Max

2002 "Art + Politics = Power"
6.4| 1h46m| R| en
Details

In 1918, a young, disillusioned Adolf Hitler strikes up a friendship with a Jewish art dealer while weighing a life of passion for art vs. talent at politics

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

Softwing Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??
Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one
Patience Watson One of those movie experiences that is so good it makes you realize you've been grading everything else on a curve.
Catherina If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.
Kirpianuscus Maybe, impressive. for the work of John Cusack. for the atmosphere of chess game. for the perspective about a character who seems well known. for tension. for end. and for explanations. a film about the roots of Hitler phenomenon . surprising for impeccable construction. and for the moral. for the clash between two personalities and for the so different intentions. a film reminding the essence of power. in the most honest and cruel way.
samkan MAX should be seen as a film about the many roads we face at turning points in our lives and the arbitrary, chaotic circumstances that influence what path we ultimately take. A corollary theme is the random selection -the unfairness- of birth, station in life, class, etc. In this respect the maker of MAX would be hard pressed to come up with a better setting that post WWI Germany! I disagree with those faulting historical inaccuracies. They appear to miss the point entirely. The only legitimate "fact" we must be concerned with is that Hitler indeed had a burning desire to be an artist (though I think his setting was Vienna, not Munich) and had he been successful and/or accepted as such there's a strong likelihood he'd never encountered politics (or at least on the scale he did). MAX' pure invention of Hitler's racist influences and his start to power merely indoctrinate and I didn't find them at all offensive. The invention of Cuzack's Max is a clever -and direct- counterpoint to Hitler's social circumstances. The "bonding" of Hitler and Max shreds, trashes, etc., the pseudo-logic of National Socialism in particular and racism and prejudice in general. Applause is warranted.Noah Taylor is nothing less than spectacular. John Cuzack is again a gem. The rest of the cast is reserved yet hardly a character or piece of dialog is throwaway. Just a tremendous achievement.
Cristi_Ciopron MAX is certainly an interesting, intriguing and original movie. It somehow slips into caricature and grotesques towards its end; yet the remarkable cast, the original conception make it noteworthy. There's also the alibi that history itself slept into grotesques and caricature, and Meyjes' movie only follows that movement. The 'two beautiful women' scene ,when Max tries to bring Adolf into the women's company, is perhaps the best in the movie.I mean some scenes are so intriguingly made, with finesse and gradation and tact, that the ulterior fall into caricature looks like slapdash, like an expedient. The movie contaminates itself with some phony Expressionism, and this spoils the previous commitment.The ultra—sexy Leelee Sobieski plays Max's mistress.In better times, this child could have been another Mrs. Sandrelli. Her glamor is genuine. She has extremely beautiful hands.
garundaboink This film mirrors Hitler's own speaking style in the way it jumbles the truth, weaving fact with fiction in such a frustrating blur one can only respond to what it says by blurting emotional responses at the screen. In Ian Kershaw's exhaustive study "Hitler", and quite fully supported by the semi-autobiographical "Mein Kampf", we find that Hitler had already been a struggling artist (and had given it up) long before the outbreak of World War One, had a fully developed political agenda rife with anti-Semitism which was the Zeitgeist of the day(feeling of the times), and was hired by the military to give oratory in the public parks because of an already well developed talent for his anti-Jewish harangues. His talent for the diatribes was noted by the army because his comrades in the trenches had become sick of listening to the endless vitriol and had complained to higher-ups "that he wouldn't shut up". All the qualities that Hitler is portrayed by this film to have developed in some form of crisis while deciding between art or politics, this artistic flair for polemics, had already taken shape many years before. In "Mein Kampf", one reads from Hitler's own pen that the question of whether the Hasidic Jew he encountered "was a German" arose when he was in Vienna, which was about 10 years before the start of World War One. Curiously, Hitler himself was not a German either! There are many anachronisms in this film. One merely has to see a German military greatcoat of the era in a photograph to know that what Hitler was wearing was probably some Canadian military surplus of WWII. The rest of the costumes were very anachronistic as well, looking like the costume manager just rummaged through the neighborhood Sally Anne for old clothes. For instance, in 1918-1919, at formal gatherings people still wore top-hats. Hitler wore a top-hat to his inauguration in 1933! Collars were higher on the neck, sports coats had belts in the back at least, if not in the front too, and the leading edges of coats had round or tapered edges not square. The houses were decorated in a fashion not seen until Ikea came along, arc-welding, cars, and on and on. Some of the coarse language by Max's women friends can be seen to be out of place as well.Although all of these inaccuracies turn the film into a "what if" scenario, it still scores a few points with its implied assertion of Hitler's sexual dysfunction and the interesting proposition that if Hitler simply got laid at an earlier age his interests in life may have been diverted away from murder and imperious expansionism. But then again, he may simply have been a happily married despot. One tends to forget in these deep studies of Hitler's mind that it required an equally disturbed national psyche to follow him into the abyss that was Nazi Germany.When we examine Germans and the question of Nazi Germany with any truth, we see an advanced people much like ourselves, and so the examination should become one of introspection. People incorrectly try to pick apart the mind of Adolf Hitler looking to pin all the blame on a curious freak of nature, forgetting the influence of Nietzsche, and the thousands of anti-Semitic publications of the era. The moral, missed by the authors and so hard for the history re-writers to accept, is that we are all capable, given the correct circumstances, of becoming Nazis.