User Reviews (12)

Add a Review

  • I really think that in this movie Gotz deserved an academy award. When you watch the movie you really think: "This guy is a fuc...g psychopath!" Especially when he talks about how he chopped a corpse and then laughs, like it was fun! He says that he made sausages out of it... And yet somehow... you see this man, who in reality is still a boy. He hasn't got a clear idea of what a crime is, or how he should feel about it. Creepy stuff and for this performance Gotz deserved an Oscar.

    The mood is very creepy also. Like a true European film it focuses on feelings rather than special effects where you can see how arms and legs were chopped of. This is not a movie about the act of killing but a movie about the psyche of a mass murderer.

    Somehow it's even better than the Silence of the lambs. :)

    See it! It's a must!
  • If you're interested in real-life-crime films, then this film is a pure recommendation. However, keep in mind, this film is structured more like a chamber-play, carried by two actors: Götz George as child-murderer and cannibal Fritz Haarmann and Jürgen Hentsch as police-psychologist Prof. Dr. Ernst Schultze, who tries to peek into the mind of a monster in human-shape.

    Don't expect intricate psycho-games like in "Silence of the Lambs". Don't expect any action; 99.9 percent of the scenes take place in one room alone. And if you're looking for gory murder, move on; there are none. However, when Haarmann talks about his crimes as casually as a butcher would about preparing cattle for consumption, I can guarantee you that you'll be grateful that those scenes are "only" in your head.

    Some people have pointed out that George would have deserved an Oscar for his performance and I couldn't agree more. George had been best known as TV-policeman Schimanski, probably the most iconic character from the whole "Tatort"-Series. But as is often with such cases, George had grown sick of been typecast and wanted to break the mold. With "Der Totmacher" (and around the same time with the TV-Thriller "Der Sandmann") he managed to do just that and establish himself among the great actors of his generation.

    Within seconds the memory of Schimanksi, the tough street-cop with a heart of gold, is forgotten and there is only Fritz Haarmann: A seemingly harmless figure, at times even timid and child-like, intellectually and mentally retarded, plagued by a bad childhood and at times unable to understand what's going on around him. But since the story is based on the original files, we know that this is a cunning psychopath, convicted of the murder of 24 boys (there may have been more), whom he killed often by biting their throats and turning their flesh into sausage, often offering his neighbors some of his "home-cooking". As Haarmann and Schultze grown more comfortable (for the lack of a better word) with each other, there always looms the question of how much Haarmann actually plays the fool (Haarmann had worked as a snitch for the police prior to his arrest and was often described as by no means as simple as he presented himself during interrogation).

    Jürgen Hentschs performance is no less impressive. He plays the sober, proficient psychologist, who tries to maintain the necessary professional distance from his "subject", but being only human, cannot always conceal his emotions and personal opinions about this monster he has to work with. These range from suspicions to disgust and at times, even pity and sympathy. In other words: Hentsch is almost a catalyst for what the viewers will feel.

    I often wondered: Had some director attempted a similar cinematic "experiment" with the Thomas Harris figure Hannibal Lecter, would it have been accomplished or interesting as "The Totmacher"? Probably not. "The Totmacher" shows that reality often is much more horrific than anything an author can come up with and that it is very possible to create something great with only two human beings and a room. However, like me and many other critics have stated: you have to bring along a little patience and an interest in the subjects rather than the action.

    8/10
  • George realy did a perfect job in this! Based on the historical examination script they deliver a film that comes very close to your stomach. Some people I know couldn´t stand it and turned it off and some turned the video off, because they were bored. Try it yourself! This is absolutely an about average view on the so popular subject "serial killer". I watched it late at night with 100 percent thrill and interest.
  • micmul10 December 2005
    This is a quite spartan film. The only location is a sparse-funitured room, no special-effects, no score, just a few actors. - But what for actors! Götz George is supposed to be one of the best German actors, and after this movie the viewer knows why. Here he really shows what he is able to. I rarely (never?) saw such an intense, brilliant and convincing performance before. The sparse environment has the effect that the viewer can concentrate himself on the acting - and and this is what makes this film worth seeing.

    But it's not only Götz George. The other actors (esp. Jürgen Hentsch as the psychiatrist and Pierre Franckh as the stenographer) are performing impressive and convincing. They are a well contrast and counterpart for George alias Haarmann. This prevents this movie from becoming a Götz-George-One-Man-Show.

    I rated this with 8 because I think. a film for a 9 or even 10 should make more use of the diverse capabilities of the medium. After all a good film, but an absolute excellent play.
  • In "Der Totmacher" Götz George basically just plays a murderer during a cross examination. Several sessions are shown. I am certainly not George's biggest fan on the planet, but what he did in this movie is what I have to call the greatest performance ever as he does not have any virtual assistance by effects or anything, it is just him. People who like to see movies where it is the actors who create the atmosphere must not miss this incredible performance of George.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    minor spoilers here..

    OK, first of all this is more a intimate play then a real movie. Its about the inquisition of Fritz Haarmann, one of the sickest serial killers in europe. The whole movie is set in one room... first i thought it will surely be boring but NO !! the dialogues are great and there is always a great tension in the background.

    But the best of the movie is the acting of GÖTZ GEORGE. I've seen many German movies but I've never seen such a great performance of any actor (maybe BRUNO GANZ as Hitler in Der Untergang is almost so great) People watch this intelligent psychoanalysis - its a great movie apart from the mainstream
  • Most of my fellow reviewers around here dedicate their entire user- comment, or at least the largest part of it, to praising the formidable acting performance of Götz George. And don't get me wrong, I definitely concur. Götz George's depiction of the notorious and legendary despicable German serial killer Fritz Haarmann is absolutely stunning and mind-blowing! Jürgen Hentsch' performance as the shrink is terrific as well. Heck, even Pierre Franckh's performance as the silent stenographer is excellent! But a great film exists of more than just terrific acting performances from the lead characters, if you ask me. Thrillers, particularly when dealing with sensitive and socially relevant topics like real-life murderers, ought to have suspenseful scripts, moody atmospheres, authentic decors and filming locations and gripping action sequences. "Der Totmacher" isn't that type of film, clearly. The screenplay is based on Haarmann's profound and extended psychiatric evaluation, conducted by professor-doctor Ernst Schültze in between the serial killer's arrest and his inevitable execution. Fascinating material, for sure, but not suitable for a film. The long conversations between doctor and monster would make a compelling documentary and perhaps even mandatory viewing material for psychiatrist students, but it doesn't make a very interesting long-feature film. Despite the horrific content, "Der Totmacher" is tedious and monotonous. Fritz "The Vampire of Hanover" Haarmann previously formed the inspiration for another German thriller, the brilliant but sadly obscure "The Tenderness of Wolves" in 1973. That film features magnificent contemporary set pieces, numerous ultimately disturbing sequences and also fantastic lead performance (from Kurt Raab).
  • Warning: Spoilers
    "Der Totmacher" or "Deathmaker" is a German 110-minute movie from 1995, so it had its 20th anniversary last year. The writer and director is Romuald Karmakar and it is easily the most known work by him. A lot of that also has to do with the film's success in terms of awards recognition. It won the grand prize at the German Film Awards (Outstanding Feature Film), brought Karmakar, who was only 30 back then, the directors' trophy and lead actor Götz George also won, while his co-lead Jürgen Hentsch was "only" nominated. This film is about Fritz Haarmann, one of Germany's most notorious serial killers and he was also the main inspiration for Fritz Lang's "M". over half a century before this film already. But back to this one here. It is really all about George's performance and he can let it all out without ever seeming desperate, cringeworthy or hammy in my opinion. Hentsch was good too and he was in basically every scene of this film as he was the guy interrogating Haarmann from start to finish. But he was really just a trigger that got the best out of George on many occasions.

    Do not be fooled here: This is a very dark film that takes us into the abyss of a deranged human soul, namely Haarmann's. Theer is lots of profanity in here, but the talk about how people were graphically murdered and also the talk about many sexual references (very explicit!) is nothing for the easily offended. But it is essential as it helps a lot in finding out who Haarmann really was. George died earlier this year and this work from over 2 decades ago is without a doubt one of the finest things he left us. I am not surprised the film was submitted by Germany to the Oscars, but I am not really surprised it did not get nominated as I can see some people not finding access to the material in terms of the dramatic impact it makes. But those who (like myself) will be really rewarded with a quality piece. Maybe the premise also was too simple for the Academy voters. It is basically from start to finish 2 people (sometimes more) in an interrogation chamber and a film cannot really be more dialogue-driven than this one here. What Haarmann says and how he says it are easily the heart and soul of the movie. I also believe, due to the setting, that this is a perfect film to turn into a play on the theater stage, but I have not really come across many approaches from that direction sadly. Maybe they were just scared because they probably never would be as good as the original. But it's fine, they don't have to be in my opinion. They can still be good and another approach on the subject would be interesting to see. Anyway, about this film here, I highly recommend the watch to everybody who likes psychological thrillers, crime movies or just lead actor Götz George. They will be really well-entertained by this bold and relentless (positively meant of course) achievement. You really do not want to miss out.
  • Basically that film is just about one long dialogue between the killer and his psychiatrist in a german prison (or psychiatric clinic?) in the 1920s or 1930s that spans over some days before the killer's death penalty. The other actors barely speak a word in this movie. That sounds rather dull but the compelling performance of the two main actors made me sit through the whole film. On the other hand, if you don't like dialogue movies the avoid. There's no action at all, only language and expressions... I'd give it a 7 out of 10..
  • Warning: Spoilers
    "Deathmaker" is an outstanding movie. It's psychologically intense and very well played, BUT...

    The major problem of this feature is that the director chose the wrong medium for his project. The story told in "Deathmaker" would fit better into a (classical) theater. The whole setting is placed in one room only, there are less than a dozen actors needed and no (!) optical and only few sound effects are used. Nothing indicates that this story needs all the technical possibilities of cinematography. So this movie is - in my eyes - nothing more than a theater play filmed for distribution of the piece beyond theaters The story itself is quiet slow - many will find it boring or too long. There is nearly no action at all in it. Majorly three people sitting on chairs in a room together and talking. If you can sympathize with this kind of storytelling, then you should watch this movie. Else I can not recommend it.
  • Would a different translation have made it chillier or scarier? Are the subtitles too compact to convey the nuances of the original language? Does it even matter? You may have heard that great actors can make reading a phone book exciting. Well, this is an opportunity to judge for yourself.

    If this isn't about homosexuality, murder, dismemberment, psychopaths, insanity, deviant psychology, then it is about acting - acting helped along with lots of dialog, So, enjoy the acting or muse about how titillating the dialog actually is.

    For English speakers, "Twelve Angry Men" might be a better choice. There's a bit more interaction, and you can judge if the acting is consistent with the dialog. You don't have to wonder if you're missing something.

    I would recommend Andy Warhol's "Empire" to those who like this film.
  • this film can be enjoyed, but it's nothing too special. much-praised acting is no better nor worse than one would expect from professional performers. as for direction, maybe i missed it... there didn't seem to be any at all. this is by no means a film to be watched in the cinema. on tv, on a snowy winter evening, okay. better still, watch it performed onstage in a small, intimate theatre, where it belongs... the dearth of good german movies is highlighted by the fact that this very unexceptional effort garnered so much attention and praise in that country, which produces so much, but so little of note. keen to see "manila," though what i've heard thus far is anything but encouraging...