Hollywood Free Movie Download

Henri "Papillon" Charierre is sentenced to life in prison and transported to the penal in French Guyana. Aboard ship on the voyage over, he meets Louis Dega, a forger. They form a bond that will last them a great many years. The conditions at the penal colony are horrific and Papillon desperately wants to escape. His first attempt ends quickly in failure and as a result he spends 2 years in solitary confinement. His next attempt is somewhat more successful and he actually spends a idyllic time with a tribe of Central America Indians. Once caught however, he does 5 years in solitary confinement. Once released, he decides to make one final attempt at freedom.

Directed by Franklin J. Schaffner (Planet Of The Apes/Patton), Papillon is adapted for the screen by Dalton Trumbo & Lorenzo Semple Jr. from notorious French felon Henri "Papillon" Charrière's own novel. It stars Steve McQueen (Papillon) & Dustin Hoffman (Louis Dega), is primarily shot in Jamaica & Spain with Fred J. Koenekamp (The Towering Inferno) on photography duties and Jerry Goldsmith provides the score.

Henri "Papillon" Charrière was a crook, a bad egg, he however was sent to the notorious, inescapable, prison fortress of Devil's Island for a murder he didn't commit. The film, as is the book, is a fictionalised account of Charrière's time at the penal colony.

The film is probably best described as being a stirring drama of friendship under duress, endurance and opportunism, all neatly blended with an adventure based heart. Schaffner directs it with great technical skill, for in a film with minimal dialogue, he manages to perfectly stifle the viewer with a hot sweaty atmosphere. Something that is crucial for us to feel the confines of this penal colony life. These men are doing hard time, lets not soft soap it Hollywood style, lets get the feel right, something, that much like Don Siegel also did in 79 with his excellent Escape From Alcatraz, Schaffner does exceptionally well. He is helped enormously by two fabulous performances from McQueen & Hoffman.

McQueen is in his element as Papillon. Always an actor whose ability for dominating scenes without using histrionic acting was undervalued, Papillon goes some way to readdressing the myth that he was more about iconography than actual talent. His solitary confinement scenes are sublime, without saying barely a word. As Papillon stave's off starvation, madness and disease, McQueen has such a powerful and believable presence, he pulls us into that five by five paces cell with him. Incredible! Once again tho the Academy ignored McQueen's excellent work and the film only received the one Oscar nomination for Goldsmith's pinging tropical score. Hoffman's great work was something of a given, meticulous as usual in his preparation {he had studied for weeks about penal colony life}, he is the perfect foil for McQueen and the relationship is tender yet never twee. Fine support also comes from Anthony Zerbe as a compassionate leader of a leper colony & Victor Jory as an Indian Chief.

The production was an expensive one, with the original budget of $4 million ballooning to $14 million, making it the most expensive film of 1973. A couple of scripts were jettisoned {money down the drain} before Schaffner enlisted Trumbo to write the screenplay. A good move because Trumbo was able to flesh out character relationships that didn't exist in the source novel. Hoffman himself was adamant that he would only play Dega if the film steered away from a buddy buddy formula and gave Dega intelligent integrity. He got it, which is credit to Trumbo since the Dega character is barely formed in the novel, in fact the film version is an amalgamation of several penal colony characters. Trumbo was rewarded with not only a considerable paycheck, but also a bit part in the movie as the colony commandant early in the piece.

Initial critical reaction to the film was harsh, but the public didn't agree since the theatres were packed and the film made almost $50 million Worldwide. Making it Allied Artists most successful film ever. It has since garnered a massive fan base and has been favourably reassessed by a new wave of critics. Those old complaints about it being too sombre and too enduring to get thru just don't add up. One only has to note the thematics and essence of the story to know this fact. 9/10

In 1935 in Foshan, south China, there are martial arts schools on every street corner. Ip Man is the undisputed martial arts champion, yet he has not devoted himself to teaching. Despite this, it seems that all the kung fu masters of the city are eager to fight him to improve their reputation. 

Donnie Yen is a long time favorite of mine, although this is mainly due to his martial arts skills and screen presence rather than his acting skills. In Ip Man (or Ye Wen, as they were shouting in the seats next to mine) he delivers a truly solid performance on the acting side, carrying the burden of a nation on his shoulders with gravitas, at least that's what he conveyed to the audience at the cinema. They were actually applauding at times. Then again, moviegoers might be more absorbed over here on a regular basis. I digress.

I'm not going to delve deeper into plot details. The basic stuff is already outlined above, and I also feel the historical accuracy of certain events depicted can be debated. That's a bit of a moot point, though, since most people will watch this for the action scenes. Nobody will be disappointed. Donnie kicks twelve kinds of ass in this movie, and it is all accompanied by some of the meanest sound design I've ever heard. Every one of his rapid punches can be felt as he pummels the poor bastards in his way with the Ip Man-style of martial arts (imdb won't let me spell out the name for some reason). The final bout is epic,but for me it was one scene about halfway through that got my heart beating faster. It involves Donnie, ten Japanese karate practitioners and some of the most furious fighting I've ever seen on screen. You can really sense the anger of his character in this scene. Great stuff.

The film moves forward at a brisk pace and contains a surprisingly large amount of fight scenes. It totally lacks the vintage over-the-top-aesthetics of Donnie Yen's films of the 80's and 90's, but for some people that's a good thing. I personally think this is his finest performance to date. 

Highly recommended for fans of martial arts cinema!

Based on the real life story of legendary cryptanalyst Alan Turing, the film portrays the nail-biting race against time by Turing and his brilliant team of code-breakers at Britain's top-secret Government Code and Cypher School at Bletchley Park, during the darkest days of World War II.

As the film announces at the start, it based on a true story. The essentials are true, and to get so much history into a film things have to be condensed. Unfortunately unnecessarily inaccurate things were portrayed which didn't save any time. For example, Turing mutters under his breath so most audiences will not notice, that the Poles made the first crucial breakthrough. By the start of the war, the Poles led by Marian Rejewski had been breaking Enigma for over six years and built the first machine, called a "bomba" in 1938.

In July 1939 the Poles passed on all the information to the French and British including details of the bomba and their successes at a meeting which included Denniston. The problem started to mount for the Poles and later the British when other rotors could be swapped in and the indicator method was changed by the Germans. The film is correct in showing that Turing's genius was using known words from the coded messages to reduce the myriad of possibilities. This idea happened in 1939 and so he started from the outset to design the British "bombes" to use this method, not after they had been running for months.

Four senior code-breakers, not just Alan Turing, but also Gordon Welchman, Stuart Milner-Barry and Hugh Alexander wrote to Churchill in 1941 over Denniston's head about the shortage of staff and praising Edward Travis. In February 1942, Denniston was demoted and transferred elsewhere. His successor, Edward Travis, transformed the procedures.

Cairncross, played by Downton's ex-chauffeur, never appeared at Bletchley until 1942 and the alleged blackmail is an unnecessary red-herring.

The idea that there would be a chart on the wall in Hut 8 showing the latest positions of all Atlantic convoys is laughable. This chart was in a secure bunker in Liverpool that was as closely guarded as Bletchley Park.

Turing's team had no input into how the information was to be used, but it is true that Ultra intelligence had to be supported by other information and so patrols were sent out to find what was known to be already there.

Lastly Turing would never, ever, have disclosed even the existence of Bletchley Park to a detective he had just met.

The performance of Benedict Comberbatch is exceptional, and the rest of the cast good. Keira Knightley is pretty enough to have turned even Turing, but, despite the lines that told us, she never gave the impression she had a double first in mathematics from Cambridge.

Good film, though it could have be closer to reality without making it longer or more complex.

In the Eighteenth Century, in a small village in Ireland, Redmond Barry is a young farm boy in love with his cousin Nora Brady. When Nora gets engaged to the British Captain John Quin, Barry challenges him to a duel of pistols. He wins and escapes to Dublin but is robbed on the road. Without an alternative, Barry joins the British Army to fight in the Seven Years War. He deserts and is forced to join the Prussian Army where he saves the life of his captain and becomes his protégé and spy of the Irish gambler Chevalier de Balibari. He helps Chevalier and becomes his associate until he decides to marry the wealthy Lady Lyndon. They move to England and Barry, in his obsession of nobility, dissipates her fortune and makes a dangerous and revengeful enemy.

When I was in high school, it was considered "cool" to watch Stanley Kubrick movies as they were seen as "more enlightened forms of entertainment" over stuff by Steven Spielberg and John Hughes. If you didn't memorize the opening speech to Full Metal Jacket or hadn't seen Nicole Kidman in Eyes Wide Shut then you were rejected from the clique. This was at the time when I was first viewing Kurosawa's Rashomon and Ran and accidentally came across this gem. Sure, the rest of the gang would be quoting along with Alex DeLarge in A Clockwork Orange, but not one of them would dare sit down and watch this or 2001: A Space Odyssey. Fools.

Barry Lyndon is another sign of sheer genius on behalf of Kubrick. Notice that in his career he is never concerned about making money, just creating an image and telling a story. Imagine if Michael Bay did the same, he'd be out of the business in no time and having to sell his own movies at the Video Hut. This movie is one of his better detailed (and yet mysteriously unsung) masterpieces that is so beautiful to look at that it almost becomes artistic pornography (in the sense of creating intense emotion). This isn't to say that Barry Lyndon is vulgar. By comparison to Eyes Wide Shut and The Shining, this is a kid's cartoon.

Kubrick is once again a certified genius with his camera. The elaborate and glamorous scenes ranging from duels to gardens and even just the opening prologue are beautifully rendered in a style reminiscent of Monet or other artists. I found it interesting how Kubrick includes pigeons (doves?) in the final duel. Perhaps John Woo gained some inspiration from this.

The story is paper thin compared to 2001 and lacks much of the symbolism. In fact, it is very hard to either sympathize with Ryan O'Neil as the title character because of his lack of portrayal. As a whole, none of the characters gain either support or disapproval because of their fleeting presence. The sets and costume designs themselves become more of a character than the actors. Thankfully, the story is not as convoluted as I expected. It flows nicely and never gets boring because of the variety of powerful elements infused into it.

First off, kudos to both Ken Adam and Vernon Dixon for their brilliant production design. I loved what Ken did with Dr. Strangelove (smart move for him to ditch the Bond series for that). John Alcott is one of Kubrick's lesser cinematographers, but he is still very talented here. I'm certain that, if he had lived longer, Kubrick would've kept using him. He is not as concerned about symmetry, that or the topics aren't, as the rest of Kubrick's work. The biggest irony about Barry Lyndon would have to be that everyone in the categories EXCEPT Kubrick won an Oscar for their work. I think the Academy has something of a grudge against him because of his superior quality of work.

Overall, a phenomenal quality of film that they just don't make anymore. I put this in my Top 10 required viewings for anyone who wants to be in film. Kubrick has transcended Shakespeare with this film. 4.5 out of 5 stars.

Judah Ben-Hur lives as a rich Jewish prince and merchant in Jerusalem at the beginning of the 1st century. Together with the new governor his old friend Messala arrives as commanding officer of the Roman legions. At first they are happy to meet after a long time but their different politic views separate them. During the welcome parade a roof tile falls down from Judah's house and injures the governor. Although Messala knows they are not guilty, he sends Judah to the galleys and throws his mother and sister into prison. But Judah swears to come back and take revenge.

What can you say about this film? It has everything, magnificent script, superb acting ,and the most famous chariot race in Hollywood history. Although the chariot race is the centrepiece of this spectacular ,it is by no means the only highlight.Ben Hur (Charlton Heston) is the victim of a terrible miscarriage of justice on himself and family ,and his dramatic adventures in the desert, at sea and finally back in Rome are just brimming with highlights. At the same time his meetings with Christ just add to the Wonderful drama that enfolds in this movie.It has a magnificent musical score which just adds to the drama,and I suspect the climax of the film would only leave the stone hearted unmoved.It has other great stars who make this a must see film ,particularly Jack Hawkins,Hugh Griffith and Stephen Boyd.

This is the sort of film Gladiator should have been but wasn't (what a waste). Still we'll always have Ben Hur to enjoy.

A small time thief from Belfast, Gerry Conlon, is falsely implicated in the IRA bombing of a pub that kills several people while he is in London. Bullied by the British police, he and four of his friends are coerced into confessing their guilt. Gerry's father and other relatives in London are also implicated in the crime. He spends 15 years in prison with his father trying to prove his innocence with the help of a British attorney, Gareth Peirce. Based on a true story. 

Jim Sheridan's astonishingly fantastic 'In the Name of the Father' tells the brutally direct story of a wrongfully accused family who are tortured into making a false confession and imprisoned by the British justice system. Sheridan has a way of telling his stories where he gets straight to the point and does not fear to show the reality of the situation while keeping us viewers at the edge of our seats. The film is based on Gerry Conlan's autobiography where Daniel Day-Lewis plays the central character. Sheridan effectively portrays Gerry and Giuseppe's struggle and fight against injustice and his portrayal of the corrupt British justice system is frightening. Just the idea that people could get away with such things in a country like the UK is chilling and Sheridan skillfully brings that across on screen. Terry George's brilliant screenplay with rich characters and solid dialogues forms a good backbone for the film. I also liked how the humour was infused in a modest dose as not to interfere with the intensity of the story. There are some excellent performances. Daniel Day-Lewis delivers a suitably explosive performance as he breathes fire into the role while Pete Postlethwaite is sublime and equally outstanding as Gerry's father, Giuseppe. Though father and son do have issues to fight over, it is Giuseppe who is Gerry's conscience and Postlethwaite's heartbreaking act really touches the heart. Emma Thompson holds her own and she is simply excellent. The rest of the cast do a superb job (watch out for Tom Wilkinson in a bit role). The soundtrack fits the mood of the film and the cinematography is good, especially in the prison sequences, where it creates that feeling of claustrophobia which gets stronger after Gerry is alone in his cell. I have liked all of Sheridan's ' films that I have seen so far and 'In The Name Of The Father' is another remarkable film from this fine director. It is a difficult movie to watch due to some disturbing themes and scenes (though most of them are rather suggestive it is the idea behind that sends chills down the spine) but it is definitely worth watching.

Based on an incredible true story of one man's fight for survival and freedom. In the pre-Civil War United States, Solomon Northup (Chiwetel Ejiofor), a free black man from upstate New York, is abducted and sold into slavery. Facing cruelty (personified by a malevolent slave owner, portrayed by Michael Fassbender), as well as unexpected kindnesses, Solomon struggles not only to stay alive, but to retain his dignity. In the twelfth year of his unforgettable odyssey, Solomon's chance meeting with a Canadian abolitionist (Brad Pitt) will forever alter his life.

Who can possibly argue against the power of this kind of movie, and the injustice that it waves as a welcome reminder? Superbly directed and acted (especially leading man Chiwetel Ejofor playing Solomon Northup), and set with high levels of realism in pre-Civil War America, there is little to separate what the filmmakers intended and what they achieved. A work of excellence.

It is not, however, quite the masterpiece it might have been. I don't mean the story or the level of competence here at all. I mean the way the story is told, the choice to simply tell it like it was.

That means that the presentation is quite linear (excepting a few gratuitous flashbacks that seem like a last minute editing decision). And uncomplicated. This is the biggest surprise. I mean, the basics might seem enough—a free black man in Saratoga goes to Washington and is kidnapped and made a slave, and he remains a slave until his recovery 12 years later. But that is actually the entire movie.

Oh, I know, the details are missing in that sentence. But it is these details where the movie succeeds too well. We are shown the horrors of slavery and made to experience them. It isn't that this is ignoble or unimportant. On the contrary, this is an "important" film and should be seen. But in some weirdly surreal way, we already know everything that happens in these details. 

Do we need to see a woman, naked and tied to a post, whipped and whipped and whipped, with screaming in our ears? Many will say yes. We need to feel that horror even a little bit (through a movie) to understand how utterly unbelievably horrible slavery was. I would just argue back that I don't really want to be tortured directly to confirm what I already fully agree with. It's just a choice you want to make as a moviegoer. It's similar to watching a kidnapping movie—do you want to experience the inner and outer torments of the kidnapped, or see some larger view of a kidnapping situation and the complexities of that kind of plot?

For me, then the movie was excellent at being literal, but that's not enough. For example, there is absolutely no hint at what the family did when Solomon didn't return home after his trip to Washington. Did they search? Worry? How? Who helped, who ignored them? Etc. That's just one of many complexities the movie avoids for the sake of a direct experience of the protagonist. 

I hope that gives a sense of where this unpleasant, terrific movie leaves you, and whether to watch it.

During the 1990s, some of the worst atrocities in the history of mankind took place in the country of Rwanda--and in an era of high-speed communication and round the clock news, the events went almost unnoticed by the rest of the world. In only three months, one million people were brutally murdered. In the face of these unspeakable actions, inspired by his love for his family, an ordinary man summons extraordinary courage to save the lives of over a thousand helpless refugees, by granting them shelter in the hotel he manages. 

I have no doubt that this is the only movie for the past year that can get me totally, if not 101%, emotionally involved. For other movies, I might be interacting with the story a lot , say associating my personal experiences with the characters, making judgment on them, criticizing the development of the story, ways of expression, the cinematography, acting, etc. BUT, Hotel Rwanda simply took me over as I was watching it. My emotion was going along with Paul ( Don Cheadle) all the time. The director did a great great job in capturing the feelings of people facing uncertainty, horror, ridicules, anger, death, waning faith... Family, life and dignity/integrity become the largest things in the situation. What's more is that it squarely shows the realist thinking in international politics.It honestly shows the weakness or helplessness of the UN and the non-governmental organizations. It truthfully tells how indifferent most of the international community (or individuals, which may or may not include you and me) are towards the deprivation of social justice taking place in other parts of the world. It makes you question to what extent that it is true to say what we see ( the sufferings in the world) is what we tolerate. It shows you how monstrous human being can be. It scares you how sanity would fail. At the same time, the uglier the people become, the more beautiful you find those who have managed to keep brave and maintain humanity. The movie fully succeeds in showing me the spirit, faith, and compassion that the world is dreaming for.

From the heights of notoriety to the depths of depravity, John Forbes Nash, Jr. experienced it all. A mathematical genius, he made an astonishing discovery early in his career and stood on the brink of international acclaim. But the handsome and arrogant Nash soon found himself on a painful and harrowing journey of self-discovery. After many years of struggle, he eventually triumphed over his tragedy, and finally - late in life - received the Nobel Prize. 

"A Beautiful Mind" is an exceptional story, but it is only and exceptional film because of its director. Ron Howard does an amazing job of engaging his audience, introducing a brilliant main character, and making the audience experience the reality of mental illness. This could have been an unbelievable story to which very people could relate; however, the directorial mastery Howard exhibits throughout allows the audience to accompany Nash on his journey and awareness of his illness. Anyone who has been close to the frailties of the human mind will appreciate how respectfully and honestly this film approaches the subject. Howard is able to portray all the complex reactions to mental illness while maintaining the humanity and dignity of the patient. Superbly directed, wonderfully acted by Crowe and cast, this film succeeds on every level.

It has been three years since the most important Nazi leaders had already been tried. This trial is about 4 judges who used their offices to conduct Nazi sterilization and cleansing policies. Retired American judge, Dan Haywood has a daunting task ahead of him. The Cold War is heating up and no one wants any more trials as Germany, and Allied governments, want to forget the past. But is that the right thing to do is the question that the tribunal must decide.

As I see again the old movies of the 40s, 50s and early 60s, I am impressed by the quality of material and acting in those movies. Judgment at Nuremberg is an excellent example. Although Montgomery Cliff had a very brief part, he was, as usual, outstanding. He always was. Clearly the acting and direction were flawless. Can't beat it for a view of the period just after WWII, and its effect on both Europe and the USA. Highly recommend the film -- especially on DVD as a brief scene was omitted in going from Tape 1 to Tape 2 on VHS (running time 3 hours and 7 minutes).

John Merrick (whose real name was Joseph, as this is based on a true story) is an intelligent and friendly man, but he is hated by his Victorian-era English society because he is severely deformed. Once he is discovered by a doctor, however, he is saved from his life in a freak show and he is treated like the human being that he really is.

I first saw The Elephant Man at its pre-release showing in 1980, and it struck an immediate and resonant chord with me. Few movies are like this, and it remains (many viewings later) one of my top 10 films of all time.

The plot is presented well in other reviews here, so I will not repeat it or comment further. Of the film itself I would only add that it is without doubt the most mature and satisfying of David Lynch's works - in many ways it is the final, polished jewel carved from the rough and ugly (but fascinating) diamond of Eraserhead, with the self-conscious artiness and juvenile qualities of the earlier film distilled into a potent and poignant statement on the human condition.

Some critics have dismissed The Elephant Man as an exercise in emotional manipulation, however I believe this completely misses the point. All films are manipulative to some degree, but it is a manipulation in which we as an audience engage by consent. The Elephant Man will stand the final test and it will be appreciated fully by future audiences, in much the same way as Citizen Kane had to wait for some decades until audiences were able to fully comprehend its greatness.

Based on a true story, a group of allied escape artist-type prisoners-of-war (POW's) are all put in an 'escape proof' camp. Their leader decides to try to take out several hundred all at once. The first half of the film is played for comedy as the prisoners mostly outwit their jailers to dig the escape tunnel. The second half is high adventure as they use boats and trains and planes to get out of occupied Europe.

This is a great movie which much more historically accurate than it is often given credit for. So many who say otherwise are ill-informed and obviously don't know much about the actual history of that actual escape. The depiction of what happened to the recaptured prisoners in the movie of THE GREAT ESCAPE is reasonably accurate as detailed on the historyinfilm site...specifically on the "Reprisal" page; along with being detailed in the various published accounts.

Hitler ultimately calmed down after being reasoned with by Goering, Feldmarschall Keitel, Maj-Gen Graevenitz and Maj-Gen Westhoff, and dictated that more than half the prisoners be shot and cremated. So, as depicted in the film, several of those recaptured were not executed and were indeed returned to confinement. In fact, even those executed were not "shot on the spot" for the most part, but were actually executed later after being turned over to the Gestapo; most being shot while being allowed to relieve themselves, under the guise of "trying to escape".

Furthermore, there are many accounts as to how much more humane the environment was within the camp (which even had a popular and very successful theatre, featuring prisoners who would later be name performers) than many other POW camps...and certainly nothing like the harsh conditions associated with the Concentration or Extermination camps.

To quote one source:

"It must be made clear that the German Luftwaffe [the German Air Force], who were responsible for Air Force prisoners of war, maintained a degree of professional respect for fellow flyers, and the general attitude of the camp security officers and guards should not be confused with the SS or Gestapo. The Luftwaffe treated the POWs well, despite an erratic and inconsistent supply of food.

Prisoners were handled quite fairly within the Geneva Convention, and the Kommandant, Oberst (Colonel) Friedrich-Wilhelm von Lindeiner-Wildau, was a professional and honourable soldier who won the respect of the senior prisoners."

Finally, virtually all the major engineering aspects in regards to the tunnels and the initial escape in the film are as they were actually acheived in the real escape.

It would behoove some to learn a little more actual history or do a little simple research before shooting from the hip with supposed "knowledge" of reality. THE GREAT ESCAPE certainly takes liberties in tone and character portrayal, but not in the key elements that are disparaged out of sneering ignorance.

BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI is also a great film, but took even greater liberties with the technical details of the events described than THE GREAT ESCAPE did....and offering up VON RYAN'S EXPRESS as a more realistic alternative is simply delusional and ridiculous.

In April of 1945, Germany stands at the brink of defeat with the Soviet Armies closing in from the west and south. In Berlin, capital of the Third Reich, Adolf Hitler proclaims that Germany will still achieve victory and orders his Generals and advisers to fight to the last man. "Downfall" explores these final days of the Reich, where senior German leaders (such as Himmler and Goring) began defecting from their beloved Fuhrer, in an effort to save their own lives, while still others (Joseph Goebbels) pledge to die with Hitler. Hitler, himself, degenerates into a paranoid shell of a man, full of optimism one moment and suicidal depression the next. When the end finally does comes, and Hitler lies dead by his own hand, what is left of his military must find a way to end the killing that is the Battle of Berlin, and lay down their arms in surrender.

In recent years, war films have given a new exposure to the sheer nature of war. In "Saving Private Ryan," "Black Hawk Down" and "Born on the Fourth of July," we were exposed to the realities that a soldier endures not only on the battlefield, but what they take with them long after the battles end. However, "Downfall," a German film nominated for Best Foreign Language Film at the 2005 Oscars, brings a unique perspective to the table. It is about the last days of Hitler and the Third Reich and the ultimate demise of both. More so than a war movie, this feature exposes the insanity of Hitler and the blind faith of his followers at the end. It is a deeply disturbing, intimate portrait of the cruelty that he inflicted not only upon 6 million Jews, but ultimately on his own countryman at the end.

Based on the book "Inside Hitler's Bunker" by Joachim Fest, "Downfall" is in a word, shocking. The last act in the great horrific play of the Third Reich plays out like that of a cult—so many men and woman who swore allegiance to Hitler commit suicide by either shooting themselves in the head or by ingesting poison capsules. But the madness of Hitler himself is horrifically captivating. He changes his mind and opinion on a whim. One moment he advises his SS-Guards and Generals to leave the city after learning that he does not have enough troops to protect Berlin. A particular one named Gruppenführer Hermann Fegelein , who was Eva Braun's brother-in-law, takes the Fuhrer for his word and leaves Berlin. When Hitler realizes this, he denounces Fegelein and orders him executed. What is more, Hitler discusses the final demise of the German people. He explains that this failure is not only that of the military, but of the civilians themselves. As such, his soldiers do not protect the people from the coming onslaught of the Soviet Army. He advises, "In a war as such there are no civilians." 

Hitler is recreated by the superlative performance of Bruno Ganz, who appeared in the 2004 remake of "The Manchurian Candidate." Ganz captures the movement, voice, even the involuntary shaking of Hitler's left hand so well, that the audience would feel as if they are watching the dictator himself. We are often left with shivers down our spine at how realistic Ganz's depiction is. 

Surprisingly enough, Thomas Kretschmann, who played the Nazi captain that gave Wladyslaw Szpilman a coat and food in "The Pianist" is seen here as Fegelein. I first noticed Kretschmann as a German U-Boat commander in 2000s, "U-571." He is a remarkable actor who brings with him a demanding presence on the screen through his stern looks and ultimate resolve. 

Unfortunately my knowledge of Eva Braun other than Hitler's mistress is limited. So it was refreshing to see a film that revealed her. Based on "Downfall's" depiction, Braun, portrayed by Juliane Kohler, was either one of the shallowest individuals I have ever seen, or she was so blinded by her faith in Hitler that she disregarded almost any sense of reality. For example, during Berlin's first days of bombardment, she becomes bored with being in the bunker and orders a party in an above ball room—not surprisingly during that party a shell lands nearby and blows out windows in the room. Secondly, during later heavy bombardment, realizing that she will commit suicide with Hitler, she writes a letter to a relative where she states what jewelry she will leave behind. She is simply detached from reality and lost in the fanatical jargon of the Fuhrer. 

Certainly the film's most disturbing instances occur when Magda and Joseph Goebbels poison their children in the name of the Fatherland. One of their children, a girl probably about 10 years old, has a dim understanding of what is happening and refuses to take the drink given. She is then forced to drink it by her mother and a guard. Later on, Magda would come into her children's room while they were asleep and would give them the final capsule to eliminate them. 

"Downfall" is certainly one of the most powerful film's I have ever seen. As stated above, Hitler and his followers played out their existence as if they were in a cult. The blind faith of his followers and the insanity of the man are so well realized by director Oliver Herschbiegel, that it changes one's perception from that of simply being history to that of realism. 

These events happened less than a century ago and although most have learned to forgive Germany's past, no one will ever forget it. It is the stigma that haunts this generation of German youth because many of their grandparents or great-grandparents were a part of one of history's most infamous armies. But the fact that this film is German was surprising to me. I would have guessed that no one in Germany would have wanted to dig up their past in this way. However, if one looks at this film as closure to Germany's transgressions, then maybe this new generation of German youth can learn to have a sense of national identity without the horrors of the past seen in their shadows. **** out of ****