2B/not2B (or, Lubitsch vs. Hitler)

The repetition of certain lines of dialogue is one of the defining characteristics of Ernst Lubitsch’s cinema.  Lubitschean characters repeat certain lines as a way of creating double-entendres on the spot.  Audiences are expected to recognize the repetition, and to remember the context of the original lines, so that those memories get overlaid on top of the repeat, imbuing the words with a weight of additional meaning beyond the literal significance of the words themselves.

To single out an especially piquant example from To Be Or Not To Be, consider what Lubitsch does to the phrase “Heil Hitler.”  Over the course of 90 minutes it is yawned by Jack Benny, treated like an Abbot and Costello routine by most of the rest of the cast—Heil Hitler!  No, I Heiled Hitler first!—there is Bronski’s fake Hitler says “Heil myself,” and of course Carole Lombard’s orgasmic moan.


The central conceit of the movie isn’t about making fun of what the Nazis took from Poland, it’s about creating a fictional space where the Poles take everything from the Nazis.  This isn’t a movie about the German invasion of Poland—it’s about a Polish invasion of Germans.

During the course of the film, our heroes subversively appropriate the Nazis’ uniforms, their identities, even their salute—and as these icons of Nazi terror are systematically taken over by the Polish actors it simply serves to undercut the power of those totems.  They turn “Heil Hitler” into a punchline before the first German troops set foot in Poland.

By the time the real Nazis show up and try to say this salute seriously, the words have been completely deracinated and redefined by the heroes so that you can’t help but chuckle.  Name one other movie where the phrase “Heil Hitler” is used as a joke.

Well, I can name one—Ninotchka, by Ernst Lubitsch in 1939.  That’s right, the year that WWII began is when we find Lubitsch’s first ever “Heil Hitler” joke.

Ninotchka concerns the efforts of the Soviet government to raise money by selling some of the jewels confiscated from the former Russian royalty.  A group of Soviet emissaries have been bumbling around Paris enjoying Western decadence without ever coming even remotely close to selling any jewels.  So Stalin sends a new emissary to take over their misfired mission and get the job done right.  So, the Soviet Three Stooges come to the train station, nervously awaiting the imminent arrival of this new agent.


They scan the faces of the people disembarking from the train, trying to spot which one is their newly arrived comrade.  They see a little man with a scraggly beard and an Eastern European mien about him—this fellow is certainly Russian, they agree.  But as they approach, he salutes, “Heil Hitler!” and embraces an Aryan blonde.  Ooops.

So right away, the very first use of a Heil Hitler joke in the Lubitsch canon is about the danger of relying on stereotypes to judge people, about the difficulty in distinguishing us versus them.  The guy you think is a communist turns out to be a Nazi.

And then here comes Greta Garbo as Ninotchka—she’s the one they’re supposed to be meeting.  And she is a hard-edged, no-nonsense Bolshevik firebrand—a Communist Leslie Knope.  Practically the very first words she speaks, uttered within seconds of the Heil Hitler gag, is to note approvingly that Stalin has just overseen a new round of mass trials—“There will be fewer, but better, Russians.”


Which is about as black a joke as you can get.  Here is a joke about mass murder and state-sponsored terror that is intended to be our introduction to the title character, the heroine, Greta freaking Garbo—the person we’ve bought our tickets to see, the character whose triumph we are here to root for.  And over the course of the movie, Ninotchka never backs down from that position or recant it.  To the end she remains a committed Soviet, genuinely committed to the cause and determined to do her part to advance Stalin’s government’s agenda.

Not only that, but the movie stands in her corner, too.  She gets to spread her propaganda to other characters in the film—and to us in the audience—and she is persuasive, too, getting Melvyn Douglas to join her team.  Although she is corrupted by him in turn too, as we’ll discuss in just a second, just not in any way that implies that she was wrong to believe as she does.

Just ruminate on that.  In 1939, Ernst Lubitsch made a comedy about communism that didn’t universally condemn it, and it was a mainstream blockbuster hit.  This, from the director who brought you Design for Living, a romantic comedy that endorses three-ways as the solution to love triangles.  Lubitsch was in the business of defying conventional wisdom and prevailing social mores and doing so in ways audiences enthusiastically endorsed.

How does Melvyn Douglas’ character corrupt Ninotchka?  By getting Great Garbo to laugh.  That was the selling point of the movie, you know—Garbo laughs!  But more than just a one-off gimmick, it’s the heart of the movie and a consistent theme across Lubitsch’s body of work.


Melvyn Douglas seduces her with silly jokes—most of them told horribly, none of them very good.  And in the end he has to abandon the wordplay and go for a slapstick pratfall, but once she laughs she’s hooked.  Life is better when you laugh, and a society that rejects laughter isn’t a society that is worth fighting for.  The ultimate contest between Capitalism and Communism won’t be won by ideology, it comes down to who has the best jokes.

It’s all about the liberating—and revolutionary—power of laughter.  And in the end, it’s about the power of silly jokes and dumb slapstick, not sophisticated humor.


Which brings us to Cluny Brown.  Because Ninotchka, with its first stab at a Heil Hitler joke, came out in 1939, the eve of war.  And Cluny Brown also handles Nazism, in 1946, the end of the war.  They are Lubitsch’s bookends to WWII, and they frame the themes of To Be Or Not To Be very nicely.

For example, consider To Be Or Not To Be’s villain, Professor Siletsky.  In some ways he’s like Mr. Fisher from Alfred Hitchcock’s Foreign Correspondent—an intellectual whose speeches and radio broadcasts are key to whipping up anti-fascist sentiment in the West, but who turns out to be a traitor helping the Third Reich.


Did Lubitsch just crib the character type off of Hitchcock?  Well, not so fast.  You see, in 1946, Lubitsch returned to this theme in Cluny Brown, but this time the hero is an intellectual who escaped the Nazi clutches in Czechoslovakia and is a man without a country in England, where a group of idealistic young people lionize him for his moral and intellectual fervor—he’s Siletsky, but for real, what Siletsky would have been if he wasn’t a turncoat fraud.  His name is Adam Belinksy—which even sounds like Siletsky.

Cluny Brown was adapted from a novel, and the hero of the novel was a horny author, not a Czech exile known for speaking out against fascism.  In adapting the novel into the movie, Lubitsch went out of his way to bring in the parallels to Siletsky—and so it’s hard not to see Cluny Brown as giving us a redemptive take on Siletsky.


Adam Belinksi, played by Charles Boyer, falls in love with the free-spirited manic pixie dream girl Cluny Brown, played by Jennifer Jones, and they bond over silly jokes.  The repeated line in Cluny Brown is Belinski’s reference to defying conformity by choosing to throw “squirrels to nuts,” instead of the (more sensible) other way round.  And they quote this back and forth to each other, and to other characters, throughout the film as a way of distinguishing which people have a proper love of silliness or are agents of conformist stuffiness.

But the thing is, although Cluny Brown is set in 1939 and features endless talk about the urgency of facing the Nazi menace, no actual Nazis appear in the film at all.  For a movie seemingly obsessed with Nazis, it never gets around to showing any.  Except it does show plenty of conformist, small-minded, laughless people—the people who side with censors and put labels on people.  These are the eternal villains of Lubitsch’s films.  They’re the bad guys in The Man I Killed, in Design for Living, in Ninotchka, in Shop Around the Corner, in Cluny Brown, and in To Be Or Not To Be—and every other Lubitsch film ever made, too.


And here’s where things can get tricky, if you come into To Be Or Not To Be looking for a specific condemnation of Nazism, if you’re looking for propaganda.  Because what Lubitsch decries about Nazis, what he opposes, isn’t something unique to them—it’s the same thing he’s been fighting all along.  And that’s because, as we’ve seen all throughout this movie, the Nazi salutes and Nazi uniforms and all those markers of Nazism don’t really mean anything.  Anybody can wear that uniform, anybody can say Heil Hitler.  That doesn’t mean a thing.  What matters is the person underneath—and people are people, the world over.

That’s where Lubitsch got himself into trouble with 1942 audiences—because they came for propaganda.  He could get away with heroic communists in Ninotchka because in 1939 we weren’t yet in full Red Scare mode—if Lubitsch had tried that same movie in the McCarthy era the response might have been very different.  And when To Be Or Not To Be opened in March of 1942, it opened to a country at war with the world, and watching in dismay as Hitler was winning that war.


To Be Or Not To Be is part of an existing tradition of Nazi satires made in the early 1940s—which included Charlie Chaplin’s The Great Dictator, the fourth highest grossing film of 1940.  Having Jack Benny dressed as a Gestapo officer should have been nothing compared to having Charlie Chaplin play Hitler.  Right?

But there’s a difference—Chaplin didn’t lose his audience when he played Hitler—he lost his audience a few years later with M. Verdoux when he invited that audience to sympathize with a serial killer.

To Be Or Not To Be didn’t get in trouble for putting Jack Benny and his costars in SS uniforms but because it systematically invited the audience to identify with Nazi characters, like Sig Rumann.


Consider the power of the “piece of cheese” joke.  The “piece of cheese” joke is an amazingly powerful piece of subversion, when you think of it.  The first time we hear it, it is part of a play—and within the world of the play, we are supposed to think of it as something that disloyal German citizens mutter to each other in secret as a way of secretly resisting the Nazis.  But as soon as it is mentioned, it turns out the Gestapo officers have heard it, too—and suddenly everyone is worried about whether their reaction to the joke will be perceived as politically correct.

Yet we discover the joke is circulating among the Polish underground—disloyal Poles muttering it in secret.  And wait—the Gestapo has heard it, too, and they are worried about whether their reactions are perceived as politically incorrect.  This silly joke has jumped all kinds of boundaries—it exists in fiction and reality in the same way—the first encounter was a counterfeit but it turns out there is a real one, too, and it behaves the same way as the counterfeit.  That’s some joke.

But we’ve seen in Ninotchka how a silly joke can unravel the most deeply held ideologies.  And both Ninotchka and To Be Or Not To Be had their stories written by Melchior Lengyel, so we should expect to find some parallels.

This is why the Nazis are bound to lose.  Because you can ban jokes all you want, it doesn’t stop people telling them—and a society that tries to forbid silly jokes will find itself in perpetual war with its own citizens, while the society that celebrates the silly will find no end of converts and loyalists.

Our heroes don’t just celebrate jokes—they invented this one—and if there’s one thing we know from watching Lubitsch’s films, it’s that in a battle between comedians and censors, the comedians always win.


6 Responses 2B/not2B (or, Lubitsch vs. Hitler)
Posted By DBenson : November 16, 2013 8:07 am

Actually, Lubitsch got away with Benny in a Gestapo uniform because the story explained he wasn’t a Nazi — just an actor making trouble for the real articles. Chaplin’s

Adenoid Hinkel was balanced by his innocent Jewish lookalike — and both were obviously puppets of Chaplin himself, hardly hiding the strings or his sympathies.

The Three Stooges could explicitly play Hitler and his minions, without any narrative fig leaf, because they were in slapstick short subjects whose purpose was obvious.

Disney made Donald Duck a Nazi for “Der Fuhrer’s Face”, not tipping it as a nightmare until the end. But Donald was a comically oppressed and unhappy cog in a factory, not an enemy trooper or ideological fanatic.

The presence of fallible comic Nazis served a different purpose than to allow sheepish comics to assume wolf’s clothing. In anything but the most pitch-black comedy — the sort of thing Hollywood rarely if ever ventured — actual horror had to be dialed way down. Murders in comic whodunits were tidy and left nobody unduly bothered (“Another body? Oh dear.”). Slapstick comics never showed blood or realistic pain. And Nazis were never so monstrous and certainly never as cold-bloodedly capable as their real-life models. Not when they had to be fought and defeated on the comedians’ home turf. Lubitsch simply went beyond making them arrogant cartoons and turned them into flawed humans for his own purposes.

Posted By Doug : November 16, 2013 6:04 pm

I’m reading a biography of Will Rogers right now-on a trip to Russia in the mid 1920′s Will wanted to meet Leon Trotsky;instead he had an exchange with a Communist official:
“I told the official the nature of the visit was to find out what kind of Guy Trotsky was personally, and that I did not want any state secrets…I just wanted to see did he drink, eat, sleep, laugh or act human, or was his whole life taken up with the betterment of mankind.”
The official shook his head.
“We are a very serious people,” he explained. “We do not go in for fun and laughter. In running a large country like this we have no time for appearing frivolous. We have a great work to perform. We are sober.”

I’d say that Lubitsch nailed it with both Ninotchka AND “To Be Or Not To Be”.
When we watched “To Be” our viewing party roared with laughter every time Sig Ruman opened his mouth. “…SHULTZ!!!”

Posted By Jeffrey Ford : November 16, 2013 6:55 pm

Underlining your points is the fact that the German cinema throughout the Nazi era didn’t produce a single noteworthy film comedy. I guess what it proves in the end is that we should NEVER forget to joke. We should NEVER forget to laugh! A-men to that.

Posted By vp19 : November 17, 2013 4:47 pm

If we had a modern-day Lubitsch, one could imagine some sort of elegant comedy about China, full of jokes about Tianamen Square, its (recently altered) one-child policy and the like. Of course, none of the studios — eyeing huge Chinese profits from bombastic CGI comic-book adaptstions — would dare touch such a production.

Posted By robbushblog : November 18, 2013 6:22 pm

You have a point, vp19. The China-love makes me sick sometimes. We didn’t worry about upsetting the Nazis or the Soviets by making fun of them during the times they were in power. Technically we’re not at war with China. Okay. And we have a huge amount of trade with them. Okay. And they own 8% of our debt. Okay. Still…..screw ‘em. Let’s see some good ol’ ribbing of China.

Posted By Tom Hering : November 25, 2013 11:46 pm

From the former East Germany: “There are people who like to tell jokes about the state. And there are people who like to collect jokes about the state. And then there are people who like to collect the people who tell jokes about the state.”

Leave a Reply

Current ye@r * is the official blog for TCM. No topic is too obscure or niche to be excluded from our film discussions. And we welcome your comments on our blogs and bloggers.
See more:
See more:
3-D  Action Films  Actors  Actors' Endorsements  Actresses  animal stars  Animation  Anime  Anthology Films  Art in Movies  Australian CInema  Autobiography  Avant-Garde  Aviation  Awards  B-movies  Beer in Film  Behind the Scenes  Best of the Year lists  Biography  Biopics  Blu-Ray  Books on Film  Boxing films  British Cinema  Canadian Cinema  Character Actors  Chicago Film History  Cinematography  Classic Films  College Life on Film  Comedy  Comic Book Movies  Crime  Czech Film  Dance on Film  Digital Cinema  Directors  Disaster Films  Documentary  Drama  DVD  Early Talkies  Editing  Educational Films  European Influence on American Cinema  Experimental  Exploitation  Fairy Tales on Film  Faith or Christian-based Films  Family Films  Film Composers  Film Criticism  film festivals  Film History in Florida  Film Noir  Film Scholars  Film titles  Filmmaking Techniques  Films of the 1960s  Films of the 1980s  Food in Film  Foreign Film  French Film  Gangster films  Genre  Genre spoofs  HD & Blu-Ray  Holiday Movies  Hollywood history  Hollywood lifestyles  Horror  Horror Movies  Icons  independent film  Italian Film  Japanese Film  Korean Film  Literary Adaptations  Martial Arts  Melodramas  Method Acting  Mexican Cinema  Moguls  Monster Movies  Movie Books  Movie Costumes  movie flops  Movie locations  Movie lovers  Movie Reviewers  Movie settings  Movie Stars  Movie titles  Movies about movies  Music in Film  Musicals  Outdoor Cinema  Paranoid Thrillers  Parenting on film  Pirate movies  Polish film industry  political thrillers  Politics in Film  Pornography  Pre-Code  Producers  Race in American Film  Remakes  Revenge  Road Movies  Romance  Romantic Comedies  Satire  Scandals  Science Fiction  Screenwriters  Semi-documentaries  Serials  Short Films  Silent Film  silent films  Social Problem Film  Sports  Sports on Film  Stereotypes  Straight-to-DVD  Studio Politics  Stunts and stuntmen  Suspense thriller  Swashbucklers  TCM Classic Film Festival  TCM Underground  Television  The British in Hollywood  The Germans in Hollywood  The Hungarians in Hollywood  The Irish in Hollywood  Theaters  Thriller  Trains in movies  Underground Cinema  VOD  War film  Westerns  Women in the Film Industry  Women's Weepies