Die Macht der Bilder: Leni Riefenstahl

If you've ever been curious about filmmaker Leni Riefenstahl, or more significantly, have wondered how a civilized nation like Germany could have stumbled into a black hole of evil and tyranny, you must see this superbly made documentary. It is scrupulously fair, presenting both exonerating and damning evidence without flinching. While it's very clear that Riefenstahl was not evil in the sense that Hitler, Goebbels, Goering, and Hess were, she certainly had blind spots, and a tendency to let wishful thinking sway her judgment. Like most Germans at the time, she often looked the other way when she could (though not always, as on at least two occasions she probably put herself at risk by openly criticizing the Nazi regime).

She is shown as being far more interested in art than in Nazism. I had barely realized what an extraordinary talent she was, not just as a movie maker but as a dancer, mountaineer, actress, and photographer. It is so sad that she became a significant cog in the Nazi regime, and was severely punished as a result (as indeed all of Germany was). It would have been worse if they had not.

"Triumph of the Will" stands as a monument, a sobering reminder of the madness of crowds and the potential tragedy that lurks when they come under the sway of a master manipulator. Riefenstahl's personal tragedy finds some vindication in her willingness to make this film and thus to help us learn the lessons from her life.

9 points.

This film explores the boundaries between the artistic and the political (or, when does fiction have to pay for the reality it may help to create?).

Why is Leni Riefenstahl, who created propaganda for the murderous Hitler ("Olympia" -- which pioneered many of the techniques now cliche in sports camerawork and editing, and the notorious "Triumph of the Will"), despised and reviled while the work of Eisenstein and others who created propaganda for the murderous Stalin is lovingly taught in film schools? Well, maybe it was because Stalin was on the winning side of the war, according to Ms. Riefenstahl, a tough old broad who was apparently ecstatic about being interviewed. Up to a point.

This is a top-notch documentary. The cinematography is gorgeous. The probing questions are important. Riefenstahl is alternately combative, charming, evasive . . . and a whole lot of other things.

I give it a 9 of 10.

This is an excellent biography of one of the most influential filmmakers in history. It not only gives a comprehensive overview of her body of work but reveals many of innovative techniques she pioneered. Her accomplishments are all the more impressive when one considers the role of women in her heyday.

However, the most interesting aspect of this film for me is how this intelligent woman (still lucid in her 90's) deals with queries about her political involvement during the National Socialist period in Germany.

Interesting. This is a good documentary about a great documentarian.

I guess the normal form for commenting on this is to take a side on the art/politics controversy. Or perhaps to note film as propaganda tool today.

I think I would rather simply remark that you just cannot watch movies as a lucid viewer without understanding something about who you are in the things. And that means wondering about who the filmmaker thinks you are. And that in turn means considering what it means when a camera is placed or moves in a certain way.

If you do, you will find yourself wondering about the camera of Hitchcock and Welles. Surely that is at least as fundamental as you need to go. But you can go a half step further back and you will find yourself here, with this woman and her dancing eye.

Yes, her personality at 90 is still German, which means she is a romantic idealist and an apologist for her generation. Annoying, but typical. And does it matter? Does it matter if, say, van Gogh was an anti-Semite? You decide. For me, I assume the artist is often the dumbest person involved in the process and the last person to ask. So the art is the thing.

There are three great things she did, and these are apart from the idealization of the body, a constant theme.

She advanced the art of filters to create abstract frames. In this, she was merely one in a line of talents. She was an innovator in creating a new philosophy of the camera. In this, she was a genius. But that wouldn't have mattered if she wasn't also a genius innovator in the art of editing.

She understood that in addition to the story, the images themselves have a rhythm and song apart from the thing depicted. I think she really means it when she says her great propaganda film could have been of any choreographed event. She was a master of exploiting the movement of the eye as well as the movement of the subject, even the rhythm of the greyscales and depths. You need to watch "Triumph" and "Olympia" ignoring the subject, perhaps upside down as I did to see the music.

Having said that, the effect of these two films undeniably altered life. The Nazi film was the single greatest influence in convincing the rural German public to support Hitler. That's huge. But perhaps a larger impact was on sports. Until that point, sports were something you did or read about. You might go to a contest purely for the association of the thing.

What her art did, incidentally, was she made sports cinematic. And we may all be the worse for it.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

For American tastes, this documentary is much too long for the subject matter. Yet, it is worth watching for several reasons. Considerable insight into the early appeal of Hitler to the German people shows through Frau Riefenstahl's comments. More than that, though, is the detailed presentation of a master documentary filmmaker and her secrets. As evidenced through her later work in Africa and under the sea, she is an amazing woman. Her comments and her work are presented in such a way that both can be appreciated.