What to Do in Case of Fire? (2001)
What To Do In Case of Fire? tells the humorous and touching story of six former creative anarchists who lived as house squatters in Berlin during its heyday in the 80s when Berlin was still an island in the middle of the former eastern Germany. At the end of the 80s they went their separate ways with the exception of Tim and Hotte, who have remained true to their ideals and continue to fight the issues they did as a group. In 2000, with Berlin as Germany's new capital, an event happens forcing the group out of existential reason to reunite and, ultimately, come to grips with the reason they separated 12 years ago.
Watch Trailer
Cast
Similar titles
Reviews
"Was Tun, Wenn's Brennt" (2001), directed by Gregor Schnitzler, is a German cult movie that has, strangely enough, never reached a greater popularity outside of Germany. It is true that the situation of the former anarchists in West Berlin is not depicted historically exact, but this is not the aim of the movie. The movie is about the ones who remained faithful to themselves and the other ones who have forgotten their origins.What makes this movie so special, besides it very high entertainment-value, are the performances of Martin Feifel as Hotte and of Sebstian Blomberg as Mike. Feifel reaches without doubt an Oscar-worthy accomplishment. Tim (Til Schweiger) and Hotte are the last ones from a former small group of a radical political film-club whose whole live was once determined by the conflicts between East and West Berlin, including street battles, during one which Hotte lost his legs. 11 years, after the group has separated, Tim and Hotte are still living in the house-ruin where the "Kommune" used to house, without any contacts to the former members. Suddenly, a bomb explodes in an empty villa, and the police find traces of the former film club. Unfortunately, the police investigator who used to fight against the radicals in the glorious times, is not yet retired, and so he spends considerable time to trace the bomb back. ("Police-dog" Manowksy is the last role of the great Klaus Löwitsch which makes this movie especially precious). Since immediate danger is waiting before the door, after the house-ruin has been stormed by the police, Tim and Hotte decide to try to find the other Kommune-members who meanwhile have become banker, lawyer, single mother and party-girl. When finally they are re-assembled together, they decide to fight one more time against the police force.
OK. I just watched this film and, while it was an exciting action picture, it was horribly inaccurate. So bad in fact it was inexcusable. Had Hollywood turned out this crock, I could have forgiven them, but this was a German production and I expected a lot more from them.I lived in Berlin for most of the Eighties. Part of that time was spent in Kreutzberg, among the Anarchists. I knew many of them and even took part in some of their demos. I could write volumes on how these people think and act and, believe me, it was nothing like this movie depicted.In the movie, the characters were too clean and smart. Also they were all straight and the girls were pretty. And they were quite capable of launching a James Bond style breaking to a top security police fortress.In reality they were dirty, burnt-out looking, as often as not gay/lesbian and didn't mind flirting it. Many were drug users, came from broken homes, were sexually abused as kids, and had the organizing skills of Beavis and Butthead. If the girls were half way decent looking, they were probably prostituting themselves or working in strip shows to make a living. Nearly all of them were on welfare. Not to mention the frequent riots and vandalism that came with the lifestyle. Certainly nothing like the happy-go-lucky characters the movie depicts.I never ever heard of any Anarchists moving out and becoming Yuppies. Not even in the Nineties. Usually they just stayed in place until they were forced out of their squats and into concrete block neighborhoods in East Berlin.Also the police are not that stupid. Nobody ever broke into Tempelhof and stole the riot trucks or blew up the archives. Get real! This stuff never happened and should not be depicted as though it did. The worst part of it for me is that back then, the media depicted the Anarchists as the lowest trash who should be locked up immediately or disposed of by any means necessary. Now they are cashing in on them by making action movies with sexy Anarchist good guys.It's as if, 10 years from now, Hollywood made an action movie featuring Osama Bin Laden and his Mujahadeen as the good guys and put Michelle Yeoh in as the female lead. That bad! Enjoy this movie but History it ain't!
This is a touching movie about a group of young, idealist anarchists who lose their beliefs and their friendships and become what they never expected. In being a slightly older than young idealist/activist myself I found this film very moving. But I think it can appeal to anyone who has had close friendships, only to see them pulled apart by approaching adulthood, social responsibilities, or changes in values. The film actually portrays these young punks in a convincing way unlike many other movies I've seen in which underground or subversive groups are shown in the most basest of stereotypes. The characters' background story or former look is not the focus though, so it does rush through that time rather quickly. The main draw in the film is the amazing job it does showing all of the reasons for the group's disbanding. You sympathize with each of the characters and can understand each of their reasons for choosing their current lifestyles. The plot is solid, the characters engaging, and the dialogue can be quite funny. This is the kind of film that has you laughing, crying and cheering all in a span of 2 hrs. Highly recommended.
No matter what good things people may say about this film, What to do in case of fire is just one step far from becoming a dull experience. It's spine bone is made out of contrivances, holes and cliché characters. It's not as ironic or clever as I thought it would be based on the plot read on the back cover, and this group of so called "idealistic" people don't catch our attention because there's no way you can feel their commitment neither back then, when they performed minor terrorist acts in the twilight of the eighties, nor now, when they must stop police's investigation about a delayed home made bomb that set off in 2000, and links the bunch with it. Now, almost fifteen years later, they all have changed but two, whom stay "true to the cause": one is a lawyer, other is a yuppie, one more is a teacher or so, and other one is a mother. Can this changed minds reunite to stop what started when their ideals were radical? You'd be better off never finding out (although you guess the ending long before the end). German movies has put me down in the past and I ought knew this one shouldn't be different (the most recent being Das experiment). I´ll never learn. Usually, they start up with a nice welcome, but as the story unfolds, they loose ground and focus on narrative; I think they just don't know how to tell a story properly 'cause that is exactly what happens here: the beginning perhaps is not a compelling one but at least seems like fun, but then, the movie rolls on and you find out this amateur effort in every possible way is going nowhere. Now, in What..., the visual matters may find every now and then some good eye candy stuff, but overall, just when the end credits starts to roll, you realize this none other thing but a waste of time and money. The one you paid to see it, and the one they spent on it. They say two times in the movie: "what to do in case of fire?", "let it burn". Well then, let's just follow it's advice and set on fire this one to let it burn until it's consumed to ashes.