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.

The Diary of Anne Frank is a film based on the Pulitzer Prize winning play of the same name, which was based on the diary of Anne Frank. It was directed by George Stevens, with a screenplay by Frances Goodrich and Albert Hackett.It is the first film version of both the play and the original story, and features three members of the original Broadway cast.The movie was based on the personal diary of Anne Frank, a Jewish girl who lived in a hiding place with her family during World War II. All her writings to her diary were addressed as 'Dear Kitty'. The diary was published after the end of the war by her father Otto Frank. By this time all his other family members were killed by the Nazis.This is the autobiographical drama of a young Dutch Jewish girl hiding from the invading Nazis during World War II. Anne and her family share a claustrophobic attic with another family. Tension is often unbearable, as the people hiding know that their discovery by the enemy could lead to almost certain death at the hands of their captors. They also must contend with the Dutch Gestapo or "Green Police," who will turn them over to the Nazis if discovered. Dutch nationals risk their lives by hiding the family for two years. The group, despite the horror and crowded conditions, still find time for celebrations of Hanukkah and rejoice quietly in the small attic that has become their world. The story is told from the narrative perspective of Anne, a young girl hoping to live to womanhood. A poignant drama bringing us into the lives of Anne Frank, whose diary inspired millions seeking to understand why such a sweet, innocent child could be murdered in the Holocaust.It remains a potent statement about the horrors of war and a valid testament to the girl who could answer them by writing, 'I still believe, in spite of everything, that people are really good at heart.' Also,Mr. Stevens has done a superb job of putting upon the screen the basic drama and shivering authenticity of the Frances Goodrich-Albert Hackett play, which in turn caught the magnitude of drama in the real-life diary of a Jewish girl.

George Stevens' 1959 Classic, 'The Diary of Anne Frank,' is unique among the array of Holocaust pictures made over the years. Not only was it the first major, big-budget production to touch upon the subject (except for perhaps 'The Great Dictator,' which did not approach the subject directly), but it is directed from the point of view of a man trying to come to terms with the unspeakable horrors he was unprepared for upon the day of the liberation of the Nazi Concentration Camps. It is told from the point of view of a man who witnessed the aftermath of genocide, but who still sought to believe that there was still good in the world.Stevens could have taken many approaches to making this film, but he chose to approach it with optimism, a decision derided, it seems, from all sides. Most recently, books such as Francine Prose's 'Anne Frank: The Book, The Life, The Afterlife' and Carol Ann Lee's 'Hidden Life of Otto Frank,' have taken negative approaches to the film, as if the film's sole purpose had been to discredit and vandalize the Anne Frank story. They cite with dismay the footage of Millie Perkins in Auschwitz that trial audiences found distasteful, as proof of the film's inadequacy, never mind the fact that such footage, if it exists at all, cannot be viewed today.To address this point, let me remind those concerned that the war had ended not even fifteen years before the film went into production. Many Holocaust survivors were beginning to start new lives for themselves, including Otto Frank and his new wife. To think that the filming of the camp scenes would not have rekindled memories of such horror is simply unrealistic. And, although Otto Frank would neither see the play nor the film, were he to have seen it, why would he have wished to see a reenactment of his daughter's humiliation, degradation, and eventual death? Never mind the fact that they could never have filmed on-location at this time, and that there could not possibly have been a soundstage large enough to capture the daunting horror of Auschwitz and Bergen Belsen.Rather, over fifty years later, after the Holocaust had been successfully explored in other mediums, after the full impact of the Nazi atrocities were realized, and after an appropriate amount of Post-War time, the world was ready for the camp scenes, which were heartbreakingly conveyed in 'Anne Frank - The Whole Story.' Like Jean Marie Falconetti in 'Passion of Joan of Arc,' Hannah Taylor Gordon would agree to have her head shaven, to illustrate the suffering of an innocent, young heroine, which brings me to my next point.. the choice of Millie Perkins as Anne.The most widely ridiculed part of this film, Millie Perkins never seems to get a break. To contrast her with Gordon may perhaps be unfair, and Perkins herself would be liable to conced that Gordon's is superior, if only given the nature of her performance, which may be one of the finest ever recorded on film. The difference between Millie and Hannah would seem to be that while Millie was playing Anne Frank and playing her very well, Hannah seems to have become Anne for a brief period of time and lends her soul to the part, as if they were linked for a moment.But, nevertheless, Millie stands on her own. Stevens' choice was widely criticized, and still is, for his choice of an American girl, but the search itself was authentic as could be. "We're looking for an actress who hasn't found out that special secret about herself yet," Stevens declared at the press conference. To view her old screentest, why Millie was chosen is not obvious at first, but to look closer, she exhibits a quirkiness, fascination with small things, and detailed memory that was associated with Anne Frank. Perkins had not yet seemed to have discovered her "special secret." But, perhaps the reason for an American girl to portray her was the need to drive home the point to the American audiences, who, unlike Europeans, had largely been unaffected by the realization of the Nazi atrocities. No doubt they felt for the victims, but could not identify with them. If one allows themselves to become so absorbed in the fate of these characters that every time a Gestapo siren wails in the background, their heart pounds as theirs would, and to refocus one's attention on the child-like Millie trying to lighten the situation, one can appreciate the depth of her levity, only to be brought back to earth with the realization of what her fate will be. We are supposed to believe that whatever happened to the real Anne will happen to her. We may find this Anne annoying, whiny, or brattish, but never so deserving of the cruelty she would encounter in her last seven months. Perhaps Stevens understood this.

Some stories are simply begging to be told. Since the end of World War 2, the conflict had provided inspiration for hundreds of motion pictures, and most of these were for the purposes of gung ho entertainment rather than poignant reflection. There's nothing shameful in that. It is just the case that with some of the more horrific aspects of the war, we needed more time to come to terms with them and understand them. And with a story like this, it was also essential that it be handled by a team who could get it exactly right.The picture was based on an earlier stage play by Frances Goodrich and Albert Hackett, not too especially well-known names in filmdom, although they were responsible for some of the best screenplays of Hollywood's classic era, including It's a Wonderful Life. As such it should come as no surprise then that their dramatization of Anne Frank's diary is bursting with tenderness, frank humanity and above all a reverence for human life. They have often condensed several significant events into the same scene, and possibly exaggerated a few characters, but this is the way it must be to make it work as a play, and no disservice has been done to Anne's work (As a side note however, I would recommend everyone read up on Fritz Pfeffer, the real name of the Alfred Dussel character, as his story is far more complex and tragic than what we see here). This screen version of the Goodrich-Hackett play was produced and directed by George Stevens, and there may have been no better man for the project. Stevens's method in his 1950s pictures was to shoot from every conceivable angle, and have the perspective sometimes change jarringly from shot to shot. This may seem confusing at first, but it makes the audience lose track of the size and shape of rooms, and focus totally on the actors. However, he does things slightly differently for this picture. He begins by making us very much aware of the space, with lots of foreground clutter, and doorways leading off in the background. It is as if we are somehow being held back from the action, as if we are looking in on it from outside. Then gradually, around about the time Anne begins her diary, the camera begins to move inside the space. As we get to know the characters, the camera becomes more intimate, and as usual with Stevens he makes us forget the place and remember the people.And this is an appropriately memorable cast. Originally Audrey Hepburn was sought for the lead role, and while she would surely have been excellent, her substitute Millie Perkins is perhaps a better yet for this role. She has a kind of genuine youthful exuberance to her, and is able to appear much more like a real teenager. It is also appropriate to have an unfamiliar face for the part. An equally young Richard Beymer (better known as Tony in West Side Story) is also ideal for the same reasons. The supporting players are a delight. People like Josef Schildkraut and Shelley Winters are like a mark of quality on any picture. They did not have egos, they did not want to steal the show or upstage anyone; they simply undertook each part with sincerity and played it to the best of their abilities. The real surprise however is Ed Wynn, a daffy comedy actor, but here playing it mostly straight and even eliciting some sympathy for a character who is basically the fall guy in the absence of any tangible villain. But why is Anne Frank's story so important? It is not of great historical value. It does not make for an unflinching account of Jewish persecution by the Nazis. What it is, is an incredibly touching and insightful narrative by someone in a trying and excruciating situation. It is astonishingly well written, and as such has at times been denounced as a hoax, although its authenticity has now thankfully been proved. Anne unwittingly made herself a spokesperson for a generation and for a people. Her story is one we are lucky enough to have handed down to us, among the millions that can never be told, and as such it should become known and spread. Anne herself may not have survived, but her diary… her diary is life after death.