MamaGravity good back-story, and good acting

Bereamic Awesome Movie

Twilightfa Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.

Rio Hayward All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

frankwiener Firstly, Director George Stevens ("Gunga Din", "Place in the Sun", "I Remember Mama") must be commended for his ability to create the dark, claustrophobic conditions experienced by eight Dutch Jews hiding for two entire years in the stifling attic of a small Amsterdam spice factory while he was forced by Fox executives to film their story in glorious CinemaScope. This was an impressive accomplishment by itself. As the head of a combat motion picture unit at the end of World War II in Europe, Stevens was deeply affected by the horrors that he had experienced, including the Normandy invasion and the liberation of the Dachau concentration camp. Unlike films depicting the large-scale conditions of utter de-humanization that existed in the Nazi concentration camps, this movie enabled Stevens to present a view of Nazi victims while they were still able to salvage what little humanity remained within them. In spite of the very difficult circumstances of the Jews in hiding, the victims were still able to maintain at least some form of civility and respectability in their interactions with each other.Not to be overlooked is the separate but related story of the astoundingly brave Dutch citizens who risked their very lives in order to protect their Jewish neighbors. These courageous acts of righteousness occurred in European nations throughout the Nazi occupation, and are never to be underestimated or taken for granted. Imagine risking your own life and those of your loved ones by daring to resist the extreme brutality of the Nazi regime so that others might live. For me, the most powerful scene was of the Nazi transport vehicle screeching to a halt before the address of the hiding place while the dramatic music rises and the menacing, two note Euro siren blasts throughout the streets of Amsterdam. After two agonizing years of confinement, the worst nightmare had suddenly become a reality for the group in hiding. I don't think that Mr. Stevens could have presented this climactic scene more forcefully and perfectly.With minimal cinematic support, the small cast of actors, along with the extraordinary skills of Mr. Stevens, faced the daunting task of carrying the movie from start to finish, and they succeeded very, very well. For me, Shelley Winters and Lou Jacobi as the frustrated, bickering couple stood out from the rest. They could have been my aunt and uncle or the neighbors down the street. They were that real in spite of the fact that they were reading lines written for them by someone else, something that still amazes me when I watch exceptional acting. Ms. Winters was especially gracious to donate the Oscar that she won from her work here (the other was for "Patch of Blue") to the Anne Frank Museum in Amsterdam as she promised Anne's father, Otto Frank.I have read some criticism among reviewers here of Millie Perkins for her interpretation of Anne, but I don't agree with it. Mr. Frank approved of her casting as his beloved daughter, and that is good enough for me. I have a feeling that Anne would have approved of her too and that Millie would have taken a very prominent place in Anne's cherished film star book, had she only survived the war.The only criticism I have is that the film could have been shortened significantly, not for my sake but for that of all of those folks, including the many IMDb reviewers, who felt that it ran too long. As the film has a very significant, personal connection to me, I was completely engrossed by the dialogue and by the outstanding performances on the part of the entire cast. I am more concerned about the vast majority of viewers who do not have any personal linkage to the film's reenacted situation and who may lose their interest in a story that must be told so that the horrific crimes committed less than 75 short years ago will not be repeated. While an estimated 60 million people were killed during that global cataclysm, the systematic, highly organized. and meticulously planned campaign of genocide by the Nazis of Germany against the mostly defenseless, civilian Jews of Europe is unprecedented. This film illustrates the story not only of Anne but of seven other human beings who were doomed to destruction not because of any specific act that they committed but by the mere fact that they were Jews. Unless we truly learn from the past, we seriously risk repeating it.

D Lindsey I do not know why you insist on listing Gusti Huber as Mrs. Frank when Joan Plowright is the obvious actress. If you look at Ms. Plowright's credits you will see she played Mrs. Frank. Joan did an amazing job with the role. I always knew it was her. So in watching it today again, after so many years and seeing ms. Huber listed, I am very confused. She was even listed in the opening credits of the actual movie. Does anyone know what happened? Of all the versions of this movie, this one was the most profound and left the longest lasting effects. I have watched every version of the movie, play , even a dance rendition and nothing can compare to this movie. I feel sad for anyone who does not catch this one first.I always thought it so kind and generous that Mr. Frank shared this very personal part of his life with us and wish I had a chance to thank him before he died.

BoyWiththeGreenHair George Stevens' 1959 Classic, 'The Diary of Anne Frank,' is unique among the array of Holocaust pictures made over the years. Not only was it the first major, big-budget production to touch upon the subject (except for perhaps 'The Great Dictator,' which did not approach the subject directly), but it is directed from the point of view of a man trying to come to terms with the unspeakable horrors he was unprepared for upon the day of the liberation of the Nazi Concentration Camps. It is told from the point of view of a man who witnessed the aftermath of genocide, but who still sought to believe that there was still good in the world.Stevens could have taken many approaches to making this film, but he chose to approach it with optimism, a decision derided, it seems, from all sides. Most recently, books such as Francine Prose's 'Anne Frank: The Book, The Life, The Afterlife' and Carol Ann Lee's 'Hidden Life of Otto Frank,' have taken negative approaches to the film, as if the film's sole purpose had been to discredit and vandalize the Anne Frank story. They cite with dismay the footage of Millie Perkins in Auschwitz that trial audiences found distasteful, as proof of the film's inadequacy, never mind the fact that such footage, if it exists at all, cannot be viewed today.To address this point, let me remind those concerned that the war had ended not even fifteen years before the film went into production. Many Holocaust survivors were beginning to start new lives for themselves, including Otto Frank and his new wife. To think that the filming of the camp scenes would not have rekindled memories of such horror is simply unrealistic. And, although Otto Frank would neither see the play nor the film, were he to have seen it, why would he have wished to see a reenactment of his daughter's humiliation, degradation, and eventual death? Never mind the fact that they could never have filmed on-location at this time, and that there could not possibly have been a soundstage large enough to capture the daunting horror of Auschwitz and Bergen Belsen.Rather, over fifty years later, after the Holocaust had been successfully explored in other mediums, after the full impact of the Nazi atrocities were realized, and after an appropriate amount of Post-War time, the world was ready for the camp scenes, which were heartbreakingly conveyed in 'Anne Frank - The Whole Story.' Like Jean Marie Falconetti in 'Passion of Joan of Arc,' Hannah Taylor Gordon would agree to have her head shaven, to illustrate the suffering of an innocent, young heroine, which brings me to my next point.. the choice of Millie Perkins as Anne.The most widely ridiculed part of this film, Millie Perkins never seems to get a break. To contrast her with Gordon may perhaps be unfair, and Perkins herself would be liable to conced that Gordon's is superior, if only given the nature of her performance, which may be one of the finest ever recorded on film. The difference between Millie and Hannah would seem to be that while Millie was playing Anne Frank and playing her very well, Hannah seems to have become Anne for a brief period of time and lends her soul to the part, as if they were linked for a moment.But, nevertheless, Millie stands on her own. Stevens' choice was widely criticized, and still is, for his choice of an American girl, but the search itself was authentic as could be. "We're looking for an actress who hasn't found out that special secret about herself yet," Stevens declared at the press conference. To view her old screentest, why Millie was chosen is not obvious at first, but to look closer, she exhibits a quirkiness, fascination with small things, and detailed memory that was associated with Anne Frank. Perkins had not yet seemed to have discovered her "special secret." But, perhaps the reason for an American girl to portray her was the need to drive home the point to the American audiences, who, unlike Europeans, had largely been unaffected by the realization of the Nazi atrocities. No doubt they felt for the victims, but could not identify with them. If one allows themselves to become so absorbed in the fate of these characters that every time a Gestapo siren wails in the background, their heart pounds as theirs would, and to refocus one's attention on the child-like Millie trying to lighten the situation, one can appreciate the depth of her levity, only to be brought back to earth with the realization of what her fate will be. We are supposed to believe that whatever happened to the real Anne will happen to her. We may find this Anne annoying, whiny, or brattish, but never so deserving of the cruelty she would encounter in her last seven months. Perhaps Stevens understood this.

Steffi_P Some stories are simply begging to be told. Since the end of World War 2, the conflict had provided inspiration for hundreds of motion pictures, and most of these were for the purposes of gung ho entertainment rather than poignant reflection. There's nothing shameful in that. It is just the case that with some of the more horrific aspects of the war, we needed more time to come to terms with them and understand them. And with a story like this, it was also essential that it be handled by a team who could get it exactly right.The picture was based on an earlier stage play by Frances Goodrich and Albert Hackett, not too especially well-known names in filmdom, although they were responsible for some of the best screenplays of Hollywood's classic era, including It's a Wonderful Life. As such it should come as no surprise then that their dramatization of Anne Frank's diary is bursting with tenderness, frank humanity and above all a reverence for human life. They have often condensed several significant events into the same scene, and possibly exaggerated a few characters, but this is the way it must be to make it work as a play, and no disservice has been done to Anne's work (As a side note however, I would recommend everyone read up on Fritz Pfeffer, the real name of the Alfred Dussel character, as his story is far more complex and tragic than what we see here). This screen version of the Goodrich-Hackett play was produced and directed by George Stevens, and there may have been no better man for the project. Stevens's method in his 1950s pictures was to shoot from every conceivable angle, and have the perspective sometimes change jarringly from shot to shot. This may seem confusing at first, but it makes the audience lose track of the size and shape of rooms, and focus totally on the actors. However, he does things slightly differently for this picture. He begins by making us very much aware of the space, with lots of foreground clutter, and doorways leading off in the background. It is as if we are somehow being held back from the action, as if we are looking in on it from outside. Then gradually, around about the time Anne begins her diary, the camera begins to move inside the space. As we get to know the characters, the camera becomes more intimate, and as usual with Stevens he makes us forget the place and remember the people.And this is an appropriately memorable cast. Originally Audrey Hepburn was sought for the lead role, and while she would surely have been excellent, her substitute Millie Perkins is perhaps a better yet for this role. She has a kind of genuine youthful exuberance to her, and is able to appear much more like a real teenager. It is also appropriate to have an unfamiliar face for the part. An equally young Richard Beymer (better known as Tony in West Side Story) is also ideal for the same reasons. The supporting players are a delight. People like Josef Schildkraut and Shelley Winters are like a mark of quality on any picture. They did not have egos, they did not want to steal the show or upstage anyone; they simply undertook each part with sincerity and played it to the best of their abilities. The real surprise however is Ed Wynn, a daffy comedy actor, but here playing it mostly straight and even eliciting some sympathy for a character who is basically the fall guy in the absence of any tangible villain. But why is Anne Frank's story so important? It is not of great historical value. It does not make for an unflinching account of Jewish persecution by the Nazis. What it is, is an incredibly touching and insightful narrative by someone in a trying and excruciating situation. It is astonishingly well written, and as such has at times been denounced as a hoax, although its authenticity has now thankfully been proved. Anne unwittingly made herself a spokesperson for a generation and for a people. Her story is one we are lucky enough to have handed down to us, among the millions that can never be told, and as such it should become known and spread. Anne herself may not have survived, but her diary… her diary is life after death.