User Reviews

It is easy to criticize the actions of others using the clarity of hindsight but realistically Nazis were humans and given the correct conditioning almost any human could be a Nazi. This is a story about one of the few who refused to capitulate and paid a price for it.

Some people here have complained about the film being catholic propaganda, something tells me they complain not when they view other propaganda but it is instead the fact that this film portrays some members of the church in a positive light that instead incites a reaction of anger. I don't know what is more hilarious, the fact that they themselves are ignorant of history or that they themselves would be goose-stepping in line to protect their well being. One says that the referenced event (the sending of non Aryan Christians to camps) does not occur for another 3 months. He acts as if this was the first injustice the Nazis ever bore down on anybody. From the beginning of their rule the Nazis destroyed all those that opposed them, yes the more noble thing to do would be to speak out but if by speaking out you only get people killed that doesn't make it the easy thing, or the right thing to do.

As for the critics of Pope Pius XII, I wish you would learn some history before looking for someone to scapegoat for the convenient ignorance that prevailed throughout Europe and in America to the horrors the Nazis were committing. As someone of Jewish descent I myself can say that the catholic chruch personally helped members of my extended family. Also in 1941 the Times praised Pius XII as "the only ruler left on the continent of Europe who dares to raise his voice at all". Albert Einstien too praised the catholic effort "Six million of my co-religionists have been murdered by the Nazis, but there could have been many more victims, had it not been for the efficacious intervention of Pius XII" At his funeral the prime minister of Isreal stated "When fearful martyrdom came to our people in the decade of Nazi terror, the voice of the Pope was raised for the victims." An Isreali diplomat has credit the catholic church and Pope Pius with saving more than two times the number of Jews that the allies saved. On October 20th 1939 Pius XII released a encyclical letter condemning fascism nazism and communism. On Christmas, 1942 Pius XII became the first international figure to publicly condemn the holocaust. Could the church could have done more? Possibly, but then again so could every other country and organization on the face of the globe. Trying to demonize the catholic church for its supposed "inaction" is ridiculous. Some people however would rather believe that the catholic church was an evil institution allied with the Nazis (a group which sought to abolish them) rather than an organization which tried to guide its people and save lives throughout Europe.

this film is not a propaganda movie, there were catholics who cared about the fate of the jews and there were catholics (like this film also shows) who were under the thumb of the Nazis. There is no way you can say this is a propaganda film. Yes there are some events that are not based directly on fact but there were men of the same conviction who performed similar feats and stood up in the face of the same fate.

That being said the lead actor was extremely emotive and the sparse dialog in the film helped to portray the bleakness of his situation. He is faced with a choice no man wants to make and uses his faith and his conscience to reach the right decision

"Der neunte Tag" or "The Ninth Day" is a German movie from over 10 years ago that runs for slightly over 90 minutes and was directed by Volker Schlöndorff who is still pretty famous here in Germany for directing the Oscar-winning "Die Blechtrommel". I was very underwhelmed by this one and while I am definitely not the greatest Schlöndorff fan, I can't deny he has made a couple good films and I would include this one here also as one of these I deem superior to "The Tin Drum". The best thing about it is definitely the acting. Matthes and Diehl bring their A-Game and other actors probably could not have delivered better portrayals. Both certainly elevated the material and I think that, at least back then, both count to the best Germany had to offer in their respective age groups. Hilmar Thate played a supporting character and I felt he was very good too. Then again, I may be a bit biased here as I have always liked him.

The story is about a priest who is in jail at a concentration camp during the days of Nazi Germany. A German army commander offers him a deal: If he writes a letter to the Pope and encourages the Pope to approve of German politics during that era, then he (Diehl) would let him (Matthes) free and also save many of the priest's peers from being killed at the concentration camp. Of course, the priest does not believe a bit in the Nazi's claim to being the dominant race, so it is all a decision of his conscience and there is a lot of talk about the priest acting like a Judas for the good cause and for saving people's lives. Will he finally do it? I won't tell you. You need to watch for yourself.

Another aspect I believe that is interesting about the movie is the fact that the Vatican is in Rome and people who know about the Italian political position in the 1930s will know that this may have complicated things a lot. Unfortunately, the basics are a lot more interesting in this movie than the actual story. The writers certainly could have made a better job here and I cannot say I approve of the script. The story offered so much more and even if the German Film Awards apparently disagree, I have to say that they did not achieve what they could have achieved here. The only true reason for watching this film is the political context, the real story it is based on and the convincing performances from the 2 lead actors. All in all, I give "Der neunte Tag" a thumbs-up and still call it a missed opportunity. Go check it out.

Mr. Schlöndorff's "Ninth Day" is clearly in the tradition of Veit Harlan's old Terra movies. The recipe is simple: the director takes some historical events, distorts the inconvenient facts, invents some convenient facts to meet the ax he has been given to grind, and then he shoots away.

In this case historical names are changed and events are invented to make the point that the Catholic Church behaved honorably during World War II. Whereas Joseph Philippe, the historical wartime bishop of Luxembourg has acquired the sobriquet "The Silent One," for refusing to speak out against the atrocities committed by the Germans, in this film he is presented as boldly resisting the Germans. With the bishop's celluloid moral credentials thus firmly established, Mr. Schlöndorff expects us to buy the defense of Pope Pius XII's silence about the Holocaust, simply because it comes from the bishop's mouth. Trouble is, the bishop's February 1942 argument rests on events in the Netherlands that haven't even taken place as yet, and were not going to take place until July 1942. What sloppiness! Pope Pius XII may be a controversial figure, and while the case for his defense is far from easy, it is certainly not helped by this kind of massive and careless falsification of history. When you falsify history, you better not land in some trivial contradictions. Much as he would have been pleased by Mr. Schlöndorff's attempt, Dr. Goebbels would not have tolerated such amateurishness. Unfortunately, artistically as well, this film does not hold a candle to its Goebbels-Harlan model.

**** may contain spoilers ******

I am not surprised nor offended that some reviewers find the Ninth Day a Catholic propaganda and Ullrich Matthes' silences a witness to his lack of Thespian credentials. Quite the contrary, such comments confirm that the movie, and the basis of morality which it examines, is not intellectually available or esthetically pleasing to simple-minded people. That in itself marks its quality.

There are some absolutely gripping moments in the Schloendorff's masterpiece: the mocking of the Polish priest before he is hoisted on the cross (he was not "crucified" - that just would not capture the horrific sadism in the act - the movie makes a point in altering the method of using the cross by a Dachau commandant), the reading by Gebhardt of Kremer's human weakness and sense of inferiority (the offering of the chocolates after Kremer contemptuously refuses a cigarette was a devilish coup - Kremer tries to justify his defeat by offering the sweet to an unknown little girl), Gebhardt's theory of "Judas" as the most pious Christian, his cool reception of Kremer's volcanic "noli venire inter Domine et me", Gebhardt's contempt for the cowardice of Kremer's brother ("you were right, the eggs are excellent")...no, this is no Catholic propaganda, on the contrary, the body of Christ failed Kremer by signing the Concordat with the Antichrist, in his search for the vindication of his faith he is alone, ...this has all the markings of a great classic: ingenious, complex, haunting, obsessional, true.

There is this story about a Catholic priest (Abbé Henri Kremer / Monsignore Jean Bernard) allowed by Nazis out of the concentration to go back home to Luxembourg for eight days to bury his mother. He was to return to the camp on the ninth day. The incredible actually happened. The priest in question returned to the camp, was finally released in 1942 (why?) and wrote a book about his ordeal. The book has about 100 pages and the part taken for the film is a small fraction from that book, not even a couple of pages. Several questions arise: how became it possible that the Nazis gave leave to someone from a camp? Who intervened in high places that his might be possible? The bishop from Luxembourg, mentioned in the film, earned the nickname 'The silent one' during the war because he did not speak out against the occupation. It leads to think that he might have intervened in some kind of Machiavellic plot to turn the whole of the lower clergy to the Nazi side by showing the doubters among them that the Nazis were not the monsters after all. The book on which the film is based was first published in the 1950s by the leading Catholic newspaper publisher. Over the years it became thicker because of the many introductions and forewords added. It was the same newspaper publisher who pushed the filming of the story, who got Schlöndorff on the director's seat and who is pushing now the viewing of the film by handing out free tickets and making a huge publicity. To me this whole film is nothing but propaganda for the role of the C. Church and a kind of manipulation of history by not releasing the real facts about this story. Like any propaganda movie it should be rated 0 out of 10. Sit down Mr. Schlöndorff and go over your homework once again!