Hitler

1962 "The private life of Hitler revealed for the first time!"
5.7| 1h47m| NA| en| More Info
Released: 21 March 1962 Released
Producted By: Three Crown Productions Inc.
Country:
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Info

Richard Basehart stars as one of the most influential and one of the most reviled men in history in this probing psychological study of a man who nearly gained dominance over the entire western world--at the cost of millions of lives--Hitler.

Genre

History, War

Watch Online

Hitler (1962) is currently not available on any services.

Director

Stuart Heisler

Production Companies

Three Crown Productions Inc.

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime.
Watch Now
Hitler Videos and Images

Hitler Audience Reviews

VividSimon Simply Perfect
BoardChiri Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay
Beanbioca As Good As It Gets
Verity Robins Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.
scbowen-171-210558 I was very excited to see the film being a History Major in college and somewhat of a World War 2 buff , but I found the movie to be slow and silly. Eva Braun was nothing like the portrayal of her done in this film. She was a silly, and light hearted girl who laughed a lot. This movie portrays Hitler as a sexually frustrated weirdo who is obsessed with his mother, when those who lived around Hitler swear that he had a healthy sexual relationship with Braun. The acting was good, but the script was just not even close to accurate. Also, Stauffenburg was not hanged..he was shot. The film takes to many liberties with the historical record in my opinion.
lagwmguy This film is an extremely poor saga of Hitler. If it was portrayed as a fictionalization of him then I would provide a higher rating albeit marginally so. Hitler is much more complex character than the film, and possibly any film, can provide. It's embarrassing to actually watch this awful film given the historical inaccuracies. I understand the need to take liberties for sake of piecing a film together and making the characters more believable. However, those who have studied the lives of Hitler and his closest political/economic/social/military advisers, find this film completely avoidable. The film "Downfall" (2004) is much more historically accurate and captures the essential core of Hitler as the man he was. I highly recommend Downfall knowing it only shows the last few days of Hitler and his Third Reich.
tbvanslyke Technically atrocious and hysterically inaccurate in almost all ways. Events maddeningly out of order... characters come and go almost randomly. Not a single character plays out realistically... from Basehart's histrionics to the actress who plays Eva Braun with strange stoicism which was not her primary characteristic. Even Martin Kosleck -- an otherwise talented actor -- plays Goebbles strangely and with an odd sense of sympathy, which was assuredly not a trait he had. It's not as if we don't know what occurred, but apparently the writer didn't have a clue.Inexcusable garbage, created by a hack director and the remnants of Monogram Studios in the guise of Allied Artists, though released through Warner Bros.
quijebo99 Richard Basehart is a good actor overall, so his performance is decent. But the film is so ahistorical that it should definitely be skipped. It is mainly a *psychological profile*, but the psychology is wrong. Its main strength is that it does show Hitler's complete disregard for Germany and its people during his last days.As noted by someone else, this film seems to be based on Trevor-Roper's book. Roper's research, however, was done immediately after the war (to investigate/refute malicious Soviet accusations that Hitler was still alive and possibly living in a British-controlled area) and was based on *very few* direct witnesses (the Soviets had most of them in custody). Vast amounts of additional evidence have come out since then.((In contrast, the German film "Downfall" is an absolutely *brilliant* portrayal that shows not only Hitler's megalomania, destructiveness and self-pity, but also his force of personality, particularly in the scene with von Greim. ("Downfall" seems based on the book "The Bunker", which is by far the best of the "Hitler's last days" books.)))Just a few examples of the false things in the movie "Hitler" (in the examples, H is used as an abbrev for Hitler): As noted by others, there is *no* evidence that H was impotent or homosexual. Some American and British psych people speculated on this, particularly during and immediately after the war, but they had no access to H.H's interactions with Eva: everyone who met Eva said she had no interest in politics or the war and would never have challenged H on those topics.The scenes of Stauffenberg's bombing and aftermath are ludicrous: H didn't notice the briefcase or comment on it; it was placed to H's right, not left; the bomb didn't go off for several minutes (giving Stauffenberg time to get away); and Stauffenberg was not hanged but shot (within hours of the bombing by a co-plotter trying to cover his own guilt), although many other co-plotters were hanged later.The director allows Basehart to be much too physically vigorous, even though he does limp. H's health was *extremely* poor by April 1945. H, after all, had been under severe stress and been a drug addict for years. Eyewitnesses noted that H looked a decade older than he really was (and he was 56) and could often barely shuffle his feet forward. (Thus, by the way,there is *no* chance H escaped from the bunker and went to South America, or anywhere else. H feared capture far more than death, and so would never have risked trying to escape.)As a more minor point, the Berchtesgaden/Berghof window/view in the film is pathetic compared to the actual window/view. The actual window was *huge* (much taller than a person), offered a panoramic view of the mountain and could be electronically lowered into the wall.