'Two To One' Review – A Semi-Heist Movie That Goes Nowhere
No one had a year like Sandra Hüller in 2023. Starring in two of the most talked-about movies that year, Anatomy of a Fall and The Zone of Interest, she took the world by storm, and all eyes were on her, anticipating her next move.
Enter Natja Brunckhorst's Two to One, a 'semi' money heist film that goes neither here nor there, and we get a glimpse of Hüller's experimental attitude toward her career. This feature is an entirely different breed of filmmaking. Light, sweet, subtle, and funny without being overtly comical, it is not what is to be expected from the 2023 award season queen. But that's the beauty of her experimental career, going from mega projects to a low-key, socio-political comedy.
All abandoned cities give off the same vibes. People's faces display the same expressions. Dissatisfaction, nostalgia, discontentment, and bitter acceptance; the art of enjoying the small things in life. It's Germany during a critical time in its history–a few days before pre-unification, and how that sudden economic, political, and social shift affects ordinary people's lives.
Another film that easily comes to mind tackling the same topic is Wolfgang Becker's Goodbye, Lenin! Another masterpiece about how major political and economic decisions reflect in the daily lives of individuals. These movies about the regular people we pass down the streets and meet every day are much more moving than movies about grandiose, larger-than-life personalities that don't exist beyond the abysmal worship of modern online cinephilia.
But the Brunckhorst feature vastly differs from Becker's. It doesn't take that seriously. It's low on the artistic side and doesn't feature a cinematography or a narration style that is an art form in its own right. Why should it? It's a comedic ensemble that will put a smile on faces, even from generations who have no idea what the impact of the fall of the Berlin Wall means on both sides of the conflict, especially the depressed, working-class residents of East Germany. When those depressed residents of a dying economic entity find millions of worthless soon-to-be old money (ostmarks), and to their surprise, they find they can still exchange it for the new currency post-reunification. But at what cost does this seemingly unexpected path to wealth lead them? And how to undergo it under the nose of government officials and security guards?
As for the pros and cons, a movie like that would've greatly benefited from a faster pace and a shorter runtime. But at its heart, the performances from the three leads, Hüller, Max Riemelt, and Ronald Zehrfeld -playing her husband and former flame respectively- bring tension to the somehow dull moments. Their awkward love triangle of sorts and their dynamics (owing to the vast difference in the two men's personalities) revives the narrative and creates an enthusiastic viewing experience for viewers to care enough about the characters.
However, there are too many details to follow, especially for someone who, like me, is not fully aware of the complex history of communist vs. capitalist Germany. But what makes it a fun watching experience is the vibrancy of the characters, and their growing sense of community and solidarity, but also the subtle hint at the deep-rooted greed in human nature, despite well-meaning political systems and socialist propaganda.
Two to One is not by any means a perfect heist comedy. For good reasoning. It has the perfect blend of simplicity and entertainment, the right film for a chill afternoon of wanting to explore a new film at the local movie theater. With solid performances and an engaging plot, this film is meant to leave moviegoers in an affable mood.
Two To One is currently playing in UK cinemas courtesy of Tull Stories.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
9 hours ago
- New York Times
‘Watch What Happens Live,' Direct From the Oval Office
On Thursday, right around the time of the online breakout of a feud between Elon Musk and Donald Trump that resembled a 'Real Housewives' reunion show, we were treated to another episode of what has become the president's favorite reality TV reboot. Call it 'The Apprentice: World Leaders,' and in this latest installment, the German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, appeared alongside Mr. Trump, displaying a sophisticated instinct to hold his ground and emerge unscathed during his visit to the gilded zoo of the Oval Office. We're becoming all too used to watching this new kind of presidential meet-and-greet. What traditionally had been a low-stakes and highly choreographed government function has this year been reinvented by Mr. Trump as 'Watch What Happens Live' set in the Oval Office (with JD Vance on hand to play the supporting role of the bartender). For many of us, watching these affairs offers the same queasy experience as the most car-crash-reminiscent reality shows, but with geopolitical consequences. We brace ourselves for the inevitable moments of skirmish and bluster, of braying rudeness and the possible surprise reveal straight out of 'Punk'd' or 'Jerry Springer.' We grimace in preparation for the next big cringe moment before the show goes to commercial. We watch — often through eyes shielded in dismay — as the president falls just short of resorting to his favorite catchphrase: 'You're fired!' It's natural to conflate these moments with the worst — and most addictive — elements of reality TV. Maybe it's a remnant of my early career writing public-television program guide listings, or perhaps my childhood spent within reach of the Bronx Zoo, but I have come to understand, or at least to tolerate, these diplomacy-shattering displays of ginned-up drama as more like episodes of classic nature programs. For me, they often recall 'The Living Planet,' that grand adventure in BBC travel-budget largess, narrated by David Attenborough, from the 1980s — right around the time a self-styled real estate developer from Queens was buying up New Jersey casinos that would go bankrupt. Admittedly, I might be overly influenced by the news that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, a recent most-favored autocracy, will be sending two rare Arabian leopards to the Smithsonian's National Zoo in Washington. Brandie Smith, the director of the zoo, said that Mr. Trump was most interested in learning about the leopards' 'personality.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
How to crush a nation's soul: The Nazi crusade against "degenerate" art
In July 1937, artist Marc Chagall discovered that his paintings were enjoying a star turn in a singularly unexpected venue — an exhibition organized by the Nazi Party in Munich, the birthplace of its political fortunes. Chagall's work often addressed explicitly Jewish themes: In one such painting, a bearded rabbi takes a pinch of snuff in ochre-yellow surroundings, his wry eyes looking in the direction of the viewer but not necessarily at them. How one is meant to interpret this painting, or the artist's intent, is not clear. Adolf Ziegler, the Nazi functionary charged with overseeing the exhibition, perceived no ambiguity. He provided the supposed answer for "The Rabbi" and every other artwork displayed alongside it. "Look around you at these monstrosities of insanity, insolence, incompetence and degeneration," he declared in his opening address. "I would need several freight trains to clear our galleries of this rubbish ... This will happen soon." But through the end of November that year, at least, this "rubbish," served as a useful prop for the Third Reich's campaign to excise society of its corrupting elements and usher in a new era in which art represented the superior virtues of the German nation, as the Nazis saw it. The 'Degenerate Art Exhibition,' as it was unsubtly named, drew an audience that eventually exceeded two million visitors. It featured 650 works confiscated from German museums and judged by a panel to represent "decadence," "weakness of character," "mental disease," "racial impurity" and other hallmarks of Weimar-era modernity. The exhibition included an entire room dedicated to the "Revelation of the Jewish Racial Soul" and featured paintings by and about the ethnic and religious group whom the Nazis largely blamed for Germany's supposed moral and material decline. That room and others also included works whose subject matter offended reactionary Nazi sensibilities for other reasons, such as Otto Dix's "The Trench": a gruesome tangle of human remains, discarded weapons, leaking brain matter and faces, suspended in agony in the aftermath of an artillery bombardment, with a soldier's body propped up by a tripod of fixed bayonets high above the carnage. In another of Dix's works, the drypoint "War Cripples," disfigured veterans return home, many of them with limbs missing — a common sight across Germany after World War I. (Dix was himself a combat veteran.) Such depictions of war, the curators wrote in the exhibition catalogue, were tantamount to "military sabotage." "Here, the 'art' enters the service of Marxist propaganda for conscientious objection," the catalog essay continued, referring to the practice of resisting conscription on moral grounds, even under threat of punishment by the state. Dix's art was deemed an 'insult to the German heroes of the Great War.' Elsewhere in the exhibition, one could visit the "Insanity Room,' which displayed abstract paintings. The Nazis were not fans. 'In the paintings and drawings of this chamber of horrors, there is no telling what was in the sick brains of those who wielded the brush or the pencil,' the catalog explained. Once the point had been made, some of these artworks were burned. Others, however, fell into the hands of collectors, including a number of high-ranking party officials. The Nazi penchant for playing the role of art critics and connoisseurs, combined with the party's aim of attaining complete control over all aspects of German life, resulted in a far more heavy-handed effort to twist the form and spirit of art to political ends than the scattered bleating characteristic of today's culture wars. In this campaign, the Nazis styled themselves as saviors, rather than mere destroyers, of culture. 'You artists live in great and happy times. Above you the most powerful and understanding patron the Führer loves artists, because he is himself one. Under his blessed hand a Renaissance has begun," proclaimed propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels. Art, as the Nazis understood it, was to be the reference point by which the German master race recognized its own superiority, and must be used to serve its ends. 'True art is and remains eternal,' Hitler once said. "It does not follow the law of fashion. Its effect is that of a revelation arising from the depths of the essential character of a people.' Indeed, Nazi artists spared no effort in ferreting as much inspiration as they could from the pre-modern and mythic German past — the wars of the Nibelungen, the medieval Reich, the Teutonic crusades in the Baltic, the Protestant Reformation — and making extrapolations about the timelessness of German virtue. The Nazis even infringed on cultural prerogatives claimed by Benito Mussolini's fascist Italy, citing Germanophile philosopher Houston Steward Chamberlain's claim that the German people, by right of Aryan blood passed down from the Greeks and Romans, were destined to revive the 'lost ideal' of classical beauty. Revival was indeed the operative word. The Nazis held that German society had become diseased by the advent of modern art — meaning not just works that questioned or contradicted Nazi policy, but any kind of art bearing the hallmarks of modernity: visually distorted Expressionist paintings, atonal music unfettered by a central key, edifices of the Dada movement that defied aesthetic logic. As such, it was their mission to expunge such art from the public memory. Even before seizing national power in 1933, the Nazis implemented test cases on the state level. In 1930, the Nazi Party chief in Thuringia and state Minister of Education and the Interior, Wilhelm Frick, issued orders to remove 70 Expressionist paintings from the Schloss Weimar museum, fire the director of another museum for displaying modern art in its exhibitions, and ban all pacifist or antiwar books and films, including Erich Maria Remarque's legendary World War I novel 'All Quiet on the Western Front.' The sources of modern art, according to social critic Max Nordau, were decadent, corrupted societies whose artists, afflicted with 'degeneration' as a form of mental illness, could only produce work reflecting their degenerate selves. But what the Nazis seized upon most fervently – although they certainly didn't admit to inspiration from Nordau, who was both Jewish and a Zionist — was his claim that an individual's mental deformity lay in the presence of physical deformities like 'multiple and stunted growths in the first line of asymmetry, the unequal development of the two halves of the face and cranium… etc.,' and his prescribed solution: 'Characterization of the leading degenerates as mentally diseased: unmasking and stigmatizing of their imitators as enemies to society; cautioning the public against the lies of these parasites.' Here was the framework by which the Nazis attacked modernists not just as purveyors of low-quality creations, but also as perverted, dangerous and, whenever applicable, racially inferior. Artistic works that eschewed the so-called Nordic ideal of beauty, in subject or in style, were likewise condemned for undermining German high culture. Nazi architect Paul Schultze-Naumburg later pushed Nordau's theory of degeneration further down the slippery slope, arguing that it was not social conditioning that produced such despicable degenerates, but race, and in particular race-mixing. Only racially pure artists could produce art that embodied classical ideals, he argued, while their racially-mixed colleagues could create only disorder and monstrosity. Nazi leaders like racial theorist Alfred Rosenberg embraced Schultze-Naumburg's theory as a magnificent insight. Nordau, who had declared that composer Richard Wagner — perhaps the Nazis' most venerated cultural icon — possessed a 'greater abundance of degeneration than all the degenerates put together with whom we have hitherto become acquainted,' would no doubt have disagreed. While Nordau's distaste for Wagner – whose operas were embraced by Hitler with quasi-religious fervor – was not 'racial' in nature and may have been inflated by the composer's notorious antisemitism, questions over what qualified as degenerate art illustrated how nebulous the concept was. Goebbels and Rosenberg squabbled over whether some forms of modern art should have a place in the new Germany, with the former taking great pains to keep Expressionist artists such as avowed Nazi Emil Nolde in the political fold and dispel criticism that Nazi cultural policy was overly reactionary. "We National Socialists are not unmodern; we are the carrier of a new modernity, not only in politics and in social matters, but also in art and intellectual matters,' Goebbels argued. 'To be modern means to stand near the spirit of the present Zeitgeist. And for art, too, no other modernity is possible.' In the first year of Nazi rule in Germany, the Expressionists continued to enjoy Goebbels' patronage. And in the battle for practical control of the party's cultural policy, Goebbels, a far more consummate politician and organizer than the pedantic Rosenberg, appeared to seize the upper hand; in September 1933, Goebbels founded the Reich Chamber of Culture, which all working German artists were required to join, Aryan certificate in hand. (Its members, of course, were all artists whom Goebbels considered to be loyal Nazis and sufficiently 'Nordic' in ethnicity and character.) But the next year, Hitler himself declared that all forms of modern art were degenerate and had no place in his Germany, which would not 'be befuddled or intimidated' by modernist 'charlatans.' Rosenberg received an even harsher rebuke from Hitler, who preferred Greek and Roman classicism to Rosenberg's neo-Gothic aesthetic and denounced 'those backwards-lookers who imagine that they can impose upon the National Socialist revolution, as a binding heritage for the future, a 'Teutonic art' sprung from the fuzzy world of their own romantic conceptions.'With the party's cultural doctrine now clear, artists who previously enjoyed Nazi patronage suddenly found themselves stripped of official sanction and saw their art torn from museum walls. Ernst Ludwig Kirschner, an Expressionist painter who privately disdained the Nazi regime, sought to assure Nazi authorities that he was 'neither a Jew nor a Social Democrat,' but was expelled from the Prussian Academy of Arts anyway. The aforementioned Emil Nolde, who had condemned the paintings of 'half-breeds, bastards, and mulattoes' in his 1934 autobiography, could not stop government officials from removing 1,052 of his works from museums, the most of any artist in Germany. Some of his paintings, in fact, wound up in the 1937 Degenerate Art Exhibition, alongside Dix's antiwar compositions and Chagall's rabbi. The mass removals were codified in 1938 by the sweeping Degenerate Law Act, which declared that 'products of degenerate art that have been secured in museums or in collections open to the public before this law went into effect… can be appropriated by the Reich without compensation.' Nazi officials, on the other hand, were happy to be compensated for unloading undesirable works of art to foreign collectors. Those that couldn't be sold abroad or hidden within officials' palatial homes were consigned to the bonfires. In 1939 alone, 4,000 paintings met such a fate. Artists who complained too much about any of this, or who were suspected of defiance, soon faced worse fates. Shortly after his disgrace, Expressionist painter Max Pechstein received teaching offers from schools in Mexico and Turkey, but Nazi authorities refused to grant him an exit visa and left him to languish in rural Pomerania until the end of the war. In 1939, Dix was thrown in jail over an improbable accusation that he was involved in an assassination attempt against Hitler. Max Beckmann fled to the Netherlands in 1937, only to watch German tanks enter Amsterdam in 1940. In a desperate bid to preserve 'degenerate' art he had produced in exile, Beckmann hid his 'Departure' in the attic and wrote on the back of the canvas: 'Scenes from Shakespeare's 'Tempest.'" He came under police surveillance, but was not arrested. More conformist artists, on the other hand, enjoyed much more flattering official reviews. Just blocks away from the infamous Degenerate Art Exhibition, Nazi officials staged a competing show, the 'Great German Art Exhibition,' whose centerpiece was an enormous canvas featuring Hitler on horseback and in immaculate plate armor, gazing toward the future and carrying a Nazi flag. For all of Hitler's obsession with aesthetics, art had become politics by other means. Degeneracy had not been replaced by morality, wrote artist Oskar Schlemmer, but by 'tried and true purveyors of kitsch.'
Car and Driver
a day ago
- Car and Driver
Spohn DV-13 Convertible on Bring a Trailer: You're Not Likely To See Another
This coachbuilt custom car hails from Germany and is fitted with a Cadillac V-8. Would you believe, only a handful were built? It's the concours winner nobody was expecting. The Amelia Island Concours d'Elegance features awards in several categories, including engineering excellence, historical significance, and special mentions. It also has an award for "most audacious exterior." The car pictured here is the 2013 award winner, and audacious doesn't even begin to cover it. This is a 1957 Spohn DV-13, and the customized roadster is up for auction on Bring a Trailer (which, like Car and Driver, is part of Hearst Autos). Bring a Trailer The Spohn is the offspring of a German coachbuilder with a long tradition of clothing the finest cars in the world in gorgeous design. Before WWII, Spohn bodywork was worn by Maybachs and Mercedes-Benzes. In the postwar period, it, uh, got a little more creative. Okay, let's stop beating around the bush: This car looks like what Powell Motors would have built as the sporty followup version of The Homer car from The Simpsons. It is an acquired taste, like sea urchin or accordion solos, and on first glance looks supremely goofy. Remember the part in The Fly when Jeff Goldblum gets his DNA crossed with a housefly while experimenting with teleportation? This is like that, except it's a 1949 Cadillac and a Daimler SP250 having a transporter malfunction. Bring a Trailer Bring a Trailer Bring a Trailer Brendan McAleer Contributing Editor Brendan McAleer is a freelance writer and photographer based in North Vancouver, B.C., Canada. He grew up splitting his knuckles on British automobiles, came of age in the golden era of Japanese sport-compact performance, and began writing about cars and people in 2008. His particular interest is the intersection between humanity and machinery, whether it is the racing career of Walter Cronkite or Japanese animator Hayao Miyazaki's half-century obsession with the Citroën 2CV. He has taught both of his young daughters how to shift a manual transmission and is grateful for the excuse they provide to be perpetually buying Hot Wheels. Read full bio
