Discuss Max

If so, did you like it???

6 replies (on page 1 of 1)

Jump to last post

I saw it and loved it. That era and especially young Adolf Hitler fascinates me. I believe this story was fictional but certainly the historical elements seemed accurate.

Remember the drawings Hitler made and had planned to show to MAX (before the THUGS who heard Hitler's speech killed him)???

Tried doing a search to try and find them, but had no luck.

So apparently those drawings were also FICTION rather than fact. Because all one could find was water color paintings that the real life Hitler made.

How about that MEAT GRINDER that MAX demonstrates when the film begins???

That was also a pretty impressive way to express oneself.

Check out the way this review describes the fictional character:

https://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/27/movies/film-review-hitler-before-the-fuhrer-an-anxious-young-painter.html

Make no mistake: the 30-year-old Hitler imagined by the film is a thoroughly disagreeable creep. As he skulks through the movie, radiating a clenched, clammy phosphorescence, he could be described (in therapeutic terms) as a humorless, obsessive-compulsive rageaholic with zero tolerance for frustration. He is the sort of killjoy who, when attending a social gathering, would be deemed intriguing for the first 20 minutes but quickly would wear out his welcome with his haranguing intensity, rigid certitude and lack of social grace.

Hitler had charisma, to be sure. But the movie imagines that at this point in his life it manifested itself only on a podium. The scary later scenes, which portray Hitler as a ranting backroom orator, suggest how in a public forum his toxic mixture of high-pitched fury and egomania could strike a spark and ignite mob violence.

''Max'' doesn't pretend to be an accurate biography of the youthful Hitler. It is finally more concerned with the fictional Rothman than with his sour, frustrated sometime protégé.

I think it's well known that Hitler was a struggling wannabe artist prior to being discovered by the fledgling Nazi party. As long as the spirit of the era and characters is basically extant, I don't think an imagined scenario that exists within the historical truth is always bad but certainly it's preferable if accuracy is employed.

Here's more of what the NY TIMES ARTICLE says:

Max's artistic ideas are pungently embodied in a performance piece, involving a giant meat grinder, that epitomizes the kind of art that the Nazis would later condemn as decadent.

Hitler comes up with the iconography of National Socialism, including the swastika, and proudly presents it to Rothman, who is impressed enough to proclaim that Hitler has made his crucial breakthrough. It's a novel idea: Nazism as the art project of a failed painter. Because that iconography has yet to be attached to a political and social movement, Max sees it only as a fantastically inventive work of kitsch, a grand theme park of the imagination that today might be labeled Hitlerworld.

In its eccentric way, the movie is rather like a theme park. It is a historical fantasy connecting fact and wild supposition into a provocative work of fiction that poses ticklish questions about art and society.

It's interesting how they say MAX sees the drawings as representative of a THEME PARK.

And for those who prefer FACT to FICTION here's a link where you can see some of the REAL ART WORK:

https://sobadsogood.com/2013/07/22/25-rarely-seen-artworks-painted-by-adolf-hitler/

@MongoLloyd

I don't think an imagined scenario that exists within the historical truth is always bad

In our freshman Lit class we also learned how FICTION is stronger than FACT because FICTION happens 99 percent of the time whereas FACT only happens ONE PERCENT of the time.

And that's also why FICTION is more POPULAR than FACT which is proven by walking into any LIBRARY or BOOK STORE where one finds MOST of the works are those of FICTION rather than FACT.

In other words, one also agrees with what you say about how an IMAGINED SCENARIO is ok.

Because FICTION is also more RELATABLE than FACT (which doesn't happen as often as fiction).

As for the THEME PARK or HITLERWORLD idea …

here's a link where you can see a REAL BUILDING that HITLER had built back in the 30's which has been turned into a TOURIST attraction and which also reminds one of one of the drawings in the film due to it's ENORMOUS size:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prora

The buildings extend over a length of 4.5 kilometres (2.8 mi)[1] and are roughly 150 metres (160 yd) from the beach

In late 2008, plans were approved to have Prora fill its original purpose and to turn it into a modern tourist resort.

It also looks kind of like a HORIZONTAL SKY SCRAPER laying down on its side:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prora#/media/File:Prora_renoviert_1_crop.jpg

Thus also mixing FACT with FICTION.

:book:

@Invidia said:

In our freshman Lit class we also learned how FICTION is stronger than FACT because FICTION happens 99 percent of the time whereas FACT only happens ONE PERCENT of the time.

What does that even mean? "Happens" 99 percent of the time? What? If I had to interpret that, I'd guess it means that everyone's perception of reality tends to be fictional or skewed by some bias.

And that's also why FICTION is more POPULAR than FACT which is proven by walking into any LIBRARY or BOOK STORE where one finds MOST of the works are those of FICTION rather than FACT.

I'm pretty sure fiction is more popular than fact merely because it's more interesting. Ever notice how many writers commit suicide? Ever notice how popular drugs are? Books? Movies? Video games? Porn? Electronic devices? Social media? People purposely spend much of their waking hours escaping reality and/or concocting their own pseudo realities via social media.

@MongoLloyd

What does that even mean? "Happens" 99 percent of the time? What? If I had to interpret that, I'd guess it means that everyone's perception of reality tends to be fictional or skewed by some bias.

Sorry for the confusion.

It simply means people who write FICTION write about what usually tends to happen (which is why MOST PEOPLE prefer reading FICTION).

Whereas FACT is something that usually DOESN'T tend to happen (which is why MOST PEOPLE don't read it).

Because people can RELATE better to reading about something that happens MOST of the time, whereas they don't relate as well to things that don't happen MOST of the time.

In other words, if you're reading about someone who crash lands in a wilderness that wouldn't be a story about what happens to MOST PEOPLE MOST of the time.

But if you read a love story, you'll be reading about something that most people can relate to (which may also be the reason why the SOAP OPERA called GENERAL HOSPITAL is the most talked about TV SHOW here at this place)???

I'm pretty sure fiction is more popular than fact merely because it's more interesting. Ever notice how many writers commit suicide? Ever notice how popular drugs are? Books? Movies? Video games? Porn? Electronic devices? Social media? People purposely spend much of their waking hours escaping reality and/or concocting their own pseudo realities via social media.

FICTION might be more interesting to some people, but to others it might not be.

If you are a HISTORY PROFESSOR, for example, then you might prefer reading FACT to FICTION and find reading about HISTORICAL FACTS to be more interesting.

And No also never noticed how many writers kill themselves. But found this after doing a search to see if what you said about them is correct:

http://jadevarden.blogspot.com/2014/09/writing-101-why-do-so-many-authors.html

Psychologist James C. Kaufman studied what he named The Sylvia Plath effect in 2001. His studies show a potential link between creative writers and mental illness, though his findings are preliminary. According to his research, female poets are more inclined toward mental illness than female fiction writers and male writers of any kind. In another study, female writers were found to be more likely to experience eating disorders, anxiety and panic attacks. However, research shows that all women are more inclined toward mental illness than men. They are more likely to experience depression, and married women are twice as likely to be depressed as single women. Sylvia Plath was married when she committed suicide.

Career-related studies in suicide do not show a link between authors and self-inflicted death. According to numerous studies, physicians are more likely to kill themselves than those in any other job. Other top at-risk jobs include real estate agents, lawyers, farmers, electricians, pharmacists and natural scientists.

Is it JOB STRESS that's killing doctors???

Maybe we should also do away with MARRIAGE which is probably also more STRESSFUL for women than it appears to be for men???

My girlfriend's brother was an ELECTRICIAN who saw the friend who was working with him BLOWN UP into tiny little pieces after he touched a LIVE WIRE. Her brother didn't drink but stayed drunk for the next 2 weeks. And much later on he also went into an out of the way very deep place in the woods ... where it took a week to find him ... after he took all of the BRAND NEW bottle of pills that he'd just gotten from the doctor. The pill bottle was still there in his pocket and his cell phone was also still sitting there in his hand when the law officer found him.

On the other hand, I have noticed how popular escaping from reality has been, which also seems to have been around ever since we began sitting around camp fires and telling each other ORAL STORIES about FICTIONAL ACCOUNTS of something that we claim happened.

FICTION also tends to be LIES, which also means we find LIES to be more interesting than the TRUTH.

Social Media has also never appealed to me (the FB and Twitter kind which also seems to be more ANTI SOCIAL than social in nature thanks to the SCAM MAN who ran the FAKE UNIVERSITY who keeps polluting us with his TWEETS).

Does posting messages to boards like this one also count as being a part of SOCIAL MEDIA???

If so, then by all means count me in as also being a part of it.

:wink:

@MongoLloyd

I saw it and loved it. That era and especially young Adolf Hitler fascinates me. I believe this story was fictional

Anyhow, we both seem to have ENJOYED watching this FICTIONAL account of the early life of HITLER (probably more so than if we'd watched a FACTUAL DOCUMETARY account of what his life was like AFTER he becomes a POLITICIAN instead of an ARTIST)???

:thinking:

Global

s focus the search bar
p open profile menu
esc close an open window
? open keyboard shortcut window

On media pages

b go back (or to parent when applicable)
e go to edit page

On TV season pages

(right arrow) go to next season
(left arrow) go to previous season

On TV episode pages

(right arrow) go to next episode
(left arrow) go to previous episode

On all image pages

a open add image window

On all edit pages

t open translation selector
ctrl+ s submit form

On discussion pages

n create new discussion
w toggle watching status
p toggle public/private
c toggle close/open
a open activity
r reply to discussion
l go to last reply
ctrl+ enter submit your message
(right arrow) next page
(left arrow) previous page