The Disappearance of Josef Mengele – first-look… | Little White Lies

Festivals

The Dis­ap­pear­ance of Josef Men­gele – first-look review

21 May 2025

Words by Mark Asch

A monochrome image of a man in a suit and hat standing next to a vintage car.
A monochrome image of a man in a suit and hat standing next to a vintage car.
Russ­ian exile film­mak­er Kir­ill Sere­bren­nikov selects Auschwitz’s Angel of Death“ as the sub­ject of the first film made in his new home, Germany.

Kir­ill Sere­bren­nikov had a film in com­pe­ti­tion for the Palme d’Or at three of the first four Cannes Film Fes­ti­vals post-COVID, a peri­od imme­di­ate­ly fol­low­ing his unjust con­vic­tion, in his native Rus­sia, on trumped-up charges of embez­zle­ment from the state-fund­ed the­atre of which he was pres­i­dent — wide­ly under­stood to be polit­i­cal­ly moti­vat­ed per­se­cu­tion of a dis­si­dent artist.

Then came Russia’s inva­sion of Ukraine and Serebrennikov’s self-imposed exile to Berlin. As a gad­fly fig­ure in Russ­ian cul­ture, he was known for tak­ing on pro­tag­o­nists with knot­ty, oppo­si­tion­al pol­i­tics, por­tray­ing Sovi­et-era rock punks, flu-strick­en com­ic artists, delu­sion­al spous­es and rad­i­cal poets as flawed anti­heroes tear­ing through the fab­ric of soci­ety — often lit­er­al­ly, in strut­ting, rock-and-roll track­ing shots across elab­o­rate sets that were liable to col­lapse mid­way through the scene, break­ing the fourth wall and pierc­ing the veil.

Sere­bren­nikov is back in Cannes with his first Ger­man-lan­guage film and the first to com­plete prin­ci­pal pho­tog­ra­phy since he left Rus­sia; it’s about a Ger­man anti­hero this time. The Dis­ap­pear­ance of Josef Men­gele, which cov­ers the life of Auschwitz’s angel of death” in hid­ing in South Amer­i­ca in the decades after the fall of the Reich, is a study of a fel­low exile, but one still loy­al to his home­land, and who moved, before then at least, in lock­step with his gov­ern­ment and with his his­tor­i­cal moment.

Per­haps it’s Serebrennikov’s con­tempt for a pro­tag­o­nist he has every claim of supe­ri­or­i­ty to; per­haps it’s in def­er­ence to what is still a sore sub­ject in his adopt­ed home­land and beyond, but in com­par­i­son to his recent work, the film’s pol­i­tics are more leg­i­ble and respectable — and its style more staid.

We can learn a lot from these bones,” says an avun­cu­lar med­ical school instruc­tor in mod­ern-day Brazil in the film’s first scene, invit­ing his stu­dents to think about foren­sics – and his­to­ry – while con­tem­plat­ing the remains of a doc­tor whose spir­it of inquiry was far less sci­en­tif­ic: Dr. Men­gele, who sort­ed arrivals at Auschwitz for the gas cham­bers and con­duct­ed sadis­tic exper­i­ments, like attempt­ing to pro­duce blue eyes by inject­ing chem­i­cal dyes, in sup­port of Nazi race theories.

Large­ly his­tor­i­cal­ly accu­rate in its out­lines, the film fol­lows Mengele’s life in Argenti­na, Paraguay and Brazil, under a series of alias­es and in decreas­ing com­fort and health, from bour­geois ease to hard­scrab­ble rus­tic­i­ty to decrepit pover­ty. The chronol­o­gy hop­scotch­es around; as Men­gele, August Diehl grows con­tort­ed with age (at the end of his character’s life he looks and moves much old­er than 67) in the kind of showy per­for­mance Sere­bren­nikov favours, one that spans impos­si­ble changes in cir­cum­stance with the help of stage makeup.

Shoot­ing in widescreen and black and white, with a score of noir sax­o­phone and Jok­er cel­lo, Sere­bren­nikov gives Mengele’s sto­ry the high-gloss, high-con­trast look of a noir; though he still prefers to work in long takes, his per­spec­tive feels coiled, aligned with a char­ac­ter who paces like a caged ani­mal. The cin­e­matog­ra­phy is most­ly not showy, except at Mengele’s 1950s wed­ding (divorced from his first wife by proxy, he mar­ried his brother’s wid­ow in Uruguay), the best scene of the film, which is cov­ered in a sin­gle Steadicam mov­ing from the par­lour where wed­ding guests in Iron Cross­es Sieg Heil for the bride and groom, to the kitchen, where the ser­vants stick a swasti­ka flag into the wed­ding cake and play Here Comes the Bride” (Wag­n­er, of course) on the phonograph.

Among friends, the wed­ding par­ty, which includes mem­bers of the rat­lines who got the Nazis out of Europe, speak Ger­man in front of the help, who only speak Span­ish, and exult in the reminders of their glo­ry days as the cam­era roams from out­build­ing to man­sion and room to room in one of Serebrennikov’s charis­mat­ic track­ing shots.

For the most part, though, the film­mak­ing is restrained by the director’s stan­dards, stay­ing close on Men­gele as he busts in and out of hid­ing, even return­ing to West Ger­many in the mid-1950s, where his wealthy fam­i­ly, tak­ing stock of the promi­nence of for­mer Nazis in post­war gov­ern­ment and soci­ety, sug­gest he comes back. No one cares,” he’s told, not even the Amer­i­cans, but either through ego or guilt, he remains para­noid about poten­tial con­se­quences for his crimes, intu­it­ing that Eich­mann is being indis­creet even before his kid­nap­ping by Mossad.

As the polit­i­cal regimes in South Amer­i­ca become less favourable to for­mer Nazis — the ouster of Perón in the 1950s is a turn­ing point — his per­se­cu­tion com­plex sharp­ens as his body dete­ri­o­rates. The film returns repeat­ed­ly to 1977, when a vis­it from the doctor’s estranged son Rolf brings forth undi­min­ished invec­tive against the Jews and rag­ing ratio­nal­i­sa­tions. With­in the rel­a­tive­ly slick and safe Roma-lite visu­al scheme, Diehl’s ful­mi­na­tions, about the forth­com­ing film of The Boys from Brazil or the hypocrisy of the post­war soci­ety that sin­gles out him for deprav­i­ty above and beyond oth­er Nazis (“and they call me the angel of death!”), approach camp in their extremes of its delud­ed self-pity, with­out a mad mise en scène to match the Wag­ner­ian performance.

In his two-han­der with Rolf, Men­gele ham­mers again and again at the acknowl­edged patholo­gies of the Nazi era, the nation­al­ism and natal­ist race pseu­do­science, a fla­gel­lat­ing aware­ness of which is the para­dox­i­cal source of many of con­tem­po­rary Germany’s most trea­sured moral cer­tain­ties. When Rolf — who came to despise his father, but refused to reveal his where­abouts to Nazi hunters — final­ly gets Men­gele to dis­cuss Auschwitz, the film launch­es a cen­tre­piece flash­back, and switch­es from black and white to colour. Any­one won­der­ing why the new film from Com­pe­ti­tion reg­u­lar Sere­bren­nikov has been shunt­ed off to Cannes Pre­mieres will fig­ure out why at this spe­cif­ic moment, as the Auschwitz sequence opens with a shot of Nazis at leisure, pic­nick­ing by a riv­er and frol­ick­ing in the long grass, with a bla­tant, unavoid­able resem­blance to the open­ing of Zone of Inter­est; the com­par­i­son does not flat­ter the new­er film. Next to the fixed dis­tance, omi­nous ambi­ent sound design, and fear­some­ly chilly rigour of Glazer’s film, this is pat bucol­ic irony.

Sere­bren­nikov strains to avoid the gener­ic in depict­ing the death camp, reach­ing about halfway down his bag of tricks in film­ing it in the style of a Super 8 home movie, with Nazis includ­ing Men­gele mug­ging for the cam­era in between assign­ing new arrivals to labour or death, tak­ing rel­ish in sep­a­rat­ing fam­i­lies and pick­ing out spe­cial cas­es for med­ical exper­i­ments. Like a hack hor­ror movie direc­tor, Men­gele was par­tic­u­lar­ly inter­est­ed in twins and peo­ple with dwarfism and oth­er phys­i­cal defor­mi­ties, and that’s duly empha­sised here, as a per­for­mance by an orches­tra of lit­tle peo­ple is inter­cut with the cru­el exam­i­na­tion, bru­tal exe­cu­tion, and grotesque dis­sec­tion and dis­pos­al of a man with exag­ger­at­ed kypho­sis. In cheery sub­ti­tles (not, odd­ly, silent-movie inter­ti­tles; you’d expect a flour­ish like that) Men­gele dis­cuss­es the best way to sep­a­rate tis­sue from bone, whether through chem­i­cals, or boil­ing down bones like in a stew. The aim is for dis­gust and vis­cer­al shock, but it’s hard to find unclaimed aes­thet­ic ter­ri­to­ry when depict­ing the Holo­caust, and I’m frankly skep­ti­cal of the pur­pose being served here.

Short­ly before Sere­bren­nikov left Rus­sia, in 2022, he trav­eled to Cannes to present his film Tchaikovsky’s Wife — a revi­sion­ist take on the nation­al icon and clos­et­ed homo­sex­u­al, which was insuf­fi­cient­ly respect­ful of Russ­ian cul­ture accord­ing to the Rus­sians, and insuf­fi­cient­ly forth­right in its con­dem­na­tion of it accord­ing to (some) West­ern­ers. He and his cast, espe­cial­ly those still liv­ing and work­ing in Rus­sia, were pained and self-cen­sor­ing through­out the fes­ti­val, fore­shad­ow­ing Serebrennikov’s depar­ture from his author­i­tar­i­an native land for lib­er­al West­ern Europe. But free speech has its lim­its in Ger­many, too, par­tic­u­lar­ly on issues touch­ing, as The Dis­ap­pear­ance of Josef Men­gele does, on Zion­ism. A polite guest in an artis­tic and polit­i­cal cli­mate which is flam­boy­ant­ly hos­tile to any crit­i­cism of Israel — which is some­thing like the struc­tur­ing absence of the film — Sere­bren­nikov is cir­cum­spect on the subject.

Jew­ish boys will grow into men” who want revenge on the Nazis, Men­gele rages at one point — a jus­ti­fi­ca­tion for geno­cide which has some con­tem­po­rary echoes. But this is an excep­tion. Men­gele also rants and raves about the influ­ence of Israel, as you’d expect from a Nazi, and lives in fear of Mossad, with the even­tu­al abduc­tion, tri­al and exe­cu­tion of Eich­mann hang­ing over him as a memen­to mori, as you’d also expect from a Nazi.

But in fact, after the huge­ly sym­bol­ic Eich­mann tri­al, Mossad chose not to pur­sue Men­gele despite pos­sess­ing promis­ing and, as it turned out, accu­rate intel­li­gence on his where­abouts, focus­ing their efforts, instead, on Israel’s com­pe­ti­tion with its Arab neigh­bours. Meir Amit, head of Mossad in the ear­ly 1960s, specif­i­cal­ly gave the direc­tive to stop chas­ing after ghosts from the past and devote all our man­pow­er and resources to threats against the secu­ri­ty of the state,” ie, Egypt’s mis­sile pro­gram, and lat­er Pales­tin­ian mil­i­tants. The evi­dence sug­gests that Mossad in those years was not adverse to recruit­ing ex-Nazis to help with these aims.

The film, which includes one last Auschwitz flash­back dur­ing Mengele’s death, at age 67, from drown­ing, posits the Jew­ish state, or the threat of it, as the aveng­ing con­science of the six mil­lion. The film’s view of Israel is fil­tered through the aware­ness of its pro­tag­o­nist, which is hard to fault as a for­mal choice, hard to sec­ond-guess as a sketch of the flail­ing, haunt­ed and hate­ful con­science of an evil man, and even hard to cri­tique as por­trait of at least one facet of a gov­ern­ment which, with the Holo­caust very much fresh in its mind, brought Eich­mann to jus­tice despite Argentina’s refusal to extra­dite him.

Yet this time last year, Sere­bren­nikov was in Cannes with Limonov: The Bal­lad, a sprawl­ing almost-musi­cal that exult­ed in the defi­ant, inco­her­ent, inter­mit­tent­ly gal­van­ic and ulti­mate­ly vile ethos of the Russ­ian lit­er­ary gad­fly and even­tu­al nation­al­ist mili­tia founder Eddie Limonov, played with bil­ious insou­ciance by Ben Whishaw. A self-impli­cat­ing por­trait of artis­tic ego and the urge to pro­voke, which can lead equal­ly down avant-garde and reac­tionary paths, the film looked at Limonov with min­gled loathing and fas­ci­na­tion, and had con­tra­dic­to­ry, con­fus­ing, risky things to say about the rela­tion­ship of indi­vid­u­als to the state and its pieties.

One the one hand: yes, of course, the first thing Kir­ill Sere­bren­nikov would do upon arrival in Ger­many is to make a movie about a Nazi. But on the oth­er hand, in zero­ing in on an oft-repeat­ed nar­ra­tive of nation­al shame, he han­dles a char­ac­ter­is­ti­cal­ly inflam­ma­to­ry sub­ject with unchar­ac­ter­is­tic inof­fen­sive­ness, yield­ing lim­it­ed insight.

To keep cel­e­brat­ing the craft of film, we have to rely on the sup­port of our mem­bers. Join Club LWLies today and receive access to a host of benefits.

You might like

Accessibility Settings

Text

Applies the Open Dyslexic font, designed to improve readability for individuals with dyslexia.

Applies a more readable font throughout the website, improving readability.

Underlines links throughout the website, making them easier to distinguish.

Adjusts the font size for improved readability.

Visuals

Reduces animations and disables autoplaying videos across the website, reducing distractions and improving focus.

Reduces the colour saturation throughout the website to create a more soothing visual experience.

Increases the contrast of elements on the website, making text and interface elements easier to distinguish.