Die Nibelungen: Kriemhild's Revenge (1924) User Reviews (31)

"Oh sister, what you have wrought!"

[Steffi_P · 8/10 · 18 May 2009]

Please see also my comment on Die Nibelungen part 1: Siegfried.

The second part of UFA studio's gargantuan production of the Nibelungen saga continues in the stylised, symphonic and emotionally detached manner of its predecessor. However, whereas part one was a passionless portrayal of individual acts of heroism, part two is a chaotic depiction of bloodletting on a grand scale.

As in part one, director Fritz Lang maintains a continuous dynamic rhythm, with the pace of the action and the complexity of the shot composition rising and falling smoothly as the tone of each scene demands. These pictures should only be watched with the note-perfect Gottfried Huppertz score, which fortunately is on the Kino DVD. Now, with this focus on mass action, Lang is presented with greater challenges in staging. The action sequences in his earliest features were often badly constructed, but now he simply makes them part of that rhythmic flow, with the level of activity on the screen swelling up like an orchestra.

But just as part one made us witness Siegfried's adventures matter-of-factly and without excitement, part two presents warfare as devastating tragedy. In both pictures, there is a deliberate lack of emotional connection with the characters. That's why Lang mostly keeps the camera outside of the action, never allowing us to feel as if we are there (and this is significant because involving the audience is normally a distinction of Lang's work). That's also why the performances are unnaturally theatrical, with the actors lurching around like constipated sleepwalkers.

Nevertheless, Kriemhild's revenge does constantly deal with emotions, and is in fact profoundly humanist. The one moment of naturalism is when Atilla holds his baby son for the first time, and Lang actually emphasises the tenderness of this scene by building up to it with the wild, frantic ride of the huns. The point is that Lang never manipulates us into taking sides, and in that respect this version has more in common with the original saga than the Wagner opera. The climactic slaughter is the very antithesis of a rousing battle scene. Why then did Hitler and co. get so teary-eyed over it, a fact which has unfairly tarnished the reputation of these films? Because the unwavering racial ideology of the Nazis made them automatically view the Nibelungs as the good guys, even if they do kill babies and betray their own kin. For Hitler, their downfall would always be a nationalist tragedy, not a human one.

But for us non-nazi viewers, what makes this picture enjoyable is its beautiful sense of pageantry and musical rhythm. When you see these fully-developed silent pictures of Lang's, it makes you realise how much he was wasted in Hollywood. Rather than saddling him with low-budget potboilers, they should have put him to work on a few of those sword-and-sandal epics, pictures that do not have to be believable and do not have to move us emotionally, where it's the poetic, operatic tonality that sweeps us along.

a double bill of Die Nibelungen: Siegfried and Kriemhild's Revenge

[lasttimeisaw · 8/10 · 16 January 2016]

At the age of 34, Fritz Lang astonished the world with his grandiose silent adaptation of THE SONG OF THE NIBELUNGS, a monumental poem written around AD 1200, is extolled as the pioneer of epic cinema, divided into two parts, each comprises 7 cantos and runs over 2 hours in their integral restored versions, it is an awestruck experience to behold early cinema's most enterprising saga compounded heroism and romance with deception, jealousy, undiminished hatred and bloodletting revenge.

The first part SIEGFRIED starts as a myth-abounded adventure of our hero Siegfried (Richter), who masters the art of sword-forging and is misguided to a dangerous route to win the heart of Kriemhild (Schön), the princess of Burgundy, en route he slays a dragon (a prototype puppet model looks formidable but moves too ungainly to call it as a monster) and acquires the invincibility from bathing in its blood (save for one spot, his Achilles heel); defeats Alberich (John), king of the dwarfs, takes possession of a magic net powered with invisibility and transformation, as well as the Nibelungs treasure. Sequently, a quid pro quo is achieved between Siegfried and King Gunther (Loos), Kriemhild's brother, Siegfried uses his mighty strength and the little help of his invincibility, to help Gunther conquers Brunhild (Ralph), the powerful queen of Iceland, in a threefold strength competition, and we are pleasantly to see a double-wedding, Gunther and Brunhild, Siegfried and Kriemhild. This is where the surreal side of the tale reaches its crest with Lang's groundbreaking cinematic wizardry.

From then on, an inauspicious plot of Greek tragedy looms large, our hero will unwittingly succumb to his demise owing to the coalescence of a pompous queen's vengeful lie, a weak king's low self- esteem and blind enviousness, and a wide-eyed wife's inconceivable gullibility, the first half of the tale finishes with a big bang of pathos.

In KRIEMHILD'S REVENGE, the fantasy element has been completely abandoned, it focuses on Kriemhild's iron-willed commitment to avenge Siegfried, she agrees to marry the Hunnish King Etzel (Klein-Rogge), and gives birth to a boy, then invites Gunther and co. to celebrate summer solstice in King Etzel's hall, meanwhile secretly plots the ultimate revenge on Hagen of Tronje (Schlettow), Gunther's adviser who personally sets up the ambush and dispatches Siegfried. In sharping contrast between Burgundian's fantastically make-believe Celtic fashion and Huns' barbarian style with grotesque garments and unsightly makeup, a tangy whiff of racial supremacy is self-evident, King Etzel is dutifully portrayed as a weakling, wailing over his infant son, but cannot fight in the front-line, a shocking contradiction to his savage appearance. The battle is elongated in spite of the multitude of Huns, Gunther and his brothers refuse to give up on Hagen in exchange of their lives, subconsciously they are all guilty for the conspiracy, they are willing to fight until the last man standing. Besieged in the king's hall, the remaining Burgundians will face their doom in a staggering conflagration, tremendous manpower has been deployed for the arduous ending, no wonder it was such a mammoth sensation when it came out!

In retrospective, these two films are par excellence in its imposing production design and advanced special effect grandeur, Huppertz's guiding score is a masterwork of its own vitality, yet, the laggard pace can unfortunately hold many contemporary audience at bay, which cannot be rescued for the archaic and stilted performance, although Margarete Schön is excellent in the second part where her facial expressions fully take charge in the lengthy narrative. Among Fritz Lang's superlative filmography, a defining note is that DIE NIBELUNGEN saga opportunely prefigures his most stylish endeavour METROPOLIS (1927), and his most well-grounded masterpiece M (1931), while its own heritage should also be set in stone, even just for historical reasons.

Epic Epic

[Tweetienator · 9/10 · 3 February 2021]

Like the first movie, The Nibelungs: Siegfried, the second part named Kriemhild's Revenge is a fantastic and epic piece with fantastic settings, imagination and acting. I really like from time to time to drown myself in those old movies, that are most imaginative and an art form and nothing less, and in comparison, most of today's movies are exposed for what they are, products of a soulless and unimaginative mass industry that does not attract genius and talent but mediocrity.

A Memorable Portrayal of the Revenge-Crazed Kriemhild

[Snow Leopard · 22 July 2004]

This second half of Fritz Lang's epic filming of the Nibelungen Saga has many of the same strengths as the first, with memorable characters and interesting, atmospheric settings. This part of the story continues with many of the same characters, but the story itself is of a much different nature. There is less complexity but more action, with the entire focus being on Kriemhild and her inflexible desire for revenge. This part of the story does not have such interesting relationships amongst the characters as did the first part, but instead provides first and foremost an unforgettable portrait of the obsessed Kriemhild.

She, Gunther, and Hagen are now thoroughly defined characters who have chosen where they stand, and so there is not the kind of dramatic uncertainty and tension that the first part held. Instead, there is a more straightforward battle of wills, but with an added wild card in the person of Attila, portrayed memorably and with great energy by Rudolf Klein-Rogge. Attila and the Huns are depicted in a way that most likely has little basis in history, but it is certainly interesting to see the bizarre fashion in which the Huns and their world are portrayed. As events unfold, the developments are not always fully plausible, but the stakes and the pressure on each side steadily rise, building to an intense climax.

What you remember most after the film is over is the remorseless, implacable Kriemhild. With her costume obscuring almost everything else, Margarete Schön portrays the depth of Kriemhild's emotions and determination using only her face and, especially, her eyes. It is about as memorable a portrait as you will find in cinema of the madness and destructive fury of revenge. While "Kriemhild's Revenge", as a whole, does not have the thematic depth of "Siegfried", it succeeds in establishing this central image in a manner not easily forgotten.

Revenge on an operatic scale

[manuelu · 10/10 · 4 April 2010]

This film portrays revenge on an operatic scale. But do not confuse with Wagner's opera Das Ring des Nibelungen. Although both the film and Wagner's opera are based on related Norse and Icelandic sagas, Wagner devotes attention to Brünnhilde's reaction to the death of Siegfried rather than on Siegfried's widow Gutrune's (i.e. Kriemhilde's) reaction to the murder of the hero. Both the film and the opera are romantic in style. But unlike the 19th century opera, the film has elements of early 20th-century German expressionism. Everything about this film is perfect. The acting is over the top, as it needs to be. The sets are sublime. The crowd scenes are powerful. Imagine a film where the heroine makes Attlla the Hun (Etzel) seem like a reasonable, sympathetic host.

a breathtaking silent film

[frojavigdis · 9/10 · 1 March 2002]

I saw this film last night at a special movie theater showing in Nürnberg, and it was superb. I do have to admit that the original music composition of the cello player and percussion/xylophone player influenced the mood of the film, but the film itself also had force in its portrayal of the tragic Nibelungen saga.

If you are interested in silent films or in the Nibelungenlied, I highly recommend this film. The costumes were fantastic and creative, the sets were opulent and exotic, and the acting was dramatic and breathtaking (as is typical of silent film "tragedies") Unfortunately, I have not seen the first part of this film duo that concerns Siegfried. The story of this second film begins after Siegfried's death, when Kremhild (Gudrun in the Norse versions of the story) begins to plan her revenge against her brothers.

Also, I watched this film in German; I am a native English speaker and have a basic German knowledge. It was difficult to read the ?subtitles (what do you call that in silent films?) at first because of the old style German script, so I advise that if you watch it in German that you make sure you can differentiate your "k's", "f's", and "s's" in the old script. :)

Superb Poliltical Mythology

[Dr_Coulardeau · 10/10 · 30 March 2021]

A very beautiful film. We may wonder how Fritz Lang managed to get to that level of quality of picture but also that width of picture with the camera of the time. But he managed at least to give the impression he had wide pictures of landscape and movement, particularly galloping horses and masses of people.

The film is not in black and white as expected but in gold and black and that gives it a tremendous impact since it is color without being color. It is warm whereas white and black would have been cold. That establishes a relation with the audience that is close like some story telling at night in front of some fire in the winter. We are inside the story. Another quality is the costumes. The luxurious costumes of the Nibelungen from Burgundy and the city of Worms are strikingly imposing and even forbidding. Hagen Tronje's rough costume and extravagant helmet make him look like a barbarian, violent by principle, treacherous by nature. He is the man apart that will never be betrayed by the clan, in spite of all the misery he will bring down upon them. In the same way the Huns are shown as primitive, mostly have nude, and children are shown as systematically nude, living in some kind of huts or tents, at times troglodyte caves, though at the same time they have a palace in the "city" and that palace is in a way beautiful though rather massive and heavy but quite comparable to that of the Nibelungen in Worms which is maybe vaster and more richly decorated and has a cathedral.

The restoration of the film has a lot to do with the quality of the picture but all the rest is really Fritz Lang's.

The question this film brings up is the motivation of Fritz Lang when he directed and produced this film. The film goes back to the traditional Germanic more than German legend of Siegfried and his wife Kriemhild. This version is not the only one in Germanic culture with some others more Scandinavian in which Siegfried is named Sigurd. This film is centered on Burgundy seen as German and the Huns in the East. This redistributing Europe to the benefit of Germany is typical of the post World War 1 atmosphere, the desire to step over the defeat. At the same time the Nibelungen are run amok because of one of their allies who is untrustworthy, and yet they stick to him. That leads to all the Nibelungen being destroyed by the vengeful will of one of them, hence some kind of a traitor, Kriemhild herself who wants to avenge the murder of her husband, though she forgets to remember she gave the killer the information he needed to succeed. She wants at least everyone to forget. And she will get her vengeance, but she will be destroyed by one surviving member of the clan.

That means the defeat comes from inside because the Nibelungen were not able to respect and protect the hero they had welcomed in their clan. You see the myth behind, the lesson to the German audience: be faithful and support your heroes. Just nine years later it is this mood that will produce Hitler and the full German support to him. The Germans did not do the same mistake as in the old days. Surprisingly enough the lesson comes from a Jew, the main victims later on.

The vision of the East, the Huns, Attila, is the vision of a primitive and extremely barbaric people but yet courageous and dedicated to themselves, the Huns, with waves and waves of simple people turned warriors without weapons or equipment, dying in great number but finally overwhelming the well equipped and well trained Nibelungen. True enough the killing idea came from Kriemhild: burn them all in and out, but yet it is the Huns who did it, burning down their own palace to roast the Nibelungen inside. At the same time the motivations were clear: they wanted to avenge the killing of Attila's own son by Hagen Tronje. They were justified since Hagen Tronje killed an infant out of pure spite.

We can wonder if this film, a lot more popular medium than the rewriting of the myth by Wagner's operas, though Wagner could now be heard on the radio in the 1920s and 1930s, if this film did not contribute to build the atmosphere and motivation that brought Hitler to power. One thing is sure: the film is a very compelling call to the Germans to reunite and get inspiration from their mythology or past and at the same time to unite behind their heroes not to make the same mistakes again. In 1924 Hitler was still unknown but yet the momentum that was going to bring him to power was already moving and building up. This film is one piece of the puzzle. And it's probably for that reason that we had to wait so long before getting it restored to some glory. Some historical facts of the past are at times difficult to digest by modern people.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU.

All-Encompassing

[kurosawakira · 9/10 · 19 March 2013]

"Die Nibelungen" (1924), Lang's five-hour, two-part epic is quickly becoming my quintessential experience with Lang. The two films are all-encompassing: the first plays more like a fairytale (that translates well to filmic special effects), the latter more like "Hamlet" and its ilk. Siegfried is necessarily blank as a character, in fact he seems more like a characterization of virtue than flesh and bone; Kriemhild, too, is like white space in the first film, but is transformed by revengeful hate to a driven character of great psychological power. The second film is thus far more internal in its drama.

Not to say it wouldn't have some of the most amazing action sequences ever put to film. In fact, the riding of Etzel (Attila) and his men across the valley, the siege, the ensuing battle and climax are so well-done and full of so much real danger that the effect is dumbfounding. Where in modern cinema can we find risk in this manner? Herzog's "Aguirre, der Zorn Gottes" (1972) or "Fitzcarraldo" (1982) don't really fit the classification.

Indeed, the climatic fire is so visually violent that not even Kurosawa topped it in "Ran" (1985). I was breathless in awe and wonder and fear by witnessing it, sure that a huge rafter would crush the actors.

It's a beauty to behold on Blu-ray. We're lucky to have the restoration on both Region A (Kino) and B (Masters of Cinema series).

True Epic and Historic insight

[Flunky3k · 7/10 · 1 September 2013]

Impressive sets, costumes, and action highlight this 2 hour conclusion. The surprisingly good restoration was available for both parts on Netflix.

In some ways I suspect intentional and not, the movie subtext lays out the cultural flaws of the German/Austrian people following World War 1. The Burgundian oath upheld despite treachery and infanticide to the point of self destruction. An overwhelming need for revenge with no compromise or limit to the cost of obtaining it.

I imagine Fritz Lang and his co-writer wife sought to emphasize these faults following the war, which leads to the mutual destruction of the entire lot of Burgundy characters. Curiously the result ennobles both sides.

The non Germanic characters are grubby, disfigured, inferior animals. Only the extremes of pride, honor and infighting seem to hold the Germanic kingdom back. Within this subtext, one might see omens for the world that would be realized less than 15 years later.

The resulting film shares the same fault of its characters. Excessive pride, honor and nationalism despite the destruction and failure it had wrought. It is a vast epic and well made. But more importantly, a view of the cultural undercurrents that undermined the treaties from the war to end all wars.

Dramatic Tale of Hate, Revenge and Loyalty

[claudio_carvalho · 8/10 · 5 December 2007]

Canto 1: How Kriemhild Mourned Over Siegfried and How King Attila Woos her Through his Ambassador Rüdiger von Bechlarn: Kriemhild (Margarete Schön) insists on having the head of the killer of her beloved husband, Hagen Tronje (Hans Adalbert Schlettow), but her brother, King Gunther (Theodor Loos), refuses her request. When King Attila of the Huns woos Kriemhild through his ambassador Rüdiger von Bechlar, she makes him promise through oath in the name of his king that no man would ever offend her. Hagen Tronje hides the Nibelungen treasure in the bottom of a lake.

Canto 2: How Kriemhild Takes Leave from her Homeland and How She Was Received by King Attila: Kriemhild brings some earth from where Siegfried died, and travels to the court of the Huns, where she is welcomed by Attila himself, who also promises through oath to defend her.

Canto 3: How King Attila Besieged Rome and How Kriemhild Summoned her Brothers: When Kriemhild delivers a baby boy, Attila returns to his realm and asks Kriemhild what she would like most to please her. She asks him to invite her brothers to come to his kingdom.

Canto 4: How Kriemhild Receives her Brothers: Kriemhild insists on having the head of Hagen Tronje, but her brothers keep loyalty to their friend and again do not accept her request.

Canto 5: How the Huns Celebrated the Summer Solstice With the Nibelungen: Kriemhild asks Attila to kill Hagen Tronje, but he refuses since in accordance with the laws of the desert, a guest is considered sacred. Kriemhild offers gold to the Hums for the head of Hagen Tronje. There is a fight, and Hagen Tronje kills Attila's son.

Canto 6: The Nibelungen's Distress: The Huns lose the battle against the Nibelungen, but keep them under siege inside Attila's castle. Kriemhild promises to spare their lives provided they deliver Hagen Tronje, but her brother Gunther tells that German people are loyal with their friends.

Canto 7: The Nibelungen's End: After the death of Rüdiger von Bechlarn, Giselher and Gernot, Hagen Tronje and Guhther are finally captured. Kriemhild kills Hagen Tronje, ending her revenge with the destruction of the Nibelungen.

The conclusion of the poetic saga of Siegfried through "Kriemhild's Revenge" is also told through seven dramatic cantos. The nature of the first part is a magnificent tale of fantasy, adventure, romance and betrayal; the second part is a dramatic story of hate, revenge and loyalty. The solid screenplay with a perfect development of the characters, the excellent performances of the cast and the awesome direction of Fritz Lang produced another epic ahead of time. Margarete Schön is impressive with a total different woman, obsessed and inflexible in her revenge wish. The costumes that Kriemhild wears are also very impressive, and her acting is based on her face and look. I was a little disappointed with the reaction of Attila after the death of his only son, since I found it too passive. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): "Os Nibelungos – Parte II: A Vingança de Kriemshild" ("The Nibelungen Part II: Kriemhild's Revenge")

Second instalment of the epic masterpiece from genius Fritz Lang

[The_Void · 6/10 · 24 May 2006]

Anyone who's seen the first instalment of Die Nibelungen (which should be anyone who's viewing this) will know exactly what to expect. Kriemhild's Revenge is the story of the vengeance for Siegfried's death by his wife, Kriemhild. One again, the genius Fritz Lang dazzles his audience with the larger than life plot and visuals, and the second instalment of the series is an epic in every sense of the word. On a personal note, I've got to say that this pair of films didn't do a great deal for me, other than educate in the history of cinema. The scene staging is fantastic, and the way that Lang makes every event a big thing ensures that the film has a real epic feel. The use of music is one of the film's strongest elements, as Gottfried Huppertz's score bodes well with the rest of the movie. This instalment is less frantic than the first, and that discredits it a little as the film isn't easy viewing anyway; and more scenes such as the one that saw the hero fighting a dragon in the first film wouldn't have gone amiss. But even so, this is a great story directed by a cinematic genius and this film is bound to appeal to people who like classic silent films more than I do.

An equal to the first part; 8/10

[zetes · 8/10 · 24 September 2001]

In some ways, The Wrath of Kriemhild surpasses Siegfried's Death, but it also loses some of that film's greatness. The plot of this one is more cohesive than the first, which is quite amazing. The second half of the actual poem is a lot sloppier and a lot harder to tread through, until, that is, you get to the climactic battle scenes; only the Iliad's are better. Lang and Harbou embellished the Huns. The poet-compiler of the Nibelungenlied didn't know a Hun from his right ball, and as a result they are, more or less, the same as the Burgundians in custom. For example, although the poet clearly describes Etzel as a heathen (which is Kriemhild's main concern as Rudiger tries to persuade her to marry him), when she gets to Hunland, the first thing she does is go to mass. The Huns here are clearly heathens; they're almost like caveman. The depiction of them is hilarious, especially Verbal, the jester, who has two marvelous scenes. Etzel's character has been given more weight. He is much more formidable. All he does is bemoan his fate in the original poem. Lang and Harbou are masterful at building suspense, especially at the banquet scene, which is intercut with Verbal's second performance to an amazing effect. However, as is the nature of this half of the poem, the film's amazing technical accomplishments are missing in this one, for the most part, except for a dazzling sequence where Etzel's hall burns down with the Nibelungs inside. The one thing I do have to object to is the way Harbou changes the ending. SPOILERS: in the poem, after Hildebrand captures Hagen and Gunther, they are imprisoned. Kriemhild visits Hagen in his cell and demands that he reveal where he has hidden the horde. He refuses and she herself decapitates her brother. When Hagen still refuses, she decapitates him. Hildebrand (or possibly Dietrich) is so disgusted that a woman would presume to murder a great warrior that he, in turn, decapitates her, calling her a "Devil Woman". Etzel, who is much weaker in the poem than he is here, says something silly like: "Ah me!" I can understand why they would want to keep a unity of time and place as Hildebrand brings them from the castle; to retain the prison settings of the two deaths would make the film very anticlimactic. I also understand why they didn't have Hildebrand kill Kriemhild: his character is much reduced here; his name is only mentioned once. But, to have Kriemhild kill herself, adopting Brynhild's death from the Icelandic sources, is just catering to the audience instead of challenging them. The point of the poem is that Kriemhild's wrath goes far beyond it should into the realm of pure evil. Here, we simply have her die for her lost love. It's not as interesting.

Lady Macbeth of Burgundy

[Varlaam · 7/10 · 24 October 1999]

I finally got my wish to see this one in a cinema. I'd seen Fritz Lang's film on video some years ago. I'd been hoping that ideal screening conditions would work their magic.

Conditions were ideal at Cinematheque Ontario. Pristine full-length print. Intertitles in the original Gothic-script German with simultaneous English translation, accurate without being too literal. Live piano accompaniment. Ideal.

The film's magic sputtered for a little while but ultimately failed to catch, at least for me.

This film bears no real relation to Wagner's Ring cycle as I already knew but some may not. Wagner had adapted the 13th c. Niebelungenlied to his own purposes. Part I of Fritz Lang's epic -- "Siegfried" -- has much that will be familiar to listeners of Wagner however.

"Kriemhild's Revenge" is the story of Siegfried's wife Kriemhild, her marriage to King Etzel (Attila) the Hun, and her desire for revenge against Hagen and Gunther, the rechristened Nibelungs, for the murder of Siegfried. The spectacular conflagration in this film presumably evolved and expanded in the Wagnerian mythos into his Götterdämmerung, his Twilight of the Gods, and the end of Valhalla. This film remains earthbound.

Most of the film is spectacular. The massive sets rival those of "Cabiria" (1914), which inspired Griffith's "Intolerance" (1916). Their decoration sets a new benchmark in barbaric splendour. There's a huge cast of scarred, mangy Huns and Art Deco Burgundians. And battles. Battles that never seem to end in fact.

Kriemhild is very successful in her plan of revenge. She manages to destroy all around her. Her loyalty to her martyred Siegfried seems not to stem so much from love, or devotion, but from something closer to psychosis. Lady Macbeth cried out, "Unsex me here." She knew she was emotionally unprepared for what she needed to do. But Kriemhild displays no normal human emotions, and certainly nothing one equates with the feminine principle. She is already "top full of direst cruelty", to borrow Shakespeare's phrase, from the outset. Margarethe Schön and her director convey this with a glower. I don't want to exaggerate, but that glower is virtually the only expression ever to "animate" Kriemhild's face. It's the ultimate in one-note performances. It's clearly intentional however, not simply a case of poor acting.

What we have then on offer is a one-dimensional sketch of an avenging Fury. Some might see Kriemhild as an empowered heroine. I just see the film as misogynistic.

Part 2 of Lang's take on the epic Nibelungen saga

[Horst_In_Translation · 4/10 · 23 December 2015]

"Die Nibelungen: Kriemhilds Rache" is a 131-minute movie (in the version I saw) and it came out in 1924, over 90 years ago. Writer is Thea von Harbou, director is Fritz Lang, the same duo that made the legendary "Metropolis" 3 years later. Their work here is again a black-and-white (gold-and-white actually) silent film that is fairly known and among the better known movies from the 1920s too. It is the second installment of the Nibelungen saga after the focus on Siegfried in the first. And as with Reinl's work from the 1960s, I must say I always find the Siegfried part more interesting. One reason are the dragon fights sequences. However, this is not a failure we have here. The battle scenes are decent, costumes and set decorations are pretty nice too. It's just for me very personally that I cannot really develop any interest Kriemhild's revenge story. Overacting, as usual in those silent films, is sometimes present too, but it's bearable in here. Intertitles could have been a bit more for my taste to better understand the story in detail, but at least it's not hardly any like in other works from that time. Cast is fine mostly, Rudolf Klein-Rogge is probably the most known member. All in all, due to my personal preferences, I did not really enjoy the watch. Also too long in my opinion, maybe 90-100 minutes would have been more appropriate. Not recommended

Incredibly complex film

[mohaas · 11 May 2000]

Although this is not as immediately thrilling as it's prequel (*Die Nibelungen: Siegfried*), I thought this film had an incredibly complex and quite dark climax and ending. The film does not contain all of the fantastical aspects of the first film, although the set design (especially of the Hun's castle and village) was still pretty amazing. What I liked most about the film, though, was the way in which there is no clear good and bad guy by the end. By now, we're all used to this sort of thing, but I have to think that this was a much rarer and more risky endeavor in the 20s than it is at the end of a century of film.

[There are probably going to be spoilers below, so if you haven't seen the film and want to without hearing all of the plot, don't keep reading on.] Some of the comments I've read about the film is that this is pretty pro-fascist film, citing the fact that this was one of Hitler's favorites. I can see how a quick reading of the film would elicit this response, but I really do think that it is much more complex than that. The loyalty Kriemhild's family shows to the hagen is at times portrayed in a very patriotic and positive light. At one point, the Huns demand the handover of the hagen in order to let the rest free and the Burgunds say, "You obviously don't know the Germans." They stand by their people through thick and thin and are referred to as heroes. And, when they finally die in the fire, most of the Huns are now against their death. This all would seem to say that loyalty to the homeland is honorable regardless of mitigating factors.

However, what are they being loyal to? Clearly, the hagen is an evil character. Not only does he kill Siegfried in the first film, but he also kills Kriemhild's defenseless child. There's not much honor there. Also, what is the result of the Burgunds' loyalty? Ignominious death by fire (they don't even die valiantly in battle). And so, yes, Lang is clearly trying to get us to question the ferocity of Kriemhild's lust for revenge. But, equally, Lang seems also to be saying that her family is just as blinded by their own sense of loyalty to stop the inevitable train of events. The tragic ending, then, becomes one which is not just caused by Kriemhild's rage, but also by the Burgunds' blind loyalty to something and someone who does not deserve it. After all, in many senses, Kriemhild's revenge is just (doubly so once her child is killed). No one comes out the hero by the end of the film.

So, a little slower than the first part. But, the philosophical issues which are raised by the end are well worth the wait. I honestly thought this was one of the deeper films I've seen in a while.

The violent conclusion to a great epic

[MissSimonetta · 9/10 · 14 April 2020]

KRIEMHILD'S REVENGE isn't as captivating as the first film in Lang's DIE NIBELUNGEN series, mainly because, as user Snow Leopard observes, the relationships between the characters are far less interesting or ambiguous this time around. Much of the film is focused on batllefield action and to be honest, it got tiresome after twenty minutes. However, the film has two major strengths.

The first of these strengths is inherited from the first movie: a gorgeous stylized aesthetic. From the staunch geometric sets to the costumes, both films in the NIBELUNGEN series look amazing, bringing to life a sense of myth that naturalism would only destroy.

The second is unique to KRIEMHILD'S REVENGE and that is Margarete Schon as the vengeful Kriemhild herself. She has marvelous command of her body and face. She often expresses a stiffness that illustrates both her regal bearing and barely controlled rage, making it all the more unsettling when she does lash out. It is genuinely heartbreaking to see her transformation from a loving, honorable woman in the first movie into a revenge-obsessed monster unable to love anyone. I read one other user on here claim this portrayal is sexist, but I disagree: Kriemhild is tragic, betrayed by her family and denied justice for the man she loved. She is trying to gain power the only way she can in a male-dominated world: through marriage and manipulation.

In this movie, there are no heroes to speak of. Everyone is corrupt, bloodthirsty, and beyond compromising. The whole thing ends in an apocalyptic bloodbath, as though without Siegfried no goodness can exist in this universe.

All in all, I was highly impressed with DIE NIBELUNGEN as a whole. While the first half is stronger than the second, both movies are essential viewing for silent movie geeks. They rather remind me of John Boorman's EXCALIBUR in that they evoke the feeling one gets when reading old myths and legends. Everything is epic and grand rather than intimate and small-- emotions are expressed through large gestures, characters are larger than life.

Winter has come

[highnemonkey · 9/10 · 15 June 2020]

A deserved conclusion to the two part epic Lang started with "Siegfried".

Having started to watch "Game of Thrones" lately, I could not help finding the relationship these two works seem to have. What impressed me with the series was a range of female characters, some exceeding the often-used attribute "strong" by being straight violent. Kriemhild is one of these. The first moments of the movie are set in a icy wintery castle, the association was inevitable for me - winter has come in the kingdom of Gunther.

Kriemhild is an emancipated woman, not by careful development but by force, by revenge and circumstances. We see the former white princess change into a dark entitiy, which cannot even be shook by entering a savage mayhem such as Etzels camp. Not just unintimidated, she takes the scene, dominating each frame like a dark angel and places herself high above the male-lead kingdoms. This is not a fight between civilized Gunther and savage Etzel, this is a fight fueled by vengance. Kriemhild is neither a goodie nor a baddie, she is a natural force awakened.

In a rare moment we see her transformed back into the white princess - in her bedroom, all by herself, stripped of cloak and mask, she is again the snow white, innocent girl. We can imagine that this is her true self but after this short glimpse, she goes back to her dark self and sets out to finish the inevitable. To achieve this, Daenerys, pardon, Kriemhild forges a bond with the leader of a barbaric horse tribe.

The action propelles into a devastating war that knows no winners, losers or heroes. In the end, both parties proclaim: "Blood cries for blood!". But no matter how often Kriemhild urges "Hand over Hagen and you are free!", the easy way is not and option - in the end, the seeming nobleman and their loyalty appear as stubborn and violent as the barbarians, bringing needless pain and violence.

One of the lessons that one can take from Game of Thrones is deeply rooted in this epic already - in a world where magic and spells (Alberics magic hat) and even dragons are real, the real destructive forces are peoples battles for power.

Bow down to the First Greatest Dual Epic of the World Cinema, bow down to Master Fritz Lang.

[SAMTHEBESTEST · 8/10 · 23 February 2021]

Die Nibelungen : Kriemhild's Revenge (1924) :- Brief Review -

Bow down to the First Greatest Dual Epic of the World Cinema, bow down to Master Fritz Lang. Die Nibelungen: Kriemhild's Revenge follows the story of Kriemhild's insane and uncontrollable Revenge after Sigfried's murder and believe me there's no stopping to the visual extravaganza from the beginning to the end. Unlike its predecessor, this one wastes no time in introduction. It gets to the point right on the beginning note from where you don't get a moment to think about anything else for 2 hours. Fritz Lang had saved a lot of content for this one but the biggest achievement of this film is catching the burning tone of insane self destruction within an acceptable revenge. Revenge stories are nothing new but a fine tit for tat, blood for blood in typical forms but Fritz Lang fetched unethical terms and inappropriate outburst to discover a salvation in realistic fantasy world. Kriemhild's Revenge could possibly be a contender for One Of the Greatest Epic Adventure ever made, not because of its grandeur but because of humanly possible techniques of self-blessedness within cinematic boundaries. Even if you exclude its artistic values, you still have a great explosive money making entertainer in hand and that's what the greatness of this film lies. From performances to screenplay to spectacular visuals to unlimited production designing to the impeccable storytelling, Kriemhild's Revenge tops the list in every aspect. What LOTR and Bahubali achieved in 21st Century, Kriemhild's Revenge did it in 1920s only and that too without the help of advanced technology. Words might fall short to explain the glory of this Fritz Lang Classic in today's time but all i can do is bow down to the Legend and his Legendary Magnus Opus. The Greatest work in Larger Than Life Cinema of its time, that's it!

RATING - 8/10*

By - #samthebestest

Blood cries for blood.

[brogmiller · 10/10 · 3 March 2024]

The marriage oF Fritz Lang and Thea von Harbou might not have been the most harmonious but their professional partnership represents one of the most outstanding director/writer combinations in the history of Cinema.

The monumental 'Siegfried/Kriemhilds Rache' has been adapted from the original 13th Century epic poem together with ideas from the operas of Wagner and the play by Friedrich Hebbels, in a production of which von Harbou had played Kriemhild. All of UFA's artistic, technical and financial resources were brought into play to provide this tribute to the German nation during troubled times. Ironically, although now regarded as an undisputed classic, the film was not universally popular and 'Kriemhild's Rache' was not shown during the Nazi era as it was deemed too nihilistic!

Lang was blessed to have some of the finest art directors, costume designers and cameramen at his disposal and was to enjoy a continuity and loyalty from an united team which he seldom if ever experienced in Hollywoodland. The paintings of Caspar David Friedrich and Arnold Boecklin inspired the landscapes and the Kriemhild of Margarete Schon resembles a portrait by Klimt. Lang's musical taste was pretty dismal and he was known to loathe Wagner but the score here by Gottfried Huppertz is suitably majestic.

Film historian Georges Sadoul has referred to Part 1 as 'architectural' and Part 11 as 'dynamic' which seems a fair description. Dominated by the all-consuming hatred of Kriemhild the second part is darker in tone whilst the extended battle scenes show Lang's preponderance for violence and cruelty with an unforgettable final conflagration filmed simultaneously by sixteen cameras. It comes as no surprise to learn that it was Lang himself who fired the arrow with magnesium powder on its head that ignited the blaze.

Lang manipulated his actors' movements like a puppet master which results in stylised performances lacking a certain humanity but the one-dimensional characters are in keeping with the epic mode. The stillness of Margarete Schon is mesmerising whilst Hans Adelbert von Schlettow is a formidable Hagen. Top marks must go to Rudolf Klein-Rogge for despite Otto Genath's grotesque make up, he makes Etzel hugely sympathetic.

A miracle of the silent screen this opus continues to haunt not least because, in the words of Thea von Harbou, it depicts 'the inexorability with which the first guilt entails the last atonement'.

Great battle scene but slow pace for the majority of the film

[amok1980 · 7/10 · 18 January 2002]

Great battle finale and nice sets help keep this often-slow movie enjoyable. At times it had me checking my watch, although there were enough memorable moments to make the film stand out in my mind days after watching it. The ending should surprise even those familiar with the Nibelungen story line.

Everything Burns

[davidmvining · 10/10 · 19 August 2022]

The first half of this story was a grand fantasy adventure that ended sadly. The second half is...an amazingly great, morally complex, and incredibly involving tragedy. I mean...I loved the first part of this large epic film, but this second part is something else. It's not the greatest of analogies, but it's like going from Beowulf to Hamlet. I love Beowulf, but it's Hamlet.

Kriemhild (Margarete Schon) mourns the murder of her husband Siegfried by the king's advisor Hagen of Tronje (Hans Adalbert Schlettow). Even when she confronts King Gunther (Theodor Loos), her own brother, with the common knowledge that Tronje did the deed, no one will do anything to exact justice. She's alone in her own home of Worms, and when the foreign king Atilla of the Huns (Rudolf Klein-Rogge) sends a messenger asking for her hand in marriage, she accepts when she gets a promise that Atilla will exact vengeance on those that have wronged her, and she's off to a foreign land to take a husband she's never met after her Germanic ideal of a husband has been murdered with the implicit consent of her king of a brother by his chief advisor.

I found it curious that the fantasy elements of the first half have been completely removed from the second half. There's no dragon. There is no magic helmet that turns anyone invisible. The second part is more purely a historical epic, and the film takes its time to establish characters really firmly before things go south. Kriemhild wasn't the most fleshed out character in the first part, but here she takes center stage and her thirst for vengeance drives her. When she shows up at Atilla's foreign palace, a much earthier construction than the stone-built castle at Worms, the place is a mess of men. The large hall is filled with Atilla's most trusted warriors with nary a woman's touch present to clean up the puddles of water along the floor. Her steely beauty is obviously offended by the situation, and yet Atilla takes off his own robe to lay over the puddle. She's willing to deal with a lot in order to get what she wants, and when Atilla promises to exact the vengeance she wants, she accepts her situation.

All that's left is for them to seal their marriage with a child. She promptly delivers Atilla a son and has Atilla invite Gunther to Atilla's court for a visit.

The second half of this second part is one concentrated event, Gunther's visit, where Kriemhild's vengeance is wrought. It is obvious that Kriemhild is not only justified in seeking vengeance but that Tronje deserves it. As the extended episode plays out with the arrival, the feast, the underhanded way Kriemhild gets Atilla's men to attack Gunther's men out of sight, and the eventual death of a key character, nothing feels too out of sorts with a woman seeking vengeance. She's got bloodlust, but it hasn't taken over. However, when Tronje ends up too strong and smart to get taken out quickly and easily, things spiral out of control, and Kriemhild will not let go. Atilla ends up on her side, and everything burns. Her vengeance ends up so complete and all-encompassing that there's no longer any satisfaction in the act. It's dirty and sullied. It is obsession taken to the extreme. This is the sort of thing that David Lean made movies about decades later.

And that descent into obsessive hatred is the source of the film's moral complexity. Kriemhild's vengeance is justified. Gunther's standing by his loyal Tronje has justification as well. Kriemhild's willingness to sacrifice everything, having been killed by Siegfried's death (as she puts it), is understandable. Atilla's grief feeding it all makes sense. This is a complex mashup of character motivations playing out until there is nothing but fire and death. It was so compelling that I loved it.

The physical production elements are just as impressive, though less showy, as in the first part. The large palace of Atilla the Hun gets used a lot in many different ways as the second half plays out with the battle between the Huns and the Burgundians evolving several different ways. There is an attack on the front door, an attack from above, and finally the use of fire. The burning of the palace ends up recalling Kurosawa's much later burning of Lord Hidetora's palace in Ran. It really looks like they burnt the full-scale set down for the cameras, and it's impressive.

The centerpiece of the films' acting is Margarete Schon as Kriemhild, and she is the movie's cornerstone. Her face is stonelike, but her true emotions of rage are perceptible always just below the surface. Her steely beauty sells the obsessive acts that Kriemhild follows through on in the end extremely well. It's one of the great silent film performances, I think, and it's in one of the great silent films.

Lang's silent career is dominated by Metropolis, a science fiction film of unquestionable influence, but I think it may be the second part of Die Nibelungen that is his greatest silent triumph. The physical production is impressive, and the emotional impact is strong. This is great.

Epic

[gbill-74877 · 7/10 · 17 April 2021]

This film has some amazing costumes and set designs that dazzle the eyes with their patterns and textures. It's got all the makings of an epic with how lush it is, the cast of thousands, and a palace fire scene that looked pretty damn dangerous for the actors. Margarete Schön is well-cast as Kriemhild, though in thinking back, her performance which consisted of an austere gaze is pretty one-note. I loved the look of Rudolf Klein-Rogge as Etzel/Attila and the Huns are suitably barbaric in their revelry, but there seems to be some racial subtext in this, as it compares to the steely Germanic characters who have all the actual power. The bigger issue is the plot, however; the completion to the story just never truly engaged me, or kept up with all the wonderful visuals. The fantasy elements from the first part (Siegfried), such as the dragon and invisibility cloak, give way here to lengthy battle sequences that weren't as meaningful to me. Watch it for the grandeur and spectacle of it all though.

a perfect follow-up

[lee_eisenberg · 10/10 · 21 May 2005]

In "Die Nibelungen: Siegfried", Siegfried was betrayed. Now, Kriemhild seeks revenge. She marries Hagen, and through a series of events, finally engages in a very drastic (but fitting) action at the end.

One of the things about watching this movie nowadays is that we can look at certain portrayals. Attila the Hun (called Etzel in the movie) is shown as the strange person from the east, possibly an allusion to the Soviet Union. Obviously, it was not Fritz Lang's fault that Hitler used "The Nibelungenlied" for German national pride in the Third Reich, but one can see what the Fuhrer liked about the story. Nonetheless, this is an absolutely formidable movie.

Much worse than part 1 "Siegfried"

[frankde-jong · 6/10 · 9 January 2023]

In my review of the first part of the Nibelungen ("Siegfried") I already made a few remarks about the history of the story. In summary:

In the first place Fritz Lang is with his movie more faithful to the Medieval "Nibelungenlied" than Richard Wagner, Tolkien or Peter Jackson.

Secondly one has to be careful to associate a work of art ex post (that is to say because some Nazi protagonists did like it) with the Nazi regime. That is something completely different from the situation in which a work of art has been made commissioned by the Nazi regime, for example the films of Leni Riefenstahl. Even in that case there can be a work of art aesthetically speaking, although politically speaking it is of course very objectionable.

These remarks are more or less also applicable to the second part "Kriemhilds Rache", although this part is sometimes on a slippery slope when using phrases such as "Blut schreit nach Blut" or "Deutsche Seele".

While "Siegfried" is about blind love, "Kriemhilds Rache" is about blind hate. The way Margarete Schön plays this blind hate however is very "over the top" (eyes wide open constantly) and ultimately got on my nerves.

While "Siegfried" is a knight movie, "Kriemhilds rache" is more a war movie. The last 45 minutes are nothing but continuous battle. However spectacular, eventually it gets boring. "War and peace" (1965, Sergey Bondarchuk) is a famous film who has the same problem.

All in all "Kriemhilds Rache" is much worse compared to "Siegfried".

A tad slow but fascinating.

[David-240 · 4 September 1999]

Like grand opera, this film and its predecessor, "Siegfried", are a little too slow in pace, but the visual treats are unforgettable. It is best to see the two films together, but the sequel is not as good, mainly because there is not very much story left. Most of the time it's just Kriemhild wandering around looking vengeful, but Margarethe Schoen does it so well! The performance of Rudolph Klein-Rogge as Attila the Hun is wildly energetic - he is magnificent. But you can't help thinking why don't they just kill Hagen Tronje and get on with life, especially after he murders the baby. Something to do with Teutonic loyalty apparently.

But who can forget the rabbit-warren Hun village, and all those grubby Huns running about. Of course the film is racist as the Teutons somehow survive against overwhelming numbers of Huns - no wonder Hitler liked this film. "Siegfried" was very fascist too, with the glorious Aryan impregnable and very gorgeous (thanks to Paul Richter). But "Kriemhild's Revenge" lacks the wonderful fantasy sequences of "Siegfried" like the dwarves kingdom and especially that superb dragon fight - but at least here Kriemhild herself gets some balls - she seemed so stupid in "Siegfried".