Der Rosengarten

On the whole, I enjoyed this movie. Set in Germany, Liv Ullman is the defense lawyer for Maximillian Schell. Schell is accused of attacking an elderly man without provocation, although we later find out that the man is in fact a Nazi war criminal. The only hope for Schell may be Ullman's tireless search for justice.

Sometimes the movie is edited in such a way that necessary sequences seemed to have been edited out, for instance the first court scene seemed to jump from one point to the next, seeming to miss something in between the two. You'd see Liv Ullman saying something, and then the scene cuts to something which doesn't relate to what she had just been saying, creating confusion.

At times, the movie is highly frustrating - the court scene again, where the plaintiff's lawyer is basically badgering and shouting at defendant Maximillian Schell, and it kept making me want to tell the lawyer to shut up and leave poor Maximillian Schell alone. I know that this kind of behavior wouldn't be tolerated in American court, but the movie is set in Germany (I think, because to be truthful, no locations are ever mentioned except for the times that Ullman sets off for Hamburg).

There are problems with this movie, but they're not overwhelming. Overall I would recommend it, and Liv Ullman gives an outstanding performance.

When the film makers take a real story and overload it with details that don't make any good to the main topic it's a sign of failure.

Even the brilliant actor Maximilian Schell could not play that drivel. I met hundreds of Holocaust survivors. I had them among my family and friends. My in-law survived Auschwitz after he saw how his mother and little sisters were taken to the gas chambers. However, none of those people who went through unthinkable suffering behaved in such a crazy manner that Maximilian Schell shows to us.

The court proceedings in this movie are highly impossible. And the side story about two successful lawyers who are unable to find a babysitter for their daughter is just laughable.

It's a pity that an excellent team of movie makers lost a great opportunity and produced a cheap soap opera that is instantly forgettable.

Wonderful performances by pretty much every actor in the film, particularly Maximilian Schell, Liv Ullman and the actress who plays her young daughter. The story is chilling and thinking that it actually happened is devastating.

However, the plot is sometimes hard to follow and the pacing is uneven. More problematic is the fact that the court scenes and procedure of the case are very unrealistic. Maybe it is because I am a lawyer, but for that reason, the movie was a hit and miss for me.

Anyone know if i can get this film on DVD or VHS as its my Boyfriends favourite film and i so want to be able to get it for him!

It's his 40th and I wanna get him something he will remember and cherish! Call me an old romantic!!

He found the film intriguing yet compulsive to watch and he prefers the 1989 version! The story line is compelling and deals with the issue of war crimes in a sensitive manner and makes u appreciate the suffering in an understanding way!

The twists and turns in the trial keeps u gripped - its a shame it is so hard to find a copy!

Cheers xx

"The Rose Garden" is based on a crime allegedly committed near the end of World War II. If you look up "Bullenhuser Damm" you'll likely find several places on the internet where the story is told with varying details and characters. This story is also mentioned by the American prosecutor played by Richard Widmark in the movie "Judgment at Nuremberg".

The basic story is that in the last days of the war a group of Jewish children who had allegedly been used in medical experiments were murdered along with a number of adult prisoners in the basement of a school in Hamburg. These secret killings were carried out we are told because the Nazis wanted to hide the evidence of experimentation on prisoners and therefore could not allow these prisoners to be discovered by the Allies.

So according to the story the children and the adults to be disposed of were brought by truck from a camp about ten miles away to the Bullenhuser Damm school to be killed.

I've known about this story for about 20 years and in that time come across several versions on the internet. I haven't yet found a version that tells what happened after the killings - that is, what was done with the bodies.

Before posting this I checked the "Children of Bullenhuser Damm association" website and while it tells us what happened after the war regarding prosecution of the accused perpetrators nothing is mentioned or explained about the disposal of the bodies of the victims. I've also tried to find a transcript of the court proceedings of the original trial in 1946. One might exist as it is mentioned on the association's website that in 1986 "extracts from the transcript of proceedings of the "Curio-Haus trials" were read out...". But that's all we're told and without the transcript of the trial this story simply is not believable.

According to the story the victims were killed (and presumably disposed of), the perpetrators left the scene of the crime and the war ended. So there were no witnesses left behind and no evidence that a crime had even occurred.

The first question should be: How was this crime discovered?

One of the versions of this story tells us the killing of the children happened this way: "The children were told that they had to be vaccinated against typhoid fever before their return journey. Then they were injected with morphine. They were hanged from hooks on the wall, but the SS men found it difficult to kill the mutilated children. The first child to be strung up was so light - due to disease and malnutrition - that the rope wouldn't strangle him. SS untersturmführer Frahm had to use all of his own weight to tighten the noose. Then he hanged the others, two at a time, from different hooks. 'Just like pictures on the wall', he would recall later. He added that none of the children had cried. At five o' clock in the morning on April 21st, 1945, the Nazis had finished with their work and drank hard-earned coffee ..."

This sounds monstrous, doesn't it. It would also be at least somewhat more believable if a full and credible transcript of the trial could be found which explained the problematic details of the story . And the very first question were satisfactorily answered.

The second question would be: Why did the Germans bother to go to all this trouble?

Rather than transporting all these victims miles away from what we are told was a "death" camp, why didn't they just gas or shoot them right there in the camp and dispose of them - the evidence, that is- in the camp's crematory ovens?

The camp at which the prisoners had been held - Neuengamme - has been described this way: "Thousands of inmates were hanged, shot, gassed, killed by lethal injection or transferred to (other) death camps". In view of this description why did the Germans need to transport these victims to a special location instead of just dumping them onto the alleged conveyor belt of death that we are told Germany had been remorselessly operating for 12 years?

If these questions - after 75 years - still have not been answered then why was this movie made? And why is this story still being told to school children in Germany today? Doesn't it matter whether the story is even true?

I would add that anyone with questions about this story or others like it see the documentary One Third of the Holocaust (2008)