The Rape of Europa

Wow, it is so tempting to comment on how the release of this film casts a dark shadow over the destruction of Babylonian manuscripts in Bagdad, Iraq a couple years back. I will not, though.

Hitler, according to one of the talking heads in this film, "was not a bad painter at all, but he certainly was not great or innovative, either." That's well-stated, in my opinion. Of the three artists applying for the scholarship, he was easily the least talented. This fact is suggested, as well. I suspect that while he was not an artist of note himself, the most that could be said was that he did have an eye for artwork. Whether that would be a "remarkable" eye remains to be suggested, but it hardly matters.

There are a few scenes in this film that are so incredibly harrowing, my mind had wandered into thoughts of how destructive was the damage in Europe: peculiar that that's precisely the objective of "good art," that it causes the mind and imagination to wander as such.

The last twenty minutes offers a noticeable glimmer of hope (and it is not a too-little-too-late message, either): Give Back. At least that's what I heard.

That said, this film offers a novel voice to the narrative presented. Thumbs up.

Greetings again from the darkness. Watching the 2014 release of The Monuments Men inspired me to re-watch this fascinating documentary on the same subject. Thanks to the interviews of real life Monuments Men like Harry Ettlinger, Kenneth Lindsay, Charles Parkhurst and Bernard Taper, we better understand the overwhelming mission these folks were on, and how even today, some battles wage on over the rightful owners of artwork.

To drive home the point that there is more at stake than just pride, the case of Klimt's "Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I" is studied. Adele's niece continued her litigation against Austria until a court finally awarded her the painting (and 3 others). She sold "Adele" for $135 million to a collector. So clearly the cause is not just for mother country. Economics play a huge role. Regardless, the more interesting portion of the story is the relentless pursuit of stolen artwork, artifacts, furniture and collectibles, and the attempts to return them to the rightful owners. That, combined with the devastating architecture destruction brought on by WWII, really make it a bittersweet story.

The breathtaking photographs and archival film footage provide a clear understanding of the breadth of destruction. Seeing the before and after of the Monte Cassino monastery is just crushing. Gaining perspective on the damaged frescoes, some dating to 1360, when Pisa's Camposanto was bombed drives home the significance of culture and history. Seeing the aftermath of the bombing of Florence's iconic bridges brings tears to the eyes. The most impressive piece is that so much of Europe has been rebuilt in the past 7 decades. Maybe that goes to answer the question of whether a human life is worth protecting art. People survive and find a way ... even if Rafael's "Portrait of a Young Man" is still missing.

This is based on the book by the Lynn Nicholas, and the film does a terrific job of presenting how the war impacted Russia, Germany, Italy, France, Austria and Poland. It's also tough to reconcile, as one of the Monuments Men attempts, the idea that the Nazis were so careful with the stolen artwork while simultaneously exterminating so many Jewish people. Maybe things would have been different if a young Adolph Hitler had been accepted to art school.

The Rape of Europa is a slick, well shot, well directed, interesting, highly informative and still entertaining documentary from the directorial triumvirate of Bonni Cohen, Nicole Newnham and Richard Berge. The documentary uses the book by Lynn H. Nicholas of the same name as a kind of runway for its exploration of the Nazi's systematic plundering of Europe's art. The film incorporates interviews, voice over narration. vintage footage photos and documents that all work cooperatively in making this documentary work in every respect. The film takes its viewers on an in depth journey of the subject through seven European countries, most notably France, Italy, Poland and Germany.

The film sheds light on Hitler's own personal art career, from his rejection of Vienna's art Academy to his plans to amass the world's largest art collection in his ideal city. Interesting and relatively unknown facts are uncovered that relate Hitler's art career to his actions as dictator. Hitler's antisemitism, as one interview subject suggests, was likely fueled by his rejection from Vienna's art Academy as the academy's panel was largely Jewish. Hitler also created a "hit-list" of famous works he wanted for his collection, most of which directly correspond to his invasion of various European countries. Art collecting was a highly important pastime among Nazi officials for a variety of reasons, as discussed largely with Herman Goering and Hitler himself who had amassed enormous, unparalleled personal collections, largely through theft.

Another highly interesting portion of the film shows the perilous and miraculous journey many of these works underwent. As a Nazi invasion loomed, hundreds of people, in France's world famous Louvre for example, gathered and worked tirelessly, packing the priceless art and transferring it to castles throughout the French countryside. The daughter of the man entrusted with the Mona Lisa is interviewed in the film.

The film examines the seventy-year plus struggle to restore and reclaim these stolen masterpieces, many of which remain unaccounted for. The allied position of fighting while simultaneously trying to maintain the hostage art is also discussed in detail, as well as the Allied efforts to return the art after it was repossessed. The film is a must-see for art or WWII historians as well as those simply interested.

I have just returned from this film and am another satisfied customer. It always feels a bit strange going to the cinema to see a documentary, but docs always turn out to be so much better and more fulfilling than the blockbusters. A real whirlwind of emotions, the Rape of Europa is something in which everyone living in the western world has a stake. The destructive force of war on human beings and those things which are crucial to our humanity, our art, is put into a perspective that is about as balanced as we can hope to get. Many positive things I would say have already been said, so I will offer one criticism: the city of Dresden, once called the "Florence on the Elbe," was not mentioned in the film. As perhaps the worst bombed city of the war, and a city which had no military value whatsoever but was of incalculable worth culturally, I felt this was a major omission. Of course, the film covered an amazing amount of ground, and the Dresden bombing remains a touchy subject for many, so I can comprehend the constraints of time and the need to avoid charged tangents. However, as someone who has lived in that city (many parts of which remained ruins until only recently), I still would have liked to have heard it mentioned. That said, the film was wonderful on a whole. If only everything they showed in the cinemas were half as good.

"The Rape of Europa" is a documentary film about the Nazis' concerted, organized, and methodical theft of the art patrimony of Europe during the Second World War, and the film tilts heavily toward the Nazis' theft of art from Jewish collections. Ultimately, this emphasis on the anti-Jewishness of the Nazi program is the film's weakness. While the documentary appears to shine a light on the loathsome Nazis, there is also a detectable anti-German subtext to the film and, in particular, the Austrians come in for muted scorn.

No one can come to the defense of the megalomaniac Adolf Hitler, so why do some people continue to go out of their way to slander him as a "bad artist." Let's be honest here, that disturbed man was without a doubt a better artist/painter than 99.9 percent of all of us reading this IMDb forum. Has anyone ever heard of Winston Churchill being described as a "bad painter?" To slap the "bad artist" tag on Hitler comes across as mere propaganda, and propaganda always casts doubt on the ultimate truth of a work of non-fiction. There is a also a noticeable tone of artistic condescension in this film, especially in interview segments with author Lynn H. Nicholas.

The film touches on the controversy surrounding Gustav Klimt's portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer. Bloch-Bauer herself wanted the portrait to go to the Austrian State Gallery upon the death of her husband, but when he fled Austria the Nazis apparently confiscated the painting. While the painting did eventually make its way to the Austrian State Gallery after the war, it was decided in the 1990's to remove the painting from the that gallery and award it to Bloch-Bauer's remaining relatives. They subsequently sold this family heirloom for something in the neighborhood of 100 million dollars. So much for honoring Block-Bauer's bequest. One might get the impression that the whole affair was not about truth or justice or rightful ownership, but about money.

This film would be a good primer for those who have heard relatively little about the destruction wrought on Europe and its culture by World War II. However, there must be hundreds of other documentary films that touch on the subject in a better way. I found Joan Allen's narration to be particularly weak, her lightweight voice lacking the authority required in a serious documentary film. She's certainly no Alexander Scourby.

I do not think that anyone anywhere can adequately convey the hell on earth that was the Second World War. This narrowly focused film only confirms that view.