Süss, the Jew
September. 24,1940Nazi historical drama about Duke Karl Alexander of Württemberg and his treasurer Süß Oppenheimer.
Similar titles
You May Also Like
Reviews
Perfect cast and a good story
Good start, but then it gets ruined
Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.
One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.
"Jud Süss" is without a doubt one of the most racist and radical propaganda movies and has been banned in several countries. Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels described the movie once as the absolute antisemitism movie. The movie is indeed filled with stereotypes and wrong historic connections and interpretations. As minus points are not possible, I would give the lowest rating to the intellectual part, the story and the message of this ugly piece of art.If we have a look on the rest, this movie is quite well acted and succeeds in his dishonourable goals as he really creates the image of a egoistic, capitalist and pitiless finance minister that brings evil over an entire population. Apart of this main character, we have many appealing secondary characters. There is the naive and beautiful young girl that sacrifices her life for her husband and the march of rebellion. Her husband is a tough and courageous man with a lot of charisma. The father of the girl is an honest, direct and sage man that seeks for justice rather than for vengeance. The decorations and costumes of the movie are detailed and luxurious. The creators of this movie put a lot of works and details into this entertaining and emotional movie. For the costumes, the filming techniques and the acting, I would normally give at least seven or even eight points.But the truth is that the propaganda of antisemitism can't be weighted up by the rest as this movie constantly focuses on this and its only purpose is to show how dangerous and evil Jewish people are. The ending of the movie even justifies the acts of the Nazi government to ban Jewish people and don't let them play any role in society.Even though the film is banned in several countries, historians still get access to this movie with certain permissions and I was able to watch this movie in order to write a dissertation about propaganda movies at the university. From a historical point of view, this movie played a very important role and is surely a stunning document of its time, society and ideology under the swastika. This movie can easily portray the lies and propaganda if you know and understand the horrible background of its creation. This movie should be considered as a warning how easily people can get manipulated by the medias and watching this flick really sharpened my senses for this topic. One should nowadays avoid this disgusting content without a doubt. On the other side, one shall not forget that this kind of films have been made and are still made nowadays in countries with radical leaders and have a shocking impact.If I sum all of this up mathematically, I might give four points to this movie even though I hate its message and wish this would have never been created to support the genocide of millions of innocent people under a reign of absolute terror and holocaust.
Watching this film provokes divided reactions. You can admire it for its expensive production values, acting, photography, and editing. Director Veit Harlan's use of crowd scenes are also impressive here as in his other films. 'Jud Sus' is comparable to the handsome Hollywood historical biopics of the time such as Warner Brother's 'The Life of Emile Zola' and others with Paul Muni. The big difference is you will detest 'Jud Suss' for its obvious message (unlike the 'Zola' film) which was to inflame anti-semitism and quash sympathy for Jews at a time when Germany was preparing to destroy them. The film's production history and aftermath is worth exploring. After the war Ferdinand Marian who played the title character supposedly committed suicide due to guilt over his role and Werner Krauss who portrayed several stereotypical Jews was blacklisted. Harlan was acquitted twice for war crimes and went on to make more films. History is still divided about Harlan's role in creating the film. Was he forced to make it or was he a willing co-conspirator who made it too good? There's a new documentary about Harlan that might provide answers: 'Veit Harlan: In the Shadow of Jud Suss' now on DVD>
This film can be viewed from several different angles, and it indeed is. First of all, it's by no means a bad film, meaning - it's very aptly directed, and the narrative runs smoothly. Some of the leading actors are very good, especially Ferdinand Marian, who doesn't stoop to anything banal and draws us a fascinating portrait of a man you can both hate and love. Then there are the shots where German people have had enough of his cunning mastermind, and take justice in their own hands. Of course, when one is immersed in the film, you would do the same. Which means, the film works as it is meant. But then - one is always allowed to ask oneself whether it was impossible for this kind of thing to happen in 1730s Germany. I think it wasn't. I think we can watch this film, and hate the bad guy, without automatically deciding to hate every Jew in the world. After all, there are hundreds of films produced in Hollywood, where the bad guy is Russian or who ever. I do think we as human race are sufficiently grown to leave our emotions in the cinema auditorium and not be influenced by something that we know is not right.
All past comments about this notorious film have been proved correct: it IS rancid, fetid, despicable. The reasons why this film was made are equally above-board: Nazi Germany's number one goal was to descredit Jews the world over by propanganda so vile as to make the average person denounce Jews as vermin to be exterminated. It is said that when _Jud Suess_ was shown, crowds of people would set themselves wildly on Jews in the streets. That Veit Harlan, who as an actor and artist always showed a certain elegance, should have anything to do with this film (and as the director he had quite a lot to do with it), is amazing. One cannot forget that being assigned films had more to do with commands than with choice; nevertheless, he should have been leery of the project that was said to vie with _Der Ewige Jude_ as the start of the campaign of racial genocide.A final tip when viewing _Jud Suess_: Pay close attention to Ferdinand Marian's diabolical portrayal of Suess Oppenheimer. In mannerisms, the easy refinity, the worldliness, the dropping of a bon mot, the wily insouciance of the "Jew" of yesteryears' imagination; it is all caught on celluloid Agfa film. Ferdinand Marian later committed suicide, said to be because of his remorse about his "greatest" acting role.