Reviews & Ratings for
Effi Briest More at IMDbPro »Fontane - Effi Briest (original title)

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Index

10 reviews in total

---

19 out of 22 people found the following review useful:
The word "masterpiece" comes immediately to mind..., 23 March 2002

Author: gsims from Melbourne, Australia

This film has everything one could ask for: astonishing visual intelligence and imagination, wonderfully evocative, impeccably composed images that draw on silent cinema and painting, all perfectly adapted to the very moving story being told, and the period/milieu in which it unfolds: Effie Briest is presented as enclosed in the many different spaces (most of them - especially the interiors - saturated with stifling formality, social rectitude and conformity) through which she moves and in which she lives, or tries to live (the bird in the cage being a transparent symbol of all this). Quite simply, Fassbinder knows - knew - what "mise en scene" really means. The passage of time is brilliantly handled (through, for example, the use of the fade to white, intertitles and a moving voice-over narration), and the cast is flawless, as well as being flawlessly directed. A film of immense dignity and power, yet it somehow remains understated...

---

22 out of 30 people found the following review useful:
one of the best films ever made, 17 July 2005

Author: from United States

Fassbinder's Effie Briest is a tremendous film. it is not an 'adaptation' of the book. it is much more complicated than that. the title as it appears in the film is:

Fontane // Effie Briest // oder

then followed by a long quotation in the next frame. the word 'oder' (or) works as a hinge holding the first title onto its meaning (erklarung). the whole of Fontane's book is framed within the title. and the film is a meditation on the limits of enframement. mirrors are everywhere, doubling and re-doubling the images and framings. to anyone that thinks the camera-work is sub par was obviously not paying attention. the execution of some of these scenes is unsurpassed by anyone.

the film consists of several different layers. there are inter titles, narration (direct quotations from Fontane), and then dialog. this would be the three orders of representation. then there are the layers of sense. as an example take the figure of Effie Briest. she is never a unified subject that we can refer to as an individual. she is the contested site of a number of different forces in a number of fields of discourse. the most obvious evidence of this is the contestation of the name: Effie. Effie Briest? Effie Von Instetten? the film is about this change. and the possibilities of refusal. what would it be to have ones own name and not the name of an other? she cannot. or as her father (who is always called by the signifier 'Briest') continually says 'Das ist ein zu weites Feld'. he pronounces the limits of thought in its foreclosure. it is always a command and always ends the dialog: there is nothing left to say on this subject because we CANNOT think THAT (the repressed idea, which reveals itself as thinkable through the fathers disavowal of its thinkability).

---

7 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
deep movie, 10 January 2003
Author: ans-2 from nyc

a highly philosophical, political, deep, beautiful masterpiece of Fontane, reiterated by Fassbinder. I believe that Fassbinder chose this book because it's reflects his own story of "Angst", in his case, the guilt that if we know the mistakes of our society but still hesitate to rebel.this movie, as most Fassbinder titles is no superficial hollywood entertainment, it made me think.

---

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
The Calculus of Fear, 9 January 2010

Author: hasosch from United States

One the tablets used by Fassbinder in this movie (the same method he shall use 6 years later in "Berlin Alexanerplatz") shows the text: "He put her under pressure wherever he could. So-to-say a calculus of fear" (Fontane). As any other calculi, also the calculus of fear consists of theorems. Speaking about the relationship between Von Instetten and Effi, we have: 1. Never treat her without menacing, but do not show the menace open, so that you can deny it after. 2. Isolate her from society, best make her a child as soon as possible so that she does not get bored. 3. Never praise her for what she is doing, unless in the presence of foreigners. 4. Praise her in front of her parents with whom you should establish a good friendship. If she is complaining later about her marriage, the guilt will be given to her.

As the sub-title of the movie says (the longest ever used in a movie): The movie is about those people who are capable to see the unjustness of social rules but don't help changing them, and by doing so, confirm them. "Effi Briest" is therefore a typical Fassbinder movie which he liked to call "melodramas" and thus also a predecessor of his later "women-movies" about Maria Braun, Lola, Lili Marleen and Veronika Voss.

That this film is an outstanding masterpiece has nowadays been recognized by all leading film experts around the world. Although Fassbinder let himself sometimes inspire by works of literature, Fontane's "Effi Briest" is one of his only three explicit literature adaptations, besides "Berlin Alexanderplatz" and "Querelle". One could perhaps go as far and say: While in "Effi Briest", society is criticized at the hand of one single, individual fate, in "Berlin Alexanderplatz" a society as a whole is put in the pillory, and in "Querelle" a possible alternative world after all the disgust is shown. Fassbinder made this long way in societal criticism in only eight years, during which he approached the society of the time in which he lived, by systematically coming closer to reach the 50ies of the 20th century (Lola). His movies can be seen as chronicles of different means of suppression by using calculi which turn out to be independent of time.

---

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
A Woman's Heart, 15 June 2008

Author: zolaaar from Berlin, GER

Maybe Theodor Fontane does not belong to the outstanding writers of world literature (he would be too provincial for the whole wide world perhaps), but nevertheless, his poetic realism and his sophisticated powers of observation lead his stories to a deep, often radical criticism of social conventions.

That's probably the reason why Fassbinder adopted Fontane's most famous novel "Effi Briest" - to tell the story from the writer's very point of view, as far as possible and to make the social mechanisms of oppression and the assimilation of the individual to that obvious. His concern is already pointed out in the exceptionally long title of the film, which I can imagine is the longest in history and translates something like this: Fontane – Effi Briest or: Many who have a notion of their abilities and needs and nevertheless accept the current regime in their minds through their deeds and therefore stabilize and pretty much affirm it

The atmosphere of coldness, of distance (which is, thanks to Fassbinder, at times really excruciating), of alienation is thematised through the cinematic techniques: mirror shots of the actors with a sometimes very blurred camera, misalignment of the camera by statues, flowers or curtains, cross-fades of dialogues and blindingly white fade-outs which sometimes abruptly interrupts a scene. In this sense, Fassbinder tightened Fontane's criticism to a maximum, but he wouldn't be Fassbinder otherwise.

---

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Sublime visuals marred by ungainly narration and dialogue, 25 August 2010

Author: timmy_501 from United States

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

By 1974 RW Fassbinder had reached the height of his creative powers. With Fontane - Effi Briest, Fassbinder consistently amazes with his visuals; there's something sublime about his casual mastery of angles, reflections, framing, and camera movements. Given the power of his images it's also somewhat shocking to see how clunky the script is. Fassbinder saddles the film with narration that is only interrupted by tedious, drawn out conversations and extraneous intertitles. Various characters narrate the film at different times but more often than not the narrator is actually omniscient and entirely divorced from the story; this device is just part of a bigger problem: a slavish devotion to the source material that isn't kind to the book or the film. One particularly important moment is conveyed via a stagy, histrionic monologue when it could easily have come out naturally in conversation. Overall, Effi Briest is one of the most frustrating films I've ever seen as the marriage between the amazing visuals and the awkward script is no more successful than the doomed relationship between the naive titular character and her pedantically moralistic husband.

---

6 out of 12 people found the following review useful:
Beautiful but distant, 22 April 2004

Author: (nekanderson881@cs.com)

Exquisite black-and-white photography, gorgeous costumes, stunning landscapes, and actors photographed in mirrors and through laced-curtains are the highlights of this emotionally distant film. It is true, however, that the leading actress has her cathartic scene, but it comes late in the film. Too late to really make one care about the spoiled, rich young lady. But this is Fassbinder, and Fassbinder is always watchable, even at his most pretentious. One joy of this film is the presence of Irm Hermann, who can do more with one glare (she doesn't need dialogue as "The Bitter Tears of Petra Von Kant" proved for all time) then any actor I can think of. Schygulla and the other actors are mostly wooden. The beauty of the scene with the starkly handsome Lommel as the rich major and Schygulla picnicking at the beach makes one forgive the shortcomings of the film.

---

2 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Tedious..., 23 March 2010

Author: planktonrules from Bradenton, Florida

Wow, I am out of sync on this German film. While the overall score is very respectable and the reviews are mostly glowing, I didn't like the film at all. Now I've seen about a dozen Fassbinder films and I often have really enjoyed them, but watching this one was a chore.

First, the film's style seems less innovative or interesting than just dull and, dare I say it, cheap. The black & white film looked more like a way to save money than anything else and the film played like a long series of vignettes all strung together with awkward dissolves. This made it all seem very episodic--like the audience is getting snippets instead of seeing a story.

Second, the story wasn't particularly interesting. The film played like a Bergman film WITHOUT the complexities. And, sadly, the film was slow and the characters uninvolving.

Overall, I found watching this film a chore. There are many wonderful German films out there, but I assume the average person would also find this film dry and unapproachable, as you need a lot of patience to stick with this film.

---

6 out of 15 people found the following review useful:
I feel exactly the opposite way of this film's first commentator below, 8 October 2001

Author: zetes from Saint Paul, MN

I did not find Fassbinder's filmmaking static and boring. I found it brash and exciting. His style is superb. HOWEVER, I have to say that I found the story, with which I am unfamiliar, incredibly bland. How many 19th and early 20th Century novels have this exact same plot? It's the simplistic "fallen wife" scenario without a spark of invention, it seems to me. In that way, I could not stand this film and was trying hard not to pass out. However, Fassbinder's miraculous filmmaking, cinematography, mise-en-scene, direction, music, even the acting, kept me at least interested. I give it a 6/10.

---

8 out of 33 people found the following review useful:
A very problematic Fassbinder, 4 November 2000

Author: Sorsimus from Surrey

When reviewing an ordinary film (like Jurassic Park) It is customary to note if the film is not particularly "cinematic". This would then mean that the film in question wouldn't have flashy tracking shots, groovy camera angles, fast paced editing and so on. If these are considered to be good qualities in a film then Effi Briest surely is a bad film.

But what if from the beginning the film was meant to be like this? Fassbinder has chosen to hide his work in order to bring forth the original book Effi Briest is based on. To do an adaptation of a text he obviously liked a lot can't have been an easy task to a filmmaker who never relied on existing models of filmmaking. Considering that, one must view Effi Briest as an attempt to create a film as faithful as possible to the original.

The result, however, is not alltogether satisfying because most of us will interpret it through a framework of "watching a film". And it must be noted that as a film Effi Briest is slowgoing, static (as is to be expected) and dramatically flat. This could be perhaps a result of a Brechtian device of Fassbinder's to prevent the audience from sinking into the plot (which in itself would be a fine starting point for a soap)but what difference does it make if the film is unwatchable.

---

---

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Ratings	Awards
External reviews	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user reviews	Your vote history