The character of Franz here is a real smarmy hustler type who victimizes gay men he picks up in Berlin gay bars and threatens to squeal on for breaking some morals law. The sad thing is that he's breaking the law, but he has the upper hand. For concert violinist Conrad Veidt, that's the sad story of his life, and here, his story is documented, and there's only few moments of happiness when he seems to find real love. The film is greatly edited from its original form (utilizing stills and newly created title cards to help move the action along with what remains), so it's not the product that German film audiences saw between 1919 and 1920 when it was banned. What remains is a compassionate portrayal of an aging gay man who becomes the mentor of a young violin player, the romance that follows between them, and the threats of scandal that tear them apart. Flashbacks to Veidt's younger self (with another actor portraying the character during his school years who looks very much like a younger Veidt himself) show all of the trauma he's gone through, with a rather effeminate schoolmaster coming between the younger version of Veidt's character and the fellow student who can't seem to live without him. The blackmailer, Franz, is seen in a cabaret consorting with a very unattractive, yet effeminate man who seems to be a part of the blackmail scheme, making it appear that if you were not attractive enough to find companionship, you would do what you could to prevent somebody else from finding it.
The newly made dialog or letter cards seem sort of forced and not like real letters or pieces of dialog, so that becomes one of the film's few detriments. A scene of a costume ball shows men dancing with men, women dancing with women, and Franz lingering around Veidt to pretend to make a play for him. A real life sexologist is there to provide a scientific reason that homosexuality exists and to show the audience that there is nothing unnatural about it. This was banned because it put a positive light on the reasons for homosexuality, and was considered almost like an invitation to become gay. Veidt's character has some effeminate mannerisms, but in a confrontation with Franz, shows that he has the strength to carry the upper hand, so he's no limp wristed "poof". A disturbing party scene has Veidt being molested by female college students hoping to "straighten him out", but Veidt's reaction to all this shows that he is who he is, and like Jerry Herman wrote for "La Cage Aux Folles", didn't need no excuses. The ending is a downer but has an element of hope, looking fifty years into the future when gay liberation really began to move forward.
The newly made dialog or letter cards seem sort of forced and not like real letters or pieces of dialog, so that becomes one of the film's few detriments. A scene of a costume ball shows men dancing with men, women dancing with women, and Franz lingering around Veidt to pretend to make a play for him. A real life sexologist is there to provide a scientific reason that homosexuality exists and to show the audience that there is nothing unnatural about it. This was banned because it put a positive light on the reasons for homosexuality, and was considered almost like an invitation to become gay. Veidt's character has some effeminate mannerisms, but in a confrontation with Franz, shows that he has the strength to carry the upper hand, so he's no limp wristed "poof". A disturbing party scene has Veidt being molested by female college students hoping to "straighten him out", but Veidt's reaction to all this shows that he is who he is, and like Jerry Herman wrote for "La Cage Aux Folles", didn't need no excuses. The ending is a downer but has an element of hope, looking fifty years into the future when gay liberation really began to move forward.