The Genesis of a Monster (Max (DVD))

Member Name: harlequin21

Product:	Max (DVD)
Date:	17/05/08 (63 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: Profound and interesting story; enormous talent in the two leads; well-realised period

Disadvantages: Poorly executed and unaccomplished; flawed and inconsistent writing; unsubtle attempt to be subtle

The villains of history are doomed to become caricatures in the world of cinema. As regards Adolf Hitler, most people have not wanted to see him as a human being, his twisted mind leading to one of the most catastrophic events of the twentieth century, a mind that one struggles to understand. However, there have been glimpses into the soul of this man in past years, insights which have gone past that mythic figure of evil and revealed a rounded individual beneath. But a convincing portrait of such a multi-faceted man is an incredibly difficult challenge, not just because one has find the balance between an angry human being and an evil monster, but also because his crimes are only sixty years in the past, and society has struggled to come to terms with them, hence the man himself. Max is a film that strives to find this balance and set aside Hitler's future transgressions, painting a picture of the world that isn't black and white, but grey. However, the attempt is rather superficial because, again, this is a thinly disguised indictment of history's most hated criminal.

Nonetheless, Menno Meyjes' film does touch on the fact that Adolf Hitler (Noah Taylor) didn't emerge from the horrors of the First World War with ambitions for politics. Indeed, Hitler was a penniless soldier who practically lived on the streets, depressed and angry, his only passion his art. It is his passion for art that brings strikes up an unlikely friendship with a Jewish art dealer, Max Rothman (John Cusack), a wealthy, flamboyant character who similarly felt the horrors of war in the loss of his arm, and with that, his ability to paint. But the war is the only thing these two individuals have in common, for Rothman comes from well-bred stock, has a profitable business and a loving family, as well as a mistress, Liselore (Leelee Sobieski). Yet Rothman takes an interest in Hitler, recognising a talent in him that simmers furiously, attributed perhaps to Hitler's own insecurities and hatred of the world. The reason why Rothman retains interest in him is ambiguous, though it could be seen to arise from Rothman's own inability to paint and therefore express himself, so he attempts to help an emotionally disturbed man to do what he cannot. Hitler's unbridled passion, however, has yet found no direction, and it is recognised by his superiors in the army, who, embittered about the 1919 Treaty of Versailles, encourage the "Bohemian corporal" to channel his unusual views and passion into public speaking. What makes Max is an interesting venture is that the Hitler we see is only partially recognisable, since he has not evolved into a real person, not having found his purpose in life. He's merely a nobody, living on the desolate streets of post-war Munich, disturbed, anti-social and obnoxious.

But his portrayal as such is questionable. Noah Taylor brings an enormous amount of talent to the picture, capturing Hitler's intensity and physique brilliantly, but his performance is let down primarily by Menno Meyjes' screenplay. It never finds a realistic balance in Hitler, his character a mish-mash of contradictions, sometimes suggesting that he was humane but confused man, then at other times suggesting that he was an anti-social, ranting lunatic. Meyjes and Taylor never decide whether they want to show the villain Hitler or the human Hitler. The main fault of the writing is that it reduces Hitler to a lispy whelp, a childish man devoid of any ability to relate to people. Taylor's Hitler would struggle to win over one person, let alone millions. Indeed, surely a man who was able to gain the trust of so many would at least have some charisma and charm, and from eye witness accounts it's evident that he did. Granted, at this early stage of his career he was directionless and confused, but when one compares Taylor's performance to Bruno Ganz's in the 2004 film Downfall, we see an unconvincing, jaggedly drawn Hitler up against a rounded, but flawed and crazed human being. That said, Taylor is by no means weak in the role. His Hitler is truly affecting when silent, and Meyjes brings up the intriguing issue that Hitler was jealous of Jews, admiring their intelligence and prowess in business. There is one insightful moment when Hitler claims that he is not anti-Semitic, rather anti-racism in that he believes there should be only one race, a chillingly cold remark. Sadly though, the writing never finds a balance in Hitler, constantly fluctuating between caricature and the subtler elements to the dictator.

Max Rothman himself, however, is an intriguing blend of many subtle elements. Whilst he is fictional in that he is an amalgam of several people, he is still a richly drawn character. Self-sufficient, apt with money, not entirely honest (in both love and business), extravagant, subversive in his tastes, and somewhat elitist, Rothman almost epitomises what was hated about Jews at the time. If Hitler were not so disturbed and hateful, Rothman would appear crass beside him, irresponsible and care free, his habit of chain smoking and fraternising with young women clashing with Hitler's somehow humanitarian ideals not to smoke, eat meat, cage animals or betray one's wife. Rothman is in this sense a selfish man, an opportunist as much as Hitler is, but Cusack pulls off the character with his trademark charisma, superbly channelled into this intriguing personality, so much so that one can forgive his failure to mask his American accent. The performance isn't a flawless one, however, which owes itself to sensing that Cusack is miscast, despite the quality of his acting. Although the charisma is there, one can feel very little depth to Rothman and he never really convinces as a man of the era. Then, like Hitler, Rothman is so full of contradictions that little sense is to be made of him. This isn't Cusack's fault, more Meyjes', his decision to roll several personalities into Rothman explaining why the lead protagonist being drawn to Hitler never really making sense. Clearly, these various Jewish businessmen had different attitudes to the young Austrian artist, some positive, some negative, but the incorporation of this into Rothman makes for a paradox.

Ultimately, it's admirable that Cusack and Taylor make a poor screenplay interesting. Meyjes' writing is deeply flawed, his screenplay adopting a horribly transparent subtle approach that tries to ease Hitler into the role of the leader, but at heart uses noticeable plot triggers in what are otherwise superfluous scenes. Depth often lacks, particularly in the Rothman-Hitler relationship, which could've been handled far more deftly. A complete, rounded understanding lacks from the script, and that is very apparent when the film focuses on the philosophy behind art, a subject on which Meyjes clearly has far more profound knowledge. Unfortunately, there's a crippling stiffness to the central subject, but that said, the topic is an incredibly difficult and sensitive one, so credit should go to the actors for salvaging some merit from it. The period itself is quite effectively realised, the desolation of post-war Germany conveyed in draining colours, although the film would've benefited from a higher budget, since it occasionally appears quite stagy and rough around the edges. Again, the balance lacks. This is seen very prominently in the erratic accents, which range from American, to Scottish, to the Queen's English, to gently accented German. It's just another example of how unaccomplished the film is, the supporting actors themselves turning in mediocre, dull performances that are entirely forgettable, especially in light of the Cusack-Taylor duo. Although the story is a small one, it would be saved by higher production values and attention-to-detail, something which would make it far more poignant, rather than an interesting but fleeting picture.

But because it so interesting and unusual a story, it's definitely worth seeing. The intentions behind it are genuine and profound, and it says something when we actually occasionally feel pity for the lonesome, strange little man who would go on to forge the darkest period of the twentieth century. It's hard to understand so erratic a human being, one who was unable to look past aesthetic artistically, but the thing that Max does successfully establish is that Hitler was quite a talented individual, bursting to the seams with ideas, but ones that, perhaps by a twist of fate, tragically manifested themselves in a coldly sinister way.

Summary: A noble but inconsistent and uneven attempt to rationalise Hitler