Heimat - Eine deutsche Chronik Online

How do I begin to extol this extraordinary film, of which it can truly be said 'all life is here'. I hadn't seen HEIMAT since I was seventeen, and was thrilled to discover that it was every bit as enthralling and rich as I'd remembered, a whole other world to lose myself in. First things first: YOU MUST WATCH THIS FILM. I know that sounds a little peremptory - hey, we haven't even met - but believe me, after nearly 16 - oh yes - hours, you'll be wanting me to bear your children for having offered you this advice. Or something. It may not change your life as it did mine - this was my first experience of what would become my cinematic obsession, the melodrama - but I wouldn't bet on it.

Don't be put off by its length - it was made for TV and so can be watched as such, an episode a week. After a couple of programmes, though, I guaranteee that will not be enough. And yet it's one of those films you never EVER want to end. If that's not enough, the sequel is even better.

So what is HEIMAT? Nothing less than the story of 20th century German history, told through the experiences of a small village, and one family in particular. But this is not a weighty history lesson. Every major event takes place off-screen - we experience their repercussions on a people remote from them in terms of time and space. The saga is a satisfying feast on the level of a novel-sequence by Powell or Proust - a varied dramatis personae, precise detail, anecdote, incident, communities, generation struggles, local and national crises, social comedy (I hadn't remembered how funny it was), domestic and national tragedy; each episode is packed with these, building up accumalitively a quiet, yet inexorable, power.

'Heimat' means both 'home' and 'homeland', and was also a type of film encouraged by the Nazis, espousing reactionary (no!) sentiments tinged with bucolic utopia. Therefore, although we will be introduced to hundreds of disparate characters, it is appropriate that the main character, and the first image of such a massive document, is the land. Outside of the Archers and King Vidor, you will not see a greater cinematic sympathy with nature, such a feeling for its texture and spirit, such a recognition of it as a marker of human history, as an inhuman constant in a world heading for nihilism, as a quiet, immemorial force thast looks on at, and yet is indifferenct to, a human comedy that becomes steadily unfunny.

The first episode is, in its quiet way, a manifesto of how the film intends to proceed. For all its smooth technical surface, this is a film seething with disjunction, comprised of layers and levels that refuse to cohere in the village's dream of community, continuity and order. As in all great melodramas, this confusion is an apt formal representation of its main character's state of mind.

This protagonist is Paul Simon, who begins the episode walking back from a French prisoner-of-war camp and ends it leaving his wife, child, family, community, past, tradition. He returns from the war into an unchanging quiet village world which could have existed at any time over the last few centuries. Indeed, it's almost as if he is some sort of Prince from fairy tale, returned to awake the enchanted sleeping inhabitants, because life suddenly flourishes in its own way.

The community's rhythm is one of slow circularity - his first sight of his father is of him forging a wheel; the circularity of his plot. And yet all has changed. Most of the men have died in the war - all that are left are invalids, idiots, strange young boys and crusty old codgers.

This is a film so rich, despite its narrative concerns, in detail, image and symbol, that I won't succumb to interpretive hubris. But that initial impression of disjunction lingers. Paul's first action is to urinate; we cut to a shot of a barren, pest-ridden fly-paper, a disgusting image of the entrapment and sterility on offer here. The fly plays a very important symbolic role in this episode, as do all kinds of images of flight - kites, planes.

Paul operates on a different level from his mundane family and neighbours - his world is that of dreams, hope, visions, ideas, fantasy. His pursuit of science and invention - progress - contrasts with the circular harvesting of the men. I used to wonder why the film would alternate between colour and monochrome. I don't think there's a systematic explanation for it - not only does the colour change, but the film stock itself does too - this surface instability in a seemingly gliding technique perfectly mirrors the torment in the mind of a superficially placid man, and makes his seemingly capricious departure more explicable.

The main disjunction in HEIMAT, of course, is that between the characters in the film and us, the viewers. We know what is going to hapen in the future, and this heavily colours a seemingly frivolous portrait of rural life. A huge pig chases away geese, a naked woman - 'probably a Jewess' mutters a witness - is found dead in the forest; a marten breaks into the shed and kills the hens: none of these incidents are remarkable on a narrative level, but create a terrifying sense of foreboding of the horrors we know are to come. There is a little Hitler lord mayor; a hugely comic unveiling ceremony in which the risible words of a puffed-up local dignitary are eerily similar to those that will be used with deadly seriousness by the Nazis; the almost pranklike attack on Jewish political dissidents; the harrassment and ostricising of an amazingly hardworking woman, ostensibly because she slept with an enemy officer, but really because she looks like a gypsy - all these serve to darken a seeming idyll, show that the seeds of Nazism were already truly in place; and you have to try very hard not to slip into disgust, and play 'spot who'll become a Nazi'.

The biggest disturbance of all comes in the plot of the lead character. The first two hours of this film are told largely through the point of view of Paul - both narratively and formally. And yet he ups and leaves, and there are still 14 hours to go. Itr gradually becomes apparent that it is his wife, Maria, who will become the saga's pivotal figure. Now the film becomes a different kind of melodrama, but this was announced from the beginning. While all the men were out japing like kids, the women were trapped behind windows, doing all the hard work, denied the privilege of escape offered Paul.

Seeing this film, or rather set of films, in my early teens irrevocably changed my idea of the possibilities of human interaction and the range of potential experience. This monumental exploration of individuals, and their historical setting, reveals how full bodied and intense every human existence is. The people are portrayed as they are to themselves: their experiences of the smallest to the largest internal and external phenomena are detailed with the greatest of artistry and perception. Edgar Reitz displays a fabulous appreciation of human motivations and longings.

When these phenomena are set against the immense time allowed by the length of the work, one cannot help but apprehend the force and vivacity of happiness, defeat, lust, love, sadness, melancholy, that each person feels. When I saw these films I perceived my future experiences, how my life would inevitably twist and oscillate due to both intended and accidental events. I acquired a feeling of the longevity of being and what it meant to reflect upon past lives, memories and contexts. A masterpiece and a revelation. I only wish the BBC would screen it again.

If anyone knows where I can get a copy, could they contact me

I can only echo the preceding comments: See this film. I would add some ifs, however: See this film if you appreciate good direction, consistently solid acting, and discriminating characterizations; if you savour cultural subtleties; if you find 20th-century European history fascinating; if you think the dynamics of community life have much to tell about the human condition; if you've ever wondered what it meant to be German in the 1920s, '30s, & '40s (although the film covers 1919-1982); if you can't quite understand how Nazism could have gained acceptance and then pre-eminence in a northern German village far removed from Berlin and full of the usual diverse personalities; if you want to put a human face on the monolithic histories about war and propaganda; and if your attention span is longer than that required by the average Hollywood production (the film runs to something like 16 hours, in 9 videocassettes).

Heimat is a superb cinematic chronicle of social and political change in human enterprise, a Bildungsroman of a community. You will not forget it.

What can one say? This is what (television) drama should be. I saw the first Heimat when it was broadcast in the Netherlands in 1985, shortly after it was released in Germany. I was stunned. It seems that every decade one or two television productions excel, and this was without a shred of a doubt the eighties' highlight. When the second Heimat was shown on Dutch television in two marathon sessions (it runs for over 25 hours in all) I sort of locked myself in, and never regretted it.

I cannot begin to describe what Heimat is about. It's an epos. It's European history of the twentieth century on a small scale, literally. It's 'roman fleuve' and yet it's not. It's your family, that sometimes you wished wasn't there (and for good reasons) and then you're glad to meet again. It's all the human frailty and without the excuses. It *is* the human condition. And it only helps that it is beautifully shot, that the actors put on a superb show, that the music at times is haunting.

Now, on the verge of having the third series shown on TV, the first Heimat is finally available on DVD (with the other two series promised for the next few months). And although I saw most of it about twenty years ago, it is like coming home again and meeting your boyhood friends, those favourite aunts, that dear old uncle - what was wrong with him, again?

If you are looking for action, a thrilling plot, romance in a grand manner, wonderful CGI, and be done before dinner, don't look at Heimat. But if your willing to submerge yourself, to be engulfed by a very good story, to get really, I mean really, well acquainted with characters - well, I'm not in for commercial breaks, but go out and get it!

Recounting the lives of the inhabitants of a German village from 1919 to 1982, Edgar Reitz's epic miniseries Heimat- A Chronicle of Germany is a stunning showcase of film-making at its finest, a fifteen-hour masterpiece, unequaled in European cinema.

The story begins with Paul Simon's return to Schabbach, the village where he was born, at the end of World War I. The conflict has left its marks on him, but no one notices this until it's too late: the first episode ends with Paul leaving Schabbach in 1928, without telling anyone.

We will subsequently learn he has become a successful businessman in America, although this aspect of the plot is covered sparingly, the director being more interested in the Scabbach community, where life revolves around Paul's wife, Maria (Marita Breuer). She is the heart and soul of these eleven episodes, watching her sons grow up, her in-laws get old and the world change radically: over the course of fifty-four years, she will witness war, poverty, family crises and much more, always trying to remain calm and controlled.

Reitz's brilliance lies partly in the story he tells (the history of an entire nation seen through the eyes of common people), but most of all in the means he employs to tell it: on the surface, Heimat looks like an ordinary TV miniseries, but in fact the director delivers a fifteen-hour art-house film, as testified by the techniques used to bring the story to life: what mainstream television product would feature so many black and white/color transitions (dictated by emotional reasons, rather than narrative), ambiguous characters (especially Maria, whose increasingly cold behavior has a devastating effect on her son Hermann, as we will see in Heimat 2), unconventional themes (adultery and sexual initiation were still taboos on the small screen in 1984) and bizarre fantasy sequences (one might even be entitled to think Reitz began the TV revolution given US form by David Lynch's work on Twin Peaks)? And let's not forget the unreliable narrator (every episode is introduced by Glasisch, the village fool), who makes the viewer unable to interpret the Heimat cycle in only one way. I also have to point out that the title is ironic: the people portrayed in these episodes struggle to find a home-country (that's what "heimat" means, although the translation doesn't fully live up to the significance that word has in German), but are destined to fail on one level or another: they can only find a temporary home, which will eventually vanish along with them.

For all the reasons listed above, Heimat deserves to be seen: those wondering if there still is a difference (in terms of quality, if not even success) between big and small screen really ought to give this intense opus a look.

Like most other people who saw the series so many years ago,It has remained vividly in my mind,and was a very welcome release on DVD. Although the entire cast were excellent,the performance of Marita Breuer as Maria was outstanding.An amazing, and thoroughly convincing portrayal of the phases of one womans lifetime.With so many strong characters appearing through the story,her magnetism is all the more remarkable. Now we have the wonderful news that HEIMAT 2 will be released in May,with HEIMAT 3 following in August.Can't wait. HEIMAT has to the best piece of sustained drama ever to appear on the small screen.Why can't British TV produce programmes of this calibre? The Singing Detective from the BBC remains the only thing approaching it for quality.

You can only appreciate this series if you like the German tradition of very slowly moving, but brilliant novels, like 'the magic mountain' (der Zauberberg) by Thomas Mann. Don't expect any form of action: it's real life, looked at through the eyes of real people, and there's no heroism, just life and the things it does to all of us. I had the habit of watching at least one or two episodes each week in winter, and I think this is the way to enjoy the series; watching the whole thing in - let's say - one week, would ruin it and make it boring. The way music is integrated in the series, and even becomes a theme in the second series, often triggered something; it's like Marcel Proust's 'a la recherche du temps perdu': the emotions shown, the feeling of time moving on and never coming back and history being written without you being able to change a single thing doesn't make you happy, but gives you a mild feeling of accepting things just the way they are.

Heimat is one of the best works of art of the twentieth century. Period. That is really all there is to be said. But the format of these comments forces me to write a minimum of ten lines. Well, lets just say that never before in film there has been as successful an amalgam of epic and lyric qualities. The TV-series depict the troubled history of Germany by focusing on a small community and a handful of families. As the show unfolds they become our family. Also: In art the profound and the entertaining seldom go together. In Heimat they do. Be amazed and cry. Still not enough lines. I have nothing more to say. Heimat is the ultimate television masterpiece.

Usually, the index deals only with feature length films; however, HEIMAT is an exception, since it is structurally a very long full length movie. The index considers seven variables--acting, plot, production sets,dialogue, artistry, character development, and film continuity--on a scale from 10 as high, 5 as average, and 1 as weak. On all counts, HEIMAT rates a 10. The acting is simply outstanding on every level, from major to minor characters to atmospheres. Even so, two performances are superior: Marita Breuer as Maria and Rudiger Weigang as Eduard. Breuer's facial expressions and eye movements speak volumes. In this case, less is indeed more. Weigang's acting is worthy of the highest one would find on the Shakespearian stage, a Polonius with precise body movement. It is a pleasure to watch both performers. Attention to plot is paramount in a long production, and there are no unnecessary scenes or fill-ins. Both the chronicles of the Simon family and that of Germany are effectively interwoven. One is never bored watching this marathon. The dialogue is appropriate, and the artistry exceptional--especially if the fair scene near the conclusion. Character development is reflected in a natural development over the time of the movie. Suffice it to say that everyone changes to one degree or another. The film continuity is special, held together with change and the changes change brings. There seem to be two minor flaws in the film's continuity: the plane which Ernst flys over the town and the Army MPs who appear in 1944. The plane looks more like a pre-WW II US trainer used by the Canadians who joined the RAF. It certainly is not the Focke-Wulf 190 which Eduard suggests it is. And, secondly, the two American MPs who appear at the Simons' front door in 1944 seem miscast ed. It is not likely that two moustached black MPs from a yet not officially integrated US Army would appear in a small farming community in Germany in 1944. It seems that they better fit MPs from a much later occupying force. I always wonder why these apparent flaws happen. Overall, this mini-series is excellent. I highly recommend you put aside some time and watch it all, which is inevitable once you have seen Part I.

Excellent historical/drama series. The depiction of how the residents of a small German village become embroiled in the rise of Nazism is fascinating. Long overdue for re-showing on British television, particularly in view of new UK history channel available on freeview. Last shown by BBC with subtitles several years ago. Sadly now only available on video from Germany (no english subtitles obviously.)

Absolutely, I agree with my previous commentator in describing this as a riveting,fascinating and certainly beautiful film. It's not necessary to see all the episodes,since the first ones are the best,while the last ones are a-bit tiresome,but for any person who likes German's and their good-natured ways,all episodes are worth seeing.In typical german fashion, values are constantly questioned,even it's murderous Nazi past is confronted in the last episodes, the rich dialogues are particularly interesting. These episodes are recommended for anyone who is about to live or travel in Germany,preferably in original language!!

I spent a year as an exchange student in the Hunrueck area of Germany (where the series opens). I both laughed and cried as I heard the accents and idioms that were used. They have not changed since the early 1900's until my residency there. The outside scenery shots took me back as well. The outside scenes to be back to the Germany that I remember with "Fernweh/Heimweh. I would like to point out one error in the englich subtitles. They make reference to a bucket of "berries" while the spoken word in the audio uses to local idiom "Krombeeren", a.k.a. potatoes. A great series. I am glad that winter is coming so that there will be plenty of nighttime hours to see Heimet 2. Gruess Gott!

Here's something about people. About common folks living their daily lives in the tight-knit community of a small village - farmers, blacksmiths, shop keepers, politicians, their wives and children. The place is Germany, more precisely the Hunsrück region near the French border, where nothing particularly world changing happens, yet it's the center of the world for the few who are born, grow up and die there. The time we get to meet these people for the first time is the early 20th century. Starting in 1919, right after the end of World War I, we see defining moments of family life for several decades in Edgar Reitz' 15 hour long epic mini-series "Heimat", right until 1982 when a generation comes to its inevitable end. It's a journey a director has rarely attempted before in terms of scope, done with dedication, intensity and fervor dealing with all those things usually left out in dramatizations of an epoch, where the focus lies solely on the big, flashy events, but the trivial is neglected. Contrary to that "Heimat" follows a host of minor characters step by step, with a regular mother substituting for a "heroine". Main subjects of the series are the family ties and estrangements throughout the years passing by while the world around changes and the Hunsrück people with it, for good or for worse. Alternating rhythmically between black and white and color photography and a subtle, but haunting score by Nikos Mamangakis, Reitz manages to remind us at the same time how far away and yet how close a past reality is - the memories accompany us, the memories remain, the memories are what we build upon.

The "Heimat" series is as much an art project as it is high profile television entertainment and an indispensable historical document. As despite the fact that the material is fictitious it is based on meticulous research, feels earthy, direct, involving and relevant, and is presented with style. In Edgar Reitz' career it was only the first major work before continuing on with the "Heimat II" and "Heimat III" series and finally the film "Die andere Heimat". In all these additional projects he explores Hunsrück lives even further as they traverse into the 21st century, building on characters introduced in the very first series. By doing so Reitz still comments on this work of reference, adding even more and more intricacy and depth to it. A life's work not to be missed.

Some trivia: with "Heimat", probably the most ambitious project in post-war German film history, Edgar Reitz became one of Stanley Kubrick's favourite film directors. As Kubrick was fond of both scope and minutiae, it comes as no surprise that the attention to detail and the amazing narrative breadth of Reitz's almost 1000 minute long film roused Kubrick's admiration. He saw all of it in his private movie theatre and hung his favourite film still from the film (of Maria's coffin on the rainy street in Schabbach) over his office desk. Kubrick even contacted Reitz in the 80s to ask him about his set designer Franz Bauer, whom he considered for "Aryan Papers" (Kubrick's unmade Holocaust project).

When, years later, Kubrick had finished the filming of "Eyes Wide Shut", he expressed the wish that all dubbed versions of his film in the most important European countries be supervised by his favourite film directors: in France by Patrice Chareau, in Spain by Carlos Saura, in Italy by Bernardo Bertolucci, and in Germany by Edgar Reitz. At that time Reitz was busy preparing "Heimat 3", yet after Kubrick's untimely death he bent to Kubrick's wishes.

The final "Heimat" film was released several years after Kubrick's death. With its release, and a now combined length of 53 hours and 25 minutes, the trilogy became one of the longest series of feature length films in the history of cinema.

The first "Heimat" film, subtitled "A Chronicle of Germany", takes the form of a family saga set in the fictional South Western village of Schabbach in the years prior to World War 2. The film traces the lives of families, farmers, mayors, tradesmen, shop owners, politicians and soldiers, but primarily focuses on the fortunes of the Simon clan, who pull themselves out of the humiliating defeat of World War 1 and witness the rise of Hitler and the entry of their country, not only into the Second World War, but Germany's post-war economic boom.

Being a backwater town, Germany's conflicts and larger historical events are only glimpsed in fragments by the villagers. The gossip of neighbours, messages on radios, the appearance of Nazi armbands, allusions to the Final Solution and a subtle scene in which a boy on a bicycle observes a concentration camp being constructed, all hint at unseen horrors.

The film is largely shot in black and white, though colour sequences do increasingly pop up, most notably during Germany's first colour television broadcast, which our humble villagers witness with great fascination. Spielberg would borrow similar techniques in "Schindler's List".

"Heimat 2" and "Heimat 3" are equally epic. While "Heimat 1" moves from the small town life of 1919 to the social unrest of the 60s and 70s and finally to the relative stability of the 1980s, "Heimat 2" largely takes place in the late 60s and 70s, whilst "Heimat 3" centres on the late 80s and 90s and the fall of the Berlin Wall. Unsurprisingly, "Heimat 3" focuses on a composer-conductor rebuilding a dream house whilst the Berlin Wall comes crumbling down, a gesture which epitomises the overriding theme of the entire trilogy. With the word "Heimat" meaning "homeland", and with the trilogy packed with shots of abandoned factories, discarded US bases, apartments and crumbling walls, the chapters, and the final episodes in particular, are all about collapse, abandonment and rebuilding, Reitz primarily concerned with the idea of rebuilding homes and reclaiming Germany (and the German identity) from nationalistic ideology (and later the threats of Globalization).

What's most interesting about the trilogy, though, is watching how the Simon clan changes over the decades, humble villagers becoming industrialists, aviators, arrogant playboys etc. Unsurprisingly, these characters are also used as entry points into other topics, like one character's narrative symbolising an influx of Russian immigrants, another the effects on reunification on East Germany and others the effects of Western capitalism on German heritage.

Like "The Wire", the "Heimat" trilogy is ultimately one of those rare projects which captures the scope of Balzac and Dickens. It serves up the vast universes expected of great 19th century novels, with its Balzac-like focuses on inheritance, complex character juggling, money flow, boardroom dealings and the way the world changes (and stays the same) with time. Where the "Heimat" trilogy differs from such fare, though, is in its mythical scope, Reitz paying attention not only to his characters, but the very heartbeat of the earth. For all the drama on display, he is always inserting moments where natural phenomena (earthquares, storms, eclipses) utterly dwarf his cast, lending the series a unique tone, a strange blend of realism, documentary, social comedy, melodrama, mysticism, and German Romanticism.

9.5/10 - "Heimat 1"

8.9/10 - "Heimat 2", "Heimat 3"

A work of extraordinary ambition. "Heimat 1" and "Heimat 2" are the best of the trilogy, though the scope of "2" necessitates that its themes be handled in a somewhat superficial manner (notice the lack of minorities etc). "Heimat 3" ends strongly, but is hampered by its short length.

The Heimat films are presented here as a TV-series. However, I have seen all Heimat films in the movie theater in Amsterdam. The first two series of films in Desmet (in 1984 and 1992), the third series in the Filmmuseum Cinerama (in 2004). In most events you could see two, sometimes three films a night for five or six days in a row. In that way you could see the whole of Heimat 1 and 2 and 3 in one week. As the films span almost two decades and they were only shown once, I think there are not much people who have actually seen all films on the big screen. Another interesting faits divers is that one of the actors, Daniel Smith, lives around the corner here in Amsterdam. In the second Heimat he plays Juan. We ran into him last year during a percussion workshop.

Some elements of this series are superb and spell binding but some are just downright irritating. The soundtrack leaves much to be desired -- atonal jazz doesn't draw me in, more period music would have helped. Why the constant shifting back and forth between colour and black and white? I could find no meaning in it and it looked more like the director couldn't afford colour for the entire series so he used it only when he could afford it. Also a little more flushing out of some characters and downplaying of others. Herman had too large a role to play in the last two episodes in my opinion while Glasisch who is the narrator took me forever to figure out he was related to the main family. I wanted to know more about Lucie but she all but disappears from the storyline after 1948, and why Apollonia is even in the film at the beginning is a red herring, she never reappears. I fully expected Paul to have taken up with her in America. Why was the father cut out of the afterlife scene? It sounds to me like they couldn't afford to hire him back or the actor had died... not that he wasn't there because he was blind... Why did Anton go deaf because of a lack of vitamins? I didn't even know that Robert had gone to the Russian front in 1945... There were too many loose ends and red herrings throughout the series.

On the other hand, I loved the development of the village from a rural backwater to a quaint German town that was desperate to modernize and ripped out its century old doors and covered up its half timber walls with fake siding. I loved how they aged most of the characters very believably and how their stories intertwined with each other. I loved how the National Socialist Movement slowly infiltrated the village and how each member of the village became a part of the war machine in various ways and at different levels of interest.

There was much to admire about this series but it sure could have had 3 hours edited out of it without any problem or cutting of the storyline. It kept switching from brilliant to boring throughout the entire series. I am glad I watched it but I won't watch it again! I gave it a 7 out of 10 because it is worthy of much acclaim but I really wanted to give it a 10 for the good parts and a 1 for the bad parts.

Some trivia: with "Heimat", probably the most ambitious project in post-war German film history, Edgar Reitz became one of Stanley Kubrick's favourite film directors. As Kubrick was fond of both scope and minutiae, it comes as no surprise that the attention to detail and the amazing narrative breadth of Reitz's almost 1000 minute long film roused Kubrick's admiration. He saw all of it in his private movie theatre and hung his favourite film still from the film (of Maria's coffin on the rainy street in Schabbach) over his office desk. Kubrick even contacted Reitz in the 80s to ask him about his set designer Franz Bauer, whom he considered for "Aryan Papers" (Kubrick's unmade Holocaust project).

When, years later, Kubrick had finished the filming of "Eyes Wide Shut", he expressed the wish that all dubbed versions of his film in the most important European countries be supervised by his favourite film directors: in France by Patrice Chareau, in Spain by Carlos Saura, in Italy by Bernardo Bertolucci, and in Germany by Edgar Reitz. At that time Reitz was busy preparing "Heimat 3", yet after Kubrick's untimely death he bent to Kubrick's wishes.

The final "Heimat" film was released several years after Kubrick's death. With its release, and a now combined length of 53 hours and 25 minutes, the trilogy became one of the longest series of feature length films in the history of cinema.

The first "Heimat" film, subtitled "A Chronicle of Germany", takes the form of a family saga set in the fictional South Western village of Schabbach in the years prior to World War 2. The film traces the lives of families, farmers, mayors, tradesmen, shop owners, politicians and soldiers, but primarily focuses on the fortunes of the Simon clan, who pull themselves out of the humiliating defeat of World War 1 and witness the rise of Hitler and the entry of their country, not only into the Second World War, but Germany's post-war economic boom.

Being a backwater town, Germany's conflicts and larger historical events are only glimpsed in fragments by the villagers. The gossip of neighbours, messages on radios, the appearance of Nazi armbands, allusions to the Final Solution and a subtle scene in which a boy on a bicycle observes a concentration camp being constructed, all hint at unseen horrors.

The film is largely shot in black and white, though colour sequences do increasingly pop up, most notably during Germany's first colour television broadcast, which our humble villagers witness with great fascination. Spielberg would borrow similar techniques in "Schindler's List".

"Heimat 2" and "Heimat 3" are equally epic. While "Heimat 1" moves from the small town life of 1919 to the social unrest of the 60s and 70s and finally to the relative stability of the 1980s, "Heimat 2" largely takes place in the late 60s and 70s, whilst "Heimat 3" centres on the late 80s and 90s and the fall of the Berlin Wall. Unsurprisingly, "Heimat 3" focuses on a composer-conductor rebuilding a dream house whilst the Berlin Wall comes crumbling down, a gesture which epitomises the overriding theme of the entire trilogy. With the word "Heimat" meaning "homeland", and with the trilogy packed with shots of abandoned factories, discarded US bases, apartments and crumbling walls, the chapters, and the final episodes in particular, are all about collapse, abandonment and rebuilding, Reitz primarily concerned with the idea of rebuilding homes and reclaiming Germany (and the German identity) from nationalistic ideology (and later the threats of Globalization).

What's most interesting about the trilogy, though, is watching how the Simon clan changes over the decades, humble villagers becoming industrialists, aviators, arrogant playboys etc. Unsurprisingly, these characters are also used as entry points into other topics, like one character's narrative symbolising an influx of Russian immigrants, another the effects on reunification on East Germany and others the effects of Western capitalism on German heritage.

Like "The Wire", the "Heimat" trilogy is ultimately one of those rare projects which captures the scope of Balzac and Dickens. It serves up the vast universes expected of great 19th century novels, with its Balzac-like focuses on inheritance, complex character juggling, money flow, boardroom dealings and the way the world changes (and stays the same) with time. Where the "Heimat" trilogy differs from such fare, though, is in its mythical scope, Reitz paying attention not only to his characters, but the very heartbeat of the earth. For all the drama on display, he is always inserting moments where natural phenomena (earthquares, storms, eclipses) utterly dwarf his cast, lending the series a unique tone, a strange blend of realism, documentary, social comedy, melodrama, mysticism, and German Romanticism.

9.5/10 - "Heimat 1"

8.9/10 - "Heimat 2", "Heimat 3"

A work of extraordinary ambition. "Heimat 1" and "Heimat 2" are the best of the trilogy, though the scope of "2" necessitates that its themes be handled in a somewhat superficial manner (notice the lack of minorities etc). "Heimat 3" ends strongly, but is hampered by its short length.

I liked the first season much better than the others, which are still good but colder towards their characters and at times pretentious. The first season has a different scriptwriter, Peter Steinman or Steinbach. The atmosphere is warmer and there is a fine humor. The combination is wonderful, I regret they did not make all the seasons together.

A really fascinating insight into rural Germany pre and post war. It's interesting to see things from a different angle and to actually empathise with ordinary Germans during WW2. I didn't expect to feel that. All stereotypes are tossed aside. Obviously a labour of love and one of the best films I've ever experienced. Incredible cast and direction.

Heimat started out strong painting a picture of a small Rhenish town right after WWI. It went through the battles inevitably fought between the old and the new and how this affected the Simon family and their friends. It was totally refreshing to see how a typical German town coped with to works wars, depression, social, political, and economic changed and finally the onslaught of the modern age. This series was less about the events of history and more about the relationships of one family. This is both a strength and a weakness. I think there were quite a few important omissions that would have absolutely affected a small town in the Rhineland not least of which would include the remilitarization of that area as well as various economic changes made in the area during rearmament. The series deals with none of these things nor does it give more than a cursory mention of any of the restrictive social policies of the Nazis. That is forgivable if this particular town had no members of any restricted groups, but this seems unlikely. Since Reitz was all about telling a true story of a real German town, these omissions seem even more glaring.

The series really lost its way midway through its 11 episodes when it moved away from the core characters. Reitz dedicated the longest episode to one character who we really had never met before beyond a few scenes when he was a toddler mugging for the camera. The character of Hermann would eventually go on to become the focus of the sequel to Heimat, but the director didn't know that when he subjected us to over two hours of a pubescent Hermann's face as he receives his first hand job, modern jazz fan Hermann singing entire songs in his high, squeaky voice, and sensitive, educated Hermann sighing at the provincialism of his mother and her generation. He's supposed to represent how much the town has changed in 20 years. Modernism vs traditionalism is a common theme in Heimat and is shown in a variety of ways prior to Hermann's episode. But I didn't know this character and so didn't care about his love story with a woman who had come to the town to marry his brother. And that's another thing. The actress was in her 30s when this was filmed while the actor was only 16. This was the first episode we see any nudity taking the form of the 16 year old actor running around nude, undressing in front of his elderly mother, or else lying in bed nude with a 30 year old equally nude actress. I'm not sure if German film studios recognize how creepy this is to the viewer but i think the director could have sacrificed a bit of realism by not showing nude children in bed with nude adults.

Other pet peeves? Way too much time was wasted pointing the camera at a variety show featuring magic tricks and barbershop singing by the townspeople. I fail to see how more than 5 minutes of this advances the story or the idea of Heimat. It was self-indulgent on the part of Reitz and painful for the viewer. The black and white vs color switching back and forth? I've no problem with emphasizing certain scenes, but I felt the quality of the film was such that it made the color looked washed out and the black and white look fuzzy. In addition, it seemed rather heavy handed of Reitz to change color mid scene back and forth. Speaking of heavy handed, some of the acting was extremely overdone and hammy. I'm talking to the actors playing Paul (adult) and Lucie. Paul looked and acted like a bad impression of Franklin Roosevelt and Lucie spent lots of time posing for the camera and also talking way too close to people. These things could and should have been fixed by Reitz because they constantly remind the viewer they are watching actors which totally ruins any realism that was built up. One other annoying thing about Heimat is its confusing casting of new actors as characters age. It might be acceptable if they were consistent about it. However, while Maria, Pauline, Kath, Eduard, and Glasich are always portrayed by the same actors, other main characters such as Ernst, Anton, and Paul change, some several times. In one episode Anton is played by a 20-something actor while in the previous episode (set four years prior) he was only 12. Ten years goes by and they've got an actor who looks about 50 playing him. All very confusing and completely breaks any connection a viewer might have with the characters. Since many of the actors were changed when their character left home for awhile, it could be Reitz' intention to show how much people change when they leave home, even temporarily. That may be, but as a viewer I would have loved to be able to recognize the characters from episode to episode. That was really the fundamental flaw of Heimat. Because the title is supposed to describe that feeling we have for our homeland, our roots; that is meant to include the people who live there. Of course the director should do his best to help us care about these characters and their connection with their homeland. But that's really where the series fails unfortunately.

The series (11 episodes) tells the story of the village of Schabbach, on the Hunsrueck in Germany through the years 1919-1982. The central person is Maria, who we see growing from a 17 year old girl to an old woman, and her family.

"Heimat" has faced some criticism for its selective interpretation of German history, with some writers noting that there is limited treatment of the hyperinflationary spiral of the 1920s, the Great Depression, or certain aspects of Nazi history such as the Holocaust of World War II. But we must remember, even with so much running time, not everything can be covered, and this is from one perspective.

Frankly, this is an admirable series because few countries in the Western world had such a turbulent 20th century. We could argue that France and Poland also did, or maybe Spain, but none of these compares to Germany. To go from being seen as the most evil place on earth to normalized relations is quite a shift, one that no other country has managed.

Hi, i bought this movie (6 - DVD version) without actually knowing what this movie is about. I knew it was about the German history and a family and i was interested by the positive comments on the Internet. I wan't to know more about the history of 'Germany, WW1 and WW2 and this movie shows you some insight in a village which is evolving thru history.

Sure it's an epos about the history of Germany but i think there is a lot of bad actor work and some conversations are not smoothly and goes strange. Yes, i give you some insight but i'm irritated by the strange conversations and bad actor work. When i read the other comments about this i don't understand why people are so enthusiast about it. Perhaps i'm not the type of person which enjoys this kind of movies.

Conclusion is that this movie tells you a story about a village in the Germany but i was irritated by strange conversations and bad actor work.

A little more than ten years ago, in my days of heroic cinephilia, I did saw Heimat, the German miniseries directed by Edgar Reitz, that deals in 11 episodes with the life of a German family from 1919 to 1982. Every day they showed one of the episodes in the Buenos Aires Cinematheque, and I remember going to see it every day (I was at the university at the time, studying a subject totally unrelated to film-making, so I was certainly sacrificing hours of study in order to see this). After Heimat, they did show Heimat II, which is even longer, but I only saw a couple of episodes of that. Heimat is good and compelling, though I stop short in calling it a masterpiece. And at the end, it is a miniseries about a family living in a small German town, during a century which was quite eventful for Germany. Besides, I don't remember a lot about the film itself, so is not very memorable (great movies should stay in one's mind long after you saw them). So I can't say whether I can recommend this, unless you are a voracious cinephile (just as I was, some years ago) that wants to see everything, the odder the better.

"Heimat - Eine deutsche Chronik" is a German mini-series from 1984, so this one will have its 35th anniversary soon. It was made by Edgar Reitz and this is his career-defining work, not just this one here, but also the two mini-series he made as sequels as well as the fairly recent really long movie about Sehnsucht/longing. But we talked and will talk about these on other occasions. Today lets focus on this one here. It consists of 11 parts with an average of 80-90 minutes perhaps. The shortest chapters run for under an hour, but the longest run for over 2 hours even. German film buffs will recognize a name or face here and there maybe, but there's really no big names in here, actors who were known crucially for their work with Herzog, Fassbinder, Wenders or Schlöndorff. But that's just a statement, that is not supposed to discredit this mini series in any way. Nonetheless, I must say I was rather disappointed by the overall outcome. From the episode list, you will see by the years listed in there that it spans over a duration of over 60 years. And according to the description on IMDb, it is about a character's life who was born in 1900: the character of Maria. But this is only partially true. There are massive, very lengthy segments that do not involve her character whatsoever, even if it may be about her family members for example.

The only episode I kinda enjoyed was the second. Afterward, it went south quickly and stayed there until the very end. Which means there were major lengths on many occasions. Not even the parts about the years of World War II were interesting. The general idea that people struggled with their everyday lives too, with work, with love, with death, with money, with family was introduced and that these issues were maybe much more important for them than the War while when you hear about the 1930s and 1940s, then everybody says immediately oh yes Hitler, the War, the 3rd Reich etc. but people had the very same problems as we do today. Sadly this approach was taken, but not elaborated on here convincingly. Back to Maria: With her in the center of it all, this could have been a defining mini-series about the average person, but sadly it moves away too frequently from her and when it moves back or stays on her life, then it is also rarely on a level that I would approve of in terms of cinematic quality.

Another aspect I personally found really distracting was Reitz' switching between black-and-white permanently, especially early on. Later on, there are also entire chapters that don't change and stay one of these creative choices from start to finish. But in the first few episodes I found it really random and annoying and I wonder if there was any logic to it. Completely aside from that, I think that the entire project resulted into an outcome of mediocrity and this refers to writing, acting and several other production values too. It is never on a level of failure, but it's way below goodness too. To me it was sadly never a memorable or even inspirational I must say. The overall bleakness or the fact that very little happens are not at the core of the series' struggles. It's perfectly fine to include it the way Reitz did, even appreciated at times when it helps the realism component. However, if doing so, you need to deliver in other fields and areas that somehow justify the existence of this story. And to convince me that the characters at the center of the action deserve a film that centers around them. I don't think this was achieved here. And that's why I give it a thumbs-down. It's clearly superior for example compared to Reitz' most recent addition to the series. I don't recommend checking out "Heimat: A Chronicle of Germany". Or only see episode number one and if you don't really love it, then stop right away as it is certainly not getting better afterward, rather worse. Save your time and stay away from this one.