Here we have "Marlene" one of the lesser known films by Bavarian director Joseph Vilsmaier, who was probably back then more famous than he is today close to his 80th birthday. The script is by Christian Pfannenschmidt, not too much to say about him, not necessary if you take a look at his recent works in particular. This one here is his most known, for Vilsmaier definitely not. He has many more famous films under his belt, for example the one about Stalingrad. This film is almost 20 years old now and by standards back then the cast is massive: Rohde, Lauterbach, Knaup, Hagen, Paul, Ferch etc. and of course Katja Flint playing Marlene Dietrich and the former has really vanished almost completely from attention in the German film industry these days. But she does a good job overall I guess. This is by no means a defining film on Dietrich, even if it wants to be. For that description, there is just too much cheese, too much unauthentic drama and too many over-the-top moments in here. The story line with Ferch's character is the best example. He is based on a real character as well I think, but there are others in here who actually reference existing characters like Jannings or Sternberg of course. So this film is interesting theoretically from the perspective of somebody curious about the days of early film, especially here in Germany with the production of "Der blaue Engel" and others, but yeah instead of going credibly in depth there, the film loses itself far too much in romantic plots unfortunately that also could have taken place the exact same way in some soap opera. From the visual perspective, it is not a bad film, but not a great one either and I am talking about sets there, costumes, makeup etc. Well that's almost all that comes to mind already, not too much looking at how long the film actually was I guess. It ran for comfortably over two hours. There are many interesting references in here, also about sexism for example when it comes to Lauterbach's character on one occasions, but they just threw them in there and that was enough, they did not really elaborate on them profoundly the way I would have hoped, which was a bit of a shame and kept the film from becoming something more essential. The subject of Marlene sure is interesting enough as Maximilian Schell has shown us in his Oscar-nominated documentary. But maybe there is hope as looking at how old this film already is now and how it is certainly not a masterpiece perhaps we will get a better Marlene Dietrich film at some point in the nearf future. I sure hope we do. There are enough talented actresses to play the part out there, not just here in Germany. Overall, I do think that the positive is still more frequent than the negative, even if it is a bit of a shallow film all in all, also in terms of the references about Jews, National Socialist Germany etc. where it just isn't as effective and spot-on as it clearly wants to be. I can see how the writer has not enjoyed a spectacular career since then. So maybe watch it if you care for any oif the actors/characters/times in history in here, but don't go in it with too great expectations. I give it a cautious thumbs-up.
Add a Review
-
As an undergraduate, I wrote my thesis on actors and filmmakers of German origin who actively resisted the Third Reich. Therefore, I read a lot of books and articles and watched a few documentaries about Marlene Dietrich. When I was recently in the library in Berlin, I discovered this film. I was very curious which portions and aspects of Marlene's life would be covered in the film. The film starts very promising with how it covers her early years as an actress and her relationship with Josef von Sternberg. After that, the film gets stuck in a melodramatic bore focusing on Marlene's romances. Do not get me wrong, Marlene's romances were very intriguing. She had many affairs over the years, and the relationship she maintained with her husband Rudi Sieber was very interesting, but the film focuses on her relationship, the "Great Love of Her Life," Carl Seidlitz, who did not even exist. To me, the most disappointing portion of the film was how they covered her involvement during the Second World War. She was very active in her support of the Allied cause and also helped fellow members of the European film industry either escape from Europe and settle in the US. The film really does not seem to properly cover this topic, as the most it shows is a scene of her paying for the phone call of one of her assistants. Additionally, the film substitutes Jean Gabin, a French actor who fought for France during the war and inspired Marlene to go overseas, for the fictional Carl. Overall, I think the acting in the movie is good, and the representations of some of the characters are fairly accurate, but the story is rather boring and too focused on romance and melodrama instead of Marlene's career and life.
-
davidturgay28 December 2001So, why is Joseph Vilsmaier so famous again? He has made so many movies and is sometimes portrayed as a german David Lean or John Huston. It's interesting that everyone ignores the fact that his films are most of the time superficial flicks, which have nothing to say. Yes, "Stalingrad" was brutal and realistic, but it didn't care about its characters at all. Yes, "Comedian Harmonists" was a great success, but it was accurate or cared about the facts? No.
"Marlene" is the latest, saddest example of this kind of filmmaking, which helps the german film to go down. Spending millions of DM, Vilsmaier wastes the money for costumes and sets, dozens of famous german actors and forgets the movie after all. And then people wonder why the film was another flop.
The movie pretends to be a biography about Marlene Dietrich, the famous german actress, who had such a interesting life. But instead of taking her life story and film it, Vilsmaier throws it away and tells a fairy-tale about a person, which never existed like that. He concentrates on about 10 years, in which she became famous, and forgets the rest. We don't get to know anything about her childhood or about her later years.
We see Marlene taking pills, sleeping with men and acting very bad. We get no reasons for any of this. We don't get explained why von Sternberg wants her so badly in his movies, even though everyone thinks she is a bad actress. We don't know why she treats everyone the way she does, including herself. We don't understand any of her motives. She acts and we have to accept it.
And as if her life was boring, they added a romance to her story, with a german officer who transforms in to a resistance fighter during WWII. This romance feels so artificial and unreal, as it really is. The nazis are again portrayed as caricatures (a typical german problem), and we never figure out what Marlene really thinks about them.
All the german actors tumble on the screen, some so unnecessary, you have to believe they're just there for the credit. Watch Christiane Paul, a really talented actress, as she has nothing more to say than a few lines or has to look sad. When she gets mad in the end, we have no clue why, or why we should care about it.
After all, another historical german epic, taking a story from real life, transforming it into a unrealistic story, with no edges. Of course this was a flop, I don't know why anyone should watch this. If you want to know anything about Marlene Dietrich, watch the documentary called "Marlene Dietrich" from Maximillian Schell. Or just watch her movies, because even there you get to know more about her, than from "Marlene". -
dora-wakeup28 November 2006Well, I have seen this movie today. I can't possibly agree with the one who said that the movie is awful. Her anti-Nazi ˝emotions˝ or what so ever are included more than just once. Person who watches can perfectly notice that she was totally against Hitlers policy, but I also heard that she moved from Germany because of Nazi-policy, so maybe this is not clearly mentioned... That, about her addiction... It's also obvious, why she was ˝addicted˝. I think the director has shown her pretty well as a star, a mother and a modern women.
Offcourse there a things that should be shown better, and there should be shown something between years 1945 and 1975, but... I still thing this is an OK movie.
And Katja Flint played her role fantastic, she really looked like her...
Still is not that bad movie as he said:) -
marky.marc18 March 2000It's a shame, that "Marlene" is not scheduled to be shown in the U.S.! Though it's almost impossible to capture the life of Marlene Dietrich director Joseph Vilsmaier ("Comedian Harmonists") did a great job. The actors (Katja Flint as Marlene, H.W.Meyer as Josef von Sternberg ...) are brilliant! Hopefully this movie will be shown in the United States, because it's absolutely worth watching ... and moreover it is for sure a no.1 candidate for the next academy awards!
-
SRSBAP20 June 2002A film that has not been picked up by a major distributor, and should be picked up, this is an excellent overlooked film that deserves a DVD/VIDEO release in the USA. Why has this film been overlooked by USA distributors ?? It is a superb biography of Marlene Dietrich. Katja Flint is excellent.