The Rape of Europa

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.

As everyone in America retreats to their suburban mansions and the computer screens, it is a great experience to go out to the movies and see a film of real social import. If you love history and art, like I do, you certainly do not want to miss this film. The brutal effects of Nazi destruction never goes away, it keeps on coming, like a nightmare from the 20th century that we are all dreaming about. This film demonstrates the innate power of art. It shows, through a deep examination of the looting of Europe's treasures, what these works really meant to the countries who had them. And it reveals the utterly strange connection between the life of Hitler, failed art student, and the hellish destruction he unleashed on the world. In this season of filmic dreck at the mall, this strong documentary is definitely worth seeking out.

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.

European museums are filled with antiquities from all over the world. Did the Louvre hide those treasures, or were they forgotten by the German Army – or by these film makers in the editing room?

The truth is that "war-booty" is a common European cultural heritage. Change the subject to the art and artifacts of conquests and murders in the past and the debate is very different. The New World Peoples have their religious artifacts strewn throughout European museums. When will they be returned? That's not the subject of the film some would say. Wrong! That's exactly the subject of the film, but we see only the part of the debate the film makers want to show us, as if the German army invented "war-booty," as if European "art" were the only valuables in the subject museums.

Where is the concern about the "plundered" antiquities in Iraq? The film makers look at the past and make no comment about the "plundering" occurring today? These film makers believe the entire world is blind and in doing so show their own blindness. Return all antiquities/art to the countries from which they were removed.

"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.