. He seems more like a bad parody of Hitler than an actual person. And he looks too old.Well... it is a drama film. Everything is overdone. I really liked his portrayal of Hitler. Ganz does look a bit too old, yes, but he looked more like his character than the actors who played Goebbels or Himmler. It is difficult to recreate the perfect likeness.

As for the holoholopropaganda, there isn't any more of it than absolutely necessary. The "six million" figure tacked on at the end seems copypasted just to avoid unnecessary controversy with Zionist groups.That upset me. The movie had nothing to do with Jews. Why not mention the Poles, the Ukrainians, etc.? Jews are favoured, as per usual.

Possibly the most irrititating thing about this film to me was the fact that the production team shies away from showing the barbaric behaviour of the Soviet troops toward German civilians and POW's, and instead shows them as merry, happy-go-lucky fellow who like dancing and giving the vanquished Germans shots of Vodka. :rolleyes:Agreed here, although there were many German casualties shown.

Monday, March 28th, 2005, 01:06 PM
I just had a thought about that Jewish issue.

Wouldn't it have been more germane and appropriate to have shown the number of German casualties at the end of the film rather than the (unproven) number of Jewish casualties, considering that the film centred around the struggle of the German people, and around not the struggle of the Jews? I know that this would cause controversy, but the fact that it would just proves something in itself. What would people call it, favouritism? It's not exactly rational to think of Jewish favouritism as A-OK, only to whine about other kinds.

In the theatre, I could hear people scoff at what they believed to be ironic statements, such as Magda Goebbels' comment that a world without National Socialism was not a world worth living in. I knew this would be the reaction of the common person. I was just waiting for that response. I can't wait until the Second World War is treated like any other piece of history. Hopefully this film is one step forward.

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, so I apologise.

Death and the Sun
Monday, March 28th, 2005, 03:26 PM
Agreed. It irritates me that the Jews are supposed to be the only people whose suffering matters. Nobody denies the camps existed and that people died there, but there still are some very big questions unanswered.

The original death toll for Auswitch was ten million, then six million, then three million, then 1.8 million, and now's it's officially about 800 000. Yet the holy "six million" figure never changes. And the deaths of any other peoples in WW2 don't seem to matter. The longer this goes on, the more people will see that something's not right here.

Monday, March 28th, 2005, 03:34 PM
The original death toll for Auswitch was ten million, then six million, then three million, then 1.8 million, and now's it's officially about 800 000. Yet the holy "six million" figure never changes. And the deaths of any other peoples in WW2 don't seem to matter. The longer this goes on, the more people will see that something's not right here.

Yes. How many people involved in WW2 know the death-toll of their own people?

I take that silence as "I´m not sure" or "Honestly I don´t know"

Yet for some reason everyone "knows" how many jews were gassed one sunny afternoon in Auschwitch...

Actually, I see that their cult is losing it´s grip among us goyim every passing day.

If you take the American standpoint, WW2 is the only war you can not criticize, as if it were a holy war. All WW2 movies are about good smashing evil while e.g movies about Vietnam War have been about "the tragedy of war" for the last 20 years...

Monday, June 6th, 2005, 01:19 PM
Possibly the most irrititating thing about this film to me was the fact that the production team shies away from showing the barbaric behaviour of the Soviet troops toward German civilians and POW's, and instead shows them as merry, happy-go-lucky fellow who like dancing and giving the vanquished Germans shots of Vodka. :rolleyes:I agree. The large number of suicides portrayed in the film appeared out of context, in that the expected behaviour (shooting of POW's and civilians, mass gang-rapes of German women, etc.) that the advancing Soviet soldiers would inflict on the inhabitants of Berlin, soldiers and civilians alike, was not portrayed.

The Romanian-born actress Alexandra Maria Lara who played Traudl Junge is very beautiful and a talented actress (her official website is here (http://www.alexandra-maria-lara.com/)). I remember seeing her in a German television mini-series Trenck - Zwei Herzen gegen die Krone, where she played the sister of Frederick the Great.


And yet, what happens at the end of the film? She walks straight through a group of Russian soldiers, and one offers her a drink! :scratch: Surely in reality such a woman, dressed in a Wehrmacht uniform, would have been treated less amicably.


Death and the Sun
Monday, June 6th, 2005, 01:54 PM
So she is from Romania? Interesting. I think I will start a classification thread about her.

Monday, June 6th, 2005, 02:11 PM
So she is from Romania? Interesting. I think I will start a classification thread about her.Funny, I was thinking that would be a good idea myself just now!

Apparently she was born in November 1978 in Bucharest, Romania. Her family emigrated to Germany in 1983 'for political reasons'.

I assumed she and her family were Volksdeutsche (since many ethnic Germans emigrated to the Bundesrepublik under Ceaucescu's regime), but then I read her original family name is 'Platareanu'. Her father Valentin Platareanu was a well-known Romanian actor. They apparently changed the family name on advice from a manager, who said their name was too hard to pronounce in German. So not German at all!

Thursday, April 20th, 2006, 11:01 PM
Who here has seen Der Untergang/ The Downfall. Did you like it? Did you think it was a fair portrayal of Hitler and the NS regime?

Friday, April 21st, 2006, 12:07 AM
Who here has seen Der Untergang/ The Downfall. Did you like it? Did you think it was a fair portrayal of Hitler and the NS regime?

I have seen it many times.Great movie.Great performance by Bruno Ganz.

I think it was fair portrayal.

Very authentic.

Friday, April 21st, 2006, 05:58 AM
Heh I seen many WW2 movies (Saving Private Ryan, Band of Brothers and Saints and soldiers) but this was the only one that portraid the war from a german perspective.. I liked the scenes that had some street fights.. The german soldiers impressed me because they didn't surrender even though they had no chance to win...

Friday, May 19th, 2006, 02:03 AM
I´ver seen this movie two times! I think it is one of the best WW2 movies I´ve ever seen and one of the most realistic ones. It is a thousand times better than movies like: Hitler: Rise of the evil! :D

Friday, May 19th, 2006, 02:14 AM
I make a policy of never watching WW2 movies. Anything that gets such "praise" must be bad...

Herr Doktor
Friday, May 19th, 2006, 02:42 AM
Who here has seen Der Untergang/ The Downfall. Did you like it? Did you think it was a fair portrayal of Hitler and the NS regime?

The question is:

Are all things true who are told in this movie?

Personally I didn't liked the executions of some people.

Friday, May 19th, 2006, 02:59 AM
Isn´t the movie based on the stories of Traudl Junge? I think you can believe most of her stories that she told! But she couldn´t know and get with all details, for example the murder on the Goebbels children is not proven to this day.
But like I said, for me it is one of the most realistic WW2 movies I´ve ever seen and it is not only anti german propaganda like 95 % of all WW2 movies!

Herr Doktor
Friday, May 19th, 2006, 03:04 AM
Isn´t the movie based on the stories of Traudl Junge?

It is. But I can't make friends with this political system.

Yours sincerely

Friday, May 19th, 2006, 08:09 AM
It was a better portrayal than is the rule for such movies.

Dr. Solar Wolff
Friday, May 19th, 2006, 08:21 AM
Traudel Jung never mentioned in her book being gang raped by Soviet soldiers but it was said by others to have happened. Even as an old lady you could see that she was good looking as a young woman and so may have been a target.

I have gotten the feeling that Germans who went through the war as she did have held back things from us which they don't think we could possibly understand now. Others may only talk among themselves at this level or reality as might soldiers at a reunion.

Graf Spee
Friday, May 19th, 2006, 10:46 AM
I personally thought that the film was one of the fairest and most realistic ones made. The good thing is that the last days of Hitler are so very good documented- nearly every sentence he said- that there is not much room left for nowadays interpretation. Also they tried it a few times to let him look bad.

Two points for example:
- In a meeting with all the officers Hitler prohibits the army to break out of Berlin. Thats not true in reality he said that when all munition is out the soldiers should try to make their way out of Berlin.
- You may also be suprised of Hitlers hope for Schoerners and Wencks attacks to help Berlin. True is that Schoerner and Wenck been to the Fuhrer during his last days and told him (!) that they will relief the city.

But in general this are only a few points and the interpretation of them depends on your historical knowledge. So if you only know the "official" history you will see Hitler as a mad and evil man. but if you know all you will see Hitler as a great man, betrayed by many of his friends, but strong and brave going his way to the bitter end.

I really liked the film- :thumbup

Veritas Æquitas
Sunday, June 25th, 2006, 12:52 AM
I saw this movie about ten times .. Love it. One of my favorites for sure.

Sunday, June 25th, 2006, 01:07 AM
I have bought this movie as a DVD.
I´ve seen it with my teenager children. We are very impressed. It´s a great and realistic movie. Bruno Ganz is a fantastic actor. :thumbup