Der Fangschuß (1976) Reviews

• Truly fine, dark, engrossing, mature

  trpdean2003-10-03

  I love Der Fangschuss (I think of the title in German, rather than Coup de Grace because the movie is told in German - there's nothing French about it in style, direction, language or locale). I also have a very different interpretation of the movie and different sympathies toward the characters than the author of the other (fine) review - and probably different from the director/lead actress who are generally involved in movies with a quite leftist slant. The three Baltic countries, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, had all been occupied by and incorporated in Russia - and any nationalist movements were put down by the Czars - for at least a hundred years before the Russian Revolution in 1917. During this time, wealthy German aristocrats were allowed by the Russian government to own and occupy great houses on agricultural estates (Junker families). The vast estates had once operated somewhat like southern plantations in the U.S., but like those plantations, were transformed by the liberation of the serfs in the 1860s. Thus, for over half a century by the time our movie begins, the great farms had been operated like any other enterprise - with the vast numbers of agricultural workers free to stay or go. With the Revolution and Russia's consequent withdrawal from World War I, there was of course chaos throughout Russia - including a civil war that lasted until 1921. During this time, the Bolsheviks (the radical Communists) sought to ensure that the Baltic countries remained subjugated - now as part of a now Soviet Union - and the nationalist Lithuanians, Latvians and Estonians sought to use the chaos in Russia to break away and resume the independence that was once theirs. During this conflict, the German Junker families sided with the nationalists (who also wished to install democracy) rather than the Bolsheviks. Thus, even as the aristocratic Germans returned to their homes from the most horrifying war that had ever existed, they were involuntarily forced into a new war for their very homes by the besieging Bolsheviks who sought to maintain the status quo absorption of the Baltic countries in a tyrannical Russia. The German aristocrats made common cause with the Baltic democrats to defend the homes in which they and their families had lived for generations. This movie concerns two such German officers - both of whom grew up in this area of Latvia - and have been friends since they were children. They have grown particularly close in four years of fighting on the western front in W.W.I. Now they are returning home - as they arrive at night, they see artillery shells from Bolshevik mortar bursting over homes. One of the officers is Konrad -whose home remains and whose aunt and sister live there. His best friend who has traveled with him for over a thousand miles from the western front is Erich, a courageous and heroic figure who knows his home was already seized. Erich is a handsome, romantic, melancholy, artistic and thoughtful figure, a veritable Siegfried, who describes his willingness to fight for Konrad's home -- rather than live comfortably in Paris or Germany --as part of his romantic addiction to "lost causes". The defenders of Konrad's home consist not only of the servants of the estate, but of native Latvian and Lithuanian soldiers from the area, as well as some Russian White officers opposed to the Bolsheviks -- some of whom want the return of the Czar and some of whom want the return of Kerensky, the democratic leader who began the Revolution that toppled the Czar but fell six months later in the October Bolshevik Revolution. Konrad's sister, Sophie, is a lonely romantic who is also an immature and trendy political dilettante who believes it romantic to flirt with the local Bolsheviks whose forces attack her home each night. Thus, she has formed a relationship with a dreary Bolshevik tailor in the town. This must all be kept secret from the dozens of soldiers who occupy her home to defend her and her aunt. However, when Erich arrives with her brother, she forms a mad attachment and throws herself at the dutiful Erich who is attempting to save all their lives by directing the defense of the house against the siege. I won't reveal any more of the plot - or the increasing madness and promiscuity of the sister. The movie reveals the trendiness of the sister as leftist political dilettante - who may display personal courage, but brings disaster to all she touches - as well as the difficult path of a romantic conservative figure who follows duty to friend and duty to oppose barbarism -- even when it means personal sacrifice and difficult choices. History shows that the Bolsheviks were defeated, and independence gained, by the combination of the Baltic peoples, the Finnish General Mannerheim (who saw the threat to Finland from the neighboring Bolsheviks - who would attack again in 1939) and the German aristocrats. As a result, the Treaty of Versailles recognized the independence of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia - independent sovereign and democratic countries until overrun in 1939/40 by the Soviet Union pursuant to the Nazi-Soviet Pact. They regained their independence in 1989-91 and are about to join the European Union. Without the difficult and successful fight for independence, these countries would not have had the recent memory of independence to console them during the subsequent half century's suppression of liberties - and would perhaps not have struggled so greatly to regain their liberty. The movie is however primarily a character study - shot in black and white - sometimes a little difficult to follow due to the rapidity with which they identify characters -- but well worth it. It is fascinating.

  More

• Great Emotional Unity

  osloj2001-11-01

  **Film plot and ending analyzed** The Baltic states in 1919 are witnessed two years after the Russian revolution, the country is torn by civil war between the Whites and the Reds and the old Prussian nobility that realizes that this is no longer Germany. Konrad and his volunteer corps have withdrawn from Reval to his parents' castle in Kratovice determined to defend the outdated feudal system. Konrad's sister Sophie maintains friendly relations with the rebels, especially Gregori Loew, the son of the Jewish village tailor. Although she shares his views, she lacks the strength to tear herself out of her surroundings. She falls more and more deeply in love with Konrad's friend Erich von Lhomond, a dashing gentleman rider who "likes to fight a losing battle" because he would only be an insignificant figure in ordinary life. He is not particularly interested in women and is attracted much more strongly to Konrad than to Sophie. He brutally rejects her love but responds more and more jealously as she throws herself headlong into various affairs with his comrades in the corps. Things come to a head at Christmas: when Sophie kisses young Volkmar von Plessen, who wants to marry her, Erich slaps her in front of her aunt and the other officers. She only admits to her love once more. Erich orders her to wait until he returns from a foray against the Bolsheviks. However, Sophie has in the meantime learned the truth about Erich von Lhomond and her brother. She sharply demands an answer from her beloved and then leaves the castle to join Gregori Loew and his band of rebels. The situation in the Baltic has become hopeless for Lhomond and his fighters. Konrad has been killed in one of the last battles and the remainder of his troop decides to head for Germany. Sophie and her comrades are captured by Erich in a battle for a farm during which Gregori Loew is killed. The other rebels are shot at Lhomond's command. Sophie demands that Erich execute her himself. Volker Schlöndorff had first come across Marguerite Yourcenar's novel "Der Fangschuss" in 1965 while working on his film TÖRLESS. Even then, he had been attracted by the idea of making a film based on the novel by an author who had become famous for her historical novels and was the only woman in the Académie Française. FANGSCHUSS follows on from TÖRLESS in both form and content, both films displaying the same respect and caution towards the literary original; both are produced in black-and-white and both are basically about suppressed sexuality and reactionary behaviour with the aim of revealing sadomasochistic relations and fascist tendencies. Volker Schlöndorff has by no means left the political arena to concentrate on a historical subject or purely human problem in this film, which was produced one year after the sensational success of DIE VERLORENE EHRE DER KATHARINA BLUM; the "problematical relationship between men and women" (Volker Schlöndorff) portrayed by the film in the form of a highly dramatic affair is closely related to the social and historical background of a struggle between supporters of the old order and the supporters of new social ideas. Sophie is not only driven to join the rebels by Erich's emotional coldness and the humiliating realization that he used her to come closer to her brother, but also by her revulsion of war and the male solidarity among the officers, as well as by the realization that they need the war "in order to live out their lives" and satisfy their secret cravings. Schlöndorff clearly contrasts the scenes showing the private relations and strains between the protagonists with scenes showing the fight against the rebels and the shooting of prisoners. The leading actors and particularly Margarethe von Trotta have prevented the film from fulfilling its intention of telling the "story of an act of humiliation ending in revolt" (Schlöndorff). Margarethe von Trotta's Sophie remains a shadowy figure capable of expressing her anger and defiance at Erich's cool remoteness, but she fails to display the emancipation of a woman who sees through the men's military madness and rebels against it. Sophie's revolt is emotional, not political. However, the subject of Sophie's desire, the handsome Erich, is also a somewhat pale figure and the erotic triangle between Erich, Konrad and Sophie is created in the viewer's imagination rather than in the reality of the film. Schlöndorff's film thus lacks the dramatic core intended by the director, but he compensates this shortcoming with dense atmospheric images of the barren snowscape and the castle's rundown interiors. With their black-and-white shading and their grey tones reminiscent of the films produced by Jean-Pierre Melville, Schlöndorff's "first mentor" to whom this film is dedicated, these images evoke a decaying, dying world in which real, open relations between people have become impossible. Despite the weakpoints in the screenplay and in the handling of the actors, this gives DER FANGSCHUSS a dramatic presence making the historical situation transparent to the present on at least an emotional level if not on an intellectual plane. It is a powerful film... full of noise and furor...

  More

• My reservations are only technical...

  jonr-32004-11-07

  ...and then only in regard to the atrocious VHS presentation of this film. It's a good thing I understand a fair amount of German and of French, for fully 2/3 of the subtitles are illegible, and the dialog is presented about 50-50 in those two languages. Why on earth did they use white lettering for subtitles--when this film takes place in winter, with snow all about? For that matter, why do they ever use white subtitles at all? It has always been possible to use either white characters bordered by black, or vice-versa, rendering subtitles legible against any background. This technical incompetence is inexcusable and an insult to a very fine film. I was completely caught off guard, not having read Ms. Yourcenar's novel, by the plot twist near the end. Let me warn you: there is not one bright spot in this whole movie, nor should there be, set as it is in the most horrific, chaotic days of World War I. It is gripping, the character development is splendid, the characters are three-dimensional and complex, and the plot presents enough moral and ethical dilemmas to occupy a thinking person's idle moments for months. Acting is uniformly excellent to superb--and the character of the aunt is one that may haunt your dreams, or nightmares, forever after. I voted an eight and am not sure this film doesn't deserve a ten.

  More

• A magnificent film, lucidly depicting the darkness of betray, jealousy, death against the backdrop of a hopeless war.

  kaspian-12006-10-17

  I had never seen any of the work of Schlöndorff prior to watching this film, so Fangschuß came as an overwhelming surprise, a movie whose pathos and displays of cinematic brilliance (Igor Luther) seem like something between the thanatotic films of Bergman and the dreamlike confusions of some of Fellini's work-- Through a Glass Darkly and La Dolce Vita come to mind. More then any film I've ever seen, Fangschuß seems to capture that terrifying collapse of ones life into a sort of unpredictable madness and ambiguity, the torture that the films personal relations depict overshadowing the brutality of the war itself, in a way that all the while juxtaposes the themes of love and death in a way I had hitherto not thought possible. Certainly not light watching-- but I'd recommend this film to everybody, especially since so few people seem to have heard of it.

  More

• Stunning

  bob9982006-11-26

  In a depopulated part of northeastern Europe, desperate men are fighting a hopeless, pointless war after the Great War has ended. It is the winter of 1919-1920 in Latvia, and the Treaty of Versailles will soon establish the independence of the Baltic states. Schlondorff has taken Yourcenar's novel and made a wonderful mood piece out of it. The acting is great: Matthias Habich is stiff and uncomprehending, Margarethe von Trotta is warm and lively as well as passionately Bolshevik, Valeska Gert, whom I remember from a Louise Brooks silent film, is the half-crazy aunt. Schlondorff's films are tremendous literary adaptations that stand on their own as film creations. I see the world a little through his eyes, just as I see it through Renoir's, or Bertolucci's, or Altman's.

  More