Helge Schneider does not like the finished product.


Before I start, I have not seen the movie, yet. I wanted to see it, but did not because Helge Schneider said shortly after he saw the finished product himself, that this was neiter the movie he expected it to be, nor did he like it very much.

"Dass der Film so anders wird, hätte ich nicht gedacht. Der Fokus war ursprünglich auf Hitler. Jetzt ist er mit aller Gewalt auf der jüdischen Geschichte. Es geht nur noch darum, wie Hitler gesehen werden soll: nämlich als Schwächling. Das ist mir zu profan. Hätte ich das gewusst, hätte ich vielleicht gar nicht mitgespielt.“

"I did not think that the movie would end up being that differnt. The orignal focus was on Hitler himself. Now it is forced upon the Jewish story. All it is about now is, how Hitler should be seen: namely as a weakling. That is too dull for me. If I had known, I might have never done it."


I think the production company was a bit afraid of making a movie of this kind. But since Dani Levy, a jew, wrote and directed, they probably thought nothing could happen to them in terms of political correctness and stuff. Of course he was given all the final descicions and the final cut.
And what did he do with all his liberties? I don`t know. I have not seen it. But why did he do it?

reply

You can read in an interview that Levy decided to modify the movie, the original version is seen and narrated more from Hitler's prospective (which apparently was too disturbing to a German test screening audience) to its current form in German theatres. If you want to see the original version on the future DVD, write a little Email to:
[email protected]

reply

Yea, I know he decided, but why did he decide so? That's what I want to know.

I don`t believe it was "too disturbing" to a German audience. There are Hitler TV Sketches and Comics all over Germany that make fun of him. I wonder why this one in particular should be disturbing.

reply

It was too disturbing because it was narrated from Hitler's perspective. Levy said in an interview:

"Ich mochte die ursprüngliche Form sehr, muß ich wirklich sagen. Die Idee war die, daß Hitler heute, 2006, noch lebt. Als 117jähriger Mann, unsterblich, unauslöschbar. In einer ersten Fassung sollte er in einem Wellness-Hotel in Berchtesgaden leben und darauf warten, daß er als Reichskanzler wieder gebraucht wird. Er führte den Film stimmlich ein, ein uralter Mann erzählt von sich und von früher, und es endete dann auch wieder mit ihm, Hitler hatte das Schlußwort. Ich habe den Film so gemacht, ich habe das auch so vertreten - bis wir ihn das erste Mal einem Testpublikum vorgeführt haben. Die Leute, es waren fast 400, waren entsetzt. Die hatten das Gefühl, Hitler sei die Stimme des Films. Der erzählt den Film, und niemand rückt das gerade. Das ist zwar als philosophisches Modell interessant, aber die Zuschauer hatten das Gefühl, der Film bleibt in einem zynischen Rahmen. Das Publikum will wohl doch eine moralische Sicherheit spüren."

http://www.faz.net/s/Rub8A25A66CA9514B9892E0074EDE4E5AFA/Doc~E48DA14F7D47E433687740BB65D8F0742~ATpl~Ecommon~Scontent.html

reply

The thing is, seen from the perspective of the Jewish character, Hitlers behavior is not always funny.
There are particular scenes that are funny in themselves, but become dull because they are placed after more serious scenes dealing with the mass murder.
Because of that comedy suffers, but the film remains (in my opinion) good.

reply