L'homme de la mort

In "Der Totmacher" Götz George basically just plays a murderer during a cross examination. Several sessions are shown. I am certainly not George's biggest fan on the planet, but what he did in this movie is what I have to call the greatest performance ever as he does not have any virtual assistance by effects or anything, it is just him. People who like to see movies where it is the actors who create the atmosphere must not miss this incredible performance of George.

Would a different translation have made it chillier or scarier? Are the subtitles too compact to convey the nuances of the original language? Does it even matter? You may have heard that great actors can make reading a phone book exciting. Well, this is an opportunity to judge for yourself.

If this isn't about homosexuality, murder, dismemberment, psychopaths, insanity, deviant psychology, then it is about acting - acting helped along with lots of dialog, So, enjoy the acting or muse about how titillating the dialog actually is.

For English speakers, "Twelve Angry Men" might be a better choice. There's a bit more interaction, and you can judge if the acting is consistent with the dialog. You don't have to wonder if you're missing something.

I would recommend Andy Warhol's "Empire" to those who like this film.

This is a quite spartan film. The only location is a sparse-funitured room, no special-effects, no score, just a few actors. - But what for actors! Götz George is supposed to be one of the best German actors, and after this movie the viewer knows why. Here he really shows what he is able to. I rarely (never?) saw such an intense, brilliant and convincing performance before. The sparse environment has the effect that the viewer can concentrate himself on the acting - and and this is what makes this film worth seeing.

But it's not only Götz George. The other actors (esp. Jürgen Hentsch as the psychiatrist and Pierre Franckh as the stenographer) are performing impressive and convincing. They are a well contrast and counterpart for George alias Haarmann. This prevents this movie from becoming a Götz-George-One-Man-Show.

I rated this with 8 because I think. a film for a 9 or even 10 should make more use of the diverse capabilities of the medium. After all a good film, but an absolute excellent play.

IF you want to know how Fritz Haarmann was thinking George as Fritz Haarmann is just amazing ... he plays his role absolutely amazing ! IF you are interested in this subject (Fritz Haarmann and his crimes) you need to watch this movie. Very much adapted to the interviews with Fritz Haarmann in the 1920ies. Disturbing ... of course .. but if you want to understand his mental understanding you need to watch this movie or read one of those interview books. Götz George manages to play this role without doubt ... Please watch it if you hace the possibility ... Great movie (more documentary like) ... Not to be missed !

If you're interested in real-life-crime films, then this film is a pure recommendation. However, keep in mind, this film is structured more like a chamber-play, carried by two actors: Götz George as child-murderer and cannibal Fritz Haarmann and Jürgen Hentsch as police-psychologist Prof. Dr. Ernst Schultze, who tries to peek into the mind of a monster in human-shape.

Don't expect intricate psycho-games like in "Silence of the Lambs". Don't expect any action; 99.9 percent of the scenes take place in one room alone. And if you're looking for gory murder, move on; there are none. However, when Haarmann talks about his crimes as casually as a butcher would about preparing cattle for consumption, I can guarantee you that you'll be grateful that those scenes are "only" in your head.

Some people have pointed out that George would have deserved an Oscar for his performance and I couldn't agree more. George had been best known as TV-policeman Schimanski, probably the most iconic character from the whole "Tatort"-Series. But as is often with such cases, George had grown sick of been typecast and wanted to break the mold. With "Der Totmacher" (and around the same time with the TV-Thriller "Der Sandmann") he managed to do just that and establish himself among the great actors of his generation.

Within seconds the memory of Schimanksi, the tough street-cop with a heart of gold, is forgotten and there is only Fritz Haarmann: A seemingly harmless figure, at times even timid and child-like, intellectually and mentally retarded, plagued by a bad childhood and at times unable to understand what's going on around him. But since the story is based on the original files, we know that this is a cunning psychopath, convicted of the murder of 24 boys (there may have been more), whom he killed often by biting their throats and turning their flesh into sausage, often offering his neighbors some of his "home-cooking". As Haarmann and Schultze grown more comfortable (for the lack of a better word) with each other, there always looms the question of how much Haarmann actually plays the fool (Haarmann had worked as a snitch for the police prior to his arrest and was often described as by no means as simple as he presented himself during interrogation).

Jürgen Hentschs performance is no less impressive. He plays the sober, proficient psychologist, who tries to maintain the necessary professional distance from his "subject", but being only human, cannot always conceal his emotions and personal opinions about this monster he has to work with. These range from suspicions to disgust and at times, even pity and sympathy. In other words: Hentsch is almost a catalyst for what the viewers will feel.

I often wondered: Had some director attempted a similar cinematic "experiment" with the Thomas Harris figure Hannibal Lecter, would it have been accomplished or interesting as "The Totmacher"? Probably not. "The Totmacher" shows that reality often is much more horrific than anything an author can come up with and that it is very possible to create something great with only two human beings and a room. However, like me and many other critics have stated: you have to bring along a little patience and an interest in the subjects rather than the action.

8/10