Documentary Film March 18
0 General Document comments
0 Sentence and Paragraph comments
0 Image and Video comments
OLYMPIA
Riefenstahl has always said how important it was to get the ‚architecture‘ of the film right. Where does the film begin? Where does it end? What are its high points? What are the less dramatic events?
The film begins displaying the early beginnings of the Olympics, Ancient Greece. By the time it ends, Reifenstahl has portrayed a modern German society in which the 1936 Olympics is being held. By showing how great Jesse Owens and other Olympians had been by using high angel shots or shots of the entire stadium cheering on people regardless of race really shows how much enthusiasm the olympians exalted out of the audience. The least dramatic events were the minimal shots of Hitler which were cut almost immediately
The film begins by displaying the setting of where the action will take place, which is in Berlin, Germany the home of the Olympics in 1936. Olympia shows the GRAND buildings and statues in the very beginning of the film to set the extreme tone for the film. I think by the time the film ends you get a feeling that some of these competitors you are watching are being portrayed as more than men. There is also a sense of a unification of the different participating countries, although you can’t shake off the perception that Germany seems to be in charge and portrayed as number one, The high points of the film are the shots of the athletes training and competing. The competition itself is highly dramatic which makes all other shots significantly less dramatic.
I agree with the above comments. The film indeed starts with ancient Greece and you see images of ruins and something that looks like a graveyard. It’s almost to show as if Greece is gone but you can have a new Greece, which is Germany.
At one point the sculptures transfer in a real person, so history becomes reality. You see the Olympics in Germany.
I would also like to add that I think the least dramatic thing was that in a time where Hitler had a lot of power, it still focuses on the sports, the Olympics and not on Hitler.
Olympia begins with portraying the traditions of the ancient sports and the city of Olympia. In this regard, Riefenstahl uses the sports events to feature exciting moments, and shows field events with architectures.
For example, the ancient Greek architectures have been survived. I think Riefenstahl might want to show the German world also would be survived for very long time, and be remembered as one of the greatest culture by descendants.
I think the film begins from showing the very early beginning of the Olympics. As the film approach to the end, it shows the modern society. Its high good point is when Jesse Owens plays a javelin throw. The least dramatic events were Hitler’s scene.
When you build something, it usually has a meaning and conveys a message. Much like bridges that allow for the connection between two points based on its architectural significance, films have to maintain and strive to achieve a sort of base format and in the end be successful in its endeavour. Riefenstahl formats the film from ancient greece and builds it up to display the new and modern Germany.
She clearly saw the process of editing as being that like composing music, and wrote about cutting the film, like a symphony…according to the laws of aesthetics and rhythm.
I’m not sure but I think they mean the way the athletes are being portrayed. For instance with the high jumps, the athletes are portrayed in slowmotion. The whole film (starting with the ancient Greek) is about the body, the goddess of the body and the way it’s healthy and strong. By slowing down the film or focusing on it constantly, you can compare it with a symphony, where also certain elements come back.
Riefenstahl uses synchronized sound within the film. The background music and narration distinguishes the film with the moving images in the film such as the movement of players.
It means Riefenstahl’s editing techniques. I think Riefenstahl uses “the laws of aesthetics and rhythm” to swing the audience’s mind. Focusing on human body, smooth transition between the sports games, and synchronizing symphony with moving pictures make the audience get impression.
“Cut like a symphony,” the elements compliment each other and work off of one another.
This film moves to the certain rhythm by showing slow motion of the player. And emphasizing the beauty of human body by slow motion is what the laws of aesthetics is here I guess.
I think Riefenstahl is following laws that emphasize the shots that focus on the athletes. Like the shot with Jesse Owens showing his leg muscles before a match. These scenes are aesthetically pleasing because they show the power of the athlete. As for rhythm, the music was chosen to build up each movement of the athletes as they compete. Like the choice of silence while the high jumpers did their event.
The aesthetics showed things must be grand, sound must have a big effect on the minds of its audience. Those in attendance were happy to be there and everything is grand in the world of Germany, even by its enemies. This is what they wanted you to believe when watching the film.
The rhythm is of an Olympic game full of excitement and equality among the contenders, even if that wasn’t really true.
of the athletes. For example, focusing on runners’ muscles on their legs.
It is to make something more appeasing. By her editing she is able to sentimentalize Nazi Germany through both the music and physical traits of her country (buildings, monuments and the athletes themselves with shots portraying their muscles flexed and during events).
Perhaps he meant appealing. Selecting the triumphant music just marries the prideful image that the film maker is trying to portray.
It seems at times that the film is less about the Olympics, but more about nationalism and the human form.
In a way this is true. The Olympics had been the glorified stage but the Olympians themselves were the main attraction. Shots covering large swaths of the stadium, low angel shots over Jesse Owens as he was at the racers line which showed his stretched muscles and steady posture shows how the people celebrated their perspectives country’s olympians and the God like physiques of the men and women participants.
By analyzing the film you can see the film is more about nationalism and human form several reasons. Firstly many of the shots and specifically the more dramatic ones had to do with the individual athlete. Rather than show an array and bunch of competitors in a single shot, Riefenstahl chose to focus on the triumph and battle one athlete would undergo. The olympics in the film seem to me just as a platform that Riefenstahl used to display the greatness of Germany. Perhaps she believed Germany hosts and Germany wins, therefore Germany is great.
The film seems to focus on the human form as far as the various camera angles (such as close-up, low angle and far away shots) to illustrate the human body in motion. It is especially true in how Riefenstahl focused on Jesse Owens at the starting line, where we got to see his superior physique and the tension and adrenaline that came with waiting for the race to begin.
Riefenstahl focused alot on the human body in this film, to the point where the actual sport became somewhat irrelevant. Her shots were very detailed of the athletes arms and legs. Riefenstahl was more concerned with how beautiful they were, opposed to how good they were at the sport. The nationalism really came from the scenes displaying the crowds. They were proud and chanting and in awe. Similar to a beauty pageant.
Although the subject of them film is the Olympics, the dramatic and patriotic way he shoots the events, the way he edits the events together and the way he glorifies the “greek god like” human body are ways in which the film is less about the actual olympics and more about nationalism and the athletic human form
An athlete’s representation at the Olympics is much more than a game of sport. It represents a nation in a broader pool of other countries. It gives people belonging to a represented country something to cheer about— a sense of pride and nationalism. Human form is also focused on with camera shots that captured athletes’ bodies, especially legs. These camera shots helped parallel the symbolic power and strength that exists in sports. This might also explain why nationalism is touched upon in this film. Strength in athletics showcase power, which reflects the desires of a strong country (nationalism).
As I said in the previous comment, it really focuses on the human body, the goddess of the human body and how healthy and strong it is. By slowmotions when people jump are start running or showing extreme close-ups of their faces, it focuses on the human form but also the nationalism of wanting to win, for your country (also by showing the audience cheering and hearing their noises). People had never seen such close-ups of athletes at the Olympics before.
I think that Riefenstahl edited powerful sports scenes to depict the greatness of human, which can be also assumed as the greatness of the German. For example, clouds with Greek statues and the human body indicate the feelings of the strength, energy, personal trial of athlete.
Olympics is where they compete their skill of each sports. But the film shows more about human body’s form, how they run, how they throw the javelin, etc. Especially when Riefenstahl uses slow motion and close-up angle.
those that are happy with the way things are and are happy with their leader. Of course, that’s all a facade and things greatly changed soon after.
Depending on how you view the film beginning to end, one will be to see two views: the first the olympics and the second one that glorifies a nation and its people. The second view is pushed more than the first at times by Riefenstahl by her scenes that glorify Berlin and scenes such as when you have the sole Olympian in trousers ready to joust a pole while being almost completely naked.
Riefenstahl used slow motion to accentuate the movements of the athletes performing routine motions while warming, but because playback is slowed we are made to focus on the movements of muscle and sinew as the athlete takes position to throw a javelin or discus, as he takes his place on the starting line. It shows nationalism but also oneness of human beings – the closeups of the athletes are very vulnerable, showing their concentration, resilience and determination not to let their country down.
The quality of the cinematography is more important than the subject itself.
Easily Riefenstahl could’ve just shot many images and scenes of the Olympics but she did not. She focused on shots that showed the unity among nations as they cheered on their olympians. Instead of taking simple shots of the olympians she instead took shots before they began their events and at the end when they crossed the finish line. By doing things like this with her equipment she took amazing cinematic shots that allowed for the viewers of this film to be really taken a back – sort of like an action movie.
For example, when they must jump over the horizontal pole. We see a handful of athletes doing it, each taking a different approach, jumping in different directions and contorting their bodies in different ways to make it over the pole.
The cinematography is being emphasized because of the way Riefenstahl orchestrated the film. Its not necessarily about the 1936 olympics rather it is the grand power of the aesthetically pleasing athletes and the greatness of Germany. The fact that she shot athletes training before the olympics gives you an idea that this is her area of focus.
Looking at the many different aspects of the film, I feel that the cinematography is the more central topic of the film rather than the Olympic’s itself. I really liked how the film started out depicting the “history” and time leading up to the actual event of the Olympic’s. This point in the film also really set the tome and really put you in the place of the event. Something that also set out this film from the rest is the amount of cameras and different angles throughout the Olympic’s. She captured some really interesting shots.
Riefenstahl really wanted to create an image opposed to just tell a story in this film. The subject of the film is the 1936 olympics, which was presented to us in it’s raw form. However, Leni also made it her business to create snapshots and slow motion movement in the cinematography. I believe the purpose of this was to recreate the ancient greek statues that we saw in the beginning of the film.
The Cinematography is emphasized because the quality of the footage reflects the artistic credentials of the director and the message that she (Riefenstahl) portrays. Not only does she want to portray her message in a carefully constructed way using selective cinematographic decisions, but her decisions also reflect the credentials and truth-value in her message.
The cinematography is emphasized because Riefenstahl could also just have shown the athletes running, jumping or the noises of the audience cheering. It would still be a nice film for that time that showed the event but no, Riefenstahl really showed the different forms of cinematography by using extreme close-ups and slowmotion. That’s why the quality of the cinematography is more important than the subject itself, in a way.
Although the film is assumed as Nazi propaganda, the documentary’s effect such as great cinematic shots still leads the audience and filmmakers to high quality and supportive film professionals.
I think that Riefenstahl’s cinematography leads the filmmakers to what documentary films should continue attempting as sports documentary featuring the successes of many countries’ athletes.
This film is a great example of how a film creates its own reality, its own universe no matter what subject it depicts.
If it were not for the shots of Hitler nor the decorations of various forms of Nazi propaganda around the stadium one would not believe this is Nazi Germany. Instead by suspending one’s reality one travels through ancient greece through history into Modern (1936)times where all of the world’s nations strive for one thing that is not war nor greed but instead Medals proving the physical achievements of their people.
I think the film creates a reality that these athletes who compete in the olympics are not like ordinary men. Perhaps she means to portray them as G-d like figures. Although this is definitely her focus, I can also see other athletes losing which in sense makes those athletes more human. However perhaps she means to say the top athletes are the ones who need to be greatly appreciated, the ones who win.
The film creates a reality that makes these athletes appear equal and respected.
Whether Hitler wanted non-white competitors there or not, they were there, and the film gives everyone camera time.
The (real) reality would be what we spoke in class- how Hitler was supposed to shake the hands of winners, however, since he didn’t want to shake hands with Jesse Owens, he didn’t shake anyone’s hand.
The film portrays the Olympics as a place for humans to gain respect and appreciation from one another through competition. Athletes from the respective countries become heroes to their people as a representation how great their nation is.
From the beginning of the film, Riefenstahl created a universe of her own. She presented Ancient Greece with the statues, lying in ruins, yet displaying emotional and strength. We then saw the statues be reborn in human form and display strength and beauty through movement. The ruins also transformed into a peaceful garden. Last but not least, the beautiful and strong travel from the peaceful garden to the battlefield, aka the stadium, where they compete. The entire sequence of these shots in the beginning of the film portrayed the athletes as immortal and god like. One could even say we were getting a peek into the heavens.
Adding to the idea of “German Romanticism”, the Olympics were also another way to show political dominance. Since many world powers (countries such as US) were to participate, the fact that the Olympics was even held in Germany showed that it was at its strongest state, holding one of the most coveted and popular athletic competitions in the world.
It shows the emotions of the athletes in some sort of way. By focusing on the athletes so much by emphasizing their bodies, slow-motions and stuff like that, it focuses on how they athletes might feel in that moment, more than just a sports event you’re watching. Maybe it’s so you start to wander what the athletes would be thinking or how much pressure they would be on (at least I thought of that). It kind of takes your focus away from the crowd or the event and really just makes you watch just one particular subject.
I believe this film creates the reality that countries could still compete against each other in the Olympics no matter what political disagreements were at play between countries during that time. It gives the audience the impression that the entire world is at peace when watching this documentary, when it wasn’t politically, and wouldn’t be literally during the years that proceeded these Olympics. These Olympics were a small period of time in which countries could express themselves through competition in complete freedom and bliss. Even Hitler seemed to be acting casually, rooting for his own country and such. This reality of peace between the world, emitted by this film, became the complete opposite the next year with a world at war.
I think the film depicts the greatness of human. The film shows many sports events. When athletes win the game, they become heroes, and people appreciated them. It is quite similar as nowadays, and thus shows reality.
I think reality that we can see is that athletes in this film are extraordinary and their beauty of human for is different from non-athlete people.
The reality of this film is that of conquest and power and the displays of those ideologies by Nazi Germany. The shots and angles glorify the impending triumph of the Hitler regime. The over all experience of valor and accolade fall right into the ideology of the Nazis and Hitler
Olympia is very much the ideological opposite of Triumph of the Will. The film celebrates the collective nature of sports, instead of exalting a single leader.
In essence both films are different. Triumph of the will idolizes a man who has given “rebirth” to a nation that had been humiliated following the First World War whereas Olympia disregards any single man, nation or group and focuses on the unity of people as they cheer for their Olympians.
That is true, he did like to say he was for world peace. But it is clear it would seek world peace under a Nazi World. In order to do this he controlled the propaganda and hence he controlled Riefenstahl.
I do not agree that the two films are ideological opposites. I think Triumph of the Will directly shows the greatness of Germany and its leaders of the Nazi party. Olympia sort of indirectly does this as well and their main ideas do not necessarily change so much.
I think it is interesting to look and compare the differences of the two even though they both involve Hitler. In Triumph of the Will, the focus on Hitler was much more prevalent than in this film. In Triumph of the Will, it was much more of a look at Hitler’s personalty and how he acted and how people responded to his actions. It was also made to look Hitler look really good and empower him. However, this last film really didn’t do that. This really was shown when Jesse Owens, was winning events at the Olympics and there were no reaction shots of Hitler. In a way I feel that they are similar because Triumph of the Will holds Hitler on a pedestal and this last film does nothing to harm his image.
I agree. Both films promote Hitler, just in Triumph of the Will it is much more direct then in the other film. Using a subtle approach still very much in fact creates vivid image of how important an individual is.
Although Olympia and Triumph of the Will celebrated different events, they both highlighted the main focus and theme — the power and strength of Nazi Germany. While Olympia celebrated the power of Germany via athletic competition, Triumph of the Will celebrated the dominance of Nazi Germany through the romanticization of Hitler.
Yes and no. I would agree by saying that Triumph of the Will indeed focuses on a single leader (Hitler) and Olympia celebrates the collective nature of sports, but I disagree because I think Olympia also focuses on one particular thing, which is the subject, the athlete. By all the close-ups and slowmotion, you really just focus on one athlete all the time and what he/she is going through so in that sense, it also focuses on one person.
Both films include Hitler. In Triumph of the Will, the film idolizes Hitler, and shows how great Hitler’s personality is, just like “He is the one.” Olympia focuses on the greatness of human, but it still includes Hitler. I think they are similar because both films deal with Hitler and the Nazi party.
If I remember correctly, they didn’t show his positive/negative reactions, just gave him some neutral camera time.
It’s ever clear when (some) attendees present the “hail Hitler” symbol during their entrance into the Olympic stadium as they address the nation.
I think they could be seen as ideological opposites. Triumph of the Will emphasized German greatness by displaying the various advancements made under the rule of Hitler. Germany were in dire straits and Hitler helped fix that. Olympia on the other hand focused on the physical strength of man. Had athletes, like Jesse Owens, not been there to shock the public, maybe more German athletes would have been featured. This would’ve displayed the greatness of the German body instead of the human body.
In Triumph of the Will, it was more about Hitler – how he acted and how people react to it and treat him as God. However, on one hand, in the Olympia it was more about the unity of the athletes and nation – Hitler was just part of it. But I don’t know if that means the two films are ideological opposites.
While in Olympia the games itself and the athletes are the stars of the film, the idea that Germany is in great hands shows that the film is almost an extension of “Triumph of the Will,” which was seemingly made just to show Hitler as an individual with a desire to help the people of his country in mind.
The way that Leni Riefenstahl’s Olympia was portrayed was much more exciting than the Olympics actually are.
She definitely fooled me. Now in the 21st century when we watch the Olympics on the TV, one can see everything, when the Olympians pause for water, take breaks and when they win or cry from losing. Leni Riefenstahl does not afford the audience this luxury because she only shows to the viewers all the cheering and medal presentations. Thus one believes the Olympics was full of nonstop events and roaring.
Just goes to show how she was in the end adhering to the policies set forth by Hitler and consequently herself. There is no way Hitler would of considered the approval or funding of her film if it did not portray Germany in a glorified light. However this “light” I mention could not shine to much on Nazi Germany itself, lest becoming a full blown propaganda film that further highlighted Nazi Germany.
It seems pretty simple that she took shots that would be exciting, dramatic, and enjoyable for the viewer to watch. She didn’t shoot all the boring occurrences in the actual olympics that would not satisfy a viewer or fan at the event. Since the olympics cannot omit these unenjoyable or uninteresting parts and Riefenstahl can, the film is more exciting than the actual event.
I feel that she took only the interesting parts of that Olympic games. She was able to edit out all of the waiting and edit them to where it was one even after the other. Also, if many people in Germany had the same thoughts on people of color as Hitler did, she was able to show just how good Owen’s was [is]. This excitement seemed to be more exciting than the actual film for me. While I was watching the film, I got roped into the events and asking myself, “Is this person going to make it?”
I think that is a sign that it was a great film.
There is clear excitement throughout the film that feels very current and enthralling at the same time.
Riefenstahl created excitement from the way she developed the prologue leading up to the olympics. The film starts by placing you years before the olympics and showing the process it took to get there . She uses tracking shots on the statues and monuments to create a perception of moving through time and history. She also shows the remains of ruins to give a sense of Germany being rebuilt and reborn with strength.
It can be more exciting than the event it covers by the way its edited together. The pole jumping scene was so dramatic, much more dramatic than actually being there and watching the entire event I’m sure. This question goes back to the idea of a film being able to create its own reality.
Because Riefenstahl left the ‘boring parts’ out. She focuses primarily on the dramatic, exiting parts of the movie and not all the parts where the audience is waiting for something to happen or stuff like that. The viewer only gets to see the most lively parts of the Olympics, which makes the film more exciting than the event it covers.
Riefenstahl has a great ability, which is to produce the film with the use of sounds, contents, and great sequence shots. These skills make the film the bigger effect and more dynamic than actual Olympic games.
As with many film makers, they have the ability to create a reality, whatever that may be for them, for its viewers. And so selecting the best scenes out of a event, creates the image that the entire Olympics was exciting than it might’ve been
She uses the details like engaging its audience through varying camera angles towards the player were well accounted for, resulting in an engaging visual experience and more exciting than the event it covers.
With the use of multiple close ups of different competitors, Riefenstahl is able to capture the expression on the faces of the athletes just as a competition starts. This creates a more engaging experience for the viewers and intensifies the anticipation of the start.
Olympia is the quintessential catalogue of the human form.
The film captures the full extent of the human body pushed to physical limits all while moving with such poise and control. Riefenstahl’s usage of slow motion during events such as the high jumps and pole vaults shows us how these athletes not only must have the physical strength and athleticism to pull off these feats, but that you must also be in tune with your body and precise with your movements, which showcases the art form that Olympia truly is.
Nature, the strong, healthy body. Riefenstahl glorifies the goddess body, being one with nature, all natural.
In order to be effective in what one came to do during this event, you had to be resilient.
You also had to have the desire to achieve what you set out to do and you had to have the strength to overcome any obstacles, physically and emotionally. Having strength doesn’t only have to relate to the body itself, but also the mind.
I couldn’t understand why Olympia was called a propaganda film.
It can be considered a propaganda film because of who produced it – Nazi Germany. During the time of the third reich, propaganda was the game. Since it was being produced by Germany it is hard to believe that Joseph Goebbels, Head of Propaganda & Communications would’ve allowed the international release of a film that did not highlight the will and power of Nazi Germany.
Is it considered propaganda simply because of who and where the film was produced or are there actual elements to this film that are propaganda? I am having a hard time finding what they are.
I think Olympia was called a propaganda film for 2 main reasons. First it showed the aesthetically pleasing but also powerful arena, statues, and buildings that were in Berlin, Germany. Those shots were also slowed down to emphasize on the grandness of them. With a strong concentration on the athlete and the human form, Riefenstahl brings a humanistic approach to the film. It is known that the Nazi party also had strong ties to humanism (their own kind). Perhaps her focus on the perfect bodies and men in the olympics is like the Nazis focus on the perfect races of mankind and hate against anyone who does not meet these standards.
It can be considered propaganda simply because of those who were involved and what there agendas were. The underlying themes of power and triumph surrounded by Nazi Germany incorporated into the film were no coincidence and served a purpose. Glorification.
By comparing ancient Greece to Germany, like a rebirth. Also by focusing on Germany and by simple having the film being produces in Nazi-Germany.
I think it is difficult to label the film as Nazi propaganda. However, the film production was controlled by Goebbels. It might make the film as Nazi propaganda.
Olympia was called a propaganda film because it was made by Nazis – it applauds the success of Germany, and this eventually support them as a “great nation.”
Maybe at the start of it, the movie was supposed to be a propaganda film. This can be seen with the German torch runners at the beginning coming after the Greek statues. This might imply that the Germans are just as important as the Greeks. The Greeks are an influences in many aspects of life and will always be. Germany is saying “we will do the same”. They just didn’t anticipate the turnout of talent at the Olympics. Maybe Riefenstahl didn’t either.
In Olympia, however, I see only pure art.
Art comes in many forms. Olympia is art because it is a sports film that incorporates new techniques such as timing audio with the film, which was difficult to do at the time, and as well shots and scenes that would of made any Director and producer at the time envious of the techniques used by Riefenstahl. Thus Olympia is art because it is different and exciting.
The Olympics is definitely a form of art. Sports in general are displays of defying feats orchestrated by the physical and mental will of the human body and psyche. The film shows the beauty of Olympia and its competitions with stunning angles and shots of the athlete performing.
I though the beginning of Olympia was pure art. Something that I noticed when she chose to have statues turn into the live, naked, models was the physique of the body. They way the body changes during the different movements and a look at what great shape these athletes keep their bodies in. I also think that this film was pure art in the sense that she was able to capture so many moments with her wide angel shots. Being able to get the crowds reactions while the games were going on was something that had never been done before.
The production of this film was able to capture the essence of what the Olympics represent in terms of seeing the human body pushed to its physical limits through competition. The production of slowing various parts to allow the viewers to see the human physique move and contort in extraneous ways. The emphasis of human movements also displays a type of coordinated choreography that can be view as beauty in its self.
I would agree, especially for that time. It wasn’t common at all to see athletes in such a close-up shot or with slow-motion. It really highlights the human body and focuses on their muscles and strongness. By glorifying their bodies as a goddess body, it can be seen as a form of pure art.
I think Olympia is an art because there are small details like engaging its audience through varying camera angles towards the player and it leads to the result of an engaging visual experience. Also we can see the art of human through the sports.
Olympia is a piece of art in the sense that it uses the art form of film and documentary to display a sense of perseverance of the athletes. Some could even argue the perseverance of the German people, leadership wise, to put on such a game during a controversial period.
I feel that in a way Olympiad was made to disguise the real face of Germany.
1936 Germany had two faces. The first was a united and strong Germany of which you see in Olympia. The other was a evil Germany hell bent on capturing everything surrounding it and eventually conquering the Eastern Hemisphere in a display of prowess that the German people and more importantly, Hitler contained.
The real face of the Olympics was that of strength, power and accolade. By Hitler spear-heading the event, his is subliminally conveying his agenda. He was the reason all countrymen and races assembled and performed.
The real face of Germany is based on what we know today, which is all of those inhumane actions Hitler and the Nazi party committed. The face of Germany was Adolf Hitler at that time and I don’t think it was a gradual process that made Hitler want to kill and conquer. Once he became the head of the Nazi party, his beliefs became the face of Germany. The film shows no signs of hatred and violence thus it disguised the real face of Germany back then.
I also feel that the real face of this Olympics was that if you are from Germany, you are a winner and you are powerful. That was the name of the game. You are number one.
So is winning one of the main themes of the film and Hitler being there was just something that was lightly focused on?
All of which is part of Hitler’s modus operandi in transforming New Germany into a national power. The Olympics itself focuses on giving accolades to the athletes victorious in displaying power, determination, and pride to represent one’s nation. So having Germany be the hosting ground for an event like this allowed for Hitler to exert his dominance as a leader and showcase what he believed made Germany rise happen.
I read that in the 2016 biographical film about Jesse Owens, Race, the filming at the Olympic Games is depicted with Riefenstahl constantly quarreling with Goebbels about her artistic decisions, especially over filming Jesse Owens who is proving a politically embarrassing refutation of Nazi Germany’s claims about Aryan athletic supremacy. I think this is a great example of how Olympia is made to disguise the real face of Germany in a way. In Nazi Germany, the Aryan race was the only ‘good race’ according to Hitler and his followers. You don’t see that in Olympia, although probably a lot of people knew. But it is definitely a disguise.
I agree with “Olympia was made to disguise the real face of Germany.” On the surface, Olympia appears to be a great sports film by portraying athletic competitions. However, I can see the political promotion because it strongly shows the intention of Nazi party, which is “we are more united than ever.”
Despite Olympia is great movie because of the use of the techniques, but the film is controversial due to its political context. To create this movie, Hitler and Nazis’ participation was necessary. Olympia is made to disguise the real aspect of Germany – to show their unity.
The director is definitely glorifying nationalism and the human form more than the actual Olympics.
Whether she glorifies both nationalism and the human form does not matter, all that matters is that she did not glorify a single nation such as Nazi Germany. She allowed herself to focus on more than one nation indiscriminately and I appreciate that. She could of easily cut out scenes that showed Jesse Owens or any other nation’s Olympian winning and filled the film with just German wins – but she did not. So I do agree she does glorify nationalism and the human form.
I am still struggling to see how Olympia was a, or can be considered, a propaganda film. Even though this film was produced in Germany, she still shot and edited this film without a bias. This is shown thru the fact that she spent such a time filming Jessie Owens. Is it wrong to say that if this film was a true propaganda film that a large aspect of the film would not be someone of color?
I think “only” is too strong of a word to use. I think she may have partially used the olympics for propaganda but she also didn’t. She could have solely focused on Germany’s athletes when shooting but she chose not to, which means the film wasn’t “only” used for propaganda.
Yes. I do, as I said in the previous answer, agree with the fact that Olympia is a disguise of the real face of Germany and in that way also propaganda. This film was also shown outside of Germany and made it look totally different than Nazi-Germany actually was (you don’t see racism or ‘bad’ things Hitler does). So yes, I definitely think it’s propaganda. It’s not objective, it’s not trying to stay as close as possible to the truth but leaving parts out (which isn’t necessarily bad but definitely propaganda in some sort of way in my opinion).
The film has an effective Nazi propaganda tool that promoted its Nationalism. It is not an objective film. It is the view of Nazi Party. The audience only can see the well-united Nazi Party, not the real face of Germany.
I don’t think she is only used the Olympic as a pretext for propaganda – but the way she focuses on one man, and having various angle shots of him instead of taking other players. But I still can see the aesthetics in the film so I don’t think the purpose of making film is just propaganda.
It really amazed me that Hitler actually allowed and wanted the Olympics to be held in Germany considering the fact that he had persecuted minorities in Germany.
No such thing as bad publicity. By being able to show to the world that the new Nazi Germany he has built from the grown up, literally, he shows that they are able to compete with everyone else in the world no matter their origin. Obviously he would of liked to his champions to win all the events but by being able to show how this rising power can compete on the World stage after being stripped of its pride, economy and military.
Hitler is a master manipulator so any glorification of himself or his brand isn’t surprising. He would take any opportunity to show off what he can accomplish. World domination was on his mind and what better way to get people to trust you than to be the main reason for was appears to be unification?
Hitler would agree to a film such as this because it shows the progress of Germany has made in being able to host an event such as the olympics. It also allows for national attention to be placed on Germany and for the country to display its emergence as a national power capable of competing and even dominating over anyone else through the strength and courage of Hitler’s regime.
This is a question we will never truly know the answer to, as only Hitler himself would have known why he agreed to the film. However I strongly believe it could have been a small piece to his ultimate plan. Hitler was a brilliant politician. He understood the game and knew how to persuade people with his charismatic approach. This film was a way to show the greatness of his Germany which perhaps attracted more followers for him. It may have also fooled individuals and nations of what Germany was truly all about.
Hitler’s agreement to filming the Olympics in Germany is another strategy of his to maintain Germany as a dominant world power. Given that the Olympics is a highly coveted and public global event, Germany’s hosting of the events showcased the extent of power that Germany has. This was a chance for Hitler to prove Germany’s strength relative to the countries participating.
For many reasons. Simply by showing how powerful Germany was, how good and strong and ‘reborn’ the country looked but also because every publicity, is good publicity. Even when people didn’t like Hitler or Germany in that time, I can imagine that Hitler wouldn’t nothing more than people to hear from him and the new, rebuild Germany. So having the Olympics in Germany couldn’t make more sense I guess. What amazes me more is that other countries allowed it to happen.
I think that Hitler absolutely knew that it is a great chance to get popularity. This is because not only does it allow the German’s attention to him but also international attention.
I think it was one of his campaign as a leader. Filming is great way to show the different side of Nazi and promote themselves to the world. And it also shows that they are still powerful in the sports – unflattering dominance.
If any stayed beyond the period in which they were expected, I’m sure he would have persecuted them to the fullest extent of his power, which was great.
Leni Riefenstahl’s Olympia captured the ideal Nazi Fascist aesthetic.
Basically, both the Olympics and fascism are earthly faiths that worship the human physique and pursue the conquest of the will. The Olympic slogan of (“faster, higher, stronger”) is something that could have been fantasized by Hitler or Mussolini. Through the 1920s and 1930s, celebrations of the Olympiads and fascist conventions grew increasingly similar. Together they fit under the quasi-religious experience, with gradually sophisticated rites and rituals, and decorated with striking iconography. Even their salutes favored one another.
The fascist aesthetic in Olympia represented what Hitler wanted his country to be — strong, youthful, and resilient. This is why Riefenstahl included shots that focused in on the human form to depict strong people in representing Germany as a nation.
Because it shows the beauty of being strong and like a God. Again: the comparison of ancient Greece with Germany, their rebirth, their power, the strong bodies and fit, healthy people. I guess they wanted to portray Germany as healthy, strong and in power as well so it the ideal Nazi Fascist aesthetic.
Riefenstahl displays aesthetics of physical perfection to pursue fascist art. I think physical perfection means “immortalizing,” also means “rebirth,” which indicates “the ideal Nazi Fascist aesthetic.”
The fascist aesthetic in Olympia is Hitler’s ideal Germany. Throughout the Olympia, it shows that how they are solid and high quality of beauty and youth. I think that is why the film didn’t focus on each sport’s result- Riefenstahl mainly edited with shots of human form.
General Document Comments 0
icons on the left to see existing comments.
0 archived comments