It’s really not. Who’d a-thunk a film with subject matter as sensational as this could be so dull? And not even a respectable, important dull. This is BORING. You WILL be disappointed. Not that I expect you to move along and pick something else, but when you come back to this page to add your own “0 STARS” review, just remember I told you so.

I bought this movie with my eyes at least half open knowing in general what the movie was about, and being a Holocaust story–at least on the surface–this would be possibly a good dvd to add to my Holocaust film collection, as it covered a specific dark side to the Holocaust, namely the sexual relationships that often went on between a Nazi camp commandant or a guard and a concentration camp female victim that was found to be desirable. This was something such a woman did not say no to very quickly, no matter what she thought of the behavior, because to fall out of favor with the Nazis meant the gas chamber. So you did what you had to do to survive. In other ways as well, this film touches on some of the depravity that was so common within The Third Reich, but aside from these two areas, this film is not really about the Holocaust at all, but instead the film maker–Liliana Cavani–has turned this so-called Holocaust film into an exploitation movie that is degrading and not fit as an example of what the Holocaust was all about. And coming from someone who collects Holocaust films, this is saying a lot.

The ex-Nazi who had the kinky sex relationship with the inmate is shown working now as a porter in a fancy hotel, when the woman and her husband show up. The husband is a classical conductor, and they are doing road shows of Mozart Operas. The closest to reality that this movie gets is that the ex-Nazi and his pals are trying to maintain a low profile. If people should find out who they are, they could lose their jobs, be deported, and maybe go to jail for life for their war crimes, and so when this one ex Nazi gets involved with a now married woman it can only bring unwanted attention to this almost invisible group.

But this group of ex-Nazis are ridiculous to begin with. They are part of an encounter group where they meet weekly to talk about their guilt and to try and free themselves from their past. Good grief. These Nazis have not repented of their past behavior, and they still give the Nazi salute, so the only reason they would go to this group would be because they had to go, but there is no psychologist monitoring their growth and change, but only they themselves are present. But here they sit and talk as if they were patients at Pine Rest. No ex-Nazi would do this, and there is no reason to talk about their guilt as if they are trying to come to grips with their past–they don’t have to pretend in front of anybody. And since this group is trying to hold a low public profile, if a psychologist did put them in this program, their secret past is already known, so why go about this elaborate charade? It just doesn’t make any sense. Reason number 425 why this is a stupid movie.

At these same meetings, they also talk about spies and what is the latest developments that their enemies might have on them…what witnesses do they have…what photos do they have…and who is left alive from those war years who could testify against them. They think they are down to their last witness, which is of course the woman who had that kinky relationship with their ex Nazi Buddy. This is also stupid, because the story takes place in the late 1950s–just 10-12 years after the war ended. There are Holocaust survivors still alive today in 2005, never mind 1957-1959. How could all but one of the thousands of witnesses conveniently die in 12 years? But all those other Holocaust victims needed to die for the story to make any sense–which it doesn’t. It is also odd that with the war so fresh in people’s minds that these ex Nazis could walk the streets freely in the very heart of Germany, and yet no one recognizes them. How come they never fled to South America along with so many other Nazis? Their behavior is like a bank robber robbing a bank without wearing a mask, getting his face caught on camera, and then later going to that same bank to deposit some money like any other local citizen, and knowing that no one is going to recognize him. Reason number 426 why this is a stupid movie.

So why make a film with so many holes in it? There is a potential for a good story line by just focusing on the Nazis need to remain undercover, and not knowing if or when they will be arrested. And throwing in a love story between an ex Nazi and a former Holocaust victim could upset things, and there you have a story line that might work. Except, were there ever any genuine love stories between Holocaust victims and Nazis that were not based on the need to survive? I have not heard of any, and this is perhaps the part you would have to ignore. Certainly, this story is not based on any historical person.

I do think there is definitely room in film making for surrealism, metaphors, analogies, and allegories, and the like. When you get into these areas, you are often stepping outside the normal bounds of film making, however, and The Tin Drum is a good example. What we have here in The Night Porter is imposed reality, and the bottom line is that it is an exploitation film, where a flimsy excuse is used to show the sadomasochistic lifestyle between two sick people, and using the Holocaust as the excuse for doing this. The more blood that spills as a result of their love making, and the more pain they feel, the better. This film was one of the early films to even mention the Holocaust, and even at the time of its release it was very controversial to say the least. But since this film came out, dozens upon dozens of other Holocaust films have been made, as well as a slew of books, and if The Night Porter had been made today, the biggest outcry against it would have been how insulting and insensitive this movie was to Holocaust survivors, but because of the age of this film its days of public outcry have long been over, and so many mainstream sources have never heard of this movie, or just dismiss this movie as an old film.

I can’t say for sure if such a relationship never occurred between a Holocaust victim, and a Nazi officer–human nature being what it is, anything could possibly happen–but when your whole family is taken away and killed, the last thing you think about is having a willing dirty relationship with a Nazi if not the Nazi who had the power to send people to that gas chamber. Roger Ebert, in his review of this movie says, “The director, Liliana Cavani, describes her film as a love story, praises the honesty between her two leading characters, and sees the story as a straightforward handling of one aspect of the concentration camp experience. I see it as a shallow exploitation of that theme, containing no real insight or understanding. Even worse, the movie is now being marketed as a controversial audience-grabber. One theater marquee quotes the New York Times: “A kinky turn-on!” I looked up that Times review. [...]

If Liliana Cavani can make a film like this, why not make a Holocaust film about a Holocaust victim who brings a pet bear with her into the barracks, and also call it a loving and tender Holocaust story? It makes about as much sense. There is an art to making movies, and it gets tricky when a film maker tries to make a complex film filled with allegories and the like. But a good starting place is that for a film to have a shot at working, someone has to understand the nature of allegory, or the nature of a fantasy film, and in this case what the Holocaust was all about. Cavani apparently did no research on the Holocaust, but treated it as if it was no different than an insurance salesman convention.

So here we have this woman in a flashback. She is in a Nazi topless bar–she is topless herself. We know nothing about this woman’s background, but here she is, a Holocaust victim supposedly, singing for these Nazis, topless, and with such gusto, professionalism, and style, you’d think she had been working at topless bars all of her life. She looked more like a Nazi sympathizer rather than a victim, as if she reveled in Nazi decadence, and so what was such a women even doing in a death camp? You’d think that with the perversions that were indeed deeply present within the Nazi fold that some Nazi would have recognized her talent and said that this woman does not belong in a lice ridden, dysentery filled barracks. But once again, this is not case. It is like taking an ordinary housewife, and overnight turning her into a kinky sex machine at the push of a button with no need for training or practise. Reason number 427 as to why this is a stupid movie.

Exploitation films are films that use a flimsy excuse to show something naughty. There is no way that this film can be seen as being anything other than an exploitation film. It has a professional look to it, and wasn’t just cranked out for $100,000, but if the film maker thinks this film is a nice love story, she is full of herself, and is no different than a Concentration Camp barracks whose floors were overflowing with human excrement. In other words, this film maker is full of–. This is the kind of film a person makes while on drugs, and which at the time thinks it is brilliant, but once the drugs wear off, the film is seen as garbage. Except by this film maker.

You probably missed this movie, as it is a foreign film, although English is spoken. But if a person questions Hollywood about its lack of morals and negative influence on society, they could certainly use this film as an example. From the very beginning of films, Hollywood–here meaning film makers from all over the world–has created an unending list of scandals. One of the first movies ever made was called, “The Kiss,” and this film, just a few seconds long, absolutely shocked America with its showing of a man and woman kissing in public. Such controversy has followed the world of film making ever since.

Part of this controversy tod

When you watch “the night porter”, you must be prepared to view it as fantasy and not reality. You must also bear in mind the wider issues that it brings forth. Namely its links with the fetish/sadomasochism scene. Many people harbour secret fantasies regarding ss uniforms and punishment administered by people wearing such attire. Bogarde is of course convincing as the guilt ridden Max and Rampling as the schoolgirl-ish character with her first crush. This film only becomes disturbing if you try and think of it as real and not the fantasy which it really is.