gring0 As an history teacher, there was much that I took from this documentary- the rare footage and selected diary excerpts. However, it is far too broad in its focus; no discussion of the Depression except by 1931 and then, suddenly, Hitler becomes Chancellor. Not only does this approach prevent any understanding of the complex forces at work, but it risks giving the wrong impression of Nazi support. By November 1932 the Nazis had lost significant support (falling from 37% to 32%), and the party was in a state of bankruptcy due to Goebbels's propaganda machine. Historians argue that Hitler had peaked and, with the economy improving, he was about to enter the dustbin of history. In fact, he was suicidal. And so his being made chancellor was for him miraculous, and yet no indication is made of this- he simply becomes Chancellor without any explanation. I began questioning the point of the film, for it so simplified the situation that no indication of why Goebbels is considered a propaganda genius by many and is credited for Hitler's electoral successes. He is far more important than the film describes, but one ends up asking why he is the subject. Indeed, the development of the state in a totalitarian regime is not addressed, nor so many crucial events leading up to war that it doesn't bear reciting here, from foreign policy beginning with leaving the League of Nations, creation of the GESTAPO, rearmament and conscription to the Fall of France... incredible! Of course, Goebbels was not involved in foreign policy, but he was instrumental in devising the rationale. And to ignore the marching into the Rhineland to me was incomprehensible, considering this was Goebbels's very homeland. Some of the images have no commentary at all and so their significance too is lost. By the time 1943 comes around without the slightest reference to Stalingrad, I could only question what the point was that the producers had intended to make. An inordinate amount of time was given to the Venice biennial which only reiterates Goebbels's contempt for foreign films. This hardly constitutes an "experiment" and one finishes the film without any insight or awareness of the man and what he tried to revolutionise (to his mind). To me, the Goebbels experiment was radicalising the people which is only hinted here. It was he who initiated the book burnings. He who started the first Jewish boycott. He who launched Reichskristallnacht. So stale is the portrait in this film that his evil machinations and designs get lost in the times, and he comes across instead as sentimental and caught up in others' actions. My website shows his propaganda ministry then and now, as well as other remaining NSDAP architecture: www.tracesofevil.com

valis1949 In the fascinating documentary, THE GOEBBELS EXPERIMENT, Kenneth Branagh elicits a dramatic reading from Goebbels's personal journal while the viewer watches vintage film and news clips from the era. Carefully crafted and diligently compiled, the film reveals Joseph Goebbels to be a very human, three dimensional character- equal parts loathsome, and possibly brilliant, yet clearly trapped in a doomed and misguided chapter of world history. Joseph Goebbels was arguably the highest ranking 'non-gangster' of National Socialism's inner circle. Although a virulent anti-semite, and certainly afflicted by megalomania, Goebbels did exhibit a certain degree of intellectualism which was noticeably absent from the rest of Hitler's ruling elite. All historically significant men, and unfortunately, Hitler was one such man, require a facilitator who can translate their fundamental message to the world at large. And, Joseph Goebbels became the perfect individual who aptly aided The Fuhrer to codify, clarify, and disseminate his demented political and social policies. Certainly Goebbels was on the wrong side of history, but this fine film examines his reasons and motivations quite admirably.

ralphsf I was really hoping this film would give some real insight to the life of a very complex and horrible person. Unfortunately, it is, for the most part, a chronological retelling of events. It tells you little about his early life, his switch from socialist to Nazi, next to nothing about his joining and rise in the Nazi party, his reaction to events like the Putsch, the Battle of Britain, Stalingrad, the assassination attempt on Hitler. It gives no information about the making of films like "the Eternal Jew" or any of the inner workings at UFA studios. It does show his dislike of Reifenstahl and then, subsequent fawning over her when giving an award, but the commentary is very limited.I understand they wanted to limit it to his diary entries but they just aren't enough to give a full perspective on Goebbels. No mention is made of his families' and his deaths (portrayed so well in "Downfall") and nothing of his life in the bunker. Too many gaps, way too much left out. There are some interesting comments about his mistrust and jealousies with Himmler and Goering, but all stuff that has been well reported elsewhere. Some of the footage is interesting including pieces I haven't seen before, but really not much that is of an informal nature. If you're hoping to gain more perspective on why someone would do what he did, or even the inner workings of Nazi Germany, sadly you might as well skip this film.

renau-1 My complaints here concern the movie's pacing and the material at hand. While using archival film and letters lends the film a fresh and interesting perspective, too often the material selected to highlight simply isn't very interesting (such as when Goebbels complains about this or that ailment, &tc., or the ad nauseam footage of his small German hometown). Also, the movie crawls along in covering c. 1920-1939 and then steams through the war years. In sum, the film is little better than a History Channel documentary, with the exception that the filmmaker has a slightly greater sensibility than your average History Channel documentary editor and thus can more artfully arrange the details of Goebbels' life. Still, I found it wanting.