Add a Review

  • Warning: Spoilers
    Its probably no secret that the individuals 'duty' is one of the main themes in this movie. And it gracefully manages to keep a consistent theme throughout the story without watering it down.

    The main character is burdened with duties from all sides: He shall report traitors, while at the same becoming one by whistle-blowing on the artist. The artists begs him to keep quiet, which in turn means to dishonor his father and break an obligation of biblical proportions. His sister puts the responsibility of staying in an abusive family on him, while his brother forces him to keep quiet about his hiding place - by threat of breaking his skull.

    Wherever the child goes, he is presented with things he must not do, there are rare occasions of uncoditional love, mostly his interactions with humans are: '...but you must not...!'. He experiences life not in freedom but within the boundaries of duties.

    No wonder his knowledge of obligations fills hundreds of pages.

    So, in all these situations, with opposing forces of obligations, which one would be the right thing to do? Speak or keep quiet? Reveal or hide? A or B?

    In retrospect, these questions are easy to answer. But this movie puts us in the head of a child without an omniscient perspective, just at the beginning of orienting his moral compass, with magnetic forces pulling on either side.

    Its a tragedy, really.
  • Wonderful story of family ties that get untied due to an overachieving Nazi father who values duty more than his own blood. Very well played by all main cast and beautifully shot. On a side note we see how (too) many Nazis remained in power after the War. The protagonist is torn between his love for art and the pain his father causes, so the spectator feels for him as he seems to lose his mind.
  • Christian Schwochows adaptation of Siegfried Lenz' 1968 landmark novel is a visually striking and competently made movie that sadly misses many subleties that made the story come alive in the first place.

    Yes, I have read Deutschstunde not too long ago and was impressed not only by the main story and the quite suspensful thread that runs through it, but also by the honest characterisation of the people of Nordfriesland, their quirks and the subtle description of their beliefs. This was something that was dearly missed here. Of course, several side-characters were omitted from this 2019 movie version, but the main change is that the focus shifts from our protagonist young Siggi, whose thoughts we are told firsthand in the novel, to the depiction of the conflict between his father and the painter Max Ludwig Nansen. And this is where the movie fails: for a story that deals with repressed emotions and the blind need to 'do ones duty', it is played very emotional: there are several instances of flying fists, shooting guns, screaming and crying to the point where it becomes a bit unbelievable. Also, because of the neglect of the highly complex character of Siggi as our focus, we can hardly understand the change he goes through and his actions at the end of the movie can become confusing. This criticism would not be so hard if the movie would try to introduce something new to the story instead of simply retelling the main points and staying closely beneath the surface.

    Still there are strong points. The visuals of the raw northern german shoreline are beautiful, but not to the point where some movies lose itself in neverending elegic drone-footage. It is presented more like another character here and this is exactly what this movie needs. Also, some praise must go to Tobias Moretti who as the strong-willed Nansen makes us believe in the need to paint and what it means not only to him but everyone around him. He is the main reason that Deutschstunde is still recommendable and doesn't quite fail as a competent adaptation of one of the most iconic german novels of all time.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    "Deutschstunde" or "The German Lesson" is a German German-language movie from 2019, so a really new release from this year and here we have the newest collaboration by Germany's right now most famous filmmaking duo, director Christian Schwochow and writer Heike Schwochow. They are also sort of the only one I can think of right now. They have worked on several films together in the past and also worked with other filmmakers/writers before, but here they are united again. It is a really long film at easily over two hours, but it never really drags, if at all slightly at the ending. But the flaws there are really only minor compared to everything that was done right before that. First of all, it also needs to be said that this film is based on a novel by Siegfried Lenz, a German writer that everybody here in Germany knows by name really at least if they haven't read something from him, certainly one of the most impactful authors of his time. He only died a little over five years ago and that does surprise me as I thought he was older. Anyway, his story here is set in the 1940s when it can basically be seen already that Germany is losing World War II. And while there are many references about the political climate at that point, it is still much more of a character study than a historical movie really. The two grown-up lead actors are played by Ulrich Noethen and Tobias Moretti. Well, of course you always get quality with this duo, no surprise here and they deliver again. I think overall probably Noethen had the more memorable performance, but at its peak Moretti was better. With that, I mean the scene when we see Moretti say bye to his wife. I still find it awesome to see what a great career Moretti has been enoying for years now winning awards left and right and it certainly wasn't totally to be expected like this when he started on Kommissar Rex, a show that had some nice heart, but not exactly the greatest writing. Same is of course true for Karl Markovics who stems from the same show.

    Anyway, as for this film here, we have a Nazi (Noethen) who is told to make sure that a renowned painter (Moretti) will not create any new pieces because his approach is categorized as "entartete Kunst" as we say here. It is such a specific term that I don't like translating it, but you could say "degenerate art" is what the Nazis considered it, not what it was. At the same time, we learn a lot about these two and their family backgrounds. What makes things more complicated is that they were friends before that and there is even a brief mention (actually two if you include the painting at the end) of Moretti's character saving the other's life at one point. This is also why the Nazi will not rat on his (former) friend as he says himself when he finds out that he painted again. Afterwards, he does not, but for example shows the Nazi's son how to paint and causes further trouble by that. I would like to mention a few specific scenes now. One would be the comparison between the scene when they sing together and the scene at the end when they mourn another character. During the first, the Nazi is still present and part of the group, during the second, he is the one who is merely an intruder and the moment he shouts about how they have to go to the street and then fires a few shots into the air makes obvious how hopeless and alone he was at that point, even when it comes to his family. Clearly his actions stand as a symbol for the failing country of Nazi Germany at that point. It wasn't always like that though. early on, there was still the possibility of Noethen turning out as a good guy because he did not rat on his friend as I said earlier. But the longer the film goes, the more he turns into a main antagonist who is really only evil. When he hurts his youngest son's hand on the hot cooking plate, it is just as obvious as for example the scene when he tells the Nazis that his oldest son is with them and basically signs his death sentence this way. Also at the end, it shows he has not changed one bit, even if the days of Nazi Germany are over, there is not one bit of remorse in him. Noethen reminded me a bit of Klaußner in "Das weiße Band" at times in terms of his approach to the character and his ruthlessness. The film is in general fairly sobering, almost depressing, also like Das weiße Band, with color of course and not only because Dragus is in here. Every time, there was a slight bit of hope and positivity, something bad happens right after, for example the scene when we see Dragus' character swinging high up in the air and briefly afterward, there is the blood on the boy's hand, maybe an indicator to what happens with his hand later on. Or when they are singing and moments later the mail man arrives and tells brings the bad news that all the man's paintings will be confiscated. Or also in the latter parts of the film, when the painter is released that his wife dies not much later.

    As for Noethen, you could write a lot more about his character. One thing that is crucial in here is also his ego. This becomes obvious on several occasions. When his eldest son turns out to be a deserter, he talks about what people think about him, same when we find out about his daughter posing nude as a model and of course also during the scene that is the final blow to his relationship with the painter when he gets humiliated with the empty sheets of paper and the one that is not empty because as we find out eventually, his youngest son painted it, which makes him really really angry. In general, there are many moments in this film when characters have to leave and we cannot be sure if they ever return or recover. Sometimes they do (the main characters), at other times not (Wokalek, Hofmann). As for the latter two, I also want to say a few words. Wokalek I always like to see and I am glad she has been in more films again in recent years. She is really always good and her portrayal here deserves a German Film Award nomination in the supporting category. As for Hofmann, I don't like him. He was not really as bad as he is in other films this time, but this is mostly because he has hardly anything to work with. Like it seems with all he has played in movies in the last five years, his range is almost completely restricted to suffering in front of the camera. Total type-cast. This film here is really defining for his career. He enters the film with a gunshot wound he brought upon himself and the rest is crying and whining basically. Oh yeah, he also threatens his younger brother on one occasion. His role could have been played by anybody really. As for other symbolic aspects from this movie pay attention to the frequent depictions of dead animals in the first half. Skeletons basically. There is a clean connection between them and the death of art the moment that Moretti's character is not allowed to paint anymore. Overall, it is a good film, maybe not good enough for a rewatch, but the actors really hold it all together and the script isn't bad either. I have not read Lenz' book, so I cannot comment on parallels and differences really, but the way the Schwochows adapted it here, it works well overall. Then again, the subject is one I am interested in anyway, so this surely helps, even if this is clearly not a war film, not a Nazi film, not a Holocaust film etc. Like I said, the focus is on the characters and the consequences that happen to them from what is decided in the frequently mentioned "capital" that seems so far away. One thing I did not like too much was the framework really with the boy's struggling with authority and even if it is how he tells the story of what happened when he was young I could have done without that altogether. Also the part at the end about him indeed stealing the paintings I would not have missed if they hadn't included it. I can see why they did because it is fairly crucial character-wise, but I did not really dig it. Maybe just me though. overall, this one gets a thumbs-down from me and this was one of the contenders for Germany's Oscar submission this year. it did come short and that is alright, even if I kinda doubt the one they went for, a much more modern film, is really better. Anyway, we shall talk about that one one another occasion. until then, go watch "Deutschstunde". Recommended.
  • I didn't read the original novel, so the story was completely new to me. It is a wartime movie, with a village policeman (initially) forced to prohibit his friend from painting; common practice in Nazi Germany. But the story has many levels: it addresses the conflict of a father/son relationship (with the painter competing for that role) the battle between good and evil (how can any painting be bad for society?), how do we deal with populism in our own age, how can it be that hardened war criminals simply return and continue as before...? The backdrop of the German coast, with constant rain torturing the characters, complements a very intriguing story that forces the viewer to continue to watch.
  • This is literally one of the most beautifully directed historic movies out there. I cannot believe how underrated this is.

    Everything from the pacing to the acting is done very nicely, and the story is also told in a very interesting manner.

    It definitely deserves higher ratings!
  • lolipop_big13 March 2024
    I think it's a good movie. I watched so many World War II, German movies. It's the German point of view of the war. Shows how Germans had it Bad as well. Towards the end it was confusing. I did not get the ending. Good story.... Also, how some people regardless of what they went through, like the father, there are avid Nazis. Those are horrifying. Especially what we see in today's world. I feel bad for the son, he was blamed before and after the war. Sad, but interesting story. Worth watching. It's a bit slow, but overall OK. Nice scenery. Good picture, I like that it was an English. I would recommend it.
  • I didn't get into the film because I couldn't understand the concept of banning art. The visuals and the scenery are beautiful though.