BBC Television programmes  permalink

The Dark Charisma of Adolf Hitler

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 1 - 50 of 59
  • Message 1. 

    Posted by K_Nicholson (U15499901) on Monday, 12th November 2012

    What a terrible programme! Aside from the dreadful, sensationalist subject matter - haven't we had enough of this type of fetishisation of the Nazis? - it is badly presented and the graphics are awful. How could the BBC agree to show such trash?

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Fishinghellfly (U9173430) on Monday, 12th November 2012

    It's ho-hum so far. Nothing new.

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by stirling (U13732738) on Monday, 12th November 2012

    The rise (and fall) of Hitler is well documented - not sure what this 3 part documentary adds?

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by Fishinghellfly (U9173430) on Monday, 12th November 2012

    I think it is a little unwise to show this shortly after a repeat of the outstanding series "The Nazis: A Warning from History".

    This is a bit GCSE by comparison.


    Report message4

  • Message 5

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by tumteatum (U15488526) on Monday, 12th November 2012

    A completely uncharismatic programme. Its just a potted history of Hitler's rise to power. Its absolutely dreadful, doesn't have any depth, doesn't answer the question of Hitler's charisma - was the programme meant for GCSE students? I can't stand the tone and intonation of the voice over... I can't work out why but I find it very annoying.

    Report message5

  • Message 6

    , in reply to message 5.

    Posted by ftakeith (U14732747) on Monday, 12th November 2012

    Laurence Rees is a great documentary maker

    but another documentary series on hitler is a step too far

    its just mostly a rehash of 'the nazis a warning from history'

    Laurence Rees should make a series and book on post world war germany and europer from 1945 to now

    Report message6

  • Message 7

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by CJML (U15499939) on Monday, 12th November 2012

    I agree with your sentiments. This programme is rather out of keeping with Laurence Rees' previous and excellent series 'The Nazis' and 'Auschwitz'. As has been said already by others, this rather weak narrative on Hitler's character gives every impression of having been intended to educate schoolchildren, rather than adding to the extensive record. I very much hope that is the case because otherwise such infantile commentary would be inexcusable. Perhaps a reworking dubbed with a commentary intended for educated and interested adults might redeem this travesty. As it stands, a thorough disappointment.

    Report message7

  • Message 8

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by stockportmick (U15500335) on Tuesday, 13th November 2012

    It's ho-hum so far. Nothing new.  Agree totally. Failure to mention Treaty of Versailles or Hyper-inflation removed crucial context in order to emphasise Hitler's "charisma".

    Report message8

  • Message 9

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Catherine Laz (U15500386) on Tuesday, 13th November 2012

    Absolutely right. This programme is both partonizing and superficial. How many times do their articulate the word charisma? We're not 5 yrs-old. Nothing about the fact that his dark charisma took root in his necrophiliac tendenties and that he was clearly hysterical due to a post traumatic stress disorder. His lure was that of to the sexual deviant he really was, similar to paedophiles. He was sexually and psycholigically twisted, but not a word about that! Terrible programme.

    Report message9

  • Message 10

    , in reply to message 9.

    Posted by heterodox (U14291406) on Tuesday, 13th November 2012

    '...his necrophiliac tendenties and that he was clearly hysterical due to a post traumatic stress disorder. His lure was that of to the sexual deviant he really was, similar to paedophiles. He was sexually and psycholigically twisted, but not a word about that! Terrible programme.'


    That could be because the programme makers, wisely in my view, did not want to enter into empty speculations about a man's mental condition nearly seventy years after his death. I would say that all your statements above are no more than conjecture.
    The programme did quite specifically state that Hitler was not a Christian and yet I can quote from a speech of his, made in 1922, where he clearly espouses a Christian faith but I don't think the programme was wrong in this because Hitler, although from a Catholic family, did seem to undergo a religious change to something based on German legend. It all became very Wagnerian in the idealisation of folk-heroes like Siegfried and Parsifal.
    What cannot be said, however, is that Hitler was an atheist and the programme didn't do so. He was never that.

    Report message10

  • Message 11

    , in reply to message 10.

    Posted by poshHebeJeebie (U9319867) on Tuesday, 13th November 2012

    I have never understood how Hitler had such a hold on the population of Germany, so I watched this, hoping for some informed perspective. There was nothing beyond the usual film clips. And I still do not see how such a person could hold a whole nation in his thrall. As a programme it was a total disappointment!

    Report message11

  • Message 12

    , in reply to message 11.

    Posted by Rhoces (U11212688) on Tuesday, 13th November 2012

    It's always interesting to see old films and hear from eye witnesses, but there wasn't a great deal of revelation in this. It was stuff we'd already seen in Nazis: A warning from history and it was a bit clunky to be honest.

    Report message12

  • Message 13

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by leadedbee (U5555345) on Tuesday, 13th November 2012

    Agree with poster above who suggested that, rather than keep scraping the Nazi barrel (that's Channel 5's job anyway), it would be much more interesting to look at the post-war reconstruction of Germany.

    Report message13

  • Message 14

    , in reply to message 5.

    Posted by O Tempora O Mores (U14540735) on Wednesday, 14th November 2012

    The main issue here seems to be that programmes such as this need to identify upfront what viewership they are aimed at. Like others, I was disappointed, as there was for me nothing new, and the level of scholarship was lower than similar programmes on the subject. But it may have been very relevant for newcomers to the subject at a lower educational level. Could this not have been indicated in the trailer / introduction / description?

    Report message14

  • Message 15

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Huckerback (U14411634) on Wednesday, 14th November 2012

    I found it pretty interesting.
    I don't generally watch Hitler/Nazi documentaries, so I learned a few new things and will be tuning in for the rest of the progs.

    Report message15

  • Message 16

    , in reply to message 10.

    Posted by colonelblimp (U1705702) on Wednesday, 14th November 2012

    Agreed, there's no evidence at all that Hitler was a sexual deviant, as far as I know, and certainly none that he was a necrophiliac. His relationship with Geli Raubal was unsavoury because of his desire for absolute control, not because of his sexual demands - of which there appear to have been none. Again, apart from Hitler's controlling nature, his relationship with Eva Braun seems to have been pretty ordinary. And that's the sum total of his relationships with the opposite sex. As for PTSD-induced hysteria, the programme made the point that Hitler's character never fundamentally changed. He seems to have been charged with rage and bitterness from an early age. As you suggest, we can never know exactly why. His relationship with his father? The death of his mother? The crushing of his aspirations to be an artist? Nobody can say but undoubtedly what put the lid on it was the German surrender in 1918. Subsequent events proved that a great many Germans felt much the same way (witness the activities of the Freikorps) - they can't all have been hysterical. Granted, in Hitler's case, the impact was greater because the roots that he had finally put down by enlisting in 1914 were torn up, and he was back in limbo again. And he fixed on somebody to focus his simmering hatred on - the same somebody that millions of Germans had it in for. The whole point of Hitler is that, as Len Deighton remarked in one of his books, he wasn't a deviant at all but the epitome of the common man.

    I doubt Hitler ever had a Christian faith: I seem to remember that the clergy who tried to inculcate it in him as a child came in for a share of his inexhaustible supply of contempt. But certainly he regularly made references to the Almighty in his speeches. Maybe his most revealing observation was in the wake of Paulus' surrender at Stalingrad: the well known quote "What is life? Life is the Volk. The individual must die anyway. Beyond the life of the individual is the Volk.". I suspect that was his concept of religion: the German people as an eternal, spiritual force. And he went on to refer, admiringly, to the suicide of a woman whom he didn't name but who was clearly Geli Raubal.

    Report message16

  • Message 17

    , in reply to message 14.

    Posted by FP (U14972643) on Thursday, 15th November 2012

    The main issue here seems to be that programmes such as this need to identify upfront what viewership they are aimed at. Like others, I was disappointed, as there was for me nothing new, and the level of scholarship was lower than similar programmes on the subject. But it may have been very relevant for newcomers to the subject at a lower educational level. Could this not have been indicated in the trailer / introduction / description?  As someone with a lower educational level I found this programme, limited though its scope was, interesting but then compared to you I am a bit thick.

    Report message17

  • Message 18

    , in reply to message 17.

    Posted by Prophet Tenebrae (U5995226) on Thursday, 15th November 2012

    As someone with a lower educational level I found this programme, limited though its scope was, interesting but then compared to you I am a bit thick. 
    Personally I find one of the supreme ironies of dumbing down to be that often those of us who object to it are typecast as ivory tower intellectuals that want dry, dull and dreary lectures that would appeal only to a minority of people and hence, we're terrible snobs who would exclude people.

    The truth is that we want something that is interesting and informative too and that should appeal to those of a wide range of abilities. It's the patronising anti-intellectuals that think everything should be spoonfed to the feckless masses.

    Report message18

  • Message 19

    , in reply to message 17.

    Posted by Anignig (U13352042) on Thursday, 15th November 2012

    "As someone with a lower educational level I found this programme, limited though its scope was, interesting but then compared to you I am a bit thick."

    From what I've seen in life being "thick" is nothing to do with educational level.

    Report message19

  • Message 20

    , in reply to message 18.

    Posted by conion (U9432813) on Thursday, 15th November 2012

    Personally I find one of the supreme ironies of dumbing down to be that often those of us who object to it are typecast as ivory tower intellectuals that want dry, dull and dreary lectures that would appeal only to a minority of people and hence, we're terrible snobs who would exclude people. 
    PT

    I am reminded inexorably of this from "Brave New World":


    "Alpha children wear grey They work much harder than we do, because they're so frightfully clever. I'm really awfuly glad I'm a Beta, because I don't work so hard. And then we are much better than the Gammas and Deltas. Gammas are stupid. They all wear green, and Delta children wear khaki. Oh no, I don't want to play with Delta children. And Epsilons are still worse. They're too stupid to be able" "to read or write. Besides they wear black, which is such a beastly colour. I'm so glad I'm a Beta."

    I wonder which is the target group for current BBC output...

    Report message20

  • Message 21

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Tim-dr (U15507781) on Monday, 19th November 2012

    Agree with everything above. A truly terrible piece of television. Is this the same man who brought us Warning from History? Dreadful and repetitive GCSE script, awful VO, pointless and ridiculous GFX and as for the 'reconstruction' I frankly cringed with embarrassment. I had to switch off. Tried ep 2 tonight. Even worse!

    Report message21

  • Message 22

    , in reply to message 20.

    Posted by Prophet Tenebrae (U5995226) on Monday, 19th November 2012

    PT

    I am reminded inexorably of this from "Brave New World": 

    Indeed. It seems now there are a multitude of people who want to start throwing the first stone when I criticise the height to which the bar has fallen, as if I'm casting myself in the light of someone who knows best - really, nothing could be further from the truth.

    But the anti-intellectual fervour that seems to be increasingly prevalent aside, I glanced some of part two... I think my only comment on what I saw is "good grief".

    Report message22

  • Message 23

    , in reply to message 22.

    Posted by alan997 (U1233723) on Monday, 19th November 2012

    Yegods. Probably the worst thing I've ever seen on the BBC. The worst thing I've ever seen on television. Um...the worst thing I've ever seen. Come to think of it, the worst thing ever.

    Report message23

  • Message 24

    , in reply to message 23.

    Posted by Prophet Tenebrae (U5995226) on Monday, 19th November 2012

    Yegods. Probably the worst thing I've ever seen on the BBC. The worst thing I've ever seen on television. Um...the worst thing I've ever seen. Come to think of it, the worst thing ever.  Is it.. WORSE THAN HITLER?!

    Report message24

  • Message 25

    , in reply to message 11.

    This posting has been hidden during moderation because it broke the House Rules in some way.

  • Message 26

    , in reply to message 21.

    Posted by kathyd (U14510986) on Monday, 19th November 2012

    This programme reminds me of a really rubbish history teacher that I had at school. She opened the subject of every 'tyrant' in history with the words 'Hitler (or Stalin, or Trotsky, or Rasputin, or Ivan the Terrible) was a ruthless, hard-headed man'. It was a wearisomely glib way of teaching history to a bunch of fourteen-year-olds back in the 1960s and I am staggered that this approach passes muster at the BBC in the 21st Century. Whoever purchased this piece of dross should be ashamed of themselves. It contains not one iota of ANALYSIS of the political situation in 1930s Germany and instead seems to want us to see Adolf Hitler as the Derren Brown of his time. It's so bad that I keep looking to see whether it is in fact a spoof.

    Report message26

  • Message 27

    , in reply to message 26.

    Posted by zencat (U14877400) on Monday, 19th November 2012

    I wish people would refrain from mentioning Derren Brown - I've absolutely no idea who he is.

    Report message27

  • Message 28

    , in reply to message 24.

    Posted by alan997 (U1233723) on Monday, 19th November 2012

    Yegods. Probably the worst thing I've ever seen on the BBC. The worst thing I've ever seen on television. Um...the worst thing I've ever seen. Come to think of it, the worst thing ever.  Is it.. WORSE THAN HITLER?!  Ok, that's a toughie. Perhaps I exaggerated. In fact, come to think of it, it's not quite as bad as QPR's performance against Southampton on Saturday. But it's still really, really bad.

    Report message28

  • Message 29

    , in reply to message 26.

    Posted by heterodox (U14291406) on Tuesday, 20th November 2012

    ''tyrant' in history with the words 'Hitler (or Stalin, or Trotsky, or Rasputin, or Ivan the Terrible) '

    I spotted the inverted commas, but I don't know what Rasputin is doing in this list of 'tyrants'. Trotsky seems to be in rather unusual company as well.
    The purpose of this programme, it seems to me, is to show how a civilised and cultured nation can be led into acts of unspeakable cruelty. Hitler seemed to be able to tap into a source of savagery within the German people but I think it would be a mistake to think that there is something specifically German in all this. The lesson is that a demagogue can tap into a quasi-religious zeal that exists everywhere and making us aware of that is perhaps the purpose of the programme.
    A point that the programme does not make much of is the effect of Hitler's voice. He spoke with a harsh resonance that it was difficult not to be moved by and you could be moved even if you didn't speak German. If we are looking for 'dark charisma' then it was his almost hypnotic voice.

    Report message29

  • Message 30

    , in reply to message 29.

    Posted by alan997 (U1233723) on Tuesday, 20th November 2012

    ''tyrant' in history with the words 'Hitler (or Stalin, or Trotsky, or Rasputin, or Ivan the Terrible) '

    I spotted the inverted commas, but I don't know what Rasputin is doing in this list of 'tyrants'. Trotsky seems to be in rather unusual company as well.
    The purpose of this programme, it seems to me, is to show how a civilised and cultured nation can be led into acts of unspeakable cruelty. Hitler seemed to be able to tap into a source of savagery within the German people but I think it would be a mistake to think that there is something specifically German in all this. The lesson is that a demagogue can tap into a quasi-religious zeal that exists everywhere and making us aware of that is perhaps the purpose of the programme.
    A point that the programme does not make much of is the effect of Hitler's voice. He spoke with a harsh resonance that it was difficult not to be moved by and you could be moved even if you didn't speak German. If we are looking for 'dark charisma' then it was his almost hypnotic voice.  
    You've just made more interesting and relevant points in a brief post than the programme made in an hour.

    Re the accent - I entirely agree. I once mused how difficult it would have been for Hitler to have done his rabble-rousing if he'd had to rely on, say, English with a broad Welsh accent, look you.

    The point you make about 'it would be a mistake to think that there is something specifically German in all this' is, it seems to me, absolutely crucial, and there's an interesting programme to be made about it. This one didn't come close to being that programme.

    Report message30

  • Message 31

    , in reply to message 30.

    Posted by Reservoir Hamster (U14288323) on Tuesday, 20th November 2012

    The point you make about 'it would be a mistake to think that there is something specifically German in all this' is, it seems to me, absolutely crucial, and there's an interesting programme to be made about it.  
    The psychoanalyst Alice Miller has some very interesting things to say about tyrants and how they manage to appeal to their audience. Basically her point is that Hitler was savagely beaten as a child by his father (like many children back in his day.) This rage at his father though was so severe it had to be repressed but Hitler's anger and hatred was displaced and redirected towards innocent targets, i.e. Jews. His audience, similarly beaten as children and with huge amounts of repressed rage, recognised him as someone who is expressing their profound (if misdirected) hatred. They couldn't see through him because they were unable to see the too-painful truth about themselves (that their parents were cruel people who abused them). Pain that is repressed robs you of knowledge about yourself and also of your ability to see others as they really are.
    It's a dimension to the explanation of the rise of Hitler that I think is important. You can't account for the rise of such a man merely by reference to economic conditions at the time.

    Report message31

  • Message 32

    , in reply to message 8.

    Posted by Jak (U1158529) on Tuesday, 20th November 2012

    Saw Part 1 last night (in Scotland). Agree with many of the crits posted above, especially:
    Failure to mention Treaty of Versailles or Hyper-inflation removed crucial context in order to emphasise Hitler's "charisma". 
    All very well to say Hitler was mad, bad, had always been filled with hatred etc, but it would have been useful to know exactly when these witnesses made their statements. Were some of them former Nazis, speaking long after the event, and very aware of what their interviewers wanted to hear? Some dates would have helped.

    About Hitler's religion, in the Brockhaus encyclopedia, published in Germany in 1938, he is described as "katholik".

    I don't think I'd have voted for him even if I'd been a German. But then, in that time and place, and with all that propaganda (the Versailles "Diktat", the "stab in the back" which led to military defeat - etc etc etc) following that horrific inflation, who, now, can be absolutely certain they wouldn't have been a patriotic Nazi?

    Report message32

  • Message 33

    , in reply to message 29.

    Posted by kathyd (U14510986) on Tuesday, 20th November 2012

    ''tyrant' in history with the words 'Hitler (or Stalin, or Trotsky, or Rasputin, or Ivan the Terrible) '

    I spotted the inverted commas, but I don't know what Rasputin is doing in this list of 'tyrants'. Trotsky seems to be in rather unusual company as well.
    The purpose of this programme, it seems to me, is to show how a civilised and cultured nation can be led into acts of unspeakable cruelty. Hitler seemed to be able to tap into a source of savagery within the German people but I think it would be a mistake to think that there is something specifically German in all this. The lesson is that a demagogue can tap into a quasi-religious zeal that exists everywhere and making us aware of that is perhaps the purpose of the programme.
    A point that the programme does not make much of is the effect of Hitler's voice. He spoke with a harsh resonance that it was difficult not to be moved by and you could be moved even if you didn't speak German. If we are looking for 'dark charisma' then it was his almost hypnotic voice.  
    Hello Heterodux. Sorry you didn't get my point - I had a really, really rubbish history teacher who liked to label all the 'bad' people as ruthless, hard-headed men and all the ruthless, hard-headed men as tyrants. It was crass. It was a glib assertion that lacked any historical analysis. In fact, it was just like this programme.

    Report message33

  • Message 34

    , in reply to message 27.

    Posted by kathyd (U14510986) on Tuesday, 20th November 2012

    I wish people would refrain from mentioning Derren Brown - I've absolutely no idea who he is.   Hello zencat. Derren Brown is a magician who plays tricks on Channel 4 (!)

    Report message34

  • Message 35

    , in reply to message 34.

    Posted by heterodox (U14291406) on Tuesday, 20th November 2012

    'Derren Brown is a magician who plays tricks on Channel 4 (!)'

    There: and I thought that they were going on about the chap who wrote The DaVinci Code.
    At risk of boring everyone, I would like to add a bit about the appeal of Hitler's speeches and the quality of his voice. He was addressing a party meeting and he turned to the subject of unemployment within Germany.
    He commenced quietly, 'How many unemployed do we want' and then he paused. One million? Two million? And so the crescendo continued until the climatical and screamed Five million?
    This was typical and it remains in my mind and, even on film and years after it had happened, it was immensely stirring and it's no wonder that his audience were brought to a frenzy.
    Dark charisma in action.

    Report message35

  • Message 36

    , in reply to message 26.

    Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Tuesday, 20th November 2012

    It's so bad that I keep looking to see whether it is in fact a spoof. 
    Yes.

    The hilarious bit with the Rottweiler dogs snarling and straining at the leash and then suddenly all subdued and with puppy eyes made one feel that the likes of Christopher Morris and Armando Iannucci etc were somehow involved.

    Report message36

  • Message 37

    , in reply to message 36.

    Posted by Rhoces (U11212688) on Tuesday, 20th November 2012

    I nearly switched off when the dogs appeared and the falling flowers. All very hammy and not needed!!!

    Report message37

  • Message 38

    , in reply to message 8.

    Posted by Anignig (U13352042) on Thursday, 22nd November 2012

    It's ho-hum so far. Nothing new.  Agree totally. Failure to mention Treaty of Versailles or Hyper-inflation removed crucial context in order to emphasise Hitler's "charisma".   It struck me that what I saw of the programme (admittedly I couldn't take more than the first half hour) what was missing was fear - detractors got beaten up. This morning I found an additional element that would explain the role that the WWI defeat played-:

    www.boston.com/bosto...
    "In other words, if you feel good about yourself, you’ll listen — and if you feel insecure or threatened, you won’t. This would also explain why demagogues benefit from keeping people agitated. The more threatened people feel, the less likely they are to listen to dissenting opinions, and the more easily controlled they are."

    Report message38

  • Message 39

    , in reply to message 38.

    Posted by Hamlet (U12521388) on Thursday, 22nd November 2012

    One programme would have been O k, to extend it to a series is too much of a bad thing

    Report message39

  • Message 40

    , in reply to message 39.

    Posted by BalDaddy (U14990270) on Thursday, 22nd November 2012

    There was nothing new here history-wise, just some cheesy visual references (e.g. the dogs and falling flowers) and a lot of important facts omitted.
    It is difficult to assess these programmes if one has a reasonable grasp of the subject; they are obviously made for a target audience which has little knowledge of this period in history.
    As an example, the recent series 'Heroes of the Skies' on 5 I found rather infuriating some of the episodes on something I knew about (e.g. Douglas Bader), but found the on on the Tuskagee black fliers fascinating.

    I wonder if these docs are made somewhat light and dramatic for the taste of US networks.

    I've seen worse fact-wise, such as a American take on the Battle of Britain with footage of Russian planes and the statement: 'on Sept 7th 1940 the bombers were sent from Germany to bomb the East End of London as that was where the Jews lived'

    Report message40

  • Message 41

    , in reply to message 35.

    Posted by xanadutheblue (U2940564) on Saturday, 24th November 2012

    At risk of boring everyone, I would like to add a bit about the appeal of Hitler's speeches and the quality of his voice. He was addressing a party meeting and he turned to the subject of unemployment within Germany.
    He commenced quietly, 'How many unemployed do we want' and then he paused. One million? Two million? And so the crescendo continued until the climatical and screamed Five million?
    This was typical and it remains in my mind and, even on film and years after it had happened, it was immensely stirring and it's no wonder that his audience were brought to a frenzy.
    Dark charisma in action.  
    That is interesting, and so are some of the other viewpoints here. The programme did leave me wondering just why the German people should idolise a murderer after Hitller's execution of some of his own party. But judging from the title, that, apparently, was the very thing it was trying to explain.

    Report message41

  • Message 42

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by selene33 (U14271316) on Monday, 26th November 2012

    One of the few strengths of this programme is some of the excellent colour footage, most of which, I have never seen broadcast before. There is something especially chilling about seeing the swastika flags on the buildings in full colour, & the people cheering in the sunlight.

    Report message42

  • Message 43

    , in reply to message 42.

    Posted by foxglove (U2178400) on Monday, 26th November 2012

    One of the few strengths of this programme is some of the excellent colour footage, most of which, I have never seen broadcast before. There is something especially chilling about seeing the swastika flags on the buildings in full colour, & the people cheering in the sunlight.
     

    That's exactly what I've enjoyed about this series,seeing all the archive film which has never been shown before. That subdued colouring was typical of the colour film of the 30's and 40's. I've enjoyed the series,but when you've lived through it you feel very differently from someone just viewing it as a history lesson.

    Report message43

  • Message 44

    , in reply to message 43.

    Posted by Fishinghellfly (U9173430) on Monday, 26th November 2012

    The colour period film was good, certainly.

    Nevertheless, there wasn't very much about Hitler's "dark charisma" at all. Those interested in psychology must have been disappointed.

    Report message44

  • Message 45

    , in reply to message 44.

    Posted by Going_once (U14931925) on Monday, 26th November 2012

    Watched the last episode but had to mute it. Some of the film stock was new to me and therefore interesting, but watching people starve to death to music inappropriate to say the least. Far too much atmospheric music and Eisensteinish. Would have preferred a straight documentary which might have given more room to understand why so many were in thrall. Understood more from that brilliant little documentary Blind Spot. Wasted opportunity.

    Report message45

  • Message 46

    , in reply to message 45.

    Posted by xanadutheblue (U2940564) on Tuesday, 27th November 2012

    Far too much atmospheric music and Eisensteinish.  

    'Spot the tune' all the way through. Plenty of Beethoven, bits of Mozart's requiem and Holst's Planets, but less Wagner than you might have expected, given that he was Hitler's favourite composer.

    They were rather fond of the Storm from the Pastoral Symphony and I thought: 'Well, you won't play *that* music to its conclusion! smiley - winkeye

    Report message46

  • Message 47

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by PrinceEugene (U13933926) on Tuesday, 27th November 2012

    The "dark charisma" theme was just a pathetic excuse to retell the story of Hitler and the Nazis for the 999th time. The narration was intensely patronising.

    I kept thinking about newly-arrived visitors to our shores turning on their hotel TVs and having all their stereotypes about World-War-II-obsessed Britons confirmed. Our Nazi-fixation is a national embarrassment and it's a disgrace that the BBC keeps feeding it.

    On the other hand, if the point of the series was to play as many different pieces of classical music as humanly possible in a three-hour period, it probably achieved its aim.

    The BBC should only commission documentaries about the Nazis or World War II from people who have something new and interesting to say - e.g. the excellent David Reynolds.

    Report message47

  • Message 48

    , in reply to message 47.

    Posted by olicana_man (U14156932) on Tuesday, 27th November 2012

    I agree seeing the swastikas in colour really makes those of us who didn't live through it realise it was really real.

    I was struck by the absolute suicide the Germans maintained towards the end when the odds were clearly against them.

    But yes the narration was patronising and seem to be aimed at 15 year olds and some of the comments you have to question as they had no explanation.

    Not a great documentary.

    Report message48

  • Message 49

    , in reply to message 46.

    Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Tuesday, 27th November 2012

    'Spot the tune' all the way through. Plenty of Beethoven, bits of Mozart's requiem and Holst's Planets, but less Wagner than you might have expected, given that he was Hitler's favourite composer.

    They were rather fond of the Storm from the Pastoral Symphony and I thought: 'Well, you won't play *that* music to its conclusion! smiley - winkeye 

    There seemed to be some Strauss younger in there as well at one point.

    Overall, however, a bizarre series.

    Report message49

  • Message 50

    , in reply to message 3.

    Posted by Foxhead (U14308619) on Tuesday, 27th November 2012

    The rise (and fall) of Hitler is well documented - not sure what this 3 part documentary adds? 
    It may not be new to most adults but subsequent generations need to be informed about why Hitler himself acquired so much power.

    This has concentrated more on HOW this happened and has not sought to glorify Nazism in any sense.

    At least it was factual and not muddied by many of the ridiculous myths and speculations some documentaries spoil themselves with.

    Report message50

Back to top

About this Board

The Points of View team invite you to discuss BBC Television programmes.

Add basic Smileys or extra Smileys to your posts.

Questions? Check the BBC FAQ for answers first!

Go to: BBC News Have your say to discuss topics in the news

Make a complaint? Go to the BBC complaints website.

BBC News: Off-topic for this board, so contact them directly with your feedback: Contact BBC News

or register to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.


Mon-Sat: 0900-2300
Sun: 1000-2300

This messageboard is reactively moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

Recent Discussions

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.