TrappedInTheCinema https://trappedinthecinemablog.wordpress.com/2016/07/15/germany- year-zero-1948/'Germany Year Zero' is the final film in Roberto Rossellini's neo- realist 'War Trilogy'. It follows 'Rome, Open City' (1945) and 'Paisà' (1946), although they are narratively unconnected and can be viewed separately. This film follows the story of Edmund, a twelve year old boy with an ill father and unregistered brother (and therefore unable to work), finds himself the main breadwinner of his family even though he himself is too young to work.Set in the ruins of what was Nazi Germany, it might be expected that political discussions would be central. But to this family, politics is of no interest, not even worthy of consideration. They care only about food and electricity (and cigarettes).However Edmund, his efforts to feed his family increasingly neglected, falls under the influence of a dubious former teacher of his, Herr Henning. While some of his motives remain ambiguous – his creepy manner is borderline paedophilic – others are very apparent to the audience at least, if not to Edmund. It is clear that Herr Henning has not abandoned the past regime. And it is under this control that Edmund falls.Where Rome, Open City was set in … well … Rome, and Paisà's various strands set around Italy, Germany Year Zero sees Rossellini abandon his native country for the first time to film in … well … Germany. But in many respects the setting remains the same – war-torn city streets strewn with rubble, surrounded by empty skeletons of buildings.It is this sense of location that is undoubtedly the strongest element of Germany Year Zero, and of the trilogy as a whole. There is a strange, unsettling beauty to the images. Bright sunlight pours into buildings through non-existent rooftops, casting light and shadows on the dark dealings down below. The sharp contrast between light and dark is excellently accentuated in black and white.But as well as the streets and buildings, it is the people and background events that inhabit them that bring a flavour to the film. In one scene we see a group of starving people cutting chunks of a dead horse lying in the street.This atmosphere is undoubtedly due to the documentary origins of Rome, Open City. Rossellini did not begin with the idea of making a narrative film. He saw his native Italy in ruins and wanted to capture the struggles of his countrymen through documentary. But he eventually decided narrative cinema could have a similar impact. However the style remained intact. He kept the street-side camera view, and some of the stories he had seen.While the first half of Germany Year Zero clearly follows this pattern set by the previous films, the second half is noticeably different. The narrative takes on a far more melodramatic tone, much to the film's detriment. It is telling that more of Germany Year Zero was filmed in a studio than the earlier two films. The sense of hardened reality from earlier is lost, replaced by traditional drama.Collectively, Rossellini's War Trilogy is one of the triumphs of 1940s Italian neo-realism. But Germany Year Zero, despite its strong first half, loses its direction and is the weakest of the three. And it is also overshadowed by the true neo-realist masterpiece of 1948, Vittorio De Sica's 'Bicycle Thieves'.

Atreyu_II Saw this film unaware that it is part of a trilogy, let alone that it is the final effort of such trilogy. The story is set in Germany, in the difficult years after the war. The injuries of the war are well visible, with all those buildings in ruins and the general poverty. Other than a portrait of that very dark age, this film tells the story of German child Edmund Kohler and his life in family and not only. Edmund and his family are among the war's survivors.In many ways, this movie has little to distinguish it from other post-war movies and lacks an effective combination of plot and pacing strength. There are moments when that works, such as when Edmund wanders through the ruins of Berlin, including a church if I'm not mistaken. But otherwise it doesn't really work that well.The ending is the strongest and harshest part of the movie. It's memorable and well filmed, but so depressing. Edmund poisons his own father as a way to put an end to his suffering. Edmund feels horrible about what he did and can't take anymore, committing suicide by throwing himself from a building.The cast does what they should for their roles, but Edmund Moeschke is the best of the bunch thanks to his strong portrayal of Edmund Kohler.

valadas This movie is one of the three Rossellini's neo-realist movies that make the trilogy of war of his direction. The other two are "Roma Città Aperta" and "Paisà". Despite having won the First Prize at the 1948 Locarno Festival it was a commercial half-failure. In 1947 in Berlin, Germany, a city destroyed by the war, full of ruins and rubbish everywhere, with people and families living in awful conditions of poverty and housing squalor, a 13 year old boy resorts to petty thefts and tricks to get money and food to help to support his family composed by him plus an old and ailing father, a sister who wins money at night by going to dance and drink in nightclubs with the allied men and a brother who lives half-hidden and unregistered for fear of being arrested and sent to a prisoners camp since he had fought there till the end of the war. The best of this movie is its documentary value since it shows in a very realistic way the images of a Berlin almost totally destroyed by the war and the life conditions of its population. The story is not bad itself but in the end it introduces an unnecessary too dramatic ending by the boy poisoning his father to death partly out of pity and to put an end to his suffering and partly to alleviate the family of the burden he represented. It's however one of the best movies of the Italian neo-realist school that flourished in the forties and fifties of last century.

iradao This movie is a masterpiece. Some other movie critics may tell you better what is neo-realism and such things. I will not do it, instead I will tell you why I liked so much this movie.In the beginning of the movie, the voice of Rosselini says: Something must be done to change what these German kids think of life, or else they will love nobody. The kid (main character) has only seen terror and misery his whole life. Before the end of the war, his father tried to take his name of the Führer youth, but the kid betrayed his father saying that the document was false. He did it because all the society, including his teacher (Herr Enning) was pro-nazism.The housekeeper, Herr Kanengaard says that it would be better the kid's father die, because he is sick. The father says he should die, because he is sick and tired of being a obstacle in their lives. Finally the teacher says that it would be better if the father died, and starts preaching the same concepts that made nazism kill millions of people during the war. That the young and health should eliminate the old and worthless. The stronger must subdue the weaker, that's how nature works. Then the kid poisons his own father. That's what I found genial in the movie, Rosselini shows the perversity of nazism, even after the war, without any cannon or bullet fired, without showing any concentration camp.Later Edmund shows to be just a child, running and playing, and he did only what he was told to do, but now the teacher said he is a monster. He keeps playing and fooling around, but then when he realizes the suffering he would have the burden of his life would be too heavy to carry, he kills himself. That's the time when I shivered and cried.