FILM FOOTAGE MADE IN THE THIRD REICH and since found in the archive has recently provoked new forms of cinematic engagement with the incriminating images that often emphasize the perpetrator's perspective on historic events. Georges Didi-Huberman calls these visual remnants of the Nazi past “ill seen images”; “ill seen” because they have been “poorly described, poorly captioned, poorly classed, poorly reproduced, poorly used” by historians as well as filmmakers. In the case of archive films that remain from the Nazi period we are left with footage that is, for the most part, fragmentary and that has sometimes been edited in only rudimentary ways. Yet, even these fragments are significant beyond their status as documents or iconic images: their particular perspectives, framing, and production context mean they have certain cinematic qualities. In order to understand them properly, then, we need to “read” them as cinematic remnants, especially where they have been used in subsequent film projects precisely for their cinematic qualities.

In his study on the sources of Holocaust research, Raul Hilberg addresses photographs and films only in passing, but nonetheless points out the particular value of visual materials, which he describes as “‘action’ films and photographs.” Referring to well known archive films from the Third Reich, he notes the important information they reveal: “a ghetto from the entrances guarded by police to bodies on the sidewalk inside, or … a group of Jews boarding a deportation train.” Photography and film are ambivalent sources, however. They have the potential to reveal marginal and sometimes even accidental details that would not otherwise be shown or perceived. But just as they present things that happened in front of the camera, they also exclude other things that were not depicted. Even if the material was not edited and presented to the public, the perspective and framing of the shots taken still produce a particular meaning. Indeed every photographic or cinematic source can be “read” and will “tell” us something about the context in which it was made, even though there are often manifold and contradictory ways to interpret these visual remnants.