The Diary of Anne Frank


Action / Biography / Drama / Family / History / War

Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Certified Fresh 76%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Upright 76%
IMDb Rating 7.4 10 10342


Uploaded By: OTTO
Downloaded 34,607 times
January 21, 2013 at 09:40 PM



Richard Beymer as Peter Van Daan
Shelley Winters as Mrs. Petronella Van Daan
Ed Wynn as Mr. Albert Dussell
Diane Baker as Margot Frank
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
1.15 GB
23.976 fps
3hr 0 min
P/S 6 / 25
2.30 GB
23.976 fps
3hr 0 min
P/S 5 / 14

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by Prismark10 4 / 10

Insipid adaptation

Having seen Anne Frank's house in Amsterdam, I felt disappointed by this 'classic' film. It does just not stand up and at one point I felt it inspired Mel Brooks 'The Producers.'

Anne Frank recorded her story of hiding in a loft with her family as well as others, living for several years in cramped harsh conditions hoping to evade the Nazis.

What we get is an overlong, mawkish film that wants to concentrate more in the love interest between Anne and a boy called Peter from the other family. We get little of the terror that these families would had felt. The film lacks the claustrophobia that should be presented to the audience. It really is a film of its time stripped of all the harshness of war.

Worse the actress playing Anne looks too old and is rather bland.

Reviewed by ianlouisiana 6 / 10

Worthy but stage - bound and lacks a pivotal performance around which to.....

.....evolve.Apart from Mr E.Wynn the cast are content to play to Jewish stereotypes and Miss S.Winters is very much full on throughout as the shrewish wife and mother who only too seldom engages her brain before opening her mouth. This picture starts promisingly enough,the set being introduced rather in the German Expressionist manner but,frankly,there is very little use made of cinema as a medium,"Anne Frank" being mainly shot as a straightforward adaption of a stageplay. To be fair to Mr G.Stevens there was little scope for opening out the production and staying fairly true to the book. So we share the sense of claustrophobia of the families which is well realised, but this has the unfortunate effect of making even the sight of marching in the street give us a feeling of relief.Unfortunately where "The diary of Anne Frank" fails is in its central performance where Miss M.Perkins is not adequate to the task. She may be pretty and cute with big eyes but she has nothing behind them. You get the impression that when the camera stops she reverts to being a perky American teenager. Worse,she is not even a very sympathetic character. The same goes for Mr R.Beymer whose carefully greased hair smacks of liberal use of hair oil that one would have thought would have been in short supply. I felt he would have been more at home with a catcher's mitt and a bat under his arm. The story deserves better. Apart from the 6 million Jews exterminated by the Germans they also "cleansed" untold numbers of homosexuals,Poles,Russians,the disabled and mentally ill and other such untermenschen."Anne Frank" speaks for them all,its just a pity it wasn't just a little bit better.

Reviewed by JohnHowardReid 8 / 10

Slow-moving, but inspiring!

A George Stevens Production. Copyright 1959 by 20th Century-Fox Film Corp. New York opening at the Palace: 18 March 1959. U.S. release: March 1959. U.K. release: July 1959. Australian release: 1 October 1959. Running times: 170 minutes (USA and UK), 178 minutes (Aust).

NOTES: First published in 1952, the book became an almost immediate best-seller and was translated into 21 languages. The play opened on Broadway at the Cort Theatre on 5 October 1955 and won the Pulitzer Prize, the New York Drama Critics Award and the Antoinette Perry Award. It was produced by Kermit Bloomgarden and directed by Garson Kanin; Susan Strasberg was Anne, Dennie Moore was Mrs. Van Daan and Jack Gilford was Mr. Dussell. In the film, Schildkraut, Huber and Jacobi are repeating their original Broadway roles... Stevens reportedly screened 10,244 applicants for the role of Anne before deciding on New Jersey-born model, Millie Perkins. The film won three Academy Awards: Best Supporting Actress, Shelley Winters, Black-and-white Cinematography, William C. Mellor (only — the 2nd unit scenes photographed by Jack Cardiff were presumably thought to be inferior to Mellor's studio work), and Black-and-white Art Direction, defeating "Career", "The Last Angry Man", "Some Like It Hot", and "Suddenly Last Summer".

On the year's "Ten Best" lists, number 2 on the Film Daily annual poll of American film critics, number 5 on New York Journal American, number 10 for Gerald Pratley, number 4 for the National Board of Review, number 1 for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, number 3 on The New York Daily Mirror, and tied with The Nun's Story for 2nd place on the Filmfacts composite listing. In alphabetical lists figured on Time, John Springer, New York Times, New York World Telegram, Milwaukee Journal.

Although the play ran a highly successful 717 performances, returning its astute backers something like ten times their original investments, the film did far less well. Including the cost of the screen rights and being aware of Stevens' ultra-expensive working methods, you'd be looking at a negative cost of at least $3 million — probably a lot more. Perhaps the story was better left to the East German DEFA's 20-minute 1958 "A Diary for Anne Frank" which packs an enormous amount of actuality background material (stills, newsreels, documents) into its well-researched account.

COMMENT: Slow-moving, but inspiring. Very much a filmed stage-play, rather blandly directed, yet somewhat heavily theatrical. Despite her stunning movie debut in the title role, Millie Perkins' subsequent career — "Wild in the Country" (1961), "Ensign Pulver" (1964), "Wild in the Streets" (1968) — didn't capitalize on her potential. Miss Perkins is a Jean Seberg in reverse.

The other players try hard (perhaps too hard) to gain dominance over the central character. Shelley Winters come off best, and Diane Baker impresses in a small role, but Schildkraut, Wynn and Jacobi act as though they were treading the boards on Broadway instead of miming in front of a movie camera.

OTHER VIEWS: A masterpiece. — Time. A surprisingly ordinary movie. — Films In Review. Profoundly moving... A film for which the industry can take a prideful bow. — Variety. Often magnificent. — Saturday Review. A masterpiece. — New York Herald Tribune. Shows Hollywood at its most honorable and least imaginative. — Monthly Film Bulletin. Easily the finest film 20th Century-Fox ever made. — Samuel Goldwyn.

Read more IMDb reviews


Be the first to leave a comment