Even so, the relationship between Anne and Peter, I believe wasn’t that romantic at all. I can understand why they played on the romance between Anne and Peter a lot in the film, it was only made a few years after the Holocaust, therefore fresh in peoples memory and so they could have used the romance plot as some form of diversion away from the horrors of the Holocaust. They did do this in AF:TWS but they only really did this in one or two scenes, which actually focused on these sounds, for example, the scene in AF:TWS where Anne is gazing at the Westerkerk from the attic window.Īpart from these however, there were many parts of the film which I thought were highly exaggerated. One thing they did in The Diary of Anne Frank which they didn’t do in AF:TWS was play the sounds of the Westertoren bells in the background often throughout the film, and also the sound of bombs. This they didn’t do in Anne Frank: The Whole Story – possibly because of the fact that they couldn’t get permission to quote the diary and so maybe they didn’t have permission to shoot outside the house eaither. They also merged Mr Kleiman and Mr Kuglar (known as Mr Koophuis and Mr Kraler in the published version of the diary) into one person – Mr Kraler.Īnother thing I thought they did well in the film was the fact that they did location shooting in Amsterdam for the outdoor shots of the Prinsengracht and the Westerkerk. There were some things which I felt were more accurate in this film than Anne Frank: The Whole Story (which is widely regarded as the most accurate of all films made about Anne Frank to this day) such as the fact that they pronounced most of the names closer to the Dutch/German pronunciation, such as ‘ah-nuh’ instead of ‘an’, ‘ay-dith’ instead of ‘ee-dith’ and ‘pay-tuh-r’ instead of ‘pee-tur’. However, the way they pronounced Margot annoyed me (especially the way Millie Perkins said it), they said ‘mar-get’ instead of ‘mar-g-ho’ which I think is how her name was pronounced.Īs the film was based on the published version of the diary (by that I mean the version edited by Otto Frank which mainly consisted of version b – Anne’s rewritten diary) the names used in the film were psudonyms rather than actual names, such as Mr and Mrs van Daan instead of Mr and Mrs van Pels and Albert Dussel instead of Fritz Pfeffer. What surprised me though was that they left out the helpers Bep Voskuijl and Jan Gies (who was Miep’s husband). However, I got round to watching it yesterday after renting the DVD out from the uni library and I have to say I was somewhat suprised. To be honest, I had my reservations about the film because I heard rumours that it was wildly innacurate and that Anne was portrayed to be like a 1950s American teenager rather than the 1940s Dutch girl which she was. You will probably be surprised to know, considering the Anne Frank fan that I am, that I have only just got round to watching the 1959 film version of The Diary of Anne Frank starring Millie Perkins as Anne. I thought I would post a review that I wrote on my own personal blog last year about the 1959 film The Diary of Anne Frank.
0 kommentar(er)
