Why is all good cinema Fascist or Communist?

When Walter Benjamin published his “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” he wrote that he worried that political message would soon control works of art and force them to conform to various standards, rather than allowing for the creativity. As we have been studying films, it has struck me how what are considered the “great films” of the interwar period came from the polar extremes of ideologies: the communist Soviet Union with Sergei Eisenstein and “Man with a Movie Camera” and Nazi Germany with Leni Riefenstahl’s “Triumph of the Will”. In this entry, I will be exploring first why these ideologies produced these so called great films, and conversely, why capitalist democratic societies did not. I will then address how fascist, communist, and capitalist ideologies played a role on the creative process of making film.

On the first question: why did Communists and Nazis make the best films. The answer was that they lived in an all or nothing era of filmmaking. If you were lucky enough to have your movie idea approved by the state, you could then expect state support to allow you to complete your vision. Especially if your film was a propaganda film designed to make the leaders of the countries seem all powerful, like in “Will”. Ironically, in capitalist countries, there was, and still are, many restrictions on the vision of films. That is because in capitalist countries film is not a tool of the government, it is an industry, designed to generate money. Film makers don’t want a beautiful film about everyday life, they want a film that will excite and awe the audiences. Even the great films from the U.S. were big money makers like “Gone with the Wind.” In this sense, Benjamin may have been mistaken. It seems that it was the greed of businessmen, more than the hunger of dictators that led to stricter control over the art of film.

Nevertheless, the prevailing ideologies of a particular country have a deep influence on the product of various film makers. “Triumph of the Will” has a feel of military order. The camera stays in line with the marching Nazi and consistently pays homage to Hitler’s power. The movements of the camera reflect, unintentionally, the amount of control Hitler has over the German people. The camera has very little freedom, despite a great amount of resources. “Man with a Movie Camera” is just the opposite. It seemingly has no direction, trying instead to capture various aspects of life. It focuses on the regular citizens, with very little cues for the audience to follow. This reflects, the free, and somewhat chaotic nature of the Soviet state. The camera moves freely, but with very few resources and very little guidance. While freedom was getting more limited under Stalin, there was no shortage of chaos. This is how all ideologies, be it Nazi, Communist, or Capitalist, impose their view on works of art in the age of mechanical reproduction.