|
PlanetOut.com
/ PopcornQ, September 2000
Paragraph
175
(2000,
USA)
Director: Epstein, Rob and Jeffrey Friedman
Producer: Ehrenzweig, Michael and Janet
Cole
Starring: Rupert Everett
Paragraph
175, German Penal Code: An unnatural sex act committed between
persons of male sex or by humans with animals is punishable
by imprisonment; the loss of civil rights might also be
imposed.
What can be said about Oscar-winning documentary filmmakers
Rob Epstein and Jeffrey Friedman (Common
Threads, The Celluloid Closet) that hasn't been
said before? There is a reason they have two Academy Awards,
multiple Emmy Awards, and three Peabody Awards. They are
sensitive, brilliant gay men. Therefore it is no surprise
that their new effort Paragraph
175 is not only one of the most important works
in the gay film cannon, but a vibrant and lyrical movie.
Very little has been written about the horrific years that
followed the gay paradise of Weimar Germany depicted in
the film Cabaret.
Until now Sean Mathias's Bent,
adapted from Martin Sherman's play, was the only film to
tackle the subject. Paragraph
175 not only shines a light on a time of terrible
gay persecution but also captures the emotion, fear, hopes,
and dreams of men who were there.
Paragraph 175 had been an unenforced part of the German
penal code since 1871. Strengthened and enforced by the
Nazis, it was used to justify the arrest of an estimated
100,000 gay men. Of that number, as many as 15,000 were
taken to concentration camps between 1933 and 1945. There
were nine known survivors at the time of filming, and Paragraph
175 introduces us to five of these men.
The subjects interviewed were between 76 and 94 years old.
The sense of urgency is woven into the fabric of the film
as we follow the onscreen interviewer (Dr. Klaus Muller,
a German historian and employee of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial
Museum) on his rounds. We share his frustration as a sixth
man refuses to talk. We see the look of horror on his face
as the sins of his forefathers are laid bare. This extra
element transfuses what could have been a traditional but
important documentary into something even more amazing.
I was on the edge of my seat.
But it is the interviews with the aged men coupled with
photographs of their youth that are the soul of the film.
- In
1941, 18-year-old Gad Beck joined an underground Jewish
resistance group in Berlin and liberated his lover, Manfred,
from a Gestapo holding camp by posing as a Hitler Youth
member. But as they walked away, Manfred told Gad that
he couldn't desert his family. Gad was powerless as his
friend walked back to the camp.
- In
1935, then 23-year-old Heinz Dormer began a series of
arrests for Paragraph 175 that lead to years in concentration
camps and prisons. His last release was not until 1963.
In 1982, he applied for reparations from the German government
and his application was rejected.
- In
1940, Frenchman Pierre Seel was only 17 years old when
he was arrested under Paragraph 175 and sent to a concentration
camp where he was sexually violated with broken rulers
and used as a human dart board by camp orderlies with
syringes.
- Heinz
F. asked Epstein and Friedman not to use his full name.
He is still unable to "come out" although in a sense he
was "outed" in 1935 by one of his friends who was arrested
and tortured by the Gestapo. Heinz was arrested and without
a trial, sent to a concentration camp at Dachau.
- When
photographer Albrecht Becker was brought in for questioning
in 1935 on suspicion of violating Paragraph 175, he said,
"Everybody knows I'm a homosexual." He was sentenced to
three years in prison at Nuremberg. When released he decided
to join the German army -- because "that's where all the
men were." He spent the rest of the war taking pictures
of naked German soldiers.
The
only flaw in the film is small. Epstein and Friedman have
included the story of Annette Eick to give a lesbian perspective.
And while her story is moving, she was not subject to the
provisions of the gender-specific Paragraph 175 and escaped
to England before the worst of the persecution. The film
needed this perspective, but it has a "tacked on" feel and
dampens the impact of the other interviews. But this is
a minor quibble about a brilliant film.
Bottom line? Go see it! Go see it now.
--Steve Pride
|
