by Miguel E. Rodriguez
DIRECTOR: Marcel Ophüls
MY RATING: 9/10
ROTTEN TOMATOMETER: 100% Fresh
PLOT: A documentary about Klaus Barbie, the Gestapo chief in Lyon, France, and his life after the war.
There is so much to unpack in Hotel Terminus, Marcel Ophüls’ epic documentary, that I am hesitant to even try to write about it. In terms of the craft of filmmaking, there is nothing to critique aside from the skillful editing, which surprisingly makes its 4.5-hour running time fly by. In terms of content…I mean, where could I even begin? Here’s a summary I found online: “Marcel Ophüls’ riveting film details the heinous legacy of the Gestapo head dubbed ‘The Butcher of Lyon.’ Responsible for over 4,000 deaths in occupied France during World War II, Barbie would escape – with U.S. help – to South America in 1951, where he lived until a global manhunt led to his 1983 arrest and subsequent trial.”
Wait, what? The United States intelligence apparatus smuggled a brutal Nazi officer out of Europe? Six years after the Nuremberg trials? Yes. Ophüls interviews various players from US Army Counterintelligence – known as the “CIC” in the 1940s – who state flatly on camera that Barbie had connections and information regarding Russian communists, so it was in America’s best interests to keep Barbie alive and out of prison and get him to South America.
So, at the very least, today I learned something.
This sprawling documentary also features eyewitnesses to Barbie’s atrocities in Lyon, France, where he was stationed. I don’t want to recite a laundry list of these terrible acts, but the film does key on two specific events during his tenure: the arrest and execution of Jean Moulin, a French Resistance leader, and the deportation to Auschwitz of 44 Jewish children from an orphanage in a town called Izieu. Ophüls interviews scores of people who were in the room when Barbie arrested Moulin. Many of them disagree who was to blame – a rat or someone with loose lips – but they all remember who made the arrest. The stories from witnesses to the deportation of the children are beyond belief.
What is the point of a documentary like this? Why should it be important for a filmgoer, or just an average Joe, to block out nearly five hours to watch a series of talking heads tell story after shocking story about the inhuman tactics of a monster? Well, for one thing, that’s not the whole story. Hotel Terminus actually has an arc, because Barbie was discovered living in Bolivia in 1972. In 1983, he was extradited to France where he was convicted on numerous crimes against humanity and sentenced to life in prison, where he died in 1991. The filmmakers didn’t know that in 1988, of course, but it felt good to throw that factoid in there. Another interesting factoid: America apologized to France in 1983 for helping him escape to Bolivia in the first place. Better late than never, I guess?
So, it’s good to know while watching that the man in question will eventually get his just desserts. But there are times when it almost feels like the “A-story” of Barbie’s eventual arrest gets overwhelmed by the “B-story,” which is the paradoxical attitudes of many of the people interviewed. One man wonders, what’s the point of it all? Barbie committed his crimes forty years earlier, and France has a statute of limitations of twenty years, so just let the man grow old and die in obscurity. Another theorizes that stirring up old memories of the war when many would rather move on actually created more civil unrest in France and Germany. Barbie’s defense attorney at his war crimes trial (a Eurasian Frenchman) wonders why Barbie is being tried for crimes against humanity while France’s own acts of torture and horrific imprisonment during the Battle of Algiers are discreetly ignored.
And always Ophüls has rejoinders for each of these statements with stories of families separated, men and women tortured, family members whisked away and never seen again. One woman recalls being tortured as a girl by Barbie, while her mother was told, “This is YOUR fault; if you would just talk, we would stop.” And so on, ad infinitum. But I am compelled to point out again how compelling this was. These and so many other stories like them did not depress me or lower my spirits. Instead, I was riveted. I can’t explain why. For myself, I felt like this was something I needed to hear, and other people needed to hear. Here was a record of something that really happened, to real people in a real place in a time that was not so long ago, in the grand scheme of things.
There was also a section that really made me take notice. Many, MANY people said on camera that, in his old age, Barbie was “a good man.” He was friendly to his neighbors – even some Jews! – and a loving father. His daughter-in-law is interviewed, and she states that he always had a kind word for her and always tried to include her in his family circle, even after her husband (Barbie’s son) died. It made me think about the driving force behind last year’s brilliant Zone of Interest: the banality of evil. Perhaps among many others, Barbie was living proof that evil will not always wear a black hat and have glowing red eyes. Evil is just as capable of engaging you in friendly conversation as the next man. (I was also reminded of a line from David Fincher’s Se7en: “If we catch John Doe and he turns out to be the devil, I mean if he’s Satan himself, that MIGHT live up to our expectations. But he’s not the devil. He’s just a man.”) Is that one of the lessons of this film? That evil is not supernatural or some kind of horrific aberration, but just a small person with delusions of grandeur? Discuss.
There are echoes of Schindler’s List in the details of these stories, but Ophüls notably never uses any archival footage of concentration camps or of the Holocaust itself. He apparently felt that audiences had, regrettably, become accustomed to the gruesome imagery of those events. Instead, he relies on the viewer’s imagination to provide all the necessary details.
He also, tellingly, never provides answers to the stickiest questions that surrounded Barbie’s trial, especially the one about France being willing to charge him with crimes against humanity while ignoring their own history in Algeria. I thought about that one a lot in relation to America. Our country is great for a whole host of reasons, but it’s not perfect. We rise up in vocal disapproval when a foreign country commits genocide, or when a country’s citizenry is threatened by totalitarianism…while ignoring (for the most part) the fact that our country exists because of genocidal practices against indigenous Americans. Am I suggesting that perhaps Ophüls is wrong to focus on Barbie and not France’s history? Absolutely not. Barbie was a monster and got what he deserved, belatedly or not. But I am suggesting that the film raises questions that deserve further discussion.
Ultimately, I’m glad I saw Hotel Terminus, and I would unhesitatingly recommend it to anyone who asks. The visceral nature of the stories told by some of the subjects is enough to make it compelling, even without the overarching structure of following Barbie to his downfall. It’s a challenging watch, to be sure, but I promise you’ll never be bored. Trust me.
2 UNPAID MOVIE CRITICS!!!! 