East-West: Olsen gang from Halberstadt | nd-aktuell.de

It has long been noted that the German film funding system is in great need of reform. The main complaint is that in the thicket of the various funding bodies, artistic quality often falls by the wayside and more focus is placed on the hoped-for box office results and marketability instead of supporting independent, innovative narrative forms. The example of “Two to One” shows how justified such criticism is. This multiple film disaster was able to raise over two million euros in funding; a large sum by German standards. It can hardly be due to director Natja Brunckhorst’s references that expectations were apparently quite high. Brunckhorst’s first directorial work after a long acting career (she became known in 1981 as the teenage leading actress in “We Children from Bahnhof Zoo”) and the inconsequential comedy “Alles in bester Order” with Corinna Harfouch, which only around 30,000 viewers wanted to see in the cinema in 2022.

Perhaps the committees also think that it couldn’t hurt to specifically promote material that is based in East Germany in order to counter the ongoing criticism of the lack of representation of East Germans in politics, society and culture. Well, well-intentioned is not always well-done, and what Brunckhorst has done with the story about the unintended consequences of the German-German monetary union in 1990 perpetuates pretty much all the clichés that exist about the simple-minded but clever, but ultimately kind-hearted and incredibly solidarity-based Ossis exists like that, and is therefore by no means a contribution to German-German understanding.

One wonders what image of East Germans still prevails in the West today when the makers of the Munich Film Festival, where “Two to One” was shown as the opening film, seriously claim in an interview in this newspaper that the film takes its actors seriously. That’s a bit like giving the Winnetou films from the 1960s a documentary character.

The basic idea of ​​”Two to One” is based on historical facts: After monetary union and the introduction of the D-Mark on July 1, 1990 in the future “new states”, it was necessary to somehow dispose of the GDR’s banknotes worth 109 billion marks. It was decided to store a large part of the cash in a tunnel and tunnel facility in Halberstadt, where the notes would rot (the coins were melted down). At the beginning of the new millennium, authorities noticed that money was regularly disappearing from the secret hiding place and turning up on the collectors’ market. Miraculously, the notes simply refused to rot, so it was decided to burn the rest.

So far, so true. From this template, Brunckhorst, who also wrote the script, developed a robber’s gun that not only lacks any plausibility, but also simply lacks knowledge of the circumstances of the unification process. In their film, a group of young people from a prefabricated building in Halberstadt discover the secret of the tunnel around July 1st. Together with the sworn household, they decide to take revenge on the West (for what exactly is not entirely clear) and climb into the tunnel via the ventilation shaft in order to take out rucksacks of Eastern money. But what else do they want with the now worthless notes?

The idea sounds as absurd as it is made up: While GDR citizens have to have their money paid into their account by July 1st, where it can then be exchanged for D-Marks (cash exchange was not allowed), West Germans are supposedly allowed until July 6th still have to deposit Eastern money and exchange it, a regulation that the reviewer has never heard of. But well, we’re not in a documentary, but in what the distributor says is a “summer comedy” – you don’t want to be like that.

The friends use the grace period between July 1st and 6th to buy tons of goods and consumer goods from West German representatives and business people who are flooding the country with the new currency and to pay for them with the stolen Eastern money. The coveted Western consumer products should then be resold for good Western money, which would have succeeded in exchanging the old notes – one could also say, money laundering. Soon the boxes containing cooking pots, microwaves, stereo systems and all the junk of consumer society are piled up to the ceiling in all the apartments on the block. After the deadline has passed, our thieving friends find out that GDR citizens living abroad – e.g. embassy employees – have been granted a special exchange period until the fall of 1990 (which is true), after which they return diplomats whose embassies are currently being closed in turn Intercept at the airport to introduce them to their “business model” and urge them to take part in return for participation.

The story is as outrageous as it sounds in the summary, and it seems puzzling how Brunckhorst was able to assemble such an impressive ensemble of actors with this largely nonsensical script. In addition to Sandra Hülser, now the “Grande Dame” of German film, well-known names such as Max Riemelt, Ronald Zehrfeld, Ursula Werner, Martin Brambach and Peter Kurth play. The fact that they all come from the East is supposed to give the film a good deal of authenticity, and you actually feel like you’re attending a class reunion of the East German acting elite. However, despite all their joy in playing, they are unable to save this film of a film.

Brunckhorst clearly has no idea about the milieu she is describing and no sense of mood, tone, dialogue, etc. One wonders why no one advised her against writing a film about a country and a time with this and with that nothing connects them. It is by no means necessary that an author has to have experienced the time he is writing about in order to come to an interpretation – preferably a contemporary one. There are plenty of examples of how someone without their own contemporaries can approach their subject through thorough research (for example, Dominik Graf’s congenial Erich Kästner film adaptation “Fabian or the Go to the Dogs” from 2021). But Brunckhorst is even a contemporary (born in 1966), but clearly has found neither a factual nor emotional approach to the subject.

Oh yes, there is also a love story, but the love triangle between Sandra Hülser, Ronald Zehrfeld and Max Riemelt remains pure assertion and a mere appendage to the actual, confusing plot. The film meanders somewhere between “Olsen Gang” and “Go Trabi Go” and activates all of the viewer’s shame reflexes. Brunckhorst does not take any kind of critical position on the subject of her story, even if her protagonists supposedly want to “outdo capitalism” with the whole action of redistributing money. The “trick” ultimately consists of learning from the West as docile students of the market economy and being just as greedy and deceitful as the “true” capitalists.

After all, all the money accumulated is not intended for personal enrichment, but rather to play the role of capitalist and buy back the liquidated VEB, in which many of the house’s residents worked, from the trust – another bizarre twist in the script. However, the collective zeal and creativity shown by the house’s residents in accumulating money leaves the viewer more sad than amused. But even this impulse quickly evaporates in view of the obvious nonsense that the director is serving us here.

“Two to One”, Germany 2024, directed and written by Natja Brunckhorst, with Sandra Hülser, Max Riemelt, Ronald Zehrfeld, Peter Kurth. 116 minutes, theatrical release on July 25th.