GamerTab That was an excellent one.

SnoReptilePlenty Memorable, crazy movie

Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Jenna Walter The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

man_with_a_van What is this movie about? The protagonist is a young man called Adolf Hitler. You'd almost think it is about the historic person with the same name. It is not! Nevertheless they mix the biography of the real Hitler with this bizarre character. But the essential facts are completely fictional. For example: Hitler gets rejected by the art college. He is living at that time in the movie in an homeless shelter. When the real Hitler got rejected he was living together with a friend in a rented room. The homeless shelter came years later. All the time he utters exact quotes from Adolf Hitlers book "Mein Kampf" but it was written years later than the period of time the movie extends over. He is disgusted meat dishes that he even sometimes has to vomit just from the look at meat but the real Adolf Hitler liked meat at that time. He just became later vegetarian because he thought that meat would cause his severe stomach problems. Hitler even ate soup with marrow dumplings up to the last.In the movie he joins a group of men who terrorize jews and hobos. That never happened. Hitler first got radicalized at WW1.He talks all the time with a strong Austrian Viennese accent. Hitler however was born in Braunau am Inn directly on the Bavarian border and then moved with his family to several places in Bavaria where he was raised. Therefore in reality he was talking in a very thick Bavarian accent. He even often said how much he hated the Viennese accent.In the movie he is constantly surrounded by a Jewish hobo called Schlomo Herzl who invented Hitlers typical look and even wrote the book "Mein Kampf" that is later stolen by Hitler. This guy never existed. I've got the feeling he is kind of the second protagonist just because he was played by Götz George, a mediocre actor that was for whatever reason very popular in Germany till he died.In one scene Hitler talks about the "Völkischer Beobachter" a Nazi- newspaper that first was named like this in 1920 and just existed because Hitler came to power in the early nazi-party. I could go on and on. I know this kind of movies. They just want to tell a moderate story and try to get attention by installing Hitler somewhere in the story. Then a lot of loose references are thrown in to save appearances. This is just a cheap trick. The poor quality of the movie speaks for itself. A total waste of time. I gave three stars just because the actors are not as bad.

OJT After being very keen about watching a dramatization of young Adolf Hitler, and what lead him to join politics in stead of art, the writing of his "Mein Kampf" and the rise of his evil soul, I must admit I was quite disappointed with this film in more than one way.First of all it doesn't tell the story in a vary accurate way, it's also in a way more focused on other persons than Hitler himself. This makes the story confusing and difficult to follow. You simply doesn't get what it's all about. It's in a way illogical to me. What's the worst sin here, though, is that the film tells what should be an exciting story, too boring.The film is well played, though the acting is quite theatrical, suited for the theater scene more than the big screen. No wonder, since this is based upon a play by George Tabori. in many ways, this hasen't been tranfered to a feature like it should have been. I can imagine it was strong in a theater.But Hitler is well depicted, by Tom Schilling, as the strange bird he obviously was, with the insane racial ideas he obviously was indoctrinated with, and at least we get to know why he got involved with politics, and how his trademark mustache origin end. We see the poor conditions in Austria (or in fact much of Europe) a good hundred years ago. We a So see the racial hate towards the Jews, something which Hitler was inbred with. This is the best part of the movie. It seems to be very historically accurate in depiction of the living conditions.We get to know young Hitler as an almost insane, ungrateful, untalented young brat, with disgusting attitude, insulting language, and still with a terrible strong intensity, which we all have seen in film clips. Hitler wasn't a great speaker, but his intensity still was able to make him "Der Fuhrer" for a German/Austrian population.This could have been so strong and interesting, but has one up as quite disappointing. At least I had much bigger expectations after seeing great Austrian films by Michael Haneke and Ulrich Seidl.

hwyhobo At first I thought the author was just being fanciful with facts, but as the movie deteriorated and sank deeper and deeper into absurd, I am left puzzling - what was the point of this? The movie has nothing to do with historical facts, it isn't really funny, it portrays Hitler as an insane petulant teenager cared for by a loving wise old Jew (however unkempt) who apparently also wrote Mein Kampf, but of course with a different message, and who is sexually pestered by a young blond maiden with long braids... should I continue?The movie meanders from ridiculous to insulting. In the end you can't believe you just watched it.

Warge I own and have read the real Mein Kampf, written by Adolf Hitler during his short stay in prison, and also quite a lot of other literature about Hitler and his early years, which is important, since Hitler did not shy from lying in the book.Now, the film about Hitler's early years in Vienna could have been so good if it didn't try to explain every little thing that would later happen - the idea to the swastika for example, or even the growth of his now characteristic moustache.The film portrays Hitler as a young, from the beginning hateful man who is adopted by a jew (of course) and how he drops from being a failed painter to a leader of a small group of thugs, leading them against the jews.This is ridiculous and has very little with the truth to do. The only thing the film gets right is: Hitler failed getting into the art academy. That's it. The rest is a some kind of desperate attempt to explain every little detail with the later NSDAP and antisemitic movement and of course Hitler himself, which is a pity really, since I looked forward to seeing a film about the early years without the bias towards Hitler - which of course is hard to shy away from if one is a normal, thinking person.Technically it is brilliant, and the acting is good - what the film lacks is a more observing eye or script, which is the basics in ANY good film.I would not recommend it, unless one has nothing else to watch and don't care about details as a history buff, because it is good enough to kill a couple of hours with. Despite the flaws.