dbborroughs Was Hitler gay? Yea I know there are rumors but was it true? That question forms the basis of this documentary. Based on a book by a heterosexual German author that ignited a fire storm of controversy. The documentary made from the book takes a look at the issue from both sides.I was prepared to laugh the film off since I had heard such terrible things about the book, however after seeing the film I'm left to wonder if there isn't at least a possibility. On the pro-side there is Hitler's attempts to destroy his past, his moving with in certain homosexual "haunts", his seeming familiarity with some of the gay ideas of the time including the idolizing of the male form with in a heroic context, allusions in the autobiography of a boyhood friend and other circumstantial reasons. The con-side consists of "no one has ever said they slept with him", "no one ever saw anything", and "there is no record of anything happening". Is there a lack of hard evidence? Yes, no one denies that. Does that mean that Hitler wasn't a closeted homosexual, absolutely not. As one person says at the start, if you're in the closet odds are you are going to do your damnedest to remain hidden. Besides just because you don't sleep with the object of your desire doesn't mean you're not made that way.Honestly this is a really good documentary that at the very least puts forward the possibility in a way that can be taken seriously. The only real flaw in the film is that some of the readings from some of the sources, Hitler's boyhood friend for example, are presented in a tone which seems to imply they are really about a romantic attachment. The words are not that clear and implying that it is weakens the argument.Will we ever know? probably not, but who knows. However if you'd like to at least entertain the possibility see this film.8 out of 10

gwailo247 This is a very interesting documentary to watch, not only for the topic it discusses, but in discussing the very nature of scholarship, especially dealing with homosexuality.As far as the documentary itself, its pretty well done. It covers how a heterosexual German historian tries to prove his claim that Hitler was homosexual, and, in a refreshing change in a documentary, it has other historians commenting on his findings and theories. In the end it does not really prove much, mainly owing to a dearth of evidence, and reliance on some rather dubious, and unverifiable sources. A good point of the argument revolves that any records confirming his homosexuality would have been destroyed by Hitler, so you're starting to delve into JFK-esquire conspiracies and cover-ups. One also may note that the stigma of homosexuality, with its negative connotations may be used simply to slander an individual, so any second hand accounts need to be examined in that light as well.But the greatest point the documentary raises, and continues in its DVD extras, is the topic of scholarship and homosexuality. Because this is such a polarizing topic, and evokes strong feelings among both straight and gay historians, it becomes very clear that retaining objectivity in this field of study is very difficult. In fact, the attempt to be objective and not let personal biases, either for or against, is probably the greatest struggle of the historian. Coupled with the fact that evidence is rarely cut and dry, gaining the truth about a person's sexuality often has to go by inference and assumption, a very dangerous minefield for any historian.The reason I gave this documentary such a high score is that it really makes you think. By having gay and straight historians, with proponents and detractors on the theory on both sides give voice, it really is one of the few documentaries that lets the viewer draw his own conclusions. The DVD extras which then discuss the very process of such scholarship further challenges the viewer to re-examine the very conclusions they just drew after the documentary's conclusion. A very highly recommended view for people with an interest in history and scholarship.

MartinHafer The title for this documentary is incorrect. You would think that the film discusses Hitler's sex life but it does not cover a broad range of theories or evidence but SOLELY focuses on homosexuality.The theory that Hitler was gay certainly has SOME foundation. It is obvious to anyone who has studied this man's life that he was both a very sick monster and was, at best, unconventional in his sexual tastes. I already knew about some of the allegations of his homosexuality but the movie, at times, gives some convincing arguments I had never heard. Unfortunately, at other times, the connections are very tenuous at best (such as "he loved Wagnerian operas--therefore he was gay" comment). Plus, there is ample evidence of other possible theories about his sexuality that are completely ignored because it didn't fit the professor's theory. Downplayed are Hitler's relationships with women as well as the allegations he had them participate in sado-masochistic rituals (such as having them urinate on him). His relationship with his 16 year-old niece, Geli, is passed off in the documentary as "being non-sexual" and talked about for about 30 seconds is just inaccurate and unfair. They had been together exclusively for a couple years and Hitler was intensely jealous of her. She had hinted about his bizarre sexual requests and ultimately killed herself because all her efforts to leave him were thwarted. Isn't this relevant to the discussion of Hitler's sex life? Geli's suicide and Eve Braun's several attempted suicides could point to evidence he was gay OR had such sick sexual requests that the women would have rather died than complied.Considering that books and documentaries have made these claims about sick relationships with women in the past, it is VERY odd that they aren't even mentioned in the film--probably because they paint a slightly different view of Hitler. All reputable historians would agree that Hitler was a sadistic maniac whose sex life was either non-existent or violent or strongly repressed. But the professor chooses, instead, to chart his own path and ignore evidence that might either challenge his theory or paint a picture of bisexuality. This just doesn't appear to be good research.So why does the film still get a 7? Well, it does try hard to be different and did present some compelling evidence. There have been countless documentaries about Hitler that simply re-hashed old material. If the film were edited to include ALL evidence and theories, though, it could have been a lot better.For another different take on Hitler, try watching Hitler and Stalin: Roots of Evil (or perhaps it's entitled "Stalin and Hitler: Roots of Evil"). This documentary compared the childhood and early years of both monsters to try to find psychological commonalities between them. Both had remarkably similar childhoods and the show is a sort of blueprint for what NOT to do when raising a child.

ElianaM Whether Hitler was gay or not, how sexual (or not) he was,... these points will always be debatable, and stir great controversy.This documentary is based on a well researched book by a known (not gay) historian, who claims Hitler was gay, after dedicating a good part of his life to researching the claim. He and many other eloquent characters (including Hitler era survivors) are interviewed masterfully in this film, alternating with extraordinary vintage images, rarely seen - even for those who think they've seen it all.These "lost" images alone make this film a must watch. Additionally, the arguments (pro and con) about Hitler's sexuality are very well told using cinema as a medium, especially when compared to a book as a medium for this debate. The live testimonies in both German and English, from contemporary intellectuals, and from witnesses who were there 60 or 70 years ago, plus uncovered "secret" letters, passionate arguments from the "he was gay" camp and the "he wasn't gay at all" side ALL come together to make for a powerful documentary.A must watch, and a shame it has been restricted mainly to gay film festivals so far. The film is of great interest to all; proof that even the worst monster is often a mere human, surrounded by all the speculative gossip we all suffer: a complex contradictory paradox, ultimately unable to really decipher after death. But it's sure fascinating to speculate with so many "irrefutable theories" and passionate opinions abound.