Effi Briest (1974) User Reviews

Fassbinder!

[gavin6942 · 7/10 · 27 August 2016]

In the nineteenth century, seventeen year old Effi Briest is married to the older Baron von Instetten and moves into a house, that she believes has a ghost, in a small isolated Baltic town.

Similarities between "Effi Briest" and 20th-century Germany were easily found, helping to explain the popularity of the book and its subsequent film adaptions there. During the 1970s, West Germany was being racked by civil unrest as people sought to effect change, among these movements was the women's civil rights movement, which became a major influence for the film, as it compared the repressive nature in society between 19th century Prussia and 1970s West Germany.

Fassbinder is one of the giants of new German cinema (by "new" I mean post-WWII), and here he demonstrates his prowess. Epic in length, using black and white to its fullest extent... this is one of those films that made him great, even if it may not be the most-remembered of Fassbinder films.

Beautiful but distant

[nekanderson881 · 6/10 · 22 April 2004]

Exquisite black-and-white photography, gorgeous costumes, stunning landscapes, and actors photographed in mirrors and through laced-curtains are the highlights of this emotionally distant film. It is true, however, that the leading actress has her cathartic scene, but it comes late in the film. Too late to really make one care about the spoiled, rich young lady. But this is Fassbinder, and Fassbinder is always watchable, even at his most pretentious. One joy of this film is the presence of Irm Hermann, who can do more with one glare (she doesn't need dialogue as "The Bitter Tears of Petra Von Kant" proved for all time) then any actor I can think of. Schygulla and the other actors are mostly wooden. The beauty of the scene with the starkly handsome Lommel as the rich major and Schygulla picnicking at the beach makes one forgive the shortcomings of the film.

EFFI BRIEST is definitely worth one's time even if evanescent frustration might bob up intermittently due to its unconventional narratology

[lasttimeisaw · 8/10 · 5 November 2019]

Theatrical rigidity becomes part and parcel of R.W. Fassbinder's fetchingly monochromatic period drama, an adaptation of Theodor Fontane's novel, EFFI BRIEST, predominantly accompanied by its own author's ur-texts in voiceover, narration or title cards, stars Hanna Schygulla as our titular heroine, a Prussian young girl consents to the marriage proposal of Baron Geert von Instetten (Schenck), a former suitor of her mother Louise (Pempeit), out of a desire for prestige, although she is only 18, and her husband is over twice of her age.

Fassbinder stridently retains its source novel's poetic realism through the film's gorgeous costumes, furnitures and a repressive air of solemnity, a matter-of-factness in probing into Effi and Geert's turbulent and unbalanced marriage, wherein a trophy wife's seemingly perfect life is under constant gaslighting and doctrinaire manipulation from her haughty husband, and Fassbinder counterintuitively keeps a perverse remove from key incidents, totally relies on wording to elucidate thoughts and relentless long takes to consistently test audience's patience, it is a bold move, but on the strength of the picture's uncannily stylish compositions (mirrors and doors are key partitions to transmit the despondent feeling of alienation, detachment, even cruelty)...

continue reading my review on my blog: cinema omnivore, thanks

The word "masterpiece" comes immediately to mind...

[gsims · 10/10 · 23 March 2002]

This film has everything one could ask for: astonishing visual intelligence and imagination, wonderfully evocative, impeccably composed images that draw on silent cinema and painting, all perfectly adapted to the very moving story being told, and the period/milieu in which it unfolds: Effie Briest is presented as enclosed in the many different spaces (most of them - especially the interiors - saturated with stifling formality, social rectitude and conformity) through which she moves and in which she lives, or tries to live (the bird in the cage being a transparent symbol of all this). Quite simply, Fassbinder knows - knew - what "mise en scene" really means. The passage of time is brilliantly handled (through, for example, the use of the fade to white, intertitles and a moving voice-over narration), and the cast is flawless, as well as being flawlessly directed. A film of immense dignity and power, yet it somehow remains understated...

deep movie

[ans-2 · 10 January 2003]

a highly philosophical, political, deep, beautiful masterpiece of Fontane, reiterated by Fassbinder. I believe that Fassbinder chose this book because it's reflects his own story of "Angst", in his case, the guilt that if we know the mistakes of our society but still hesitate to rebel.this movie, as most Fassbinder titles is no superficial hollywood entertainment, it made me think.

I feel exactly the opposite way of this film's first commentator below

[zetes · 6/10 · 8 October 2001]

I did not find Fassbinder's filmmaking static and boring. I found it brash and exciting. His style is superb. HOWEVER, I have to say that I found the story, with which I am unfamiliar, incredibly bland. How many 19th and early 20th Century novels have this exact same plot? It's the simplistic "fallen wife" scenario without a spark of invention, it seems to me. In that way, I could not stand this film and was trying hard not to pass out. However, Fassbinder's miraculous filmmaking, cinematography, mise-en-scene, direction, music, even the acting, kept me at least interested. I give it a 6/10.

one of the best films ever made

[schizolage · 10/10 · 17 July 2005]

Fassbinder's Effie Briest is a tremendous film. it is not an 'adaptation' of the book. it is much more complicated than that. the title as it appears in the film is:

Fontane // Effie Briest // oder

then followed by a long quotation in the next frame. the word 'oder' (or) works as a hinge holding the first title onto its meaning (erklarung). the whole of Fontane's book is framed within the title. and the film is a meditation on the limits of enframement. mirrors are everywhere, doubling and re-doubling the images and framings. to anyone that thinks the camera-work is sub par was obviously not paying attention. the execution of some of these scenes is unsurpassed by anyone.

the film consists of several different layers. there are inter titles, narration (direct quotations from Fontane), and then dialog. this would be the three orders of representation. then there are the layers of sense. as an example take the figure of Effie Briest. she is never a unified subject that we can refer to as an individual. she is the contested site of a number of different forces in a number of fields of discourse. the most obvious evidence of this is the contestation of the name: Effie. Effie Briest? Effie Von Instetten? the film is about this change. and the possibilities of refusal. what would it be to have ones own name and not the name of an other? she cannot. or as her father (who is always called by the signifier 'Briest') continually says 'Das ist ein zu weites Feld'. he pronounces the limits of thought in its foreclosure. it is always a command and always ends the dialog: there is nothing left to say on this subject because we CANNOT think THAT (the repressed idea, which reveals itself as thinkable through the fathers disavowal of its thinkability).

Effing good!

[Karl Self · 6/10 · 25 January 2017]

I consider Rainer Werner Fassbinder to be the single most overrated director of all times. I have desperately tried to understand what all the fuss is about when most of his movies seem like movie Experiments gone badly wrong. Effi Briest is at least an accomplished movie with a unique style, although at 2 hours 15 minutes it's pretty slow and overly long.

Fassbinder being an eccentric artiste, couldn't just use the title of the novel but came up with a monstrous title (which the IMDb spellchecker doesn't allow me to quote here) that doesn't make much sense in German, but seems to give the movie a Marxist twist (it alludes to "many know their possibilities and requirements but chose to support the ruling system"). The title is usually mercifully shortened to just "Fontane Effi Briest".

At the time, the sound recording of films was still a considerable technical problem, so that the entire film was dubbed (the voices and partially also the background noises were re-recorded in a studio and added to the film in post-production). The dubbing was done very meticulously so that the voices are in perfect synchronicity with the lip movements. The voices are in several cases not of the actual actors, for example Eva Mathes was dubbed by another actress, and voiced yet another actress). This gives the film a touch of artificiality and a sense of heightened reality, which goes well with the slow pace of the story.

So, for a Fassbinder, it's a surprisingly watchable movie. At the same time, there is no narration, no tension, nothing is building up to anything. It's love it and sit through it, or switch off the video.

Interestingly, Fassbinder also has no intention of putting a new angle on the jaded story of the romantic girl falling victim to an uncaring world. I would love to see Effi as a competent woman trying to make her own rules, or even as a femme fatale for a change.

The Calculus of Fear

[hasosch · 10/10 · 9 January 2010]

One the tablets used by Fassbinder in this movie (the same method he shall use 6 years later in "Berlin Alexanerplatz") shows the text: "He put her under pressure wherever he could. So-to-say a calculus of fear" (Fontane). As any other calculi, also the calculus of fear consists of theorems. Speaking about the relationship between Von Instetten and Effi, we have: 1. Never treat her without menacing, but do not show the menace open, so that you can deny it after. 2. Isolate her from society, best make her a child as soon as possible so that she does not get bored. 3. Never praise her for what she is doing, unless in the presence of foreigners. 4. Praise her in front of her parents with whom you should establish a good friendship. If she is complaining later about her marriage, the guilt will be given to her.

As the sub-title of the movie says (the longest ever used in a movie): The movie is about those people who are capable to see the unjustness of social rules but don't help changing them, and by doing so, confirm them. "Effi Briest" is therefore a typical Fassbinder movie which he liked to call "melodramas" and thus also a predecessor of his later "women-movies" about Maria Braun, Lola, Lili Marleen and Veronika Voss.

That this film is an outstanding masterpiece has nowadays been recognized by all leading film experts around the world. Although Fassbinder let himself sometimes inspire by works of literature, Fontane's "Effi Briest" is one of his only three explicit literature adaptations, besides "Berlin Alexanderplatz" and "Querelle". One could perhaps go as far and say: While in "Effi Briest", society is criticized at the hand of one single, individual fate, in "Berlin Alexanderplatz" a society as a whole is put in the pillory, and in "Querelle" a possible alternative world after all the disgust is shown. Fassbinder made this long way in societal criticism in only eight years, during which he approached the society of the time in which he lived, by systematically coming closer to reach the 50ies of the 20th century (Lola). His movies can be seen as chronicles of different means of suppression by using calculi which turn out to be independent of time.

Sublime visuals marred by ungainly narration and dialogue

[timmy_501 · 7/10 · 25 August 2010]

By 1974 RW Fassbinder had reached the height of his creative powers. With Fontane - Effi Briest, Fassbinder consistently amazes with his visuals; there's something sublime about his casual mastery of angles, reflections, framing, and camera movements. Given the power of his images it's also somewhat shocking to see how clunky the script is. Fassbinder saddles the film with narration that is only interrupted by tedious, drawn out conversations and extraneous intertitles. Various characters narrate the film at different times but more often than not the narrator is actually omniscient and entirely divorced from the story; this device is just part of a bigger problem: a slavish devotion to the source material that isn't kind to the book or the film. One particularly important moment is conveyed via a stagy, histrionic monologue when it could easily have come out naturally in conversation. Overall, Effi Briest is one of the most frustrating films I've ever seen as the marriage between the amazing visuals and the awkward script is no more successful than the doomed relationship between the naive titular character and her pedantically moralistic husband.

Somehow drained of life; not a good second Fassbinder film for me.

[Ben_Cheshire · 4/10 · 15 May 2015]

Effie is a young maiden who marries a Baron and talks about ghosts a lot. Effie Briest is in black and white, and its by Fassbinder. Beyond that, I just didn't like it.

The characters are cold and distant, they move like statues and speak slowly as in a Dreyer film. The narrative techniques create a literacy atmosphere, fading to white, having brief title cards, and a narrator (voiced by Fassbinder) who interferes long after when he was needed, keeping us at a distance. Its a nice looking film, gorgeous in black and white, often like a painting of 18th Century characters standing on beaches or in drawing rooms. It doesn't remind me of Sirk specifically, aside from the few shots in mirrors and the overly composed shots. There's no histrionics, and hardly any music; melo in melodrama means music. The scenes on the beach where the narrator talks for minutes while we watch the characters from a mid-shot are either meant to be funny or they don't work at all, I can't decide. After watching some Ingmar Bergman films, the massive lack of humanity in this Fassbinder film makes it feel totally empty to me.

Why is this considered a good movie?

[j-m-w · 3/10 · 28 August 2017]

I read Effi Briest, I know the story. But i couldn't see the story in this movie. Characters just appear for one or two scenes without any introduction so you just don't know who is who in this movie.

Characters who play a huge role in the book and have a rich background just appear for one or two scenes.

The scenes don't deliver the actual plot at all. Suddenly its 30 years later and no mention at all, i just know, because i read the book. And this is what this film feels like: an movie you watch while reading the book. As a standalone movie its just not working at all because it doesn't deliver story. Its just random scenes from the book. Maybe the scenes which carry the essence of the book, but only as an addition to reading the book.

Then there are very weird things happening in this movie, which doesn't make sense at all. e.g. the narrator starts narrating while the characters are still talking scenes of characters just standing for minutes without dialog weird text inserts which often repeat what characters just said or random things, unrelated

And the characters have no movements in their faces the whole movie. They just carry the same look all the time. except of Effi, who smiles from time to time but that's all. No one ever is mad, happy, angry, fearful, greedy, sad or even in love. And the book is about emotions. Its very confusing to see absolutely no emotions in this movie.

Tedious...

[planktonrules · 3/10 · 23 March 2010]

Wow, I am out of sync on this German film. While the overall score is very respectable and the reviews are mostly glowing, I didn't like the film at all. Now I've seen about a dozen Fassbinder films and I often have really enjoyed them, but watching this one was a chore.

First, the film's style seems less innovative or interesting than just dull and, dare I say it, cheap. The black & white film looked more like a way to save money than anything else and the film played like a long series of vignettes all strung together with awkward dissolves. This made it all seem very episodic--like the audience is getting snippets instead of seeing a story.

Second, the story wasn't particularly interesting. The film played like a Bergman film WITHOUT the complexities. And, sadly, the film was slow and the characters uninvolving.

Overall, I found watching this film a chore. There are many wonderful German films out there, but I assume the average person would also find this film dry and unapproachable, as you need a lot of patience to stick with this film.

A Woman's Heart

[spoilsbury_toast_girl · 15 June 2008]

Maybe Theodor Fontane does not belong to the outstanding writers of world literature (he would be too provincial for the whole wide world perhaps), but nevertheless, his poetic realism and his sophisticated powers of observation lead his stories to a deep, often radical criticism of social conventions.

That's probably the reason why Fassbinder adopted Fontane's most famous novel "Effi Briest" - to tell the story from the writer's very point of view, as far as possible and to make the social mechanisms of oppression and the assimilation of the individual to that obvious. His concern is already pointed out in the exceptionally long title of the film, which I can imagine is the longest in history and translates something like this: Fontane – Effi Briest or: Many who have a notion of their abilities and needs and nevertheless accept the current regime in their minds through their deeds and therefore stabilize and pretty much affirm it

The atmosphere of coldness, of distance (which is, thanks to Fassbinder, at times really excruciating), of alienation is thematised through the cinematic techniques: mirror shots of the actors with a sometimes very blurred camera, misalignment of the camera by statues, flowers or curtains, cross-fades of dialogues and blindingly white fade-outs which sometimes abruptly interrupts a scene. In this sense, Fassbinder tightened Fontane's criticism to a maximum, but he wouldn't be Fassbinder otherwise.

A very problematic Fassbinder

[Sorsimus · 5/10 · 4 November 2000]

When reviewing an ordinary film (like Jurassic Park) It is customary to note if the film is not particularly "cinematic". This would then mean that the film in question wouldn't have flashy tracking shots, groovy camera angles, fast paced editing and so on. If these are considered to be good qualities in a film then Effi Briest surely is a bad film.

But what if from the beginning the film was meant to be like this? Fassbinder has chosen to hide his work in order to bring forth the original book Effi Briest is based on. To do an adaptation of a text he obviously liked a lot can't have been an easy task to a filmmaker who never relied on existing models of filmmaking. Considering that, one must view Effi Briest as an attempt to create a film as faithful as possible to the original.

The result, however, is not alltogether satisfying because most of us will interpret it through a framework of "watching a film". And it must be noted that as a film Effi Briest is slowgoing, static (as is to be expected) and dramatically flat. This could be perhaps a result of a Brechtian device of Fassbinder's to prevent the audience from sinking into the plot (which in itself would be a fine starting point for a soap)but what difference does it make if the film is unwatchable.

Don't like the story, hated this version

[Horst_In_Translation · 2/10 · 6 July 2016]

"Fontane Effi Briest" is a West German movie from the year 1974 and the writer and director is Rainer Werner Fassbinder, although the writer of the original work is of course Theodor Fontane as the title already tells us. It is not one of Fassbinder's earliest works, but he still decided to pick the black-and-white route again, maybe to show how old this story already is. At 140 minutes, it is easily among Fassbinder's longest films. And that's really a negative deal-breaker here. To me, this film dragged a whole lot on many many occasions. I hardly cared for Effi or any of the supporting characters at all as a consequence. And I also really hated the dialogues sometimes. Of course, they were adapted with the exact quotes from Fontane's novel I guess, but I did not like it at all. I usually like Fassbinder when he gives us his view on society or just on how people act within the boundaries of society. There are a handful films from him I really love and some I do not care about particularly, but this one here is really a major disappointment. It is probably my least favorite work from him and it's also not helping that he several actors that appear frequently in his films such as Schygulla, Lommel, Hermann and Böhm. I may be a bit biased as I did not like the recent version starring Julia Jentsch either, but I really only recommend this to huge fans of the Fontane work. Everybody else (even Fassbinder fans) will probably be majorly bored, because it's so different compared to everything else he has done, apart from the very slowly-moving plot. I can only shake my head at other reviewers who call this one of the best films ever made and give it 10 out of 10 stars. Highly not recommended.