Andrei Konchalovsky’s Russian & German Film ‘Paradise’ (2016) — The Nazi ideal that contributed to the Holocaust

Babu Subramanian
14 min readOct 22, 2018
Film’s poster. Source

Andrei Konchalovsky is known among cinephiles as the co-scriptwriter for three films of the foremost Russian filmmaker Andrei Tarkovsky: The Steamroller and the Violin (1961), Ivan’s Childhood (1962), and Andrei Rublev (1966). Konchalovsky is also known for his own film, Asya’s Happiness (1967), which was banned in Soviet Russia for twenty years. While the film’s unglamorous depiction of a collective farm made it a classic, it also might have been the cause for its ban.

Iya Savvina in Konchalovsky’s ‘Asya’s Happiness’. Source

Konchalovsky filmed Turgenev’s novel, A Nest of Gentlefolk (1969) and Chekov’s play, Uncle Vanya (1970), capturing the spirit of these Russian works. Siberiade (1979) is an epic film made by Konchalovsky in four parts on the history of Siberia in the 20th century narrated in different styles. It won the Grand Prix Spécial du Jury award at Cannes. Among his films made in the US, Runaway Train is well known as it was co-scripted by Akira Kurosawa. Konchalovsky’s last two Russian films, The Postman’s White Nights (2014) and Paradise (2016) won him Silver Lion for Best Director at Venice Film Festival. The Postman’s White Nights narrates real life stories casting real life people living in a remote Russian village. The contrast of the village, dwelling in an earlier age, and the space launch center close to it makes it an interesting film.

For a film which had European Jewish Fund as one of its backers, Paradise has the audacity to show the strong German angle.

**Article contains spoilers**

Unlike The Postman’s White Nights, his later film, Paradise, is fiction and it uses professional actors. It’s subject of the Holocaust has been done to death but Paradise stands out by bringing multiple perspectives. Apart from Olga a Russian aristocrat working as a Vogue fashion editor and serving the French Resistance in Paris, there are two other central characters: a French collaborator, Jules, working for the French police and a nobleman SS officer Helmut. These three central roles have been acted competently, particularly that of Olga by Yuliya Vysotskaya — Andrei Konchalovsky’s wife — and Helmut by Christian Clauß a newcomer. In general films on the Holocaust are shot through the point of view of the victors. For a film which had European Jewish Fund as one of its backers, Paradise has the audacity to show the strong German angle.

Yuliya Vysotskaya and Philippe Duquesne in Konchalovsky’s ‘Paradise’. Source

The film opens with Olga’s arrest by the Gestapo for sheltering two Jewish children. Jules (Philippe Duqusne), the French police official, is willing to lighten her punishment in return for sexual favor but he gets killed by members of French Resistance. Olga is moved to a concentration camp where she unites with the Jewish children. Helmut, the nobleman SS officer, goes to inspect the concentration camp, housing Olga, for corruption. It transpires that he was hopelessly in love with Olga in the past before she got married to a prince who died later. As Germany’s defeat in the war appears imminent, Helmut dreams of going away along with Olga to Neuva Germania, the German settlement that was founded by his great uncle in Paraguay, South America.

In Paradise, Simonov’s B&W cinematography helps to evoke the period of the war with its packed concentration camp and to create the interview extracts of the three central characters which are in the form of found footage, ‘damaged’ a bit deliberately.

This Holocaust story is adeptly translated to film by the cinematographer Alexander Simonov who created the extraordinary dystopian imagery in the films of the relatively unknown Russian auteur Aleksei Balabanov: Cargo200, Morphine, The stoker and Me too. Simonov’s cinematography evokes the feeling of time standing still in Konchalovsky’s The Postman’s White Nights. In Paradise, Simonov’s B&W cinematography helps to evoke the period of the war with its packed concentration camp and to create the interview extracts of the three central characters which are in the form of found footage, ‘damaged’ a bit deliberately. They answer an unseen interviewer somewhat like Antoine Doinel does in Francois Truffaut’s 400 Blows. But there are no questions put by an interlocutor in Paradise and the actors look at the camera lens directly, which is called ‘breaking the Fourth Wall’.

Yuliya Vysotskaya in Konchalovsky’s ‘Paradise’. Source

The theatrical term, ‘Fourth Wall’ refers to the imaginary “wall” that exists between actors on stage and the audience. This is to keep up the illusion of theatre so the actors pretend as though they cannot hear or see the audience. A similar effect in movies happens with the fourth wall formed by the camera lens. The fourth wall has been broken in films even as early as The Great Train Robbery (1903) in which an actor looks into the camera lens directly. This has been for fleeting moments in general. The intense monologue of Stalker’s wife in Andrei Tarkovsky’s Stalker (1979) is an example of a long scene in which the actor looks at the camera lens. It is perhaps original of Paradise to come up with this device of interviews, breaking the fourth wall, that are interspersed throughout the movie. This has the effect of distancing the audience from the horror of the Holocaust as in Brecht’s epic theater and make them consider various viewpoints of the archetypes of the film.

The character of Helmut draws on the short story ‘Deutsches Requiem’ by the Argentine literary giant, Jorge Luis Borges. It is the fictional last testament of Otto Dietrich zur Linde, the one-legged commandant of a Nazi concentration camp, written in his prison cell as he awaits death by firing squad.

Among the three viewpoints, the one concerning Helmut, the nobleman Nazi is easily the most rewarding part of Paradise. The character of Helmut draws on the short story ‘Deutsches Requiem’ by the Argentine literary giant, Jorge Luis Borges. It is the fictional last testament of Otto Dietrich zur Linde, the one-legged commandant of a Nazi concentration camp, written in his prison cell as he awaits death by firing squad. The name of Otto has been changed to Helmut in the film. Helmut’s illustrious ancestors, who served in the military, were killed in battle just as those of Otto. Helmut’s father distinguished himself during the World War I just as Otto’s father in ‘Deutsches Requiem’. Helmut’s love for Brahms is from the Borges story. Interestingly, the title for Borges’ story is a reference to ‘Ein Deutsches Requiem’ (A German Requiem), a composition by Brahms. The film replaces Shakespeare in the Borges story by Chekov to make Helmut a lover of Russian literature. Nietzsche is another influence as in the Borges story. In the film Helmut’s great-uncle was Friedrich Nietzsche’s cousin who was one of the founders of the Nueva Germania settlement in South America.

Christian Clauß in Konchalovsky’s ‘Paradise’. Source

This outstanding short story by Borges could be disturbing as it may appear to justify Nazism but Borges has conceived an ideal Nazi, who never existed as the great writer has said. Such a character helps to look at Nazism from his point of view and understand it from his perspective. Ramsey Lawrence’s essay, ‘Religious Subtext and Narrative Structure in Borges’ “Deutsches Requiem”’, calls it a moral story because it deals with the breakdown of Christian values caused by the violence unleashed by Nazism. The breakdown of Judeo-Christianity meant going beyond good and evil. This led to amorality that caused violence. Quoting Borges and adding to it, Lawrence has written that Otto is an amoral saint and not an evil one.

Borges has explained that this ideal Nazi is kind of holy, but unpleasant and foolish, a saint whose mission is disgusting.

Otto looks upon himself as the superior man (Übermensch), as described by Nietzsche in “Thus Spake Zarathustra”, who has risen above conventional Christian morality to create his own ethics. Borges has explained that this ideal Nazi is kind of holy, but unpleasant and foolish, a saint whose mission is disgusting. Lawrence has quoted Borges who has suggested that Otto has basically got it all wrong. “Not because he acts in an evil manner, but because he misinterprets, even misreads, Nietzsche” — Borges quoted by Lawrence.

Peter Kurth, Yuliya Vysotskaya and Christian Clauß in Konchalovsky’s ‘Paradise’. Source

Borges’ story focuses on the last testament of its archetype, Otto, and through him it unravels the Nazi philosophy and its politics that feed each other. It doesn’t dwell on the horror of the Holocaust although it brings it out with astonishing economy through what Otto says about and does to a Jewish poet in the concentration camp. In Konchalovsky’s film, Helmut is modelled after the archetypal character Otto, but the religious subtext of Borges’ story has not been made use of. The film loses some of the richness of the Borges story but then Helmut’s is only one of the three viewpoints.

This gives the film the structure of a multiple perspective that is posthumous.

Konchalovsky and his co-scriptwriter Elena Kiseleva have taken the character of the ideal Nazi from Borges and built a love story around him with Olga who has an aristocratic lineage like him. Olga is Helmut’s counterpoint as a member of French resistance landing in a concentration camp. Apart from these two idealists, the scriptwriters have added Jules, a bourgeoise French collaborator, who loves the good things in life and has no scruples in working for the Nazis, to provide additional perspective. Borges’ story is told in the first person by Otto Dietrich. The scriptwriters have used this idea for all the three central characters. Since Olga and Jules are killed in the film, their interviews are posthumous. In the Borges story, Otto’s’ last testament is made before his execution whereas Helmut’s interview in the film appears to be posthumous like that of the other two. This gives the film the structure of a multiple perspective that is posthumous.

The Nazi ideal of a ‘perfect’ German paradise is an important addition that builds on Borges’ characterization of the ideal Nazi.

The scriptwriters have conceived a number of scenes and details to make a full-length feature film out of the core idea. The Nazi ideal of a ‘perfect’ German paradise is an important addition that builds on Borges’ characterization of the ideal Nazi. Helmut is disillusioned with what was going on in Germany (‘the crisis, the decadence, the mass unemployment, the Treaty of Versailles…’). He joins the war effort, gets awarded and promoted. He becomes a member of the National Socialists which made him feel “as if a wave of radiant joy was lifting me out of the abyss of despair’. Hitler’s ‘speeches were more than just words. They touched our soul… Under his leadership we would build an entirely new world. A paradise for our people. A German paradise on earth.”

Victor Sukhorukov and Christian Clauß in Konchalovsky’s ‘Paradise’. Source

The theme of paradise is taken up again in Helmut’s meeting with Heinrich Himmler (Victor Sukhorukov). This is easily the best shot scene in the film full of chiaroscuro lighting reminiscent of German Expressionist cinema. Siegfried Kracauer wrote in his influential book, ‘From Caligari to Hitler’, that the early expressionist film The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari “is a premonition of the rise of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi party”. In this scene from Paradise, a tribute to German expressionism, Himmler is happy with the opportunity to showcase a nobleman like Helmut among the ranks of SS to counter the claim of enemies that SS consists of psychopaths and sadists. Helmut comes to know of Hitler’s plan to hand over the task of creation of German paradise to young leaders like him. Helmut is entrusted with the responsibility of checking corruption in concentration and extermination camps.

It’s a cruel irony that Helmut’s favorite writer’s fiancée died in the concentration camp that Helmut is inspecting.

Helmut’s meetings with the junior SS officer Dietrich who is his friend from his university days throw light on Helmut’s background and their differing views on the ideal of a German paradise. Both Helmut and Dietrich were lovers of Russian literature, particularly Chekov. Helmut was working on a thesis on Chekov which has to wait till the war is over. Dietrich tells Helmut about Dunya Efros, the Jewish fiancée of Chekov. Dunya’s father didn’t let her convert. It turned Chekov into a full-blown anti-Semite. It’s a cruel irony that Helmut’s favorite writer’s fiancée died in the concentration camp that Helmut is inspecting.

Christian Clauß in Konchalovsky’s ‘Paradise’. Source

In a later scene, a drunk Dietrich asks Helmut to shoot him with the blind faith that an Übermensch like him cannot die. (Hitler and the Nazi regime took Nietzsche’s concept of Übermensch and turned it racial. They used the term to describe their idea of a biologically superior Aryan or Germanic master race. This is twisting the meaning of the term to suit the Nazi agenda as Nietzsche himself was critical of both antisemitism and German nationalism.) Dietrich then talks about the ghosts of those killed by them reminiscent of the ghosts that Helmut sees in the woods through the fog in an earlier scene superbly shot. With Germany’s fortune fading, the depressed Dietrich is on Pervitin and heroin as many of the Nazi addicts. Dietrich reveals the unrequited love he had for Helmut but feels sorry for him for his ideal notion of paradise and calls him stupid. Despite being an intellectual, Helmut is foolish just like the character of Otto.

A window opens suddenly carrying over the orchestra music played outside as well as the stench from the crematorium.

Unlike the Borges story, the film deals with the horror of concentration camp and the corruption there in some detail. The corrupt chief of the concentration camp, that Helmut is auditing, describes the problems of carrying out extermination at the rate at which train load of Jews arrive. He justifies his ways by saying: ‘You dream of paradise. But there’s no heaven without hell. And I created this hell. Me, Hans Krause’. He accuses noblemen like Helmut for betraying Hitler. He believes that people like him are much more important to the Reich than people like Helmut. A window opens suddenly carrying over the orchestra music played outside as well as the stench from the crematorium. Krause blames the architects for the poor planning of the windows. His extreme insensitivity comes through as he boasts about the good orchestra he has which will play for him for 24 hours.

Yuliya Vysotskaya and Christian Clauß in Konchalovsky’s ‘Paradise’. Source

Helmut’s Italian home movie scenes with Olga shot in 16 mm add to the visual richness of the film. They are contrasted with the scenes in Helmut’s house where Olga has been chosen by him to work as a maid. Helmut pines for her but she is tensed to see him. She wonders what lay ahead for Helmut is nothing but torment. She can’t believe that somebody who appreciates Brahms, Tolstoy and Chekov can turn into a Nazi. Helmut gets her a German passport and a red cross certificate to go to Switzerland. Olga is sarcastic in telling him that he is wonderful and his people are a great nation, the master race. This infuriates Helmut who rants: ‘The Übermensch has no doubts. The Übermensch is not afraid of death. Neither his own, nor someone else’s. The Übermensch is self-sufficient’.

The window opens with a sudden gust of wind making the papers from his table fly in the air and fall on the floor. We can imagine the stench from the gas chamber. This is a brilliant image that evokes the final days of the Nazi era.

The sudden opening of the window is a recurring detail in the film. Towards the end we see him sitting at his desk smoking cigar oddly unlike others who are running around helter-skelter as the allies are bombing the area. The window opens with a sudden gust of wind making the papers from his table fly in the air and fall on the floor. We can imagine the stench from the gas chamber. This is a brilliant image that evokes the final days of the Nazi era. In his last part of the interview, Helmut doesn’t find the need to justify any of his actions and accepts death. He calls himself a pioneering Übermensch. He wants the German paradise to be blessed even if they are destined for hell. He says, “if there is one reason why our cause won’t become reality, then that reason is because it is perfect. Mankind is not ready for perfection”.

Yuliya Vysotskaya and Christian Clauß in Konchalovsky’s ‘Paradise’. Source

Olga has a chance to leave for Switzerland along with Dietrich thanks to the papers arranged for her by Helmut to save her. Instead, she goes to the gas chamber in place of a fellow prisoner, Roza, to let her leave with the Jewish children and unite with her daughter. In her final interview, Olga talks about why she went to the gas chamber in place of Roza. She has hope for miracle and love. She is the one who is allowed to enter paradise with bright light falling on her. The three central characters have been in fact presenting their case at Heaven’s gate. The ending of Paradise is somewhat reminiscent of the Tarkovsky film Andrei Rublev, for which Konchalovsky was the co-scriptwriter. Although Paradise doesn’t attempt Andrei Rublev ‘s transcendence after showing violent upheavals, it ends positively for a film that covers the horror of the Holocaust.

The Konchalovsky film makes a valiant effort to raise its level by bringing in the perspective of an ideal Nazi deluded by the Nazi utopia.

As some of the reviewers have pointed out, the quality of dubbing isn’t all that good especially for Viktor Sukhorukov playing Himmler. This is something one doesn’t expect in an international production like this. Yet it doesn’t falter when it comes to handling a major risk, the subject of Holocaust, as films have been made on it ad nauseam. The Konchalovsky film makes a valiant effort to raise its level by bringing in the perspective of an ideal Nazi deluded by the Nazi utopia.

Christian Clauß in Konchalovsky’s ‘Paradise’. Source

Lotte Eisner in her book, ‘The Haunted Screen’, has written about dualism in German Expressionist films: “Caligari is both the eminent doctor and the fairground huckster, Nosferatu the vampire, also the master of a feudal castle, wishes to buy a house from an estate agent who is himself imbued with diabolism… It would seem from this that for the Germans the demoniac side to an individual always has a middle-class counterpart. In the ambiguous world of the German cinema people are unsure of their identity and can easily lose it by the way.”

By creatively structuring the narrative to give fresh insight into the worn-out subject, Paradise turns out to be a Master Class on how to pull off an outstanding film on a risky subject such as the Holocaust.

It may be a stretch to look at Helmut in these terms as he is not from the middle class. But there is a dualism in Helmut who can be so kind towards his housekeeper one moment and in the next moment he can order the old Jewish couple to be banished to the concentration camp. Unlike German expressionist films though, we get an insight into his demoniac side. His delusion for the Nazi ideal of a perfect German paradise ironically leads him commit to the horror of Holocaust and that is the tragedy of Helmut. The stock depiction of Nazis as ‘psychopaths and sadists’ (the way, Himmler says in the film, the enemies portray SS officers) won’t give us a clue. The Konchalovsky film stays clear from this danger eminently. By creatively structuring the narrative to give fresh insight into the worn-out subject, Paradise turns out to be a Master Class on how to pull off an outstanding film on a risky subject such as the Holocaust.

--

--