| The Architecture of Doom | 
| Director: Peter Cohen
Actors: Rolf Arsenius, Bruno Ganz, Sam Gray, Josef Goebbels, P.l. Troost
Studio: FIRST RUN FEATURES
Category: DVD
List Price: $29.95
Buy New: $17.46
You Save: $12.49 (42%)
Buy New/Used from $16.51
Avg. Customer Rating:   (16 reviews)
Sales Rank: 23009
Format: Color, Dvd-video, Ntsc
Languages: Swedish (Original Language), English (Subtitled)
Rating: NR (Not Rated)
Media: DVD
Running Time: 119 minutes
Number Of Items: 1
Aspect Ratio: 1.33:1
DVD Layers: 1
DVD Sides: 1
Picture Format: Academy Ratio
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.3
Dimensions (in): 7.4 x 5.1 x 0.6
MPN: 909211
UPC: 720229909211
EAN: 0720229909211
ASIN: B00003XALS
Release Date: March 14, 2000
Theatrical Release Date: 1989
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
Featuring never-before-seen film footage of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime, The Architecture of Doom captures the inner workings of the Third Reich and illuminates the Nazi aesthetic in art, architecture and popular culture. From Nazi party rallies to the final days inside Hitler's bunker, this sensational film shows how Adolf Hitler rose from being a failed artist to creating a world of ponderous kitsch and horrifying terror.
Hitler worshipped ancient Rome and Greece, and dreamed of a new Golden Age of classical art and monumental architecture, populated by beautiful, patriotic Aryans. Degenerated artists and inferior races had no place in his lurid fantasy. As this riveting film shows, the Nazis went from banning the art of modernists like Picasso to forced euthanasia of the retarded and sick, and finally to the persecution of homosexuals and the extermination of the Jews. Architecture of Doom is part of the Hitler and the Nazis box set.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 11 more reviews...
 Hitler's mission to "beautify" Germany through violence July 12, 2005
27 out of 29 found this review helpful
Several key points underpin Hitler's "mission" for the German people in this documentary directed by Peter Cohen: the need to make Germany racially clean, the need to make the ethnically Aryan people realise that they were always meant to be the dominant race in the world, and the need to make the German state the greatest in the world. Hitler's campaign in this respect was, so the film alleges, essentially civilian, but under a military guise.
The two-hour film opens with an aerial view of what is purported to be a German village, yet the background story concerns questions about what Hitler's racial theories and policies actually meant in practice. The Holocaust, in which six million Jews were exterminated during World War II, was merely the latest episode in a campaign of "ethnic cleansing", which had actually started back in the 1930s after Hitler had come to power. The focus was initially on the mentally ill and the deformed, but it later widened to include the Jews as "the microbe" which was allegedly responsible for "infecting" Europe, not just with their genes, but with their own ideas about art.
Propaganda films, which feature heavily in this film, essentially proselytize the German people into believing that the mentally ill, the retarded and the Jews were infestations that had to be eradicated. To this end, hideous methods were devised to "euthanise" the targets, whose families were lied to about the true nature of their deaths.
The death camps were the ultimate expression of Hitler's eugenics programme, yet the term could well be applied to the artistic depiction of the "perfect" Aryan, particularly through sculpture at the hands of people like Arno Breker. Through art exhibitions held every year, he wanted the German people to see what direction they should be taking, as he believed that art, his own former profession at which he ultimately failed, was one of the most significant props to his political regime. In order to emphasize the gulf between "pure" German art and those of "undesirables", he deliberately had works by the mentally ill displayed in so-called "Degenerate Art" exhibitions, albeit in separate locations.
As stated in the title, the term, "architecture", is prominent, though it appears that it is not as prominent in the purest sense of the word. His unbelievably ambitious plans for Berlin and the Austrian city of Linz are highlighted, including the relative absurdity of his receiving the final plans for a regenerated Linz, which would have included a gigantic museum of the arts, just three months before the end of the war in Europe. In this movie, we see Hitler's fleeting visit to Paris (then just conquered) very early on a June morning in 1940, where his mission was to look at the city's art treasures, including the Opera. It is even claimed that Hitler was so familiar with the plans of the building that he even noticed that an ante-chamber was actually missing; apparently, it had been eliminated during a renovation programme. The German conquest of Greece in June 1941 is also shown; Hitler envisioned a state that would be a hybrid of ancient Greece, ancient Rome and Sparta. Indeed, he considered Sparta to be the most ethnically pure state in ancient history.
The attack on the USSR later in June 1941 and the onset of the coming Russian winter in November allegedly turned the tide of the war against Germany, and even this received artistic expression when pictures drawn from the front highlighted the hardships of the German army fighting in the USSR. The overall war situations are given scant coverage, given the subject matter of the film, yet they are nevertheless put into their proper context. Hitler knew that defeat was inevitable, yet he actually looked forward to Germany's fiery defeat, reminiscent of what had happened to Carthage during the Punic Wars. The film claims that Hitler's war strategy may have been blighted by his apparent obsession with antiquity: he was allegedly fighting a modern war with ancient war objectives, which included enslavement of conquered peoples. Even if Germany was going to be destroyed militarily, he still ordered the continuation of the "Final Solution" as he believed that a defeated Germany would therefore be left with only with the weak, since the good would have died fighting for the Reich.
Anti-Semitism was, so Hitler claimed, justified on the grounds that he saw Jews as constituting an ethnic power bloc against the Aryan race. He therefore viewed his campaign to cleanse Europe of non-Aryans as a primary reason for conducting the war, and he used films, such as "The Eternal Jew" (shot in the squalor of Polish ghettos in 1940), in his propaganda campaign. He likened the destruction of the Jews to the destruction of rats and other pests; indeed, a pest control film (made in 1938) is shown as part of the propaganda where gas is used to kill pests; that same gas ("Zyklon-B") would be used in the death camps.
Overall, since it is a documentary, the film exists to inform rather than to entertain, but it does delve deep into Hitler's psyche in order to portray a failed artist (who made architectural sketches of planned buildings well into the war) obsessed with the "mission" to make Germany a mighty state primarily through racial purity and artistic expression - and, ultimately, violence of the vilest kind imaginable.
generally a model documentary February 8, 2005
20 out of 20 found this review helpful
This is a superb documentary. Bold and controversial thesis. Evidence marshalled effectively. Great use of archival footage. Generally gripping and with very good pacing (occasionally there is a digression which, while important to the general line of argument, is not introduced in a way that makes the relevance immediately clear). Plus, don't you really want to know what projects seemed closest to Hitler's heart when the war was getting bogged down on the Eastern Front? Hint: They weren't military ones.
Cohen argues that the Nazi project was that of producing a better and more beautiful human being and race, a project that integrated art and the science of the day. The Nazi aesthetic was not just propaganda to get people to become committed Nazis, but was a goal in and of itself, from the earlier optimism of producing a better humanity (or at least Aryan race) to Hitler's eventual--but not unmotivated by earlier commitments--desire for an ending befiting classical tragedy.
The beginning is marvellously done. The portrayal of Nazism is so sympathetic that one is drawn in, and may even wonder if the film maker does not have Nazi sympathies. Any such wonder disappears within twenty minutes, but the film maker's ability to see what was so attractive about the Nazi project is crucial to the success of the film. In the end, one realizes that the Nazi project was evil in a way simultaneously subtler and yet deeper than one may have thought at the outset.
The film maker never draws parallels with our time. Still, the film should make one reflect on how the desires for perfect human beings and for the elimination of the imperfect are manifested now.
 Drink lots of coffee before watching this. July 2, 2004
12 out of 47 found this review helpful
I am a student of third reich history and when I heard of the release of this film I managed to see it at an independent theatre. While there is a great deal of interesting documentary footage and fair analysis this has got to be about the dullest documentary I have ever seen. There is no style to the directing or editing. The narration is even worse. The good points are negated by the overall stale production. This is certainly not a film to even rent let alone purchase. (Unless you are an insomiac.)
 NAZISM AN ART? INTERESTING PREMISE, BOGGED BY MONOTONY July 17, 2003
28 out of 35 found this review helpful
Google lists nearly 200 films about Adolf Hitler, most of them documentaries such as Leni Riefenstahl's Triumph of the Will and Fuhrer: Rise of a Madman. The Architecture of Doom was perhaps the first to propose the notion that Hitler embraced the art of politics after failing as a painter, suggesting that Nazism was a reflection of the dictator's perverse aesthetic tastes. In its deconstruction of the Nazi movement, the movie is novel and shows an interesting, perhaps true, perspective. But what minor grouse I have is with the narrative, which is just shy of 2 hours or so and sports a frequent monotone of showing Nazi art. Yet, thankfully, it doesn't detract substantially from the intriguing perspective that Hitler's whole pet project was perhaps more of a dogged pursuit of an aesthetic. This documentary is definitely worth a watch if you are interested in the Third Reich in any way.
masterpiece. April 25, 2003
9 out of 28 found this review helpful
This is the best documentry i ve ever seen aboat the Third Reich. It really shows the core, what it is all aboat. A Masterpiece is really a very good name for this movie.
|
|
|
