OT: Triumph of the Will-- Leni Riefenstahl

Comments

busterkeaton wrote on 3/18/2007, 10:15 PM
Here is the NY Times review.

Serena wrote on 3/18/2007, 10:17 PM
Vic, that's an observation I've made in various discussions and I'm surprised people take so little interest. If you have a quality film camera with excellent lenses then no matter when it was made putting in a new film upgrades it to the latest imaging technology. And you can upgrade the hardware with crystal control and time code and video tap. It's not as if equivalent video gear is (a) cheaper or (b) better.
rextilleon wrote on 3/19/2007, 7:44 AM
Yes, not sure what this is a review of but a recent book on this Nazi Propagandist pretty much bursts the bubble of her being a victim.
ECB wrote on 3/19/2007, 10:09 AM
IMO If you want to snapshot of the propaganda machine on this side get a copy a Disney's "The War Years". I remember Donald with swastikas in his eyes. There was no respect for Hitler. When PM Chamberlain went to Germany and signed the non-aggression pact with Hitler, Hitler was bombing Poland before Chamberlain's plane landed back in England. I remember it well and I was just a kid. Historically evil people like Hitler turn up about every 20 years like Milosevic, Hussein... and it is up to the current generation of how to deal the problem.

EB
busterkeaton wrote on 3/19/2007, 11:30 AM
The review is of these two books.

LENI
The Life and Work of Leni Riefenstahl
By Steven Bach


LENI RIEFENSTAHL
A Life
By Jürgen Trimborn.
rextilleon wrote on 3/19/2007, 4:26 PM
Yeah, its the Bach book that pretty much pokes holes in the claims that she was just a misunderstood artist.
jeremyk wrote on 3/20/2007, 11:52 AM
Hey, just in time for this thread!

Here's another review in The New Yorker. Quite long and interesting:

http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2007/03/19/070319crbo_books_thurman

Jeremy
Serena wrote on 3/20/2007, 5:32 PM
Interesting review, but surely no one believes that any person who becomes a celebrity remains pure. The very process is at fault. And having got there, the falsehoods must be denied. This thread was about the documentaries which received good awards and are part of film curricula. That propaganda was a central issue is undeniable and must be recognised in analysis, but the morals, celebrity or patriotism of the director and producers neither degrades nor enhances the films. Those things might well affect one's personal emotional response to any film (there are people who object to Woody Allen films, not because the films are bad or objectionable, but because of certain aspects of his personal life), but one needs to set that aside when examining a film work.
farss wrote on 3/20/2007, 7:20 PM
Certainly not an observation lost on me. The same camera that I used 30 years ago is just as capable today and I still bump into people getting plenty of mileage out of those clockwork Bolex's with their 3 lens turrets.

Now who noticed that V7 has 3 and 5 perf 35mm TC?

Bob.
Serena wrote on 3/20/2007, 7:31 PM
>>>Now who noticed that V7 has 3 and 5 perf 35mm TC<<<

Hey, really? Hadn't looked. Hopefully has 4 perf as well.

EDIT: people today think a clockwork drive most anachronistic, but there were good things about them. Batteries never went flat when out in the bush shooting wild-life. On the down side, the Bolex only runs 14 secs at 24fps and the mechanical speed governor is only OK for silent film. On the up side, the camera has facilities for attaching a DC drive (still mech governor) or a crystal controlled electric drive. The Bolex clockwork drive provides the shortest run of any camera I used; the Pathe 16mm would run 45 seconds on a wind (do I hear wow! from the gallery?). The really good thing was that they were HD before that was thought of in video. The bad: that film is now so darned expensive (guess we have to blame video for that!).