Night and Fog

Night and Fog brings to the views attention how these victims were dehumanized and stripped of everything we've come accustomed to. It shows how they were humiliated, exploited, and tortured and how no one interjected. It plays off of so much emotion from the viewer, but in a way that is different. The viewer is expected to be as emotionless as the Nazis and viewing it from what their intentions and actions were. Watching it makes you wonder how the Nazis could live with themselves or would even create something so evil.

Jasmine.

Night and Fog

How do the objectives of the films differ? 

In Triumaph of The Will, the objective was to show the German nation that Hitler could restore it's pride once again after WWII and the Versailles Treaty. At this time Germany had just lost WWI and lost much of it's wealth and power. Triumph of the Will tried to restore that pride in Germany by using Hitler as a sign of strength and tenacity.

In Night and Fog, the objective was to show the viewer how horrific the Nazi's truly were. This was the first documentary of the Holocaust so Night and Fog had to bring the public attention to the Nazi crimes and their methods of trying to wipe out entire races of people.

How We View Films

While both films Triumph of The Will and Night and Fog Are in regards to the German Nazi party, each film differs in the message they portray to the audience. In Triumph of the Will, Leni Reifenstahl used her filming techniques to glorify the Nazi party and make it seem that they would rescue Germany from their state of dismay. By positioning the camera slightly below Hitler, it makes us, the audience; view him as dominant and above everyone else. Night and Fog gives us the straight facts of the Nazi party and the aftermath that transpired after their rule. Night and Fog shows us a mix of Nazi footage and what they filmed on their own. Ironically, which I took it as very factual without that gray area like Leni Reifenstahl's film had. Both Triumph of The Will and Night and Fog use music as a way to add to the impact of their films. When watching Triumph of The Will the music reminded me of the early Walt Disney movies like Cinderella and Snow White, with that very dreamy beautiful music. With the opening scene, with the clouds and airplane, in conjunction with that Disney like music we would think that what were about to watch is going to be in fact beautiful. And that it was, when thinking about the time period and context that the film was being displayed in. But when we take into consideration Night and Fog and compare the two, we realize that Triumph of The Will is not beautiful and is frightening because we know what really went on when the German Nazi’s had power. Night and Fog and the clips they show are truly heart wrenching and touch our emotions. As many people in class said, after watching, it made it feel like their stomachs were in knots, which I definitely felt as well. When taking into consideration if the filmmakers of either film are successful, we have to think again about the context they were being played and the time period they were released in. Triumph of The Will and Leni Reifenstahl truly reached her goal of glorifying the Nazi party and making it seem that with their help, Germany could turn around and become prosperous once again. And Night and Fog shows the truth of the Nazi party and how they were tyrants of Europe for years. When watched and discussed back to back, each movies original meaning changes.

Slightly biased

How does "Night and Fog" deal with the feeling of guilt? Does the film exploit the audience's feelings? For instance, does it exploit the audience's feeling of outrage and sorrow?

Of course Night and Fog exploits the audience's feelings. I'm not sure if there can be a relatively normal response to the imagery in the film. Parts of the film were perhaps more obviously sardonically mocking Triumph of the will, in sort of a gruesome, ironic way. The subject matter being dealt with is revolting. Reading about it is one thing, but seeing footage provokes a pretty much immediate response. The way most of us were taught history angers me; we know the important facts and dates but not the surrounding story that puts everything in context. The film obviously makes us horrified and guilty for previous ignorance. I don't think people know how to deal with such explicit imagery. It's one thing to talk about it, but this pushes EVERYTHING that was going on in our faces. It isn't bad, it's one way to force everyone to become aware of it. There's so many complexities and atrocities and intricacies involved in the planning of concentration camps and Hitler's overall plan which unveiled in the film. None of the soldiers or Nazis claim responsibility, and the film ends on that note: then who is responsible? It's a pretty heavy bomb that is dropped on us while watching. It's good we all now know, but it was hard to stomach and watch it. The overall feelings we are left with are outrage and sorrow. I felt incredibly depressed and cynical and outraged, which meant it's objectives were completed. The film's intention was to get that reaction out of us, however, I don't know, we will all forever remember the scenes, but it gave us little or no hope to grasp onto. I'm Jewish so I know the history quite well but typically my family and extended family, we don't incessantly mourn about the Holocaust. The inhumanities and atrocities happened, but out of the whole thing created a stronger protection and sustainability for Judaism and stronger sense of dignity about the religion. The film almost makes it about pity and sorrow and outrage, and I think it would've been more effective if it left the audience on a lighter (close to impossible but maybe achievable) note. It is something to be outrageously offended and sickened by, and something no one should forget, and something we should learn about, but the film did exploit audiences feelings. 

Triumph of the will response

Triumph of the will is tricky. It's made grippingly beautiful with all sorts of camera shots and angles and light each with extreme precision. The techniques Leni used make it seem like a documentary, however, in my opinion, it is somewhere between that and a propaganda film. It can't be one without being the other. It has too much nationalism and personality to be a documentary. Yes generally documentaries are biased, but usually they present the sometimes self righteous filmmaker's opinions in seemingly objective ways. Triumph had more life in it, which is where the propaganda aspect shines through. Watching it closely the intricacies are impressive. She uses light brilliantly; she makes Hitler into a sex symbol and a God. She makes him larger than life, and it puts his initial position in perspective. Germany was feeling super shitty about World War one, and they were starving. In fact one of America's better moments was when we fed Germany, forgetting politics and remembering humanity. Anyway, Hitler was basically a call from the heavens and the Germans were all relieved when he stepped up, not knowing his sociopathic insane wretched insane envisions of the world. It's a disturbing movie because of the portrayal of something everyone, and I repeat everyone agrees upon: The Holocaust was atrocious, and Hitler is evil; the portrayal of the Nazis and Hitler make them shiny and brilliant and harmless and prideful and powerful and majestic. The movie is between propaganda and documentary, and it's remarkable to say the least. 

I seriously cannot think of a good title.

The objectives in Night and Fog, and Triumph of the Will, both differ yet also resemble each other because each one wanted the audience to learn something. In Triumph of the Will, it was that they wanted the audience to learn more about Hitler, his relationship to the people, and how much influential power he had not only over his people, but his army as well. In Night and Fog, I feel like the objective was to make the audience learn about what was really going on, what Hitler really was doing. The objectives were a little bit of the same, but the emotions that come about as a result of these two films are completely different. For Triumph of the Will, an audience member watching this when it first came around would probably feel good about Germany. They would feel as though something good is going to come out of this, and they would not have a negative thought about Hitler at all. For Night and Fog, someone watching it when it first came around probably cried. They probably were shocked to discover the truth. I know that even now watching Night and Fog, I felt like it had just recently happened, not 70 or so years ago. The emotions that come from this film are just so overwhelming and depressing. Triumph of the Will, wanted to show people that they did a good job in supporting Hitler, and Night and Fog wants to show people what came from that support.

Sarcastic

The film, Night and Fog is almost making fun of Triumph of the Will, or at least calling it to attention. While Triumph of the Will creates this beautiful imagery and scene of Germany, Night and Fog parallels it with similar images of German countrysides, but then shows that even the most beautiful and innocent things can lead to disaster and massacre. Resnais intentionally juxtaposes beauty and disaster immensely in the film. The soundtrack really made me nauseous while the image was focusing in on these bulldozers cramming bodies of skin and bone into mass graves. I will indeed never forget the film because of that. I've never been so disgusted.  This is undoubtedly the objective Resnais wanted to accomplish. If he were to put a typical horror soundtrack over the images, we wouldn't think twice, but he wanted to emphasize that Nazis and a good portion of the Germans actually wanted this and thought it was the right and beautiful thing to do. Night and Fog, to me, was the sarcastic version of Triumph of the Will.