Triumph Of The Will By Leni Riefenstahl Analysis
In modern film, many critics focus on the special effects and the science of realism. However, in Triumph of the Will, directed by Leni Riefenstahl, the film contrasts the idea that film are made for profits, philosophies instead of filming for the main purpose of entertainment and money, this film focused more on politics (propaganda). Riefenstahl’s works revolutionized the entertainment world. This essay will describe how Riefenstahl’s technique were used. I.e. Riefenstahl’s techniques implicate the great power and influences in expressing propaganda. At the beginning of the 4-minute clip, one can see that Riefenstahl’s technique shows the important speaker being at the center of attention. This implies Riefenstahl’s motif in drawing the
…show more content…
Sontag supports this claim when she said “Indeed, when some of the footage of Party leaders at the speakers’ rostrum was spoiled, Hitler gave orders for the shot to be refilmed;” (Sontag 83) this shows that everything about the speakers’ rostrum needed for Hitler’s view of perfection. Inductively, one can say that Hitler needed this film to be perfect in his liking for the mass media because during fascist times, media must be controlled in a propaganda demeanor. In addition, as evident in history his propaganda flourished his empire. This adds that Riefenstahl must’ve directed this film to Hitler’s liking. Otherwise, the film would not have been supported and not shown in Germany’s media. So the rostrum being centered must’ve been in Hitler’s taste, the person speaking into the camera must’ve been in Hitler’s taste, and finally, the lowered angled camera must’ve been in Hitler’s taste. If not, the film would’ve been refilmed. Sontags supports these arguments that if the film was not in Hitler’s liking, then it must be refilmed. Furthermore, it implied that Hitler must have liked the aesthetics of the film in order to show it to the mass media. Thus, Riefenstahl utilized every element in film science to be able get this film into the mass media that would also maximize the film’s influences. And as history played out, Riefenstahl was very
Sontag supports this claim when she said “Indeed, when some of the footage of Party leaders at the speakers’ rostrum was spoiled, Hitler gave orders for the shot to be refilmed;” (Sontag 83) this shows that everything about the speakers’ rostrum needed for Hitler’s view of perfection. Inductively, one can say that Hitler needed this film to be perfect in his liking for the mass media because during fascist times, media must be controlled in a propaganda demeanor. In addition, as evident in history his propaganda flourished his empire. This adds that Riefenstahl must’ve directed this film to Hitler’s liking. Otherwise, the film would not have been supported and not shown in Germany’s media. So the rostrum being centered must’ve been in Hitler’s taste, the person speaking into the camera must’ve been in Hitler’s taste, and finally, the lowered angled camera must’ve been in Hitler’s taste. If not, the film would’ve been refilmed. Sontags supports these arguments that if the film was not in Hitler’s liking, then it must be refilmed. Furthermore, it implied that Hitler must have liked the aesthetics of the film in order to show it to the mass media. Thus, Riefenstahl utilized every element in film science to be able get this film into the mass media that would also maximize the film’s influences. And as history played out, Riefenstahl was very