(West Germany 1984 923m) DVD1/2
Aka. Heimat: Eine Deutsche Chronik/Homeland
A 1938 film, starring Zarah Leander
p/d Edgar Reitz w Edgar Reitz, Peter Steinbach ph Gernot Roll ed Heidi Handorf m Nikos Mamangakis art Franz Bauer
Marita Breuer (Maria Wiegand-Simon), Michael Lesch (young Paul Simon), Dieter Schaad (older Paul Simon), Karin Kienzler (Pauline Simon), Eva Maria Bayerswaltes (older Pauline Simon), Rüdiger Weigang (Eduard Simon), Karin Rasenack (Lucie), Peter Harting (Hermann Simon), Jörg Richter (young Hermann Simon), Gertrude Bredel (Katharina Simon), Willi Berger (Mathias Simon), Johannes Lobewein (Alois Wiegand), Kurt Wagner (Glasisch-Karl), Eva Marie Schneider (Marie-Goot), Manfred Kühn (Wirt), Hans-Jürgen Schaltz (Wilfried Wiegand), Jörg Hube (Otto Wohlleben), Sabine Wagner (Martha), Helga Bender (Martina), Arno Lang (Kröber),
Just think for a minute of that magical photo library in Shooting the Past and let’s assume a fiction within the fiction and make this proposition; if there was a small cardboard box on a shelf in that establishment marked Schabbach, Hunsrück, Germany (c.1919-1982), could the photographs therein, many of them taken by local resident Eduard Simon, have told the story that Edgar Reitz and his collaborators here unfold? The answer is of course negative, and yet having seen the lives taking place, each of the photographs we see in the narrated recaps at the beginning of individual episodes strikes a memory, which of course sums up the dual magic of photographs; instant remembrance for those who witnessed, and a source of much fantasy for those who do not.
In truth it’s impossible to do Reitz’s achievement justice in a mere page, and trying to describe the plot is ultimately superfluous. Fundamentally we see a small German village age from just after World War I in 1919 through to 1982, as the villagers go through the rise of Nazism, the second war and post-modernism. And though the central character is generally seen to be Breuer’s Maria, who we see age, like the century, from 19 to her death at 82, the real protagonist is Wagner’s village idiot who is not as idiotic as he seems and provides the nostalgic narration. His eventual death, at the series’ finale, provides the most fitting of endings, wistful, poetic and wholly miraculous.
In truth, Heimat shows that the title is as much a state of mind as an actual place, and is a work for which the very adjective ‘miraculous’ was created, a miracle of a film which, though intended to be viewed and premiered on the big screen, manages to be both pure TV and cinema. The gorgeous photography reminded some of the tone of Tarkovsky’s Stalker and The Sacrifice, further enhanced by the cutting between black and white to colour (and even sepia) and back again. In reality, the monochrome adds to the period authenticity (colour only really takes over in the final episode), and the use of colour prior to then gives rise to some beautiful moments of dramatic emphasis (think of the Nazi flags highlighted in red or the red rubies in the death’s head jewellery). And one such use of colour truly does take the breath away, as a young war bride has fifty red carnations thrown at her feet from her brother-in-law flying past in a commandeered aircraft, which suddenly bloom in full colour in her hands. Equally magical on an emotional level is the village idiot’s being the only one to understand the influence of nature’s sounds on Hermann’s music, while the darker side is perfectly summed up in Wilfried’s shocking analogy between the Jews and a chimney at a Christmas gathering. As for the individual contributions, there just isn’t the time or room to do them justice; suffice it to say the imperious Breuer as Maria and the unforgettable Wagner as Glasisch stand out amongst a peerless ensemble. Particularly brilliant in the way it shows Nazism’s slow insidious doctrinisation of otherwise good folk, Reitz’s village becomes a microcosm of German society in the 20th century, finally showing how the eponymous term itself is no more, existing only in the collective memory. “Killing time is murder” we are told, but never was the spending of fifteen hours of anyone’s life more rewarding.
Click on names for archives
Writers/Founders
Another brilliant essay by Allan of a marathon film that puts THE BEST OF YOUTH to shame, and as all-encompassing an examination of a nation’s culture amidst turbulence an dupheaval that has ever been committed to celluloid. Followed by the equally fantastic HEMAT 2 and HEIMAT 3.
The essays for which will follow in upcoming days, though not necessarily consecutive days.
You got me with these, Allan. I still need to see them!
Yup, not to have seen these is a crying shame. It’s tantamount to self denial.
But there is little Alexander has not seen, that’s for sure.
Give the young man a chance!!!
LOL!
923 minutes? No fkg way!
LOLOLOL!!!! Russel’s at it again! And, its probably wine!
Russell, stick around for Heimat 2 in the 90s poll, which is a lovely 1500 minutes.
The timing on this is excellent; last night I watched a recent German film – Summer ’04 – and among other things (including the thought that one character makes A Nos Amours’ nymphette seem geriatric by comparison) I found myself wondering how the liberal, cozy bourgeois family, which seemed to exist outside of history, arose out of the nation that followed Hitler’s goosestep. A few years back, I visited Berlin and they were by far the friendliest people I met in Europe. Another source of curiosity. To see a village transform from 1919 to 1982 sounds right up my alley.
But I’m confused: what is Heimat 2, Heimat 3? Continuations of the story through the 1980s? Continuations after? How are the essays coming up soon, if one of them was released in the 90s? Is this is all an elaborate joke?
HEIMAT 2 (DIE ZWEITE HEIMAT) continues with some of the same characters in the 1980’s and is largely concerned with music and politics. For a number of reasons I found it the greatest of the three series. HEIMAT 3 runs through the 90’s. Think of the Italian THE BEST OF YOUTH, but these are far greater.
Interesting. Strange that they would spend more time on 1982 – 89 than on 1919 – 82…
HEIMAT 2 was less of a “survey” than HEIMAT, and it examined a smaller group of characters far more acutely.
Let me clarify, MM, as Sam’s as usual as clear as a muddy trench in World War I. These pieces have been posted before – look at the date of the first few commentss – and then were posted successively. If you go back in the WitD search engine you’ll find them. They’ll be reposted when they get to those decades.
Heimat 2 is set through the sixties to the early 70s, not the 1980s – iognore Sam – it goes back to focus on what happened to one of the characters in Heimat when he went away for a period to Berlin.
Heimat 3 then takes up with the Berlin Wall coming down several years after the original Heimat.
Telling “Movie Man” to ignore me is a bit much. I did have the date wrong, but I invested many hourse into this and came away with a superlative response. I never said anything about whether this were posted on not, I was just trying to explain my own personal preference for DIE ZWEITE HEIMAT, over the still excellent piece you rightly praise here.
Great essay – especially interesting is your discussion of how the moving between black and white and colour works in heightening the dramatic emphasis. I’ve always remembered ‘Heimat’ as being a magnificent production, one of the greatest of TV dramas, and the changing from black and white to colour at key moments is probably the thing which has stayed with me the most.
Ah, Judy, it’s great to see that someone here has actually seen this, and I couldn’t agreemore with what you say. Did you also see DIE ZWEITE HEIMAT as well if I may ask?
I did see ‘Die Zweite Heimat’ too, and remember it was also brilliant, but, oddly enough as I saw it a lot later, my memories of that have faded more. There are moments and scenes which stick in my mind from the first series – like the part where all the top Nazis are invited for dinner.
Hey Allan, I’m watching Heimat now – just finished the first episode. Actually I just started the second, which brings me to my question. I’m really enjoying it so far, but one thing is bugging me. In the first episode they show the unveiling as being in 1921 or ’22 – but at the start of episode 2 the narrator twice says the “photos” of the event are from 1919. What I’m wondering is, were the yearly titles imposed after the fact? They seemed a bit arbitrary and distracting and it did some seem like some events that one would assume took place close together were spread out over a rather wide span of years (and vice versa – we see it’s 1923 then winter, spring, summer come along, then we seem to jump forward another year – and it’s 1924?!). Anyway, on with the series, can’t wait to see what comes next!