35 commentaires
Please see also my comment on Die Nibelungen part 1: Siegfried.
The second part of UFA studio's gargantuan production of the Nibelungen saga continues in the stylised, symphonic and emotionally detached manner of its predecessor. However, whereas part one was a passionless portrayal of individual acts of heroism, part two is a chaotic depiction of bloodletting on a grand scale.
As in part one, director Fritz Lang maintains a continuous dynamic rhythm, with the pace of the action and the complexity of the shot composition rising and falling smoothly as the tone of each scene demands. These pictures should only be watched with the note-perfect Gottfried Huppertz score, which fortunately is on the Kino DVD. Now, with this focus on mass action, Lang is presented with greater challenges in staging. The action sequences in his earliest features were often badly constructed, but now he simply makes them part of that rhythmic flow, with the level of activity on the screen swelling up like an orchestra.
But just as part one made us witness Siegfried's adventures matter-of-factly and without excitement, part two presents warfare as devastating tragedy. In both pictures, there is a deliberate lack of emotional connection with the characters. That's why Lang mostly keeps the camera outside of the action, never allowing us to feel as if we are there (and this is significant because involving the audience is normally a distinction of Lang's work). That's also why the performances are unnaturally theatrical, with the actors lurching around like constipated sleepwalkers.
Nevertheless, Kriemhild's revenge does constantly deal with emotions, and is in fact profoundly humanist. The one moment of naturalism is when Atilla holds his baby son for the first time, and Lang actually emphasises the tenderness of this scene by building up to it with the wild, frantic ride of the huns. The point is that Lang never manipulates us into taking sides, and in that respect this version has more in common with the original saga than the Wagner opera. The climactic slaughter is the very antithesis of a rousing battle scene. Why then did Hitler and co. get so teary-eyed over it, a fact which has unfairly tarnished the reputation of these films? Because the unwavering racial ideology of the Nazis made them automatically view the Nibelungs as the good guys, even if they do kill babies and betray their own kin. For Hitler, their downfall would always be a nationalist tragedy, not a human one.
But for us non-nazi viewers, what makes this picture enjoyable is its beautiful sense of pageantry and musical rhythm. When you see these fully-developed silent pictures of Lang's, it makes you realise how much he was wasted in Hollywood. Rather than saddling him with low-budget potboilers, they should have put him to work on a few of those sword-and-sandal epics, pictures that do not have to be believable and do not have to move us emotionally, where it's the poetic, operatic tonality that sweeps us along.
The second part of UFA studio's gargantuan production of the Nibelungen saga continues in the stylised, symphonic and emotionally detached manner of its predecessor. However, whereas part one was a passionless portrayal of individual acts of heroism, part two is a chaotic depiction of bloodletting on a grand scale.
As in part one, director Fritz Lang maintains a continuous dynamic rhythm, with the pace of the action and the complexity of the shot composition rising and falling smoothly as the tone of each scene demands. These pictures should only be watched with the note-perfect Gottfried Huppertz score, which fortunately is on the Kino DVD. Now, with this focus on mass action, Lang is presented with greater challenges in staging. The action sequences in his earliest features were often badly constructed, but now he simply makes them part of that rhythmic flow, with the level of activity on the screen swelling up like an orchestra.
But just as part one made us witness Siegfried's adventures matter-of-factly and without excitement, part two presents warfare as devastating tragedy. In both pictures, there is a deliberate lack of emotional connection with the characters. That's why Lang mostly keeps the camera outside of the action, never allowing us to feel as if we are there (and this is significant because involving the audience is normally a distinction of Lang's work). That's also why the performances are unnaturally theatrical, with the actors lurching around like constipated sleepwalkers.
Nevertheless, Kriemhild's revenge does constantly deal with emotions, and is in fact profoundly humanist. The one moment of naturalism is when Atilla holds his baby son for the first time, and Lang actually emphasises the tenderness of this scene by building up to it with the wild, frantic ride of the huns. The point is that Lang never manipulates us into taking sides, and in that respect this version has more in common with the original saga than the Wagner opera. The climactic slaughter is the very antithesis of a rousing battle scene. Why then did Hitler and co. get so teary-eyed over it, a fact which has unfairly tarnished the reputation of these films? Because the unwavering racial ideology of the Nazis made them automatically view the Nibelungs as the good guys, even if they do kill babies and betray their own kin. For Hitler, their downfall would always be a nationalist tragedy, not a human one.
But for us non-nazi viewers, what makes this picture enjoyable is its beautiful sense of pageantry and musical rhythm. When you see these fully-developed silent pictures of Lang's, it makes you realise how much he was wasted in Hollywood. Rather than saddling him with low-budget potboilers, they should have put him to work on a few of those sword-and-sandal epics, pictures that do not have to be believable and do not have to move us emotionally, where it's the poetic, operatic tonality that sweeps us along.
I saw this film last night at a special movie theater showing in Nürnberg, and it was superb. I do have to admit that the original music composition of the cello player and percussion/xylophone player influenced the mood of the film, but the film itself also had force in its portrayal of the tragic Nibelungen saga.
If you are interested in silent films or in the Nibelungenlied, I highly recommend this film. The costumes were fantastic and creative, the sets were opulent and exotic, and the acting was dramatic and breathtaking (as is typical of silent film "tragedies") Unfortunately, I have not seen the first part of this film duo that concerns Siegfried. The story of this second film begins after Siegfried's death, when Kremhild (Gudrun in the Norse versions of the story) begins to plan her revenge against her brothers.
Also, I watched this film in German; I am a native English speaker and have a basic German knowledge. It was difficult to read the ?subtitles (what do you call that in silent films?) at first because of the old style German script, so I advise that if you watch it in German that you make sure you can differentiate your "k's", "f's", and "s's" in the old script. :)
If you are interested in silent films or in the Nibelungenlied, I highly recommend this film. The costumes were fantastic and creative, the sets were opulent and exotic, and the acting was dramatic and breathtaking (as is typical of silent film "tragedies") Unfortunately, I have not seen the first part of this film duo that concerns Siegfried. The story of this second film begins after Siegfried's death, when Kremhild (Gudrun in the Norse versions of the story) begins to plan her revenge against her brothers.
Also, I watched this film in German; I am a native English speaker and have a basic German knowledge. It was difficult to read the ?subtitles (what do you call that in silent films?) at first because of the old style German script, so I advise that if you watch it in German that you make sure you can differentiate your "k's", "f's", and "s's" in the old script. :)
- frojavigdis
- 28 févr. 2002
- Permalien
"Die Nibelungen" (1924), Lang's five-hour, two-part epic is quickly becoming my quintessential experience with Lang. The two films are all-encompassing: the first plays more like a fairytale (that translates well to filmic special effects), the latter more like "Hamlet" and its ilk. Siegfried is necessarily blank as a character, in fact he seems more like a characterization of virtue than flesh and bone; Kriemhild, too, is like white space in the first film, but is transformed by revengeful hate to a driven character of great psychological power. The second film is thus far more internal in its drama.
Not to say it wouldn't have some of the most amazing action sequences ever put to film. In fact, the riding of Etzel (Attila) and his men across the valley, the siege, the ensuing battle and climax are so well-done and full of so much real danger that the effect is dumbfounding. Where in modern cinema can we find risk in this manner? Herzog's "Aguirre, der Zorn Gottes" (1972) or "Fitzcarraldo" (1982) don't really fit the classification.
Indeed, the climatic fire is so visually violent that not even Kurosawa topped it in "Ran" (1985). I was breathless in awe and wonder and fear by witnessing it, sure that a huge rafter would crush the actors.
It's a beauty to behold on Blu-ray. We're lucky to have the restoration on both Region A (Kino) and B (Masters of Cinema series).
Not to say it wouldn't have some of the most amazing action sequences ever put to film. In fact, the riding of Etzel (Attila) and his men across the valley, the siege, the ensuing battle and climax are so well-done and full of so much real danger that the effect is dumbfounding. Where in modern cinema can we find risk in this manner? Herzog's "Aguirre, der Zorn Gottes" (1972) or "Fitzcarraldo" (1982) don't really fit the classification.
Indeed, the climatic fire is so visually violent that not even Kurosawa topped it in "Ran" (1985). I was breathless in awe and wonder and fear by witnessing it, sure that a huge rafter would crush the actors.
It's a beauty to behold on Blu-ray. We're lucky to have the restoration on both Region A (Kino) and B (Masters of Cinema series).
- kurosawakira
- 18 mars 2013
- Permalien
This second half of Fritz Lang's epic filming of the Nibelungen Saga has many of the same strengths as the first, with memorable characters and interesting, atmospheric settings. This part of the story continues with many of the same characters, but the story itself is of a much different nature. There is less complexity but more action, with the entire focus being on Kriemhild and her inflexible desire for revenge. This part of the story does not have such interesting relationships amongst the characters as did the first part, but instead provides first and foremost an unforgettable portrait of the obsessed Kriemhild.
She, Gunther, and Hagen are now thoroughly defined characters who have chosen where they stand, and so there is not the kind of dramatic uncertainty and tension that the first part held. Instead, there is a more straightforward battle of wills, but with an added wild card in the person of Attila, portrayed memorably and with great energy by Rudolf Klein-Rogge. Attila and the Huns are depicted in a way that most likely has little basis in history, but it is certainly interesting to see the bizarre fashion in which the Huns and their world are portrayed. As events unfold, the developments are not always fully plausible, but the stakes and the pressure on each side steadily rise, building to an intense climax.
What you remember most after the film is over is the remorseless, implacable Kriemhild. With her costume obscuring almost everything else, Margarete Schön portrays the depth of Kriemhild's emotions and determination using only her face and, especially, her eyes. It is about as memorable a portrait as you will find in cinema of the madness and destructive fury of revenge. While "Kriemhild's Revenge", as a whole, does not have the thematic depth of "Siegfried", it succeeds in establishing this central image in a manner not easily forgotten.
She, Gunther, and Hagen are now thoroughly defined characters who have chosen where they stand, and so there is not the kind of dramatic uncertainty and tension that the first part held. Instead, there is a more straightforward battle of wills, but with an added wild card in the person of Attila, portrayed memorably and with great energy by Rudolf Klein-Rogge. Attila and the Huns are depicted in a way that most likely has little basis in history, but it is certainly interesting to see the bizarre fashion in which the Huns and their world are portrayed. As events unfold, the developments are not always fully plausible, but the stakes and the pressure on each side steadily rise, building to an intense climax.
What you remember most after the film is over is the remorseless, implacable Kriemhild. With her costume obscuring almost everything else, Margarete Schön portrays the depth of Kriemhild's emotions and determination using only her face and, especially, her eyes. It is about as memorable a portrait as you will find in cinema of the madness and destructive fury of revenge. While "Kriemhild's Revenge", as a whole, does not have the thematic depth of "Siegfried", it succeeds in establishing this central image in a manner not easily forgotten.
- Snow Leopard
- 21 juil. 2004
- Permalien
This film portrays revenge on an operatic scale. But do not confuse with Wagner's opera Das Ring des Nibelungen. Although both the film and Wagner's opera are based on related Norse and Icelandic sagas, Wagner devotes attention to Brünnhilde's reaction to the death of Siegfried rather than on Siegfried's widow Gutrune's (i.e. Kriemhilde's) reaction to the murder of the hero. Both the film and the opera are romantic in style. But unlike the 19th century opera, the film has elements of early 20th-century German expressionism. Everything about this film is perfect. The acting is over the top, as it needs to be. The sets are sublime. The crowd scenes are powerful. Imagine a film where the heroine makes Attlla the Hun (Etzel) seem like a reasonable, sympathetic host.
- Dr_Coulardeau
- 29 mars 2021
- Permalien
- claudio_carvalho
- 4 déc. 2007
- Permalien
- lasttimeisaw
- 15 janv. 2016
- Permalien
Impressive sets, costumes, and action highlight this 2 hour conclusion. The surprisingly good restoration was available for both parts on Netflix.
In some ways I suspect intentional and not, the movie subtext lays out the cultural flaws of the German/Austrian people following World War 1. The Burgundian oath upheld despite treachery and infanticide to the point of self destruction. An overwhelming need for revenge with no compromise or limit to the cost of obtaining it.
I imagine Fritz Lang and his co-writer wife sought to emphasize these faults following the war, which leads to the mutual destruction of the entire lot of Burgundy characters. Curiously the result ennobles both sides.
The non Germanic characters are grubby, disfigured, inferior animals. Only the extremes of pride, honor and infighting seem to hold the Germanic kingdom back. Within this subtext, one might see omens for the world that would be realized less than 15 years later.
The resulting film shares the same fault of its characters. Excessive pride, honor and nationalism despite the destruction and failure it had wrought. It is a vast epic and well made. But more importantly, a view of the cultural undercurrents that undermined the treaties from the war to end all wars.
In some ways I suspect intentional and not, the movie subtext lays out the cultural flaws of the German/Austrian people following World War 1. The Burgundian oath upheld despite treachery and infanticide to the point of self destruction. An overwhelming need for revenge with no compromise or limit to the cost of obtaining it.
I imagine Fritz Lang and his co-writer wife sought to emphasize these faults following the war, which leads to the mutual destruction of the entire lot of Burgundy characters. Curiously the result ennobles both sides.
The non Germanic characters are grubby, disfigured, inferior animals. Only the extremes of pride, honor and infighting seem to hold the Germanic kingdom back. Within this subtext, one might see omens for the world that would be realized less than 15 years later.
The resulting film shares the same fault of its characters. Excessive pride, honor and nationalism despite the destruction and failure it had wrought. It is a vast epic and well made. But more importantly, a view of the cultural undercurrents that undermined the treaties from the war to end all wars.
Like the first movie, The Nibelungs: Siegfried, the second part named Kriemhild's Revenge is a fantastic and epic piece with fantastic settings, imagination and acting. I really like from time to time to drown myself in those old movies, that are most imaginative and an art form and nothing less, and in comparison, most of today's movies are exposed for what they are, products of a soulless and unimaginative mass industry that does not attract genius and talent but mediocrity.
- Tweetienator
- 2 févr. 2021
- Permalien
Anyone who's seen the first instalment of Die Nibelungen (which should be anyone who's viewing this) will know exactly what to expect. Kriemhild's Revenge is the story of the vengeance for Siegfried's death by his wife, Kriemhild. One again, the genius Fritz Lang dazzles his audience with the larger than life plot and visuals, and the second instalment of the series is an epic in every sense of the word. On a personal note, I've got to say that this pair of films didn't do a great deal for me, other than educate in the history of cinema. The scene staging is fantastic, and the way that Lang makes every event a big thing ensures that the film has a real epic feel. The use of music is one of the film's strongest elements, as Gottfried Huppertz's score bodes well with the rest of the movie. This instalment is less frantic than the first, and that discredits it a little as the film isn't easy viewing anyway; and more scenes such as the one that saw the hero fighting a dragon in the first film wouldn't have gone amiss. But even so, this is a great story directed by a cinematic genius and this film is bound to appeal to people who like classic silent films more than I do.
In my review of the first part of the Nibelungen ("Siegfried") I already made a few remarks about the history of the story. In summary:
In the first place Fritz Lang is with his movie more faithful to the Medieval "Nibelungenlied" than Richard Wagner, Tolkien or Peter Jackson.
Secondly one has to be careful to associate a work of art ex post (that is to say because some Nazi protagonists did like it) with the Nazi regime. That is something completely different from the situation in which a work of art has been made commissioned by the Nazi regime, for example the films of Leni Riefenstahl. Even in that case there can be a work of art aesthetically speaking, although politically speaking it is of course very objectionable.
These remarks are more or less also applicable to the second part "Kriemhilds Rache", although this part is sometimes on a slippery slope when using phrases such as "Blut schreit nach Blut" or "Deutsche Seele".
While "Siegfried" is about blind love, "Kriemhilds Rache" is about blind hate. The way Margarete Schön plays this blind hate however is very "over the top" (eyes wide open constantly) and ultimately got on my nerves.
While "Siegfried" is a knight movie, "Kriemhilds rache" is more a war movie. The last 45 minutes are nothing but continuous battle. However spectacular, eventually it gets boring. "War and peace" (1965, Sergey Bondarchuk) is a famous film who has the same problem.
All in all "Kriemhilds Rache" is much worse compared to "Siegfried".
In the first place Fritz Lang is with his movie more faithful to the Medieval "Nibelungenlied" than Richard Wagner, Tolkien or Peter Jackson.
Secondly one has to be careful to associate a work of art ex post (that is to say because some Nazi protagonists did like it) with the Nazi regime. That is something completely different from the situation in which a work of art has been made commissioned by the Nazi regime, for example the films of Leni Riefenstahl. Even in that case there can be a work of art aesthetically speaking, although politically speaking it is of course very objectionable.
These remarks are more or less also applicable to the second part "Kriemhilds Rache", although this part is sometimes on a slippery slope when using phrases such as "Blut schreit nach Blut" or "Deutsche Seele".
While "Siegfried" is about blind love, "Kriemhilds Rache" is about blind hate. The way Margarete Schön plays this blind hate however is very "over the top" (eyes wide open constantly) and ultimately got on my nerves.
While "Siegfried" is a knight movie, "Kriemhilds rache" is more a war movie. The last 45 minutes are nothing but continuous battle. However spectacular, eventually it gets boring. "War and peace" (1965, Sergey Bondarchuk) is a famous film who has the same problem.
All in all "Kriemhilds Rache" is much worse compared to "Siegfried".
- frankde-jong
- 8 janv. 2023
- Permalien
- Horst_In_Translation
- 22 déc. 2015
- Permalien
- MissSimonetta
- 13 avr. 2020
- Permalien
Die Nibelungen : Kriemhild's Revenge (1924) :-
Brief Review -
Bow down to the First Greatest Dual Epic of the World Cinema, bow down to Master Fritz Lang. Die Nibelungen: Kriemhild's Revenge follows the story of Kriemhild's insane and uncontrollable Revenge after Sigfried's murder and believe me there's no stopping to the visual extravaganza from the beginning to the end. Unlike its predecessor, this one wastes no time in introduction. It gets to the point right on the beginning note from where you don't get a moment to think about anything else for 2 hours. Fritz Lang had saved a lot of content for this one but the biggest achievement of this film is catching the burning tone of insane self destruction within an acceptable revenge. Revenge stories are nothing new but a fine tit for tat, blood for blood in typical forms but Fritz Lang fetched unethical terms and inappropriate outburst to discover a salvation in realistic fantasy world. Kriemhild's Revenge could possibly be a contender for One Of the Greatest Epic Adventure ever made, not because of its grandeur but because of humanly possible techniques of self-blessedness within cinematic boundaries. Even if you exclude its artistic values, you still have a great explosive money making entertainer in hand and that's what the greatness of this film lies. From performances to screenplay to spectacular visuals to unlimited production designing to the impeccable storytelling, Kriemhild's Revenge tops the list in every aspect. What LOTR and Bahubali achieved in 21st Century, Kriemhild's Revenge did it in 1920s only and that too without the help of advanced technology. Words might fall short to explain the glory of this Fritz Lang Classic in today's time but all i can do is bow down to the Legend and his Legendary Magnus Opus. The Greatest work in Larger Than Life Cinema of its time, that's it!
RATING - 8/10*
By - #samthebestest
Bow down to the First Greatest Dual Epic of the World Cinema, bow down to Master Fritz Lang. Die Nibelungen: Kriemhild's Revenge follows the story of Kriemhild's insane and uncontrollable Revenge after Sigfried's murder and believe me there's no stopping to the visual extravaganza from the beginning to the end. Unlike its predecessor, this one wastes no time in introduction. It gets to the point right on the beginning note from where you don't get a moment to think about anything else for 2 hours. Fritz Lang had saved a lot of content for this one but the biggest achievement of this film is catching the burning tone of insane self destruction within an acceptable revenge. Revenge stories are nothing new but a fine tit for tat, blood for blood in typical forms but Fritz Lang fetched unethical terms and inappropriate outburst to discover a salvation in realistic fantasy world. Kriemhild's Revenge could possibly be a contender for One Of the Greatest Epic Adventure ever made, not because of its grandeur but because of humanly possible techniques of self-blessedness within cinematic boundaries. Even if you exclude its artistic values, you still have a great explosive money making entertainer in hand and that's what the greatness of this film lies. From performances to screenplay to spectacular visuals to unlimited production designing to the impeccable storytelling, Kriemhild's Revenge tops the list in every aspect. What LOTR and Bahubali achieved in 21st Century, Kriemhild's Revenge did it in 1920s only and that too without the help of advanced technology. Words might fall short to explain the glory of this Fritz Lang Classic in today's time but all i can do is bow down to the Legend and his Legendary Magnus Opus. The Greatest work in Larger Than Life Cinema of its time, that's it!
RATING - 8/10*
By - #samthebestest
- SAMTHEBESTEST
- 22 févr. 2021
- Permalien
- highnemonkey
- 14 juin 2020
- Permalien
Sometimes it is divided into two films:
Die Nibelungen: Siegfried
Die Nibelungen: Kriemhild's Revenge
Die Nibelungen (1924) filmed at UFA (Read "The UFA Story: A History of Germany's Greatest Film Company 1918-1945 by Klaus Kreimeier , Robert Kimber, et al.)
Director Fritz Lang, the original story "Siegfried's Tod" I have seen it with German subtitles and other versions with English subtitles. Paul Richter (Siegfried) was in 45 other films, from 1921 to 1972.
Siegfried (Paul Richter) is the son of the King of Xnnetn (Sigmund). He forges his own sword so sharp that it cuts chicken feathers.
He is told that near the Rhine at Warems the King of Burgundy (Gunter) and his Available sister, Kriemhild are at a castle.
Siegfried, "On the hour I leave for Worms to win Kriemhild" ..." Show me the way if you want to live!" He falls for the "I know a short-cut" routine.
Die Nibelungen snickers when he is out of earshot;" Your way leads not to Worms, but to Death" Guess who lives in the heart of the forest? Yep, it is Fafnir the Dragon.
Poor Fafnir was minding his own business getting a drink from a nearby pond when Siegfried gets that "What can I hack" look on his face. The dragon even wags his tail with the approach of Siegfried.
I will not give you step by step. I will just say that smoking can kill you. Fafnir gets stuck for the drinks and dragon blood drinks allow you to understand the birds. A little birdie tells him about that bathing in dragon blood will make him invulnerable.
You guessed it. Cover your eyes. Oops, look quick. "Dragon tail flicks a linden leaf on Siggie's back." Can you say Achilles heel?
Meanwhile back at the castle, Volker von Alzey is already singing to Kriemhild of Siegfried's triumph over Fafnir. From here it goes on to deal with treasure, invisibility, and all the stuff that Teutonic mythology holds.
You may want to investigate Fritz Lang's Epic Collection (Metropolis/Die Nibelungen/Woman in the Moon/Spies)
Die Nibelungen (1924) filmed at UFA (Read "The UFA Story: A History of Germany's Greatest Film Company 1918-1945 by Klaus Kreimeier , Robert Kimber, et al.)
Director Fritz Lang, the original story "Siegfried's Tod" I have seen it with German subtitles and other versions with English subtitles. Paul Richter (Siegfried) was in 45 other films, from 1921 to 1972.
Siegfried (Paul Richter) is the son of the King of Xnnetn (Sigmund). He forges his own sword so sharp that it cuts chicken feathers.
He is told that near the Rhine at Warems the King of Burgundy (Gunter) and his Available sister, Kriemhild are at a castle.
Siegfried, "On the hour I leave for Worms to win Kriemhild" ..." Show me the way if you want to live!" He falls for the "I know a short-cut" routine.
Die Nibelungen snickers when he is out of earshot;" Your way leads not to Worms, but to Death" Guess who lives in the heart of the forest? Yep, it is Fafnir the Dragon.
Poor Fafnir was minding his own business getting a drink from a nearby pond when Siegfried gets that "What can I hack" look on his face. The dragon even wags his tail with the approach of Siegfried.
I will not give you step by step. I will just say that smoking can kill you. Fafnir gets stuck for the drinks and dragon blood drinks allow you to understand the birds. A little birdie tells him about that bathing in dragon blood will make him invulnerable.
You guessed it. Cover your eyes. Oops, look quick. "Dragon tail flicks a linden leaf on Siggie's back." Can you say Achilles heel?
Meanwhile back at the castle, Volker von Alzey is already singing to Kriemhild of Siegfried's triumph over Fafnir. From here it goes on to deal with treasure, invisibility, and all the stuff that Teutonic mythology holds.
You may want to investigate Fritz Lang's Epic Collection (Metropolis/Die Nibelungen/Woman in the Moon/Spies)
- Bernie4444
- 10 nov. 2023
- Permalien
I finally got my wish to see this one in a cinema. I'd seen Fritz Lang's film on video some years ago. I'd been hoping that ideal screening conditions would work their magic.
Conditions were ideal at Cinematheque Ontario. Pristine full-length print. Intertitles in the original Gothic-script German with simultaneous English translation, accurate without being too literal. Live piano accompaniment. Ideal.
The film's magic sputtered for a little while but ultimately failed to catch, at least for me.
This film bears no real relation to Wagner's Ring cycle as I already knew but some may not. Wagner had adapted the 13th c. Niebelungenlied to his own purposes. Part I of Fritz Lang's epic -- "Siegfried" -- has much that will be familiar to listeners of Wagner however.
"Kriemhild's Revenge" is the story of Siegfried's wife Kriemhild, her marriage to King Etzel (Attila) the Hun, and her desire for revenge against Hagen and Gunther, the rechristened Nibelungs, for the murder of Siegfried. The spectacular conflagration in this film presumably evolved and expanded in the Wagnerian mythos into his Götterdämmerung, his Twilight of the Gods, and the end of Valhalla. This film remains earthbound.
Most of the film is spectacular. The massive sets rival those of "Cabiria" (1914), which inspired Griffith's "Intolerance" (1916). Their decoration sets a new benchmark in barbaric splendour. There's a huge cast of scarred, mangy Huns and Art Deco Burgundians. And battles. Battles that never seem to end in fact.
Kriemhild is very successful in her plan of revenge. She manages to destroy all around her. Her loyalty to her martyred Siegfried seems not to stem so much from love, or devotion, but from something closer to psychosis. Lady Macbeth cried out, "Unsex me here." She knew she was emotionally unprepared for what she needed to do. But Kriemhild displays no normal human emotions, and certainly nothing one equates with the feminine principle. She is already "top full of direst cruelty", to borrow Shakespeare's phrase, from the outset. Margarethe Schön and her director convey this with a glower. I don't want to exaggerate, but that glower is virtually the only expression ever to "animate" Kriemhild's face. It's the ultimate in one-note performances. It's clearly intentional however, not simply a case of poor acting.
What we have then on offer is a one-dimensional sketch of an avenging Fury. Some might see Kriemhild as an empowered heroine. I just see the film as misogynistic.
Conditions were ideal at Cinematheque Ontario. Pristine full-length print. Intertitles in the original Gothic-script German with simultaneous English translation, accurate without being too literal. Live piano accompaniment. Ideal.
The film's magic sputtered for a little while but ultimately failed to catch, at least for me.
This film bears no real relation to Wagner's Ring cycle as I already knew but some may not. Wagner had adapted the 13th c. Niebelungenlied to his own purposes. Part I of Fritz Lang's epic -- "Siegfried" -- has much that will be familiar to listeners of Wagner however.
"Kriemhild's Revenge" is the story of Siegfried's wife Kriemhild, her marriage to King Etzel (Attila) the Hun, and her desire for revenge against Hagen and Gunther, the rechristened Nibelungs, for the murder of Siegfried. The spectacular conflagration in this film presumably evolved and expanded in the Wagnerian mythos into his Götterdämmerung, his Twilight of the Gods, and the end of Valhalla. This film remains earthbound.
Most of the film is spectacular. The massive sets rival those of "Cabiria" (1914), which inspired Griffith's "Intolerance" (1916). Their decoration sets a new benchmark in barbaric splendour. There's a huge cast of scarred, mangy Huns and Art Deco Burgundians. And battles. Battles that never seem to end in fact.
Kriemhild is very successful in her plan of revenge. She manages to destroy all around her. Her loyalty to her martyred Siegfried seems not to stem so much from love, or devotion, but from something closer to psychosis. Lady Macbeth cried out, "Unsex me here." She knew she was emotionally unprepared for what she needed to do. But Kriemhild displays no normal human emotions, and certainly nothing one equates with the feminine principle. She is already "top full of direst cruelty", to borrow Shakespeare's phrase, from the outset. Margarethe Schön and her director convey this with a glower. I don't want to exaggerate, but that glower is virtually the only expression ever to "animate" Kriemhild's face. It's the ultimate in one-note performances. It's clearly intentional however, not simply a case of poor acting.
What we have then on offer is a one-dimensional sketch of an avenging Fury. Some might see Kriemhild as an empowered heroine. I just see the film as misogynistic.
The first half of this story was a grand fantasy adventure that ended sadly. The second half is...an amazingly great, morally complex, and incredibly involving tragedy. I mean...I loved the first part of this large epic film, but this second part is something else. It's not the greatest of analogies, but it's like going from Beowulf to Hamlet. I love Beowulf, but it's Hamlet.
Kriemhild (Margarete Schon) mourns the murder of her husband Siegfried by the king's advisor Hagen of Tronje (Hans Adalbert Schlettow). Even when she confronts King Gunther (Theodor Loos), her own brother, with the common knowledge that Tronje did the deed, no one will do anything to exact justice. She's alone in her own home of Worms, and when the foreign king Atilla of the Huns (Rudolf Klein-Rogge) sends a messenger asking for her hand in marriage, she accepts when she gets a promise that Atilla will exact vengeance on those that have wronged her, and she's off to a foreign land to take a husband she's never met after her Germanic ideal of a husband has been murdered with the implicit consent of her king of a brother by his chief advisor.
I found it curious that the fantasy elements of the first half have been completely removed from the second half. There's no dragon. There is no magic helmet that turns anyone invisible. The second part is more purely a historical epic, and the film takes its time to establish characters really firmly before things go south. Kriemhild wasn't the most fleshed out character in the first part, but here she takes center stage and her thirst for vengeance drives her. When she shows up at Atilla's foreign palace, a much earthier construction than the stone-built castle at Worms, the place is a mess of men. The large hall is filled with Atilla's most trusted warriors with nary a woman's touch present to clean up the puddles of water along the floor. Her steely beauty is obviously offended by the situation, and yet Atilla takes off his own robe to lay over the puddle. She's willing to deal with a lot in order to get what she wants, and when Atilla promises to exact the vengeance she wants, she accepts her situation.
All that's left is for them to seal their marriage with a child. She promptly delivers Atilla a son and has Atilla invite Gunther to Atilla's court for a visit.
The second half of this second part is one concentrated event, Gunther's visit, where Kriemhild's vengeance is wrought. It is obvious that Kriemhild is not only justified in seeking vengeance but that Tronje deserves it. As the extended episode plays out with the arrival, the feast, the underhanded way Kriemhild gets Atilla's men to attack Gunther's men out of sight, and the eventual death of a key character, nothing feels too out of sorts with a woman seeking vengeance. She's got bloodlust, but it hasn't taken over. However, when Tronje ends up too strong and smart to get taken out quickly and easily, things spiral out of control, and Kriemhild will not let go. Atilla ends up on her side, and everything burns. Her vengeance ends up so complete and all-encompassing that there's no longer any satisfaction in the act. It's dirty and sullied. It is obsession taken to the extreme. This is the sort of thing that David Lean made movies about decades later.
And that descent into obsessive hatred is the source of the film's moral complexity. Kriemhild's vengeance is justified. Gunther's standing by his loyal Tronje has justification as well. Kriemhild's willingness to sacrifice everything, having been killed by Siegfried's death (as she puts it), is understandable. Atilla's grief feeding it all makes sense. This is a complex mashup of character motivations playing out until there is nothing but fire and death. It was so compelling that I loved it.
The physical production elements are just as impressive, though less showy, as in the first part. The large palace of Atilla the Hun gets used a lot in many different ways as the second half plays out with the battle between the Huns and the Burgundians evolving several different ways. There is an attack on the front door, an attack from above, and finally the use of fire. The burning of the palace ends up recalling Kurosawa's much later burning of Lord Hidetora's palace in Ran. It really looks like they burnt the full-scale set down for the cameras, and it's impressive.
The centerpiece of the films' acting is Margarete Schon as Kriemhild, and she is the movie's cornerstone. Her face is stonelike, but her true emotions of rage are perceptible always just below the surface. Her steely beauty sells the obsessive acts that Kriemhild follows through on in the end extremely well. It's one of the great silent film performances, I think, and it's in one of the great silent films.
Lang's silent career is dominated by Metropolis, a science fiction film of unquestionable influence, but I think it may be the second part of Die Nibelungen that is his greatest silent triumph. The physical production is impressive, and the emotional impact is strong. This is great.
Kriemhild (Margarete Schon) mourns the murder of her husband Siegfried by the king's advisor Hagen of Tronje (Hans Adalbert Schlettow). Even when she confronts King Gunther (Theodor Loos), her own brother, with the common knowledge that Tronje did the deed, no one will do anything to exact justice. She's alone in her own home of Worms, and when the foreign king Atilla of the Huns (Rudolf Klein-Rogge) sends a messenger asking for her hand in marriage, she accepts when she gets a promise that Atilla will exact vengeance on those that have wronged her, and she's off to a foreign land to take a husband she's never met after her Germanic ideal of a husband has been murdered with the implicit consent of her king of a brother by his chief advisor.
I found it curious that the fantasy elements of the first half have been completely removed from the second half. There's no dragon. There is no magic helmet that turns anyone invisible. The second part is more purely a historical epic, and the film takes its time to establish characters really firmly before things go south. Kriemhild wasn't the most fleshed out character in the first part, but here she takes center stage and her thirst for vengeance drives her. When she shows up at Atilla's foreign palace, a much earthier construction than the stone-built castle at Worms, the place is a mess of men. The large hall is filled with Atilla's most trusted warriors with nary a woman's touch present to clean up the puddles of water along the floor. Her steely beauty is obviously offended by the situation, and yet Atilla takes off his own robe to lay over the puddle. She's willing to deal with a lot in order to get what she wants, and when Atilla promises to exact the vengeance she wants, she accepts her situation.
All that's left is for them to seal their marriage with a child. She promptly delivers Atilla a son and has Atilla invite Gunther to Atilla's court for a visit.
The second half of this second part is one concentrated event, Gunther's visit, where Kriemhild's vengeance is wrought. It is obvious that Kriemhild is not only justified in seeking vengeance but that Tronje deserves it. As the extended episode plays out with the arrival, the feast, the underhanded way Kriemhild gets Atilla's men to attack Gunther's men out of sight, and the eventual death of a key character, nothing feels too out of sorts with a woman seeking vengeance. She's got bloodlust, but it hasn't taken over. However, when Tronje ends up too strong and smart to get taken out quickly and easily, things spiral out of control, and Kriemhild will not let go. Atilla ends up on her side, and everything burns. Her vengeance ends up so complete and all-encompassing that there's no longer any satisfaction in the act. It's dirty and sullied. It is obsession taken to the extreme. This is the sort of thing that David Lean made movies about decades later.
And that descent into obsessive hatred is the source of the film's moral complexity. Kriemhild's vengeance is justified. Gunther's standing by his loyal Tronje has justification as well. Kriemhild's willingness to sacrifice everything, having been killed by Siegfried's death (as she puts it), is understandable. Atilla's grief feeding it all makes sense. This is a complex mashup of character motivations playing out until there is nothing but fire and death. It was so compelling that I loved it.
The physical production elements are just as impressive, though less showy, as in the first part. The large palace of Atilla the Hun gets used a lot in many different ways as the second half plays out with the battle between the Huns and the Burgundians evolving several different ways. There is an attack on the front door, an attack from above, and finally the use of fire. The burning of the palace ends up recalling Kurosawa's much later burning of Lord Hidetora's palace in Ran. It really looks like they burnt the full-scale set down for the cameras, and it's impressive.
The centerpiece of the films' acting is Margarete Schon as Kriemhild, and she is the movie's cornerstone. Her face is stonelike, but her true emotions of rage are perceptible always just below the surface. Her steely beauty sells the obsessive acts that Kriemhild follows through on in the end extremely well. It's one of the great silent film performances, I think, and it's in one of the great silent films.
Lang's silent career is dominated by Metropolis, a science fiction film of unquestionable influence, but I think it may be the second part of Die Nibelungen that is his greatest silent triumph. The physical production is impressive, and the emotional impact is strong. This is great.
- davidmvining
- 18 août 2022
- Permalien
Great battle finale and nice sets help keep this often-slow movie enjoyable. At times it had me checking my watch, although there were enough memorable moments to make the film stand out in my mind days after watching it. The ending should surprise even those familiar with the Nibelungen story line.
In "Die Nibelungen: Siegfried", Siegfried was betrayed. Now, Kriemhild seeks revenge. She marries Hagen, and through a series of events, finally engages in a very drastic (but fitting) action at the end.
One of the things about watching this movie nowadays is that we can look at certain portrayals. Attila the Hun (called Etzel in the movie) is shown as the strange person from the east, possibly an allusion to the Soviet Union. Obviously, it was not Fritz Lang's fault that Hitler used "The Nibelungenlied" for German national pride in the Third Reich, but one can see what the Fuhrer liked about the story. Nonetheless, this is an absolutely formidable movie.
One of the things about watching this movie nowadays is that we can look at certain portrayals. Attila the Hun (called Etzel in the movie) is shown as the strange person from the east, possibly an allusion to the Soviet Union. Obviously, it was not Fritz Lang's fault that Hitler used "The Nibelungenlied" for German national pride in the Third Reich, but one can see what the Fuhrer liked about the story. Nonetheless, this is an absolutely formidable movie.
- lee_eisenberg
- 20 mai 2005
- Permalien
Kriemhild's Revenge: After suffering the loss of Siegfried at the hands of Hagen Tronje, Kriemhild is met with an opportunity to find her revenge. She is met by Margrave Rüdiger who offers Attila the Hun's hand in marriage. Kriemhild accepts and has Rüdiger swear an oath to kill anyone who does her wrong. The issues that arise in the film are mostly due to Kriemhild's lack of planning. The first mistake was trusting Rüdiger to be able to kill Tronje. As we saw in the first film, he is quite the adversary. Kriemhild's next mistake was her vagueness when asking for Attila's path which backfired later. Like Attila and Rüdiger, the Nibelungens aren't formidable enough to take down Tronje.
Kriemhild's lack of planning and leadership just goes to show how Siegfried was not only the powerful man but he was the man with a plan. If you're watching and you're wondering when there's gonna be action or revenge, the wait is well worth it. Beautiful ending.
Kriemhild's lack of planning and leadership just goes to show how Siegfried was not only the powerful man but he was the man with a plan. If you're watching and you're wondering when there's gonna be action or revenge, the wait is well worth it. Beautiful ending.
- The-Amnesiac
- 10 avr. 2025
- Permalien
Like grand opera, this film and its predecessor, "Siegfried", are a little too slow in pace, but the visual treats are unforgettable. It is best to see the two films together, but the sequel is not as good, mainly because there is not very much story left. Most of the time it's just Kriemhild wandering around looking vengeful, but Margarethe Schoen does it so well! The performance of Rudolph Klein-Rogge as Attila the Hun is wildly energetic - he is magnificent. But you can't help thinking why don't they just kill Hagen Tronje and get on with life, especially after he murders the baby. Something to do with Teutonic loyalty apparently.
But who can forget the rabbit-warren Hun village, and all those grubby Huns running about. Of course the film is racist as the Teutons somehow survive against overwhelming numbers of Huns - no wonder Hitler liked this film. "Siegfried" was very fascist too, with the glorious Aryan impregnable and very gorgeous (thanks to Paul Richter). But "Kriemhild's Revenge" lacks the wonderful fantasy sequences of "Siegfried" like the dwarves kingdom and especially that superb dragon fight - but at least here Kriemhild herself gets some balls - she seemed so stupid in "Siegfried".
But who can forget the rabbit-warren Hun village, and all those grubby Huns running about. Of course the film is racist as the Teutons somehow survive against overwhelming numbers of Huns - no wonder Hitler liked this film. "Siegfried" was very fascist too, with the glorious Aryan impregnable and very gorgeous (thanks to Paul Richter). But "Kriemhild's Revenge" lacks the wonderful fantasy sequences of "Siegfried" like the dwarves kingdom and especially that superb dragon fight - but at least here Kriemhild herself gets some balls - she seemed so stupid in "Siegfried".