Jeanskynebu the audience applauded

Teringer An Exercise In Nonsense

Allison Davies The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Haven Kaycee It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

Dominic Berlemann This 1965 documentary by Mikhail Romm is an excellent example of the special position of film directors in the former Soviet Union, who didn't have to succumb to the economic hardships typically imposed on art by Western market economies. However, the film implicitly reveals the political interventions under which all art suffered under the Soviet system. On the one hand, Romm displays a strong and original will to educate mankind in a Soviet style sense of humanism, which by today's standards appears to be rather naive, if not outright ridiculous. On the other hand the documentary simply brushes aside important historical events in order to (over-)emphasize the undeniable contributions of the Red Army and of Soviet society in general to overthrowing fascism in the Great Patriotic War. There is no mention of 1939's Soviet-German Non-Aggression Pact, in which Hitler and Stalin divided Polish territory amongst themselves like pieces of pie, no word about the willingness of many Soviet citizens to collaborate with the Nazis because of overwhelming Russian dominance in the USSR, nothing about the fact that Britain's RAF was the only power providing successful military resistance to the Nazi war machine in 1940/41, and the decisive invasion of Normandy is not considered either. The whole war is painted as a primarily Soviet affair. The depiction of US marines as the fascist hordes of the Cold War really puts the icing on the cake, as it puts Americas's troops in the same line with some of world history's most appalling war crimes, for the apparent propagandistic benefits. However, Romm's approach is interesting insofar as it combines the analysis of fascism with sarcastic comments uncovering at least the nature of Hitler's bestial tyranny. However, most of these comments are rather common-place, such as alluding to Goerings plump figure or Hitler's obsessions with dogs and so on. This movie is not a must, but despite its obvious propagandistic tendency it provides the viewer with some interesting insights - not only about the causes of fascism, but also about the nature of Soviet dictatorship as well.

avtelnov It is hard to draw parallels between this brilliantly narrated compilation of both Allied and Third Reich's archive films and Hollywood's productions such as "Schindler's List" or "Jakob the Liar". While the latter present limited, sanitized and artificial-looking depictions of life under the Nazi rule, Romm's "Ordinary Fascism" pulls out all the stops in its selection of documentary material to draw the viewer not only into absolute horror about fascism and nazism in the 1920s-1940s Europe, but also to a firmest of convictions that nothing of the sort should be allowed to happen again anywhere in the world.Note the timing: the film was released in 1965, in the Soviet Union's heyday at the height of the great societal and intellectual "thaw" that followed the Stalin's death and the denunciation of Stalin's totalitarianism by Nikita Khruschev. Never explicitly mentioning any of them explicitly, the film targets tyranny and despotism no matter what form they may take; the release of such a film would have been impossible under Stalin. A good indicator of the power of this film could be the fact that it is available in most video stores in Germany.