MovieChat Forums > John Rabe (2009) Discussion > Is it just me?

Is it just me?

posted 15 years ago by sweetinjury-1
26 replies | jump to latest

This movie is out in hong kong recently during the German Film Festival of 2009. Seeing this as just an opportunity for me to practise a little of my poor German, I went into the cinema without much expectation, nor any knowledge of the story plot.

As it seems to me that not a lot of people on this board have actually watched the movie, i decide not to spoil it to any extend. But anyway, as a person who is not often emotional and hardly shred a tear for movies, i started crying 15 minutes after John Rabe's begun. I cried on and off throughout the movie and thought it was a painful experience. I have never in my life cried so much for a movie.

At the end of it, tears came streaming down and I realized that the whole audience applauded for it. Then the next thing i realized, was that at least one third of them stayed behind until all the credits finished rolling - i believe that was not because people wanted to see who has contributed to the production, but because they were still emotionally unsettled.

The movie was not especially violent, nor cruelly realistic. I cried not out of empathy but out of impact.

I dont know what was wrong with me, but after all the credits have gone i left the cinema, and i continued crying and crying hysterically in a park nearby and wasn't able to pull myself together until at least half an hour later.

Then when i got back home i immediately searched for any film reviews, and was disappointed that not a lot is available (perhaps it's cos it is german, instead of hollywoodian). Those available are provide either only the plot or say that it is a mediocre movie without giving much proof.

I don't understand. Is it just me?

[–] moviehit2005 14 years ago

I cried a little too , I already know most story about it ,but When I saw some picture I felt sad and angry ,Tears almost came out .I only watched the Chinese vision ,Now I am looking for a better vision .It seened not too much people knew this movie all over the world.

Sorry FOR MY POOR ENGLISH

[–] thebucketrider 14 years ago

I'm not sure what you're asking, sweetinjury-1. Is it just you who found the film emotionally moving? I don't think so. Why are reviews of it scarce? I assume it just doesn't have a big distributor, so few reviewers have a had a chance to watch it. (I don't think it's because it's German--you'll find more than a few review of Der Leben der Anderen, for example.) Personally, I didn't respond to it tearfully, but I can see why one would. I thoroughly enjoyed it and I don't usually like films set during the wartime.

[–] orchid84 14 years ago

I also was emotionally unsettled by this film, maybe not to the extent you describe though. Everytime I see a movie about the atrocaties that happened in WWII I get emotional, just because it's another realisation of how cruel people are. (Mind you, have to say that the crap Hollywood produces at times doesn't get to me as much, they don't seem to grasp the pure cruelty that has happened).
I feel really bad about the fact that what happened in Asia isn't portrayed much in cinema, even though horrible things happened there aswell!! The Japanese had such a huge part, they were so cruel. For example, my family was in Japanese prison camps in Indonesia, where they have been tortured for years and barely kept alive. Where do you ever see these things? If anyone knows if movies have been made about that, please let me know.

[–] triumph-tsx 14 years ago

If it ain't the suffering of the Jews then Hollywood ain't really interested- and why shouldn't they concentrate on the Holocaust ? If it wasn't for the powerful Jewish producers in Hollywood, the full enormity of the horror of this event would never have been told, properly if at all. I douubt any country outside the Wast have bothered- to their shame !

The horror of man's inhumanity to man can never be portrayed enough so we don't forget to recognise such wrongs and stop them.

Sadly, the suffering of others like Rwandans (Hotel Rwanda being an honorable exception), Palastinians and Bosnian Muslims isn't really going to attract Hollywood money -especially the Palastinians !- so their story, like the rape Of Nanking- is not going to be financed by Hollywood.

Columbia Pictures owned by the Japanese Sony corp is more inclined to kill a film like John Rabe than promote it as would be the case for Jewish producers approaching a film on Israeli atrocities in Gaza, Lebanon etc . They would no more undermine their political interests than the Japanese or anyone else- so what would you expect ?

John Rabe would never have been made by Hollywood- Jews forking out money about a good Nazi- get real !!!

Rabe was a hero and this film had to be made- not all Nazis were bad as not all Nazionists are bad either.

I was in such rage at the impunity that the Japanese committed their atrocities and their self-denial as well as the impotence of the international community - I cheered when the boy shot the rapists, even !

[–] ahaygood 14 years ago

I know this is a bit off topic for this board, but the subject matter was brought up. There is no mass Israeli atrocity against the Palestinians. The Palestinians (or at least the terrorist that rule over them) are responsible for the horrors of the Palestinian condition. Please understand this. Most Arabs and other Middle easterners abhor the Palestinians. Nobody is on their side and neither should you. It is true that Palestinain weapons kill Israeli innocents and Israeli weapons kill Palestinian innocents, but not all killing is equal. International Law of Armed Conflict places the entirety of the blame for civilian deaths among the Palestinians (yes even those that are killed by Israeli weapons) back on the Palestinians. Why is this? It's because the Palestinian terrorist use a atrocious and horrific form of deception called perfidy that is completely illegal. They basically seek protected status under the law for their agents of terror by hiding them amongst innocent civilians. When Israeli's are forced to retaliate out of interest of self preservation, the blood of the innocents that the terrorist use as human shields is on the hands of the terrorist. Please understand this. The atrocities are committed by the Palestinian terrorist not the Israeli's. Beyond this, the Palestinians have been known to booby trap populated apartments, hospitals, and zoo's (for the PETA among us). Why would they do this? So that when the Israeli's try to use precision engagement in and around these structures to take out the terrorist, explosions, rigged by the terrorist will go off maximizing civilian and animal casualties. The Israelis go through great pains to try to minimize innocent losses, and the Palestinians delight in making the Israeli's look like butchers even if the swinging cleaver is in Palestinian's own hands. The Israeli's want peace so badly. If the Palestinians stopped fighting, so would the Israeli's. If the Israeli's stopped fighting, the Palestinians would step up their attacks. The Israelis have done everything they can to pacify the Palestinians including giving them hard fought for land and moved established settlements, but attacks actually increased. There is no way to pacify a people whose primary condition for peace is the complete decimation of the Israeli nation. Please understand this.

[–] triumph-tsx 14 years ago

The Japanese, Nazis, fascists, falange said the same as the nazionists- the western press censor the horrors of Isaraeli atrocities - if you saw what they did then you'd change your mind. Children blown apart by Nazionit war criminals and their odious toady apologists in the media (some from a misguided allegiance to their co-religonists) and the ususal spin and lies from the Israeli propaganda ministry.

Collective punishment is what makes Israelis the worse than Nazis or Japanese- at least the Nazis used to execute 10 innocents for each of their killed and not the hundred the Nazionists do.

Exodus celebrates Nazionist terrorists- it's propaganda from the backers of the winning side - no different from Goebells

[–] snow-does-burn 14 years ago

ahaygood,

Take a look at this photo: Tank vs Rock. Scroll down to the bottom of the page.

http://www.hotpolitics.com/

What the Israelis doing in Palestin is absolute crime, there's no doubt about that.

- Love is a mix of art and spirit

[–] ahaygood 13 years ago

Your evidence of evidence of a Israeli atrocities is a snapshot in time of a living breathing kid in front of a tank? There's no evidence of anything. Pictures can be made to say anything and there is no context. Lets assume the worst and the kid was run over. It is a well known tactic that the sadist and death lovers will send their kids in front of moving convoys to be ran over (a win by negative press) or effectively stop the convoy so it can be ambushed( a win by death of troops). That is the sadist terrorist that exist in that world. Here are two quick questions for you. What would happen if all of Palestine laid down it's arms? What would happen if all of Israel laid down it's arms. Its quite simple. An independent Palestinian state and peace in the Middle east would be the answer to the first question. And the mass slaughter Jews and eventual Muslim state in what we now call Israel would be the answer to the second.

[–] snow-does-burn 13 years ago

Not just any crime, it's crime against humanity. And I'm a tory.

- Love is a mix of art and spirit

[–] mccurdy444 12 years ago

The Palestinians are fighting for their homeland, just as the Jews did. You may forget, or perhaps never knew, that many people died by the hand of jewish terrorists ( or, as they called themselves, "Freedom Fighters.") It is the height of hypocrisy for Israelis do blame the Palestinians for what they did themselves. Remember, the Palestinians were evicted from their homes of hundreds of years as a political settlement for the Jews. You think it is black and white, but there is a lot of gray for both sides.

[–] craigbhill 9 years ago

Sorry, apologist for Israeli atrocities, but your propaganda continues to sicken those of us who know better. WHERE, pray tell, is the Israeli Oscar Schindler or John Rabe who aids, comforts, protects and saves Palestinian innocents from the demonic evil of NazIsrael?

~ Native Angeleno

[–] Unwanted_Birdtamer 14 years ago

There was a recent American made documentary, Nanking, which has some Hollywood actors reading the diaries and letters of several of the International Committee members (mostly those of John Rabe, Robert Wilson and Minnie Vautrin), mixed with real footage and interviews with survivors. Not quite the same scale as the John Rabe film, but maybe it could happen (after all, both Schindler's List and The Pianist have sympathetic Nazi or Nazi collaborators and did well).

Come, we must press against the tide of naughtiness. Mind your step.

[–] yoshi_1554 13 years ago

Have you ever seen Paradise Road with Glenn Close? Its about a bunch of women in a Japanese prison camp in Sumatra. Possibly similar?

Here it is:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119859/

[–] Fentoozler420 13 years ago

There are a couple of excellent movies about Japanese POW camps. To End All Wars with Kiefer Sutherland and King Rat (based on James Clavell's book) are both pretty good depictions of what Imperial Japan did to people. (Coincidentally, James Clavell actually based King Rat on his own experiences in a Japanese POW camp.)

These don't really get into civilian camps, but the conditions would have been about the same in both.

[–] jerry4444 14 years ago

I was having second thoughts about buying this DVD, but after reading your experience, I thought, maybe it;s worth it after all. I was afraid that it might be overly sentimental and kitchy. But it might not be the case, it seems.

[–] lee8798 14 years ago

Sweet... you're correct when you note that there's a world of difference between the quality of this film and the reviews which it has gotten in the western media.

Americans have created this narrative in which they're the Dudley Do-Right heroes, knights in shining armor who saved Europe from the evil Nazis, and thus Americans could never, ever do wrong, or stand by and watch evil have its way.

They do not teach their children that Charles Lindbergh, the Taft family, Henry and Edsel Ford, the Harrimans, JP Morgan, Alan Dulles, Prescott Bush (GW Bush's grandpa), IBM, ITT, Dow, GE, Standard Oil, and so many others were in business with or allied with Hitler and the Nazis.

They do not teach their children that Standard Oil's subsidiary, the Ethyl Corporation, provided the Nazis with the patent and secret formula for making Tetra-Ethyl Lead for leaded gasoline, which prolonged the war by more than two years, helping Wall St drive England and France even deeper into debt.

They do not teach their children that close to 2/3 of the Nazi party's financing till 1933 came from Edsel Ford. They do not tell their children that Hitler's forced sterilization program was set up by American scientists and lawyers from the Harriman's Cold Harbor Springs project, the American Eugenics Society, which had been helping the US government forcibly sterilizing mostly poor black children for decades before Hitler seized power.

So yes Sweet, you're right when you say this movie isn't being given a fair shake. Americans don't want their kids seeing this movie, because it makes America look bad. It shows a Nazi helping save lives while the British and Americans sat on their hands and did nothing.

Which will make many Americans ask WHY they sat on their hands and did nothing. Which would lead to them doing some research and finding out that the Republican Party, led by Charles Lindbergh and the Taft family, and supported by Wall Street, forced Franklin Roosevelt to sit on his hands and do nothing, because the GOP and Wall St were in business with Hitler and his Nazis, and making loads of money off the use of Jewish slave labor.

And we can't have the truth being told to Americans about Wall Street or the Republicans now, can we?

Peace

[–] Unwanted_Birdtamer 14 years ago

It shows a Nazi helping save lives while the British and Americans sat on their hands and did nothing.

I don't disagree with your other points, but this really? What exactly was Minnie Vautrin doing (refashioned as Valérie Dupres in the film)? Or Miner Searle Bates, another leader in the Committee, who visited the Japanese embassy every single day to protest against the atrocities, receiving repeated threats and even assaulted by the Japanese military for it; and who along with 2 other Americans smuggled out letters and affidavits to anyone they could outside of Nanking so the world would know what was happening? Or Dr. Robert Wilson (while they may have changed Vautrin's nationality or not really focused on the rest of the committee in the film, Wilson's contributions definitely were highlighted)? Or finally what about the rest of the International Committe--consisting in total of 12 Americans, 3 British, 1 Dane, and 3 Germans? While Rabe was the only head of the Committee, the rest of them were in the thick of things just as much as him, and many of them stayed on in Nanking after Rabe left. Although none of these people's governments got involved or actively supported them, John Rabe certainly wasn't acting with the backing of Germany either, as evidenced by his disgraced status after arriving home.

Come, we must press against the tide of naughtiness. Mind your step.

[–] Miss_Sui_Generis 13 years ago

Thank you for pointing that out, Unwanted Birdtamer. You stated verifiable facts.

In 1931, Japan invaded Machuria and set up a puppet government. In 1937, Shanghai and Nanking, among other cities, were besieged and destroyed.The Japanese invasion of China-and the atrocities committed- was not ignored in the US. Nor did the US government or the citizens sit on their collective hands. Economic sanctions against Japan by the USA were strongly enforced right up until the bombing of Pearl Harbor. China was an ally of the USA during WWII.

I've read many anti-USA rants on IMdB, but lee's was one of the nastiest.

Send lawyers,guns and money/The *beep* has hit the fan

[–] Fentoozler420 13 years ago

To further your point, Miss Sui, the attack on Pearl Harbor was directly related to the US withholding oil from Japan. The US withheld oil because of the war that Japan started in Asia. Sitting on their hands? The US government was the only government actively taking steps against Japan at the onset of war in the Asian theater.

(Also, since the US didn't actively engage in the European theater until after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, it is 100% accurate to say that WWII was an American war over oil.)

[–] tempestnam 14 years ago

Americans have created this narrative in which they're the Dudley Do-Right heroes, knights in shining armor who saved Europe from the evil Nazis, and thus Americans could never, ever do wrong, or stand by and watch evil have its way.

Not really. We're more questioning of a lot of things these days.

But in all honesty...would Europeans have rather been living under the other victor of WWII? Stalin? Really?

How about we ask those on the eastern side how it was as compared to the western side who benefited from the Marshall Act, and other programs to rebuild?

They do not teach their children that Charles Lindbergh, the Taft family, Henry and Edsel Ford, the Harrimans, JP Morgan, Alan Dulles, Prescott Bush (GW Bush's grandpa), IBM, ITT, Dow, GE, Standard Oil, and so many others were in business with or allied with Hitler and the Nazis.

I'm more than willing to agree that many Americans were in business. And even the results of WWII being favorable you still have to consider that financiers love wars.

At the same time, European business didn't shy away from Germany either. And most were too busy acquiescing to Hitler thinking he would go away.

They do not teach their children that Standard Oil's subsidiary, the Ethyl Corporation, provided the Nazis with the patent and secret formula for making Tetra-Ethyl Lead for leaded gasoline, which prolonged the war by more than two years, helping Wall St drive England and France even deeper into debt.

I'd have to look further into that. But off the top of my head, Germany was invested in coal to oil research during a lot of the war anyway because they had limited oil resources and they knew that. Given the BMWs, Siemens, and on and on, Heck, they were ahead of the US in lots of areas of research.

Including Jet Engines, Rockets, Stealth Aircraft, etc, etc.

They do not teach their children that close to 2/3 of the Nazi party's financing till 1933 came from Edsel Ford. They do not tell their children that Hitler's forced sterilization program was set up by American scientists and lawyers from the Harriman's Cold Harbor Springs project, the American Eugenics Society, which had been helping the US government forcibly sterilizing mostly poor black children for decades before Hitler seized power.

It might shock you that a great deal of America's population at the time was European descending. Among them, Germans. But I'm sure no Europeans were helping them either...

Business people behave the way they do. It's mostly deplorable. But it's independent of where they are from. It's hardly an American or European phenomenon.

So yes Sweet, you're right when you say this movie isn't being given a fair shake. Americans don't want their kids seeing this movie, because it makes America look bad. It shows a Nazi helping save lives while the British and Americans sat on their hands and did nothing.

Uh, yeah, false. There was plenty of other countries (aside from the US) represented by people there trying to get the Japanese to stop what they were doing.

Again, that's independent of nationality really. To break things down that way is a little naive. The actions of the people in the movie were taken individually, we should be looking at those people who allow their humanity to come thru and see what that says.

If we really want to argue, John Rabe made his money off Siemen's exploiting Chinese people. Just because he gave a little back doesn't change that.

Which will make many Americans ask WHY they sat on their hands and did nothing. Which would lead to them doing some research and finding out that the Republican Party, led by Charles Lindbergh and the Taft family, and supported by Wall Street, forced Franklin Roosevelt to sit on his hands and do nothing

Again, it might shock you, but if you go back to the time period the majority of Americans (at times over 70 or 80%) opposed the US getting into the war. The polls showed that even into 1941.

If you're sitting POTUS and 70-80% of the populace opposes something, it's hard to get it done.

because the GOP and Wall St were in business with Hitler and his Nazis, and making loads of money off the use of Jewish slave labor.

I think you're on one side of things (particularly hating the GOP, that's fine). But there were plenty of Dems in the government too.

You seem to want to break things down to generalities and assume that's how people behave.

AS AN ASIDE:

I'm negative on this movie cause it simply wasn't that good. Sorry.

[–] !!!deleted!!! (64899393) 8 years ago

If we really want to argue, John Rabe made his money off Siemen's exploiting Chinese people. Just because he gave a little back doesn't change that.

'A little'?

[–] Buckaroo-Robot-Monster 11 years ago

Check out The Counsel of the Gods, and East German film based on finding of a subcommittee of the Nuremburg trial folks.

[–] tempestnam 14 years ago

i started crying 15 minutes after John Rabe's begun. I cried on and off throughout the movie and thought it was a painful experience. I have never in my life cried so much for a movie.

Really?

This movie didn't make an emotional connection to me. I suppose that all depends on our personal experience and what gets to us or doesn't.

It's really a rather direct comparison to "Schindler's List" - They were both business men, trying to do the right thing, while still within a system. But Schindler's List blows this movie away.

[–] hartofavalon 10 years ago

To the OP: you certainly weren't the only one. I found the film difficult to watch, and emotionally disturbing. I felt sick when we learned why Dupres had cut all her students' hair off. I can't imagine a situation where you have to make young women look more masculine in an attempt to prevent their rape, and then have to protect their innocence by telling them it's just lice. That really drove home for me the extent of the atrocities. But I didn't actually cry until Langshu's baby brother had to shoot the two Japanese officers who were trying to rape her. And this happens right after their father has been murdered. I cannot imagine the psychological trauma that boy grew up with. Of all the atrocities, that struck me the most.

I've heard others say the film was disturbing to them, but that they didn't cry. I wonder if it's just that some people feel a closer connection to the situation. I'm a Chinese-American (my parents knew people at Nanking) and it sounds like the OP lives near Hong Kong, so perhaps it feels more real for us than others.

[–] craig-buckie 8 years ago

Is it just me or does anyone else have a problem with posts related to any Chinese historical incident, especially those posts relating to Nanjing?

Why do they always seem to be following a script?

Are they written by government agents trying to extend official government views outside 'The Great Firewall'? Or are they done by an increasingly hyper-nationalistic and chauvinistic Mainland Chinese; people holding views that have been cultivated in online echo chambers, people seeking to join in on the passive-aggressive victimhood game that poses as political discussion in certain circles in the West?

Is it just me or does anyone else have a problem in deciding which possibility is worse? Is anyone else curious as to what end they are posted in the first place?

[–] !!!deleted!!! (64899393) 8 years ago

Is it just me or does anyone else have a problem with posts related to any Chinese historical incident, especially those posts relating to Nanjing?

Why do they always seem to be following a script?

Explain.