Inside the Third Reich

Rutger Hauer brilliantly plays the Nazi architect Albert Speer in a made for tv movie based on his memoirs. Being based on Speer's memoirs obviously Speer is presented in a better light than the other nazi heads of power, but the drama is evenly balanced and indeed interesting. 6 of 10

Films about real-life figures are always going to be divisive. All the more so when they are based on the figure in question's autobiography which, naturally, comes from their point of view and is therefore biased, consciously or otherwise. When said figure was a crucial member of the Third Reich- as well as an intimate of Hitler's- it takes a particularly delicate touch to make that film work without inciting offence or condemnation and to appear- at least somewhat- balanced.

A touch director Marvin J. Chomsky demonstrated at the helm of 'Holocaust,' the gripping, poignant 1978 miniseries that helped establish Meryl Streep and James Woods, among others, and brought the titular term into the mainstream. However, his adaptation of Albert Speer's autobiography 'Inside the Third Reich' lacks the nuance of 'Holocaust,' as well as the power. A truncated retelling of the highlights of Speer's book; one wonders how the same director could be behind both works.

'Inside the Third Reich' follows architect Albert Speer, a charismatic German who attracts the attention of those in the burgeoning Nazi Party. Although apolitical by nature, Speer finds himself seduced by Hitler's manic magnetism, and soon is working for the party. During the second World War, Speer is appointed as the Armaments Minister for the Third Reich, though his growing disapproval for Hitler's disregard for human life creates a chasm between the dictator and his minister that not even death can bridge.

Unlike the source material, the film is mostly a glossy, emotionless affair, which makes little impact on the viewer. In contrast, the original book makes for a fascinating read. Although most certainly Speer withholds information regarding the breadth of his knowledge of the holocaust, he demonstrates a remarkable ability to separate himself from his history, observing scenes from his past with a critical eye. He does not try to excuse himself for taking part in Hitler's murderous regime, rather attempts to understand how he fell under the dictator's spell, and why he ignored the obvious signs of the coming genocide for so long.

It is a book full of nuance, offering a unique, intimate look at a part of history from the perspective of one of its central figures. However, something was lost in translation, as Chomsky's version severely underwhelms. Rather than examining the reasons Speer and others followed Hitler, the narrative- written by E. Jack Neuman- plods along linearly, following Speer on his rise to power in the manner of countless dull biopics. Although by no means boring, when considering the opportunities Speer's rich, contemplative book allows for adaptation- for an intriguing film to be made- it is rather disappointing.

Moreover, the film doesn't question Speer's claims once- which, it is worth noting, he himself does multiple times in his book, acknowledging the inherent bias that arises when writing one's own story and recalling one's own history. The characterisation involved is one-dimensional, with the on-screen version of Speer lacking the depth and complexity of the real man. Although the dialogue- largely taken word-for- word from the source material- is strong, Chomsky and Neuman's straightforward approach lets this adaptation down, hampering its potential impact.

Conversely, the visuals are impressive throughout, with Rolf Zehetbauer's detailed production design being of a particularly high quality. Alongside art directors Kuli Sander and Herbert Strabel, he creates an authentic reproduction of the time before and during the Third Reich. The set decoration and design are especially rich and evocative, as is the striking costume design, compounding the realism of the venture. While Tony Imi's cinematography is fairly conventional, he utilises close-ups and lighting well, heightening the drama. Furthermore, Fred Karlin's score is stirring, using period pieces to great effect, and proceedings are generally well-edited.

The large cast of talented actors are also utilised well, more or less. John Gielgud does sterling work as Speer's father, who questions the direction his son's life has taken. Ian Holm brims with a witty menace as Goebbels, while Trevor Howard is typically understated and effective as Tessenow, Speer's mentor. Blythe Danner also does commendable work as Margareta, Speer's wife, while Randy Quaid is terrific as one of his associates.

The real stand out is Derek Jacobi, delivering a startlingly intense performance as Hitler. At times, he could be the megalomaniacal murderer's double; so cannily does he recreate his gesticulations and movements. Oddly enough, in the lead, the usually convincing Rutger Hauer is the weakest link, coming across as a bit half-hearted and disinterested; perhaps unsure of how to approach the role in the face of Neuman's scant characterisation.

In conclusion, where Chomsky succeeded with 'Holocaust', he fails with 'Inside the Third Reich.' The former boasted compelling characters whom one cared for, wrapped inside an engaging, poignant story. The latter is more like a summary of a book written by a student who didn't particularly care for the course they were on. Lacking the nuance or insight so prevalent in Albert Speer's book of the same name, the film disappoints. Although the visuals, score and supporting performances are commendable, both Rutger Hauer's performance as Albert Speer and the film around him are forgettable. A shame, considering the subject is one that one should never forget.

Inside The Third Reich is a great movie. Of course the central character of the movie is Hitler played by Sir Derik Jacoby. He does a masterful job of portraying Hitler. From reading a lot about the Third Reich time period and Speer's book, the film is true to the book, and to history.Many people have wondered why Speer was not hanged at Nurenberg. I think I know why the court spared him when the others were hanged. He was one of the few remaining Nazis that could attempt to explaining Hitler from a human point of view. The movie is fast moving and gripping. A great screen occurs at a lavish party when Hitler makes Blythe Danner(Speer' wife)shudder as he kisses her hand and fawns over her. She says to her husband Speer, I may attend parties for him but I will not have him in my house! This is one movie you will want in your house.

this is a 4 hour mini-series dealing with the life of Hitler's architect Albert Speer, Derek Jacobi does a fine job as Hitler and the film encompasses all 12 years of the 3rd Reich. People interested in the world war 2 years will surely find this movie interesting. I highly recommend this film as it gives the viewer a real inside look at the regime of Hitler and all his cohorts. The whole cast does a good acting job and the viewers get to know the 3rd Reich inner circle members in all their infamous glory. there are a few other movies dealing with this subject but this one is superior to the others. The movie is never dull and can really give the casual person who knows little about the era a sense of what things were like back in 1930's and 40's Germany.

This is an adaptation of Albert Speer's autobiography by the same name. The story itself is, of course, told from one point of view, Speer's. However, it is a riveting story overall. But I didn't think that Rutger Hauer had his heart in this one. His performance just seemed a bit off and he, unfortunately, was the star, playing Albert Speer. I thought that Derek Jacobi did a wonderful job as Adolph Hitler and he even sort of looked like him. The story is a pretty strong one, and the film holds up pretty well even given Hauer's somewhat lame acting. The remainder of the cast, which includes Sir John Gielgud, Blythe Danner, Randy Quaid, Elke Sommer and Ian Holm, all do a pretty good job and the film is overall fairly enjoyable. However, as I mentioned, it is told from only one viewpoint. A good film but not a great one.