Olympia 1. Teil - Fest der Völker
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Olympia Part One: Festival of the Nations More at IMDbPro »Olympia 1. Teil - Fest der Völker (original title)

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 20 reviews in total 

32 out of 35 people found the following review useful:
The evil this reveals lies precisely where we least expect it to - here and now, 7 November 2001
9/10
Author: Spleen from Canberra, Australia

It was the 1936 Berlin Games that introduced the opening ceremony, the torch relay, the three-tiered presentation ceremony, and the overall sense of lavish, religious spectacle. In a way these are the first modern games. Does it worry you that most of the stuff we most fondly associate with the Olympics originated with the Nazis? It doesn't worry me: the Nazis' moral sense may have been deplorable, but their aesthetic sense was not nearly so bad as people like to pretend.

The most striking thing about Riefenstahl's documentary, viewed today, is its good taste. I admit I haven't seen the whole thing. Split into two parts for German release, it was edited somewhat and released simply as "Olympia" elsewhere, and it's "Olympia" that I've seen. I mention this because it's quite possible that "Olympia" is the version with the jingoism edited out. But I don't think so. (Surely if the film were to wave the swastika offensively, it would do so around the beginning, and the introductory sequence is just marvellous - it no more deserves to be associated with Nazism than Orff's "Carmina Burana".) In any case, if they edited all the jingoism out of a modern, two-hundred-hour Olympic telecast, it would last about ten minutes. It's amazing how much more crass and brazenly nationalistic modern coverage is when compared with Nazi propaganda. Riefenstahl shows races won by people other than Germans (and yes, some of them are non-Aryan) - she even shows us enough of the presentation ceremonies afterwards for us to be able to hear other national anthems! During the local coverage of the Sydney games I heard NOTHING but "Advance Australia Fair". Only other Australians can fully appreciate the horror of this.

Australian sports coverage, of course, was much better when it was in the hands of the state (or rather, the state-owned ABC network) ... but then, Australia is a democracy; the real shock is finding out that even HITLER'S regime could produce more even-handed, tasteful and intelligent Olympics coverage than we'll ever see from a modern commercial network.

Riefenstahl's footage is also more beautiful and better edited, and the athletes in general look LESS like fascist monuments and more like human beings than they do today. But that goes without saying.

Was the above review useful to you?

25 out of 30 people found the following review useful:
Is beauty propaganda?, 7 March 2000
9/10
Author: bullfrog-5 from toronto

I've read that this film, which portrays human beauty and athletic success, serves to justify euthanasia of the weak and infirm. If so, does not Da Vinci's David do the same?

My belief is that without the historical context, there would not be a single viewer who would suggest that this is propaganda fostered to support the atrocities of the Nazi Regime. As another reviewer suggests: this is no better than an NFL highlight film.

Actually, this is better than an NFL highlight film. Highlight films focus only on isolated moments of peak action. Do most of us prefer to just see the winning basket or the last touchdown? It's the game, the show, the story which gives us pleasure - not just the ending or spectacular feat.

The beauty of this film and its companion lies in its crafting. The lighting, the camera angles, the sequencing, the pace - everything is blended to produce a thing of beauty. It's like the chef who creates a feast with the same ingredients we manage to render a barely palatable meal. Leni produces a feast - a beautiful feast!

Was the above review useful to you?

19 out of 20 people found the following review useful:
Highly original for its time, great use of camerawork, 3 December 2003
9/10
Author: Chris Burin from Bath, England

This is a brilliant sports documentary - the experimentation with camera angles was revolutionary at the time and the pole vault sequence at night is one of my favourite sequences in a film ever. The athletes are portrayed as superhuman, so in this sense the film is elitist and Nietzschean, but this is certainly not a racist film, politics does not play an explicit role, although one could argue that the deification of athletes (they are shown in close-up, alone, to contrast with the watching masses) promotes the idea that some men are greater than others. A fascinating film, and a definite progression from the standard documentary format of Das Triumph des Willens.

Was the above review useful to you?

17 out of 18 people found the following review useful:
Why argue-its a grand piece for work, 9 May 2002
9/10
Author: Agent10 from Tucson, AZ

If this film was never made, the current camera movements and angles we see today on television would probably never exist. Given unquestionable freedom, Leni Riefenstahl created a film which is bold in composition and visual aptitude. The motions of athleticism are caught beautifully, especially the diving sequence and the running sequences. While many will say Riefenstahl was a pro-Nazi film maker, one cannot deny the innovation she instilled in the art of film making. If you can take the near 4-hour running time and the fact there is no dialogue in the film, then experience this film for the power and breathtaking visuals, not the supposed pro-Nazi agenda.

Was the above review useful to you?

11 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
The Dawn of Sports Registration, 13 August 2004
7/10
Author: erwan_ticheler from Amsterdam, Holland

Leni Riefenstahl started something that we all take for granted nowadays when we watch sports.From the following camera in the 100 meters to slow motion action to the build up of tension(start with lesser athletes and end with the winning performance).All this is combined with some beautiful shooting of both the athletes as of the crowd together with the impressive Berlin Olympic Stadium.

OLYMPIA is not a propaganda movie like Riefenstahl's magnum opus TRIUMPH DES WILLENS but it still shows hitler and his gang plus the swastika flag several times(but hey,why is the waving swastika flag propaganda and the waving stars and stripes in SAVING PRIVATE RYAN just a flag).Anyway,it isn't so much about the nazi's,it's about the Olympics and Riefenstahl gives us a journalistic report of it.

Highlight to me(and probably to everybody)is the winning performance of Jesse Owens,one of the greatest athletes of the 20th century.

The second part of the documentary is the lesser of the two with too much emphasis on the diving,but it has got a comic sequence with the Militry.

A good documentary with high historical interest,but I would rather recommend TRIUMPH DES WILLENS.It is more shocking but it gives a better view of the nazi's. 7/10

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
beautiful, 27 January 2004
Author: libi_rose (striegl@colorado.edu) from Boulder

something like 50 cameramen. 18 months of editing. they invented the underwater camera FOR THIS DOCUMENTARY. it is a beautiful and amazing achievement. the fact that Leni managed to make a live event look like something staged, planned, rehearsed- simply amazing.

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 12 people found the following review useful:
A master of film and 60 years later still a masterpiece, 8 June 1999
10/10
Author: anonymous from dallas, tx

I first viewed this film at the Museum of Modern Art 35 years ago;I now own it and the years have only added to my astonishment of what a genius Leni is. She took film to a new and higher art form. The Nazi noise does get in the way, but the epic scope and feel of the finished product make it worth viewing. And yes, part one is far superior, but part two is certainly a work of art also. It is a masterpiece. Would that she had done more. She is a most fascinating artist.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
A goddess of filming technique, 9 February 2000
8/10
Author: Eric Sayettat (sayettat@hotmail.com) from Auckland, New Zealand

My comment will not be anonymous... this documentary is one of the best of its kind. Leni was a good film maker and had she left Berlin after 1936 she would certainly have contributed to good cinema.

Sport is here portrayed in a very classic greek and 1930's style. It is probably the best movie made on the modern Olympics.

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 14 people found the following review useful:
Comment on gbheron Review, 13 September 2004
Author: aurevmu

As you nicely pointed out the NFL footages that you watch today, and those of Olympia that were shot some 60+ years are the same. Which means that NFL is still using techniques that Leni Riefenstahl explored long time ago, which further means that she's 60+ years ahead of her time. When you denounce something you have to look at it from the historical context. This was groundbreaking at time, and every sport event coverage since borrowed from it. Leni Riefenstahl actually wanted to be catapulted with a camera to give an incredible feel of one of a kind sports event, but this could not be carried out. NFL ought to try some of this innovation that Leni considered long time ago, we're much more technologically advanced now...

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
A masterpiece of camera-work but surely not an easy watch!, 24 October 2008
7/10
Author: peapulation (peapulation@hotmail.com) from Ireland

Whether you think Leni Riefenstahl was a Nazi or not, nobody can deny that she does take a neutral stance in this film. Indeed, it is surprising to hear the American national anthem being played in a German film of the Nazi era. Another gem in the film is to see Leni quietly glorifying the figure of black American athlete Jesse Owens, who famously disappointed Hitler by winning 'too many' medals for his taste. She looks at him as an athlete, and observes his cyborg-like body. When Jesse wins, the people whistle, but that's not important, as the American national anthem will cover them off.

There is no doubt, the strength of this film is the cinematography. Riefenstahl did in Germany what Vertov did in Russia, only her style comes closer to today's tele-reportage than the Russian's. There are other fundamental differences between the two.

Olympia as a whole (part I and 2) stands proudly. Yet, although the real trick was to film the actual footage as it happened, using pioneer effects of slow motion, fast motion and precise framing, the good stuff is found in the recreations, particularly at the start of part II, which portrays a 'gods-like temple' where the athletes relax in sight of their following tests.

It's an admirable work, but as a lot of the old cinema, it is outdated. While 'Triumph of the Will' really wasn't as much (possibly because it's easier to plan an event that takes place in a shorter time, such as the Nuremberg Rally, as a lengthy event like the Olympic games), Olympia is lengthy, and overall, not an easy watch. In some bits, it's hard not to be tempted by the fast forward button on the remote control. But there is no denying that this is another testimony of Leni Riefenstahl's often underrated and mostly willingly obscured influence.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Amazon.com summary Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history