Nazi Comment
-
sengoku808 — 19 years ago(December 05, 2006 01:31 PM)
"I wonder if anyone knows where the film was shot; what served as Darlington Hall, and were the interiors mainly sets or location interiors?"
this question is answered in the Making Of and Audio Commentary for the Special Edition DVD! They filmed on real spots and there is no Studio used! The Interiors used are alloted of 5 real estates still inhabited by real Aristocrats! The Audio Commentary still holds more Information on this matter and is also very fun to watch! -
jg67 — 19 years ago(December 14, 2006 05:50 PM)
" The Audio Commentary still holds more Information on this matter and is also very fun "
I agree. Interesting how the main house that served as Darlington Hall wouldn't let them open the front door for the hunt scene.
How much did you put out to get in?
http://imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=5642503 -
pamsfriend — 19 years ago(December 07, 2006 12:41 PM)
Regarding Ribbentrop, the story went that in the runup to one pre-war crisis as tensions mounted in Germany, Nazi bigwigs were told not to worry, that Ribbentrop knew Lord so and so. I believe it was Goering who responded 'that's the problem, Lord so and so knows Ribbentrop.'
-
mark-1589 — 18 years ago(April 11, 2007 02:53 AM)
I also wondered about this comment. While I think the interpretation generally agreed upon here is plausible, it is not the only possible one. I consider it somewhat farfetched that the German ambassador would actually be concerning himself with which pieces of art would be ripe for looting. Not to defend the Nazis in any way, but their plans at that time were to take Poland and the reason they had all these meetings with Britain and France was to convince them not to intervene (in other words, they wanted victory without war). The idea of actually conquering Britain did not become a feasible reality until Britain and France declared war on Germany (Sept. 1939) for its invasion of Poland and then Germany conquered France in about 6 weeks in the May/June 1940. Before that most Germans did not believe they would be able to easily conquer France, much less invade Britain. Although Ribbentrop was a Nazi true believer, I wonder whether in 1939 his mind would have been focused on looting art after they conquered Britain. In my view, the more plausible explanation is that he wanted to impress his host and the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary with his knowledge of English art and with his general level of culture and sophistication. Part of the duping process was to convince Britain that Nazi Germany was a legitimate power, that it was following in Germany's traditional footsteps as a great center of culture, etc. If that point was conveyed, then it would be easier to convince the British that they had nothing to worry about from the Nazi's.
Anyway, that is my alternative reading of this scene. -
youwouldno — 18 years ago(June 15, 2007 03:24 PM)
I think you are correct that the earlier interpretations are off base. I feel pretty confident that he told his aide to note his approval of the painting for the purposes of discussing it in conversation later. The scene might have been suggesting the German Nazi elite were uncultured since the official asked his subordinates for their analysis.
-
mark-1589 — 18 years ago(October 17, 2007 09:03 AM)
To JustPassing, as I noted in my previous post, I think there clearly is a question. I think your view on it is quite lacking in historical perspective in the sense that you assume what did happened necessarily had to happen. The fact that the Nazi's later did conquer essentially all of continental Europe does not mean that all of them makes specific plans in advance that included conquering all of Europe, including the British Isles. The events of the film concern Germany's efforts to convince Britain and France to turn the other way while it rearms, swallows up Austria, dismembers Czechoslovakia etc. There is much historical debate as to whether the Nazis really planned in advance to do everything they eventually did, especially invading and conquering the Benelux countries and France. Many historians consider that the Nazis were hoping to essentially rewrite the map of Central and Eastern Europe without interference by the Western Powers (if you can conquer smaller lands without a fight, all the better). Especially considering how unlikely the eventual outcome must have seemed in 1936 (when apparently Germany was highly weak militarily and could have been occupied by UK and France), I find it highly implausible that 1938 Ribbentrop would actually be making a list of painting he could steal after they invade and conquer Britain.
-
Jason_Radley — 17 years ago(May 29, 2008 10:33 AM)
Having listened to the audio commentary with the director and producer (Ivory & Merchant), the meaning evidently was to do with possible future conquest, but I agree with you about this being anachronistic. Beside the point, but a more plausible interpretation would simply be that the information gathered would have been of personal interest to the art-loving Hitler.
-
Piperson — 12 years ago(January 09, 2014 12:00 AM)
The two underlings who spotted the "superior" painting were probably there as art experts. We could see their interest in the painting as a way to help their boss communicate with his host, if we didn't know about the nazis what we now know.
It is a dangerous quality in people who appreciate great art and music that they can see their love of culture as setting themselves apart from the "great unwashed".
At another point a german refers to a "second-rate" country (I can't remember which) but he implies that the country is less worthy than the germans are because the germans are first rate. This is the kind of thinking that brings about bad results. -
ThingyBlahBlah3 — 17 years ago(May 29, 2008 07:49 AM)
Actually, the first poster had it right; the top Nazis, particularly Hitler and Goering, were obsessed with collecting European art, and dreamed of bringing all of the old masterpieces to Berlin for keepsies.
There's a non-fiction book called 'The Rape of Europa' which details this aspect of the Third Reich, and there was a documentary made from it a few years ago:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0997088
I haven't seen the movie, but the book was excellent (if a little dry).
'It's a mess, ain't it, sheriff?'
'If it ain't, it'll do till the mess gets here.' -
cyninbend-149-610489 — 10 years ago(January 23, 2016 02:14 AM)
What you write is true, in fact the final solution sometimes took 2d place to Goering's need to use the trains to bring back purloined art from conquered land.
However, as I see it the dispute is whether they would have been picking out art in Britain before they ever invaded Poland. It's the timing. Were they already plannin g to defeat Britain and take art from there before they even were at war? -
CindyH — 10 years ago(December 14, 2015 06:08 PM)
I cannot say what others have explained, but I highly suggest you do some reading on Nazi's. It's important for your life, I promise.
In any case, here's my history lesson. High ranking Nazis, such as them, were terrible people. They expected to win - and therefore subjugate - the people of the British Isles during WWII. However the absolute incredible resilience of the British helped them to not fall into Nazi hands. Some of the channel islands fell, but that's as far as it went.
Nazis were known for looting. Not for looting in the sense of men keeping things for themselves, but instead for the monstrous Fuhrer. Hitler ordered all valuable art or anything of historical value to be stolen from the people he oppressed; that being, those that fell under his rule that were not German by birth, those with diseases or were sickly, anyone Jewish that wasn't famous or those who disagreed with his doctrine. Those Nazis believed that when England fell (which it thankfully never did), they would take that artwork from Lord Darlington, which of course meant they were plotting against him.
It demonstrates how naive Lord Darlington really was. He committed treason by colluding with Nazis and so that was the shame that Stevens had to deal with at the end. Why he lied about working for Lord Darlington in the shop.
Random Thoughts:
http://goo.gl/eXk3O