This is How Movies Should Be Made

A Brilliant Conflict

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

Having long been familiar with Lang's early German silent work (I watched Metropolis and Die Frau im Mond as an adolescent), I was eager to experience Die Nibelungen. I was familiar with the narrative, having read an English prose translation of the Nibelungenlied during my student days. It is from the poem, rather than Wagner's opera cycle, that Lang wisely chooses to source most of his material.Fantasy has never been my favourite genre but the result here of the marriage of the great director and the great source material is simply stunning. The greatest achievement, to my mind, is that it manages to balance the epic with the personal making this journey through vast sets an emotional one. Even though the characters as written are largely one dimensional, the actors and actresses manage to overcome this and the absence of dialogue to make them sympathetic, rounded figures.Much has been written about the grandiose sets and the way they foreshadow Hitler's ideological understanding of architecture. Irrespective of that, they work in providing scale to the story. A petty tribal dispute becomes an epic story which will impact on the course of European history.Nevertheless, with regard to politics, origin myths are extremely powerful and have enormous power to shape a people. The Romans were very much formed by the story of the clash between Romulus and Remus, whilst the ancient Israelites would not have been so distinctive without the powerful, strikingly different story found in Genesis that contrasted so sharply from the myths of their neighbours. Likewise, as a story at the very foundation of the German character, this myth should be treated with caution. Here duty and loyalty take precedence over all other virtues, including compassion and justice, the female characters are burning for vengeance, most disturbingly, warriors are depicted in an heroic light. Of course, these are all traits the Nazis would exalt. It is to the enormous credit of modern-day Germans that they have shed most of these traits so I wonder to what degree the the Nibelungenlied still resonates with them.Finally, the film features a wonderful nature/season motif, which climaxes with the shot of the bush transforming into a skull. These tribes-people are slowly evolving into Christians yet they remain close to the pagan/nature world at this stage of the Dark Ages.Overall, this film has brilliant sets, cinematography, acting and motifs but I feel that it does to some extent foreshadow the dreadful events that were soon to occur. It should act as a warning to young nations like the Australia, of the dangers of an origin story that seeks to foolishly glorify events like Anzac Day.Nevertheless, politics aside, this is a stunning film for its technical achievements, huge scale and sheer emotion.

It has to be said that, technically, the first part of Fritz Lang's epic fantasy adventure is an absolutely stunning piece of cinema, especially given the time in which it was made. However, over eight decades on, the film hasn't aged all that well...but that's a criticism that doesn't bear much weight. The film is almost two and a half hours long, and this running time becomes even more astounding when you consider that there's another equally long segment to follow! Die Nibelungen is adapted from Nordic legend and works from a screenplay written by the genius Fritz Lang and his wife at the time, Thea von Harbou; who also worked with Lang on his most famous works; M and Metropolis. The plot follows the heroic Siegfried, who travels to Worms after hearing of the beautiful sister of the King, Kriemhild. However, in order to marry the beautiful Kriemhild, Siegfreud must first win a bride for her brother. The main reason why the film works is because, much like Metropolis; it's so astounding to look at. Lang gives the film a real sense of wonder by way of fantasy elements such as dwarfs and magic powers, and it's amazing that such a piece of cinema could have been made in 1924. The standout of the 143 minute running time is the section that sees our valiant hero slaying a dragon. The effects here are better than those that can be seen in some modern films today, and the fact that the director had the audacity to show a man fighting a dragon deserves respect. On a personal level, this film didn't do a great deal for me; but fans of classic art cinema won't be disappointed.

I'll say this up front: this film can move very slowly at points. Also, I saw it in a theater with live piano accompaniment, and it's likely to be much less impressive on a smaller screen. I doubt the video print is very good, since I am familiar with other tapes that that company has distributed. Despite its slow points, when Lang and crew create the numerous set pieces, watch out: you're in for some of the greatest scenes of filmdom. I'd also like to point out that, as someone who is quite familiar with the original poem, I'll tell you that source material often moves a lot slower than this film does. As a technical marvel, I don't think some of the stuff here was surpassed until very recently, except maybe in King Kong. It's even more amazing to behold than Metropolis, Lang's next and much more famous film. All of the effects might seem dated now, but anyone who appreciates early cinema will easily fall in love. The film opens with Siegfried's infamous battle against the dragon. A bit of trivia: this scene is not in The Nibelungenlied. It is briefly mentioned in the first lay by Hagen as having happened a while ago. However, this is the one scene from this movie which is widely remembered, and for good reason. The dragon is amazingly created, nearly on the level of the dinosaurs from The Lost World and King Kong. Unlike them, though, it is a puppet and not stop motion. As far as puppetry goes, it surpasses most of the muppets of Return of the Jedi by leaps and bounds. Unfortunately, as lifelike as they made it, the dragon is not at all that fierce. It almost looks like a friendly dog (it even wags its tail as Siegfried valiantly rushes at it, sword aloft). When it is supposed to be roaring at Siegfried, the audience was giggling; it looked more like it was yelping. As a result, the depiction of Siegfried begins to come off as satirical (probably not intended, but it makes things more interesting). There is a major strain of Niebelungenlied scholarship which sees Siegfried not as the hero, but as the aggressor.The second major set piece involves the battle with Alberich, the Nibelung, an episode that occurs a bit later in the poem, from whom he wins the cloak of invisibility, a horde of treasure, and Balmung, his famous sword. The mythological characters in this episode are awesome to behold in their costuming (and simply in the casting, which is perfect throughout; the creatues in the film's first scene, in which Siegfried is forging his sword, are great, too), especially the dwarves who balance the pot full of treasure on their backs. The best scene in the film occurs in the next chapter, the dream of Kriemhild, which is animation done in sand. Other great scenes in the film include the crossing of the lake of fire, the battle between Brunhild and Gunther (with an invisible Siegfried helping him), the wooing of Brunhild, the quarrel between the queens, and the hunt. As far as I remember, only the war with Denmark is left out, which happens in the poem before they go to Iceland for Brunhild. It's not missed.Special attention must be given to the miraculous casting. Paul Richter plays Siegfried as the hero to beat all heroes. With his blonde, flowing hair, he marches across the world blindly performing great deeds and talking to birds (the look on Richter's face when he starts to hear birds talk is priceless). He's too naive to see the trouble he causes as he dishes out treasure to the poor (a wonderful touch; Lang doesn't even draw attention to how this angers the Burgundians in their dialogue, but only in their expressions). As many scholars have proposed, Siegfried's actions all suggest that Worms is in iminent danger of being usurped by him. Margarethe Schoen may not have been the best choice for Kriemhild. The actress is so manly that I assumed that an actor was playing her. She is supposed to be the most beautiful woman in the world. The actress does emote quite well, however. Now, Hannah Ralph, who plays Brunhild, exudes a manliness that her part requires. She's supposed to be a warrior maiden. Ralph does a great job conveying Brunhild's cunning, bitterness, and cruelty. Theodor Loos, who plays King Gunther, is absolutely perfect. I couldn't have imagined him better. His face exhibits both his moral predicament and his supreme inadequacy that the poem spells out so clearly. Hans Adalbert Schlettow plays Hagen. His costume may be a bit overwrought (a huge, gnarly beard, a furry eye patch, and an enormous helmet with eagle wings reaching a foot and a half upwards), but the actor's perfect for the role, although he might be too old. His age makes me wonder how he's going to fight like a demon in Kriemhild's Wrath, the second part of the film, which I'll see tomorrow. I'm very eager to see how Lang and Thea von Harbou, his wife ans screenwriter, will make the remaining half of the epic interesting on film. It's nothing but battles. Volker and Gunther's brothers are also well cast, although they'll probably be more important in the second half, that is, if the poem is followed as closely as it is here. 8/10.

When I saw this wonderfully exciting adventure film, it got me thinking, "Why can't people make films like this anymore?". Partly why the film makers don't make films like this anymore is that they are so occupied in having the best special effects around and don't give a hoot about the characters, story or detail (Jurassic Park, Lost World, Independence Day, Armageddon are only a small part). I would love to go and see a film that have real characters from these make-believe worlds. There are so many movies today that have Americans in a make-believe world, acting and talking like Americans, this makes me sick all over. This movie has real characters we care about in a believable world. This is partly why I love silent films so much. It is the acting and not the dialog that the viewer gets to know the character through.This film has all the elements that makes up for a good adventure film. Very good story, exciting action, wonderful sets, beautiful photography, chillingly wonderful villains and some of the best special effects I've seen (for the time's standard). I especially love the trick photography to make Siegfried invisible and casting a shadow even though he is. I'm looking forward to watching Kriemhild's Revenge.If you haven't seen this movie and love adventure movies, see it. It is so exciting and magical that you'll remember it always when you see a bad adventure movie, something that is normal today.