Die Nibelungen: Kriemhilds Rache

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".

Die Nibelungen: Kriemhild's Revenge (1924)

** (out of 4)

Second part of Fritz Lang's Die Nibelungen is a major step down from the previous part. In this segment (as the title says), Kriemhild seeks revenge for the death of her husband. This part of the film runs 146-minutes, which brings the total running time just under five hours and I've gotta wonder why on Earth it would take this long to tell a story. The first part was actually fairly interesting due to a good leading character as well as several memorable scenes including the infamous fight with a dragon and the bathing in its blood. This part just goes on and on and on without any real excitement until the very end of the movie. Another major problem is that the actress (Margarete Schoen) is downright boring and hard to watch. The amazing set design and costumes are on full display again, which makes it worth watching the entire film for.

"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).

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.

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.