User reviews

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

One of my fondest hopes is that the present-day cinema community has, perhaps, finally become more enlightened by moving beyond its past need to so ignorantly and personally denigrate Ms. Riefenstahl for her "past political sins". For those who have made this important step in maturity, her film "Olympia" may be viewed on its ARTISTIC merit - the finest example of both direction and cinematography ever seen in a documentary. Her pace of action, camera angles, use of scan/sweep, etc. set the standards for modern excellence using the crude technological tools of 1936. Even the most hardened and indifferent sports "fan" cannot fail to be impressed by her consummate skills. For those of a more political bent, I must agree that the film makes a most definite propaganda statement by glorifying a particular ethnicity. However, this glorification is NOT of the German Nazi party, but of the American BLACK ATHLETE. Jesse Owens, Ralph Metcalfe, Mack Robinson, Archie Williams, John Woodruff, Cornelius Johnson, and David Albritton are the unquestionable "stars of the show" as they make literal mincemeat of all their so-called Arian competition. The most touching scene is, after the completion of the long jump competition, when Jesse Owens (American Gold Medalist) and Luz Long (German Silver Medalist) walk arm-in-arm as they begin what later turned into a 24-carat friendship. However, for those of you who continue to "never let the data interfere with your theory" - you have my condolences.

Instead of Triumph of the Will there's surprisingly little politics and propaganda going on in this first part of Riefenstahl's Olympia. Riefenstahl is documenting the athletics in the Olympic Stadium, and yes, Hitler is there, but that's about it. Sure, the German athletes are the best and heroic, and there's a piece in there when the commentator says something like 'the best white European runners against the black giants', but that's about it.

Jesse Owens was the star of this Olympics in many ways, and Riefenstahl isn't reluctant to show his big smiles after winning yet another gold medal. Although a lot can be frowned upon in Germany in those days, 'Olympia' isn't as charged as many people believe it to be.

Having said that, this first part of Olympia is basically just showing us who won the medals in the Olympic Stadium, and although some of the images are great and there's a beautiful use of slow-motion, it's not really that interesting...

6/10.

This is a documentary from the infamous German filmmaker/actress Leni Riefenstahl. Unlike her slobbery love letter to Hitler ("Triumph of the Will"), "Olympia Part One" and "Olympia Part Two" are surprisingly apolitical as well as exceptionally well made--both they don't make for the best viewing today.

The film begins with its most famous scenes--nude actors doing various exercises. They are meant to be the ideals of beauty today--Germanic descendants of the original Greek athletes. Aside from a tiny loincloth covering the men, it's all nude--but not at all salacious. Instead, it comes off like an art film--and is AMAZINGLY artistic in style. You can tell Riefenstahl really made this project a labor of love with the camera-work and brilliant editing. This is why it took two years for the films to make it to German theaters--projects that were WAY overdue.

What follows next is a straight retelling of the Berlin Olympics of 1936. The opening ceremonies are shown as are the track & field events--the rest of the events are shown in Part Two. While you do see several images of Hitler on screen and a few Germans in uniforms, these really were unavoidable considering this WAS Nazi Germany and Hitler was the head of state. But, victories by non-Germans and even Black-Americans are given the same screen time as those of Aryans--which really surprised me. This is especially surprising since the Germans actually won the most medals--but in watching the film you might just as soon have assumed the Americans did.

On the downside, the film is dry--very dry. The narration is minimal--probably to make the film easier to market abroad. It really will bore the modern viewer to see most of these events. The only upside of this largest portion of the film is that occasionally the camera-work is absolutely brilliant--and better looking than more recent Olympic documentaries. The sum total effect is a film with great scenes and some amazing camera-work BUT will have LOTS of slow portions that haven't aged well because aside from Jesse Owens, you won't recognize anyone! Worth seeing once.

Until recently I stayed far away from the films of Leni Riefenstahl, because of her intimate bonds with the Nazi regime. For whatever reason the fact that someone has made Nazi propaganda is a bigger hurdle to take than the fact that a Russian director has made propaganda movies for Stalin.

With the exception of "Triumph des Willens" (1935), which for me is still a "no go" area, I have decided to take the hurdle. The reason is that the filmic qualities of Riefenstahl can not be denied.

Riefenstahl made two films about the Olympic games of 1936 in Berlin. The first part (which is reviewed here) is called "Festival of Nations", the second part is called "Festival of beauty". Although it can't be denied that the Olympic games of 1936 in Berlin were (mis)used for propaganda purposes, it is not the pure political propaganda of "Triumph des Willens".

"Olympia part 1, Festival of Nations" starts rather daringly. We see images of ancient Greek Gods (Greece being the cradle of the Olympic games) which evolve in aesthetic images of the (often nude) human body.

After a while the film becomes a more conventional documentary, showing the Olympic disciplines one after another. Even in this more conventional part of the movie there are a few things to be amazed about. We see a couple of non German medalwinners bringing the Nazi salute whem their National Anthem is played. In the high jump discipline the athletes jump according to a technique no longer in use.

Apart from that the film becomes more conventional, but not completely conventional. In this part of the film Riefenstahl is still innovative regarding camera angle (aimed to cover the exertion of the athlete to the utmost) and use of slow motion ("Raging bull" (1980, Martin Scorsese) avant la lettre).

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...

Part I The film opens up with a film tribute to the history of Greece and the games. We get to see the names of the nations at the time that the torch passes through as it reached Berlin. A much more realistic torch than today's is running into the stadium with a few pauses to let everyone see just before the final dash to the Olympic torch at the stadium. It would be great to recapture this in the present day. Some of the tribute leads me to believe that our athletes are overly clothed for the sports.

It may be unique reasons that brought you to this point such as Leni or photography, or interest in history, or, or, or. But once the action starts you feel that you are there and get lost in the "who will win what and how." Even being aware of the outcome does not prepare you to "not bite your nails" as you watch each athlete barely besting the next until it is over too soon. I noticed that instead of placing medals over the winners, they used laurel wreaths.

Any way you cut it, this movie is worth watching.

It's the 1936 Olympics in Berlin. Filmmaker Leni Riefenstahl is making one of her masterpieces for the German Nazi regime. It is striking that it starts with the IOC. That organization has never been pure. It's the Greek ruins, statues, and the Parthenon. There is a guy with his junk in a sack doing various sports. There is the torch and the guys have a bit more garment. We arrive at the stadium with the audience giving the Nazi salute. It is a little shocking to see quite a few other countries returning the salute. That part is historically important. Of course, there is Hitler front and center. Leni definitely knows how to film the epic grandness of it all. After thirty minutes, the film centers around the sports competition. Jesse Owens is the most magnetic. Racing is the most compelling on film. The fake media inserts are a choice. I'm not sure if it's a good choice, but the old audiences probably didn't know that those are fake. It is interesting to see night-time pole vaulting against a black sky. It could use a bit more light especially with the audience. As an Olympic special, this is excellent work. It is an important archival piece. Everything else is a personal matter.

OLYMPIA was split into two parts for its German release, but amalgamated into one elsewhere. I saw the amalgamated version, in which the principal focus of attention centered on the athletics. Riefenstahl's photography is quite outstanding; her sense of camera placement impeccable; her ability to define the individual in relationship to environment cannot be questioned. As a study in the human body and its potential, OLYMPIA cannot be faulted. However there is perhaps less to OLYMPIA than meets the eye: viewers looking to the film as a source of Nazi propaganda are likely to be disappointed. True, there are shots of Adolf Hitler clapping approvingly at German athletes winning gold medals; and shots of the swastika being raised during various ceremonies; but the film in this version adopts an even-handed approach to its material. The only suggestion of politics comes when the British and American athletes refuse to adopt the Nazi salute, both during the opening ceremony and during medal ceremonies; rather they salute as they might have done if they were acknowledging superior officers in the Army. As a record of a unique event, OLYMPIA cannot be faulted, but perhaps it should be treated first and foremost as a sports documentary rather than a piece of political propaganda.

In case you missed the 1936 Olympic Games, here it is, beautifully photographed, edited, and scored. Director Leni Riefenstahl composes her shots artfully and makes judicious use of close-ups and slow motion. She places the event in historical perspective and offers it straight, no chaser. A lesser film might have been burdened with too much narration, but this one is plainspoken and summarizes the discus, shotput, sprints, marathons, high jumps and pole vaults succinctly. It probably inspired many young people to try athletics and filmmakers to present sports to a wide audience. Public joy, made much of today, got a big boost in Germany, 1936.

This high-quality sports documentary, photographed in stark b&w by Leni Riefenstahl, features all of the glorious highlights that took place at the 1936 Summer Olympic Games held in Berlin, Germany.

It also features Nazi leader, Adolf Hitler as he officially proclaims the Games open, as well as footage of Hitler, all decked out in a Nazi uniform (swastikas included) saluting the athletes at the opening ceremonies - And, later, Hitler sitting with his buddies, laughing and smiling and cheering his beloved Germany on to victory.

Besides that, this production also includes several "fantasy" sequences that, presented like some sort of a slow-motion ballet, display completely nude male and female figures.

All-in-all, Olympia was certainly well worth a view.

For a movie that was intended as a hymn of praise to the glories of Aryan-ness, the historical facts made this into the Jesse Owens Show! Even the pure Nazi propaganda (which is everywhere), is gloriously filmed. This is one of the greatest visual treats of all time.

By the way, the online reviewer seems startled by the English narration. As far as I know Riefenstahl did at least two versions (one in English, one in German) and possibly more with the event commentary recorded (mostly) at the time of the event.

My favorite bit (explained in the director's autobiography "Wonderful/Awful life") occurs during a rapid montage taken from the diving. Riefenstahl intentionally inserted some of the film backwards so that the divers fly up out of the water and land on the board! I saw this segment of the movie at least 3 or 4 times before seeing the autobiography and never noticed - now, I cannot avoid noticing.

Part one is definitely more exciting than part 2 since the events in part 2 (boating, etc) do not lend themselves to "exciting" film making.

However, the visual quality of the whole work is magnificent. The shear theatricality of the Marathon (to say nothing of the Jesse Owens sequences) is amazing.

I must admit I don't get it. Reviewers and commenters lavish praise on the brilliant cinematography employed by Ms. Reifenstahl in filming the 1936 Olympics. She is supposed to have poured years of her life into her two-part documentary (this film is part one). Nowadays the NFL puts out weekly and yearly highlight films, and the only difference I see is that one is black and white, the other in colour. For me this is standard documentary, and that's all. My recommendation is that if you do not consider yourself a highbrow film connoisseur or are not interested in the 1936 Olympics this movie may bore you.

Watching "Olympia: Festival of Nations", Leni Riefenstahl's documentary of Berlin's Olympic Games, I was amazed at how the world changed in 80 years but not much for sport. But had sport changed much from the Antiquity to the 20th century? Sport is one of these elements of timeless and universal appeal that best characterizes humanity, and Leni Riefenstahl understood before any other director that motion pictures were the best vehicle for the extraordinary thrills and emotions sports provided.

Thrills, emotions… so many inspirational words immediately tarnished when put in Leni Riefenstahl's framework. The pioneer director had already proved her utility to the Third Reich by making "Triumph of the Will", and the film was no less loaded in 'thrills and emotions', so when we put our hands in something as historically loaded as the two-parter "Olympia", we're never sure we won't get a few fingers dirty. It is its misfortune to have its reputation soiled by the infamous predecessor.

Now, is "Olympia" a propaganda film? No and Yes. It is not propaganda because the film fulfills its basic mission as a documentary, which is documenting. "Triumph of the Will" was more of a glorification of the Third Reich and the exhilaration of the communion with the people. I can hear the counter-argument already: but so did "Olympia" by exalting the beauty and strength of the human body and the popularity of sports on a scale even superior to the Nuremberg conference. Yes, but we've just went through a European cup and the Olympic Games of Rio: aren't we seeking the same enthusiasms than the crowds cheering in Berlin's stadium in 1936?

This disturbing question touches the very essence of sport, as a mass entertainment translating the antagonism between people from the brutality of war to the peaceful nobility of competition. The Olympic Games are a sublime heritage of the Ancient World, a period of truce where athletes could fight with the same chances. That's the essence of sport, it can be brutal but it's always a fair play. Yet are we cheering for these values or because our team or our country won? Weren't the spectators of 1936 as joyful as the people in Rio? And who can predict our reaction if a worldwide conflict started in 2019?

So, maybe "Olympia" IS a propaganda film, but just as any film that tries to stir some specific emotions can be perceived as propaganda, just like "Chariots of Fire" or "Saving Private Ryan" or "E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial". I recently read in an article that compared the opening of "The Lion King" to "Triumph of the Will", I never thought about it, but I can see the similarities. Any film that aims to arouse a specific set of emotions to a wide audience can be propaganda, but only in the name of common sense, we'll never compare the moment with Rafiki raising Simba to Hitler's arrival in Nuremberg. In the name of the same common sense, we can't blame "Olympia" for inspiring emotions we all respond positively to.

"Olympia" opens with ruins, the remains of the Antique Age, destroyed and devoid of human presences, as to emphasize their coming resurrection, from the statues to the athletes. We're not fooled of course, but the magic of the camera and the photography is so breathtaking that the eyes precede the mind. The statues become the embodiment of a vision of the human body that doesn't necessarily imply the Aryan race. The use of lighting and shadows makes all the athletes look oddly neutral, closer to the Mediterranean type actually. And then we get to the magnificent ellipse, the resurrection, from the iconic statue of the discus thrower to a real athlete who executes the movement as if he was animated by a genetic symphony, inherited from the Antique age.

This is not a political film; this is a hymn to sport. And halfway through the opening ballet, there's a tall naked woman executing a magnificent luscious dance, and this is Leni Riefenstahl, doing more than a simple cameo, being part of this adventure as a former athlete and dancer. This is not the work of a propagandist, but a woman who knows the value of sport, not about the Olympic Games, not even about the Nations, but their athletes whose paradoxical nature is to represent countries while transcending the cultural barriers, being different but similar, universal is the word. What a strike of luck that she couldn't film the original flame moment because the running and the excitement made it impossible to have a cinematic shot, so she had to reinvent the scene and came up with one of the most memorable opening sequences of cinema's history. The Gods of Sports were behind her.

And all the directing talent of the world couldn't affect the results, so after the iconic opening, we get to the sporting events and Riefenstahl couldn't cheat and pretend Jessie Owens didn't win, and we've got enough of Owens not to label the film as propaganda. And while Hitler's present, his screen time is limited and he's only shown as the leader of the country that organized the games, but the movie is far from putting him on a pedestal, again, the hero is the athlete, the modern gladiator, and the fans of supporting countries from all over the world: America, England, Canada, Japan, Turkey, all acting as if no war would happen three years later, like normal people, joking, enjoying their time.

Maybe the best response against the propaganda allegation is that Riefenstahl couldn't paint a more flattering portrait of the Aryan athletes even if she wanted to. The very universal essence of sports is that the best one wins the game, with a fair play. And this is the antithesis of all the values the Nazis stood for, as Hitler wasn't much a fan of the games anyway. "Olympia" couldn't, by essence, be a propaganda movie.