MovieChat Forums > Taking Sides (2002) Discussion > So... whose side did you take?

So... whose side did you take?


Surprised no one has asked this question yet.

Personally, I ended up seeing things from Furtwängler's side. Not that I think he was 100% innocent, but the Major's argument was pretty thin.

Also, what about the archive footage at the end of them film? It sort of looked like he wiped off his palm after shaking hands with Hitler. I can only assume that's the case, otherwise I don't know why they would choose to include it (and replay it twice).


"Action is how men express romance on film." -- Kurt Wimmer

reply

On the basis of this film alone, which I just watched on DVD for the first time, I'm on Furtwangler's side. I wasn't even convinced that the Major was sincere in his pursuit of Furtwangler. He was going after him like a maniac because his superior told him that he had to get Furtwangler. He seemed to be playing the role of a Nazi interrogator, as it was presented in the film

I liked the film, but I expected it to have a bit more about the trial in which Furtwangler was acquitted. There obviously is a lot more to this story. The attorney who would defend Furtwangler in the trial was an American, right? He is seen once in the film and you can see that his job is to reveal the good in Furtwangler and have him acquitted, which he did.

While watching this, I wondered if the Major was really as maniacal and simple as the script and acting suggested here.

reply

I'm not even sure on what charges Furtwaengler COULD be found guilty. Conducting a symphony that Hitler attended is supposed to be a crime?

reply

As it was clear from the start that Furtwängler HAD to be found guilty (regardless of evidence) and the Keitel character bullied him Gestapo-style, I don't see how anyone could NOT side with the composer...

(NOTE : That is pretty much my main problem with the film, it seems awefully one-sided. )

Looking back, he admits he might have / should have done things differently, but in the end, you can't really blame him. I don't think anyone knows what it is to live in a country like that during the nazi years (which is pretty much what the Russian general says), certainly not Major Arnold.

I am not a complete idiot. Some parts are missing.

reply

I did not like the Keitel role at all, so I took Furtwangler's side. And, incidently, the man whose hand he shook at the end was not Hitler. I played it back several times, and nothing of the man resembled Hitler.

reply

I think Mr. Szabo here has made a fine and pretty difficult film for viewers.
Some of the questions he poses are very tough. Here we have a fellow who loved his art, helped Jews but yet hung out and played his music for the Nazi party.
Now how far was he to go for his German patriotism? And as for "nailing" Furtwangler, sholdn't there be a price to be paid for enhancing the Reich with a sort of respectability by performing great art for them while they murder. Just shows things aren't so simple in viewers' thoughts on music, art, patriotism and morality.

reply

It was Goebbels.

reply

If he had left Germany in 1934, would that have saved one single Jewish life? If the Nazis had lost their cultural poster boy, would the war have been shortened by one minute?

No, practically and objectively there could be no justification for such a prosecution.

However, who could be objective at the time? We saw some ghastly footage of Belsen after the allies moved in. It would have been worse in colour and far worse yet in real life with the smell added and seen at close quarters, a deeply traumatizing experience. And, of course, the Major would surely have lost personal friends in the conflict. You can't blame people at the time for feeling the Germans deserved everything they got.

reply

It's a pretty abstract argument, either way. Furtwangler wasn't an active Nazi himself, and did help individual musicians escape, but became a tool of the regime through his service. Having artists like Furtwangler and Leni Riefenstahl as their cultural face granted them legitimacy. How evil could Nazi Germany be with such great artists at their disposal?

Nothing's so simple as that, of course. I don't think Furtwangler's "guilt" is anywhere near as complete as Riefenstahl's, who made propaganda films seen by millions around the world. Of course, I consider Riefenstahl (based on her writings) more of an amoral "artist" who didn't give a damn about anything but her movies, which is equally odious to my mind.

On the other hand, what was his alternative? Refuse Hitler and Goering's support and lose his job, perhaps even face arrest or persecution? It's easy to say "flee the country" with the benefit of hindsight, but abandoning one's job and country for the uncertainties of exile isn't easy. And I'd agree that painting a direct line from Furtwangler's music to Auschwitz is pretty absurd.

I'm afraid that you underestimate the number of subjects in which I take an interest!

reply

Why did Americans want so much Furtwängler condemned, since he was not a party member, like von Karajan and may be others? It's something he asked too the major, if I remember well. There were many artists active in the Third Reich, like the great actor Gustaf Gründgens, to whom nothing happened. Why such a vehemence against Furtwängler?

reply