Talk:Triumph of the Will

1. REDIRECT Template:Archives

Censorship

"thriumph of the will" isn't really censored in germany. there just are some legal restrictions because it's classified as nazi propaganda. it's not allowed to display it publically unless it's for educational purposes and together with a critical treatment of the whole subject.

Thanks for the explanation. Ellsworth 22:49, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"Since the war, the film is banned in Germany under laws prohibiting Nazi propaganda." Does anyone have a citation for either of these? I don't want it up unless I can footnote it. Palm_Dogg 19:48, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

If you want, you can cite §86 of the StGB (german criminal law). It states that distribution of unconsititional propaganda in Germany is forbidden, except for educational purposes. -- Yoghurt 23:01, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Not quite. §86 StGB is only about unconstitutional symbols. Symbols are not the main problem with this film. You are right that it is unconstitutional propaganda and that's why the courts require an educational context to public screenings. I've updated the text along these lines and referenced a source. --EnOreg (talk) 15:40, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

The movie is not banned in Germany, there is just currently no one who distributes this movie there. The question of the ban was clarified by the Federal Review Board with the following decision - and indexing was rejected: “In the present case, the 12-member panel dealt intensively with the question of whether the BluRay has a harmful effect on minors in the sense that National Socialism is glorified. It came to the conclusion that the film “Triumph des Willens” is a document of contemporary history which is to be classified as of high art-historical value, but which does not pose a risk to minors.”

Source: https://fragdenstaat.de/dokumente/250081-triumphofthewill-specialeditionbluraye6219vom1-2-2018nichtindizierung-geschwrzt/ Chris Retro (talk) 10:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you!I can’t even form a sentence to accurately explain my annoyance over all of the so-called “facts” about this topic. I would also like to add that Leni Riefenstahl (the director) denied that this particular film was “propaganda”. It was/is a documentary. Last but not least, the way things are phrased regarding how the party “banned” things.. the party wanted to promote German culture. If you look anywhere in the modern world today, there are very few cultures with their own identity. Everything has become a mashed up version of every culture. Personally, I’d prefer to know my own heritage. Not saying that other cultures have no right to exist, just that we all get along better if we have our own little piece of land with our own views. Come! Visit! Adapt if you wish but don’t expect the place you visit to adjust to you and your ways! The sooner we all accept that as fact, the better! 24.137.91.45 (talk) 19:01, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Copyright Status

Note: This is taken verbatim from a conversation I had with the editor of Das Blaue Licht. Palm_Dogg 19:53, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

"Transit Filmvertrieb GmbH is the German Federation's administrator of the media assets of the Reich film industry (approx 1954). Court cases between Transit and Leni Riefenstahl persisted from the the early 1960's - the mid 1970's. In 1974. Transit Film GmbH is now the entity name. A contract was signed in 1974 between Transit and Leni Riefenstahl Produktion that defined the authorization, permission for use and distribution (between the state and LR) of box office / distribution rights. Little is known, except I am told that the death of Frau Riefenstahl forced most, if not all the exclusive rights to return to Transit and the German Federation (state). This applied both to Triumph des Willens and Olympia (parts i and ii).

"Now from what I gathered from discussing both with Riefenstahl and with producer at Synapse Films (they released Triumph of the Will on DVD in the early 2000's) copyright status can and has been avoided in various "versions" of the film (on DVD or VHS or in screening rights). These are versions that may have been held, like the one in the Library of Congress that Synapse utilized as 'public domain' or may have been edited slightly to avoid (is that the right word ?) infringement on Transit (or Riefenstahl for that matter). I have no idea how accurate these claims are but it may help explain why you have so many differing opinions on this matter of who, if anyone, holds the film rights. You might want to check with either the Library of Congress or Synapse on what their perspective is on the film version they hold/used for that DVD. I know that Synapse was unhappy that Riefenstahl's response (reportedly) showed only a primary interest in acquiring her rights for it's distribution."

This website has additional information on the copyright status and I will try to add a paragraph to the article about it. Palm_Dogg 22:38, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

The one point that seems to be ignored is that the film was released in 1935. The 70 years of copyright protection expired after Dec. 31, 2005. Simple arithmetic! Eclecticology 00:58, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

It's 70 years after the death of the creators. And that applies only to current films. For older ones, other rules may apply. In the U.S., the copyright for pre-1978 films can be renewed for up to 95 years. Ebab (talk) 20:34, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Copyright was restored in 1996

This film was removed from the public domain, in accordance with the GATT treaty. http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/1996/61fr46133.html I therefore removed the PD tag from the article. 69.110.235.152 (talk) 03:18, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

As part of a research project I corresponded the Bundesarchiv in Berlin, and can confirm that the film is back in copyright as a result of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, and listed in the document under the title "Triumph des Willens". The Bundesarchiv and Transit Film are responsible for licensing the rights. The film has also been registered with the U.S. Copyright register in Washington and a "notice of intent to enforce a copyright restored under the Uruguay Round Agreements Act", document #V8010P853, filed in 1997 by Transit Film, GmbH in Free State of Bavaria (Federal State of Germany) Dachauer St. 35; 80335 Munchen; Germany.--CaptAubrey (talk) 00:24, 8 January 2016 (UTC)--CaptAubrey (talk) 00:24, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Night of the Long Knives

I have added notes on Himmler and Heydrich for the prior crisis which chnaged the direction of the film.86.155.210.225 (talk) 13:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

IP Editor's unsupported unexplained changes and why I reverted them

None of the following list of edits have edit summaries nor are additions cited to reliable sources.

• Template:Trim&oldid=Template:Trim – no cite for "historically important film"; no reason given for removal of the link to [[Films considered the greatest ever;
• Template:Trim&oldid=Template:Trim – Goebbels already linked; no cite for "a copy was found in England in the 1990's";
• Template:Trim&oldid=Template:Trim – "a major" to "an indirect" changed without citation or supporting rationale;
• Template:Trim&oldid=Template:Trim – No supporting citation for this addition;
• Template:Trim&oldid=Template:Trim – This edit is not contested; should have had an edit summary;
• Template:Trim&oldid=Template:Trim – No supporting citation for this addition;
• Template:Trim&oldid=Template:Trim – Image is inappropriate because it is not related to, or taken from, and post-dates Triumph of the Will

—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:54, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Nicholas Reeves

The quotation in the Legacy section is a little problematic because it is attributed to "Nicholas Reeves". Few readers will probably discover that Dr. Nicholas Reeves, an English historian, is not the contemporaneous and wikilinked Egyptologist Nicholas Reeves. This could be fixed by someone who might create a stub for the unwikilinked Reeves, and then disambiguate them somehow, but for such an uncontroversial assertion, I don't believe it's necessary to include the historian's name at all and I made a change like that here. SteveStrummer (talk) 00:58, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

See also: Zero Dark Thirty

Hardly NPOV, is it? --124.183.87.78 (talk) 14:19, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

your point is extremely well taken. see also is a HUGE open sore and loophole for expressing POV. its very much abused. i agree that both are propaganda, so my personal point of view likes that link, but as an editor, its repulsive. the connection is only supported by an unstated POV. if a major film critic compared them, then we would mention that in "influences" sections. for detailed articles like this, see also should be mostly to broader articles that can be linked in the body, such as "list of german propaganda films" if no writer could figure out how to put it in the body. PS heres some POV OR: Trump has twice referred a triumph of the will of the West, and is currently asking congress to submit to the will of the voters. I can guarantee he would love to make a film called triumph of the will :)Mercurywoodrose (talk) 18:49, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Triumph of the Will. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051217014854/http://www.kamera.co.uk/features/leniriefenstahl.html to http://www.kamera.co.uk/features/leniriefenstahl.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:46, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Translation of prologue

I think the English translation of the last line of the prologue needs improvement. I am by no means an expert in German, but "Heer" was the word for the German Army, so "Heerschau" would specifically have a military meaning that is not fully expressed by the English word "columns". Could someone whose German is better than mine take a look at this, bitte? 64.30.93.144 (talk) 14:07, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

On the subtitles from the copy in the Internet Archive the line is as: "Adolf Hitler flew once again to Nuremberg to hold a military display.".--User71131159 (talk) 16:53, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

I have just changed the line.--User71131159 (talk) 17:03, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

An RfC of interest

An RfC of possible interest to the editors of this article can be found here.

Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:31, 31 July 2023 (UTC)