Set in the early part of 20th century Europe, where a dancer becomes the romantic bone of contention between 2 men; a humble shepherd and an imperious marquis.Set in the early part of 20th century Europe, where a dancer becomes the romantic bone of contention between 2 men; a humble shepherd and an imperious marquis.Set in the early part of 20th century Europe, where a dancer becomes the romantic bone of contention between 2 men; a humble shepherd and an imperious marquis.
Frida Richard
- Josefa, eine alte Magd
- (as Frieda Richard)
Max Holzboer
- Der Müller Natario
- (as Max Holsboer)
Till Klockow
- Voice of Donna Amelia
- (voice)
- (uncredited)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaLeni Riefenstahl claimed throughout her life that all the gypsies used in the film as extras were treated very well and that "all of them were seen after the war", safe and sound. It was not until the late 70's and 80's that documents were found proving that she personally went and selected the gypsy extras in the Maxglan-Leopoldskron camp (near Salzburg) for filming in the Dolomites in 1940, and in 1942, in the Marzahn camp for the studio scenes, filmed in Babelsberg. These extras are seen, for instance, in the dancing sequence in the tavern, and when gypsy children run along Pedro when he comes down from the mountain to marry Martha. It is also now proven that most of the Gypsy extras perished in the Auschwitz extermination camp.
- Alternate versionsThis film was published in Italy in an DVD anthology entitled "La bella maledetta", distributed by DNA Srl. The film has been re-edited with the contribution of the film history scholar Riccardo Cusin . This version is also available in streaming on some platforms.
- ConnectionsEdited into The Wonderful, Horrible Life of Leni Riefenstahl (1993)
Featured review
Riefenstahl was not altogether a pleasant woman but one needs to be a little careful in identifying the "crime" she committed that caused the adverse reaction to this film when it appeared in 1954. No guilt attaches to the fact that she used extras from a concentration-camp. In fact this should have been a blessing since they were promised their freedom. Her crime was that of indifference. She evidently took no care to see that the promise was fulfilled and the gypsies concerned nearly all seem to have perished in the camp. She also very foolishly lied about the whole affair when questioned.
Whether this - ugly as it was in the context - was a good reason for ending the career of the finest woman film-maker that has ever lived, I rather doubt. Riefenstahl was really being punished for her earlier pre-war propaganda films, the making of which did not in any way constitute a war-crime or indeed a crime of any sort.
The Triumph of the Will is a remarkable film which has fixed forever the image of Nazi Germany, quite as much for those who hate it as for those who admire it. Olympia (the first part at any rate) is a masterpiece. Strangely neglected is her 1935 Tag der Freiheit –unsere Wehrmacht, a film not at all appreciated by the Nazi party that commissioned it. It is an extraordinary premonitory vision of modern warfare (no country had yet engaged in such strategic bombing when it was made) where the perpetrators, the Nazi leadership isolated and bemused on their platform and swathed in encircling smoke, seem to have lost all control of the terror that they have unleashed. As a film intended to be a simple account of a military exercise, it is breath-taking in its scope.
Her fiction films are not her finest work. The photography is excellent. Riefenstahl learnt enormously from her work with the father of the "mountain film", Arnold Fanck and his expert team of cinematographers and Albert Benitz, who films this, had worked with Fanck in 1926-1927 and with mountaineer Luis Trenker in 1931 (Bergen in Flammen)and would work on Lang's final "Dr Mabuse" film in 1962 (although it is true that this is far inferior to the two silent films). It must have seemed old-fashioned in 1954 but is a wonderful reminder of a high cinematographic art fallen into neglect. The reviewer who describes it as a mix of "silent" and "talkie' is not wrong - this was precisely the intended effect of many of the great European films of the thirties and produced some of the greatest classics of the cinema.
The fantasy/allegory legendfilm style of both Der Blaue Licht and Tiefland can be a bit bit trying but really works not to badly here. The two parallel struggles with wolves, if one can put that way, are excellently realised. But the pastoral romance is difficult to take and one misses the cold, detached glare of the great documentaries.
To her credit, Riefenstahl never really attempted to trade on this film to exonerate herself politically. It is not in the last a film of political protest as some modern revisionist critics have attempted to claim (the story is a very traditional romantic melodrama) but it is true, for what it is worth, that its general tendency is quite clearly anti-totalitarian.
It remains a worthy film - and alas the last - by one of the great directors.
Whether this - ugly as it was in the context - was a good reason for ending the career of the finest woman film-maker that has ever lived, I rather doubt. Riefenstahl was really being punished for her earlier pre-war propaganda films, the making of which did not in any way constitute a war-crime or indeed a crime of any sort.
The Triumph of the Will is a remarkable film which has fixed forever the image of Nazi Germany, quite as much for those who hate it as for those who admire it. Olympia (the first part at any rate) is a masterpiece. Strangely neglected is her 1935 Tag der Freiheit –unsere Wehrmacht, a film not at all appreciated by the Nazi party that commissioned it. It is an extraordinary premonitory vision of modern warfare (no country had yet engaged in such strategic bombing when it was made) where the perpetrators, the Nazi leadership isolated and bemused on their platform and swathed in encircling smoke, seem to have lost all control of the terror that they have unleashed. As a film intended to be a simple account of a military exercise, it is breath-taking in its scope.
Her fiction films are not her finest work. The photography is excellent. Riefenstahl learnt enormously from her work with the father of the "mountain film", Arnold Fanck and his expert team of cinematographers and Albert Benitz, who films this, had worked with Fanck in 1926-1927 and with mountaineer Luis Trenker in 1931 (Bergen in Flammen)and would work on Lang's final "Dr Mabuse" film in 1962 (although it is true that this is far inferior to the two silent films). It must have seemed old-fashioned in 1954 but is a wonderful reminder of a high cinematographic art fallen into neglect. The reviewer who describes it as a mix of "silent" and "talkie' is not wrong - this was precisely the intended effect of many of the great European films of the thirties and produced some of the greatest classics of the cinema.
The fantasy/allegory legendfilm style of both Der Blaue Licht and Tiefland can be a bit bit trying but really works not to badly here. The two parallel struggles with wolves, if one can put that way, are excellently realised. But the pastoral romance is difficult to take and one misses the cold, detached glare of the great documentaries.
To her credit, Riefenstahl never really attempted to trade on this film to exonerate herself politically. It is not in the last a film of political protest as some modern revisionist critics have attempted to claim (the story is a very traditional romantic melodrama) but it is true, for what it is worth, that its general tendency is quite clearly anti-totalitarian.
It remains a worthy film - and alas the last - by one of the great directors.
- How long is Lowlands?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Runtime1 hour 39 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.37 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content