Course, I'd overlooked your link to the film putting voice to Eva's home movies and have just watched it. It's not the film I was referring to, but of course some of those home movie shots appear in many documentaries. Very interesting but not much new to me. It has always astonished me that people object to "humanizing" Hitler and those at the top of the Nazi hierarchy, for it is by recognising this that helps us to avoid repeating the experience. There was a strong lobby against "Downfall" for that reason, and against Alec Guinness's "The Last 10 Days", and against all depictions of Hitler as a "nice" man. The "nice and harmless" men continue to take us into war; uncontrolled power corrupts and deludes.

Yes, there are studio shots in "Triumph of the Will". Speer wrote of his surprise that Hess was so natural at re-enacting in the studio his introduction to Hitler's address. Look carefully for cameras in Hitler's car, shots require one elevated behind and one low in front. This was shot on 35mm. Even with Eyemo, the cameras aren't there. That the studio material cuts perfectly with the actual footage is one aspect of the skill involved.

EDIT: the book The Mitford Girls provides other views of Hitler as a person, so people who refuse to acknowledge that side have been closing their minds for a long time.

The "nice and harmless" men continue to take us into war...

Sociopaths usually "present" extremely well, as the psychiatrist terminology goes.

Thanks for the Mitford Girls reference, very interesting.

Those of us shooting "actuality events" can benefit from fixing things by re-enactments (even if only close-ups) and realise that all film making is, to a reasonable extent, a recreated truth. Those who doubt that studio footage was used in "Triumph of the Will", here is what Speer wrote:

"I recall that the footage taken during one of the solemn sessions of the 1935 Party Congress was spoiled. At Leni Riefenstakl's suggestion Hitler gave orders for the shots to be re filmed in the studio. I was called in to do a backdrop simulating a section of the Kongresshalle, as well as a realistic model of the platform and lectern. I had spot-lights aimed at it; the production staff scurried around -- while Streicher, Rosenberg, and Frank could be seen walking up and down with the manuscripts, determinedly memorizing their parts. Hess arrived and was asked to pose for the first shot. Exactly as he had done before an audience of 30,000 at the Party Congress, he solemnly turned precisely to the spot where Hitler would have been sitting, snapped to attention and cried: 'My Leader, I welcome you in the name of the Party Congress! The congress will now continue. The Fuehrer speaks!'
He did it all so convincingly that from that point on I was no longer so sure of the genuineness of his feelings. The three others also gave excellent performances in the emptiness of the studio, proving themselves gifted actors. I was rather disturbed; Frau Riefenstahl, on the other hand thought the acted scenes better than the original presentation.
By this time I thoroughly admired the art with which Hitler would feel his way during his rallies until he had found the point to unleash the first great storm of applause. I was by no means unaware of the demagogic element; indeed I contributed to it myself by my scenic arrangements. Nevertheless, up to this time I believe that the feelings of the speakers were genuine. It was therefore an upsetting discovery, that day in the studio, when I saw that all this emotion could be represented 'authentically' even without an audience."

Inside the Third Reich, p62

What you are demonstrating Serena is that "acting" is a good weapon for evil (not a word I would use as I think it meaningless but as our leader has told us they have an Axis I'll use it). The people buy it. A Good (and I will use that word only on account that we have used its opposite) and honest man who boringly tell us the way it is and what we should do is passed over these days for a smiling soft-spoken crook. Maybe this is Hollywood's fault? In the days of Theater and Literature this would never have happened. Now most people are conditioned so that when they open their eyes they are instantly receptive to hype and seduction. Everyone is sucked in by a good act. When will we get back to the Shakespearean "Beauty is truth"?

Edited for Freudian Slips

>>>"Triumph of the Will" certainly does bog down during the parade of troops, but you can't watch this without seeing modern day parallels<<<

Macworld expo????

Triumph of the Will is a documentation of the 1934 Party Congress, not 1935.

"Macworld expo????" I was thinking that too.

no

From a scientific standpoint, Macworld San Francisco certainly has elements of this. A Supreme Leader who offers a very powerful and seductive presentation, and who is never questioned.

One interesting thing about Hitler's symbology. He chose the swastika as his logo and was always talking about the purity of the Aryan race.

He took the swastika from India. The swastika has been used in India for thousands of years (and is still used there and in temples overseas), but the "solar wheel" rotates in the opposite direction, towards more light, symbolizing good.

Hitler turned it around so it rotated towards darkness, symbolizing evil.

The Aryan part? Also from India. Long story, but even English is an Indo-European language.

I mean really, what are you talking about? Hitler as the victim of his cabinet? Have you ever read Mein Kampf? Its amazing how people are revising history as we speak. Very scary.

By the way, I have seen the "home movies" What do they have to do with anything? Certainly, mass murders can be very nice in a social environment with lackies.

You are really starting to annoy me. Hitler wrote that book in Prison---It was published by a right wing press. Will you please stop this nonsense. It is unbecoming of anyone who considers themselves to be a human being.

"By the way, I have seen the "home movies" What do they have to do with anything? Certainly, mass murders can be very nice in a social environment with lackies."
Lets try to be honest; Hitler was guarded at all times and fully aware of the important of his image, there would no film footage permitted to exist that would put Hitler in a bad "context", especially if it was though it would become public. Acting 101 - moving lips does not mean someone is actually speaking. As pointed out above, Hitler and crew were well verse in acting and staging,(and killing). I don't think any historian would argue against that Hitler in the early 30's envision Germany would rule the world by military force.

Just as "Uncle Saddam" so nice around children.

Uncle Bush
Uncle Stalin
Uncle Pinochet
Uncle Kim Jong-il
Uncle Robert Mugabe

It's a large family if you ask me and all their grand schemes mean thousands if not millions of deaths.

>>>Triumph of the Will is a documentation of the 1934 Party Congress, not 1935.<<<

That's correct, but there is only one film and it was released 1935. Speer wrote many years after the event.

We're talking about films--a specific film--not politics. Please, let's stay on topic.

Actually we were talking about specific films---Hilters home movies where he smiles and kisses children on the cheek, plays with his schnauzers and is generally fun loving Uncle Adolph!

Back to the topic and film and editing, not the politics, Arriflex made the Arri 2C specifically for Reifenstahl because their other cameras of the time were too heavy for hand held work.

So the cinemtaic style of this documentary, with hand held footage, created a legacy that we employ today in our film/video making

Like it or not, call it propaganda from an evil regime, which it is, all of us are now using some of the techniques pioneered by Riefenstahl in this and her other films.

Stephen Hope

Just as "Uncle Saddam" so nice around children.

As I said above, Sociopaths usually "present" extremely well.

I have helped thousands of people across the U.S. and Canada who have been harmed by sociopaths, narcissists ("NPD"), people with borderline ("BPD") who refuse to take their meds, etc., so I'm quite familiar with the problem. Especially after having been married to one of them.

Stephen,
I think that might be the Arri II (the 2C is much more modern). The Eyemo was available from 1925, but not necessarily in Germany.
Of course the Eyemo is a very simple camera taking only 100 ft loads of 35mm, whereas the Arri II was a mirror reflex taking larger loads in magazines -- a very sophisticated camera for it's time. There's a photo of a camera being handheld in handheld on dolly for Olympia

Serena

I stand corrected, the last time I studied Riefenstahl was in 1976 at the Australian Film and Television School, no Radio in those days at the School, and my exact memory of the camera model evaded me after 31 years.

Guess I could have looked it up in Wikkipedia though....

Regards
Stephen Hope

Stephen, I make far worse slips of memory! It was a very minor correction.

Serena