Kafka's Trial (1992 film). Review by Rae West.

All the Literary Value and Sincerity of Anne Frank's Edited 'Diaries'

Someone must have been spreading lies about Josef K is the onscreen lettering starting this film, in true Jew victim style.

A few notes say this is: BBC films and Europanda BV, the latter I'd guess Jew/Dutch. Anthony Hopkins gets lead credit; I'd guess because The Silence of the Lambs made a lot of money, with its anti-white (and even anti-insect) themes. Jason Robards, with a beard. Juliet Stevenson as a Fraülein. Polly Walker as Leni, perhaps a Jew whore, or a white whore—it's not clear. Alfred Molina as Titorelli, with young girls; I'd guess a nod to Jewish underage sex. Michael Kitchen, as a Jew actor. Casting by Leo Davis, presumably a Jew. US casting: John Lyons, no doubt a Jew. 'Associate producer' Carolyn Montagu; I'd guess a name-changed Jew. Three 'Executive Producers'. Screenplay by Harold Pinter—guess what, a Jew, and 'winner of the 2005 Nobel prize for literature'. The DVD notes say he was Produced in association with Ann Wingate, a Jewish name. Executive for the (((BBC))), Geoffrey Paget—sounds like a Jew.
1992 (or 1993). Nearly 2 hours in this DVD version. I looked up some standard eulogies on Hopkins: 1991 Silence of the Lambs, 1992 Dracula, 1992 Chaplin. His filmography doe not hint at Jew awareness; the films he was in before WW1, during WWa and WW2, and post-ww2 (e.g. Amistad) all have nothing on the Jew contributions to wars, lies, fraud, or any serious issue. Probably of course he's just another Jew.

I'm disappointed with Pinter's script, which might have had scene-setting and references in French Lieutenant's Woman style. I'm not surprised though. Kafka (born 1883; died allegedly 1924) is trickier to script than a few dismissive scenes about London.
Everything about him is scrubbed and problematic.
Here's Wikipedia (of course run by Jews). The 17th century [i.e. from about 1600] is considered the Golden Age of Jewish Prague. The Jewish community of Prague numbered some 15,000 people (approx. 30 per cent of the entire population), making it the largest Ashkenazi community in the world and the second largest Jewish community in Europe after Thessaloniki. There were large fires in 1541, and 1649; it's possible either or both were originated by Jews. Jews seem likely to have funded the Thirty Years' War, possible the model for the 20th century wars. Jews were allegedly expelled in 1745, but readmitted in 1748. ('Expulsion' may be a Jewish 'truth' to cover a hasty exit). The area before that included Translvania, a large area, part of the Ottoman Empire—how much was Moslem, I'm unsure. I'm also unsure how closely Jews were interconnected with Moslems, an issue which is carefully hidden. Bohemia was a part of Transylvania, adjoining Bavaria. By the time of Kafka's parents and grandparents, Hungary ruled the area, jointly as part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, with its to-headed dual-monarchy eagle symbol. It's now known—I'm talking of post-1945—that Jews had far more power than than was ever publically expressed. Probably Czechs in Prague were regarded by them as peasant scum. Hungarian Jews often appeared later in the USA, for example in connection with nuclear frauds.
Note that the DVD hints at this chaotic diversity, at least in the English language version, with assorted accents, even American.

Kafka is always referred to as German-Jewish. The Trial is in German. The name Franz suggests French cultural aspiration—many Jews changed their names to suggest German, French, Russian, or English origins. The family surname presumably was an official registration, though it sounds to me a truncated form of the given name. Kafka's book is supposed to have been written between 1914 and 1915, not as a book, but a collection of bits and pieces; insofar as it had a title, it appears to have been der Prozess, which fits the received impression better than The Trial. It was 'published posthumously in 1925'. The first English translation, in 1937, was produced by a couple of roving translators, similarly to translators, generally I think Jews, who translated 'Communist' material (read:Jewish) from Russian. Spanish and Italian and Czech and others were translated and published, e.g. by Penguin Books, and were a huge part of the propaganda for Jews before and after the Second World War. The British education system avoided living languages, very likely to assist Jews.

It will be seen that Kafka wrote this at the start of the 'Great War'. Jews played a large part in generating war, through American financial control, and methods such as violence and blackmail. Kafka must have been aware of some of this. The period after the war was characterised by German exasperation at the Armistice. And by Jewish violence, probably identified by 'Rabbis' with the so-called 'French Revolution'. Jews in the USSR started a long period interval of horror; the more European a country, the less influence Jews had in imposing such schemes, as generally they were secretly embedded. Bela Kun in Hungary, and Kurt Eisner in Germany, both failed, or were made to fail.

Hitler and Mussolini of course both became prominent about this time. A modern view is that Hitler was 'groomed' by Jews to act the part of an anti-Jew activist, to lead Germany into ruin, analogously to Lenin in Russia. Jewish-led parties led to destruction, along with Jews in the USA and in the UK and France.
Imagine The Party or The Work Camp or <1>War by Kafka! Staccato chapters, barked orders, large-scale deaths, incomprehensible procedures, secret alliances, rapes and torture, absurd superstitious ceremonies. All the most interesting parts of Judaism are not there. A standard Jewish practice, of course. The scheming against the 'goyim', maybe instinctive, continual and unswerving. The contents of the Talmud. The power of 'Rabbis'. The descriptions of secret planning, the probings through historical events as viewed uncontestedly by Rabbis, the partitioned schemes, the violence assisted by ordinary Jews, the hired assassins, the arrangements for hasty flights, the elaborate lies, the secret discussions with temporary allies...

I'd suggest the patchwork book has been misunderstood, as a serious "award-winning" product, deserving the attention of literary persons, superior to mere goyim feebleness. I'd substitute appreciation as money-making Jewish propaganda. Very like Anne Frank's faked diaries.

Kyle Maclachlan acted the main character, possibly Kafka himself. He played a bank clerk, or chief cashier. I couldn't determine if the character was meant to be a white Christian, or a Jew, though the latter is likely. It struck me his face had expressionless eyes, and a weak chin from one angle, strong from another. My best guess is a Jew with many goyim to take orders. Trying to decode all this, I wondered about differences of opinion between officials probably being a jewish thing—various 'rabbis' disagreeing with each other, no doubt on lines of self-interest.

A synagogue scene—rather ridiculous bearded men, women upstairs perhaps, intangible verbal tricks to conceal evils. In view of the close-packed populations, I'd guess distinctions are important: underling goyim being ignored, street urchins as they were called, underlings waiting to be paid, 'shiksas' being assumed to be whores, though this aspect is not prominent. Just once (I think) a woman is called a 'dirty little whore'—she has a physical defect, a prosthetic bit of pink plastic looking like a webbed finger. No doubt the Talmud has pre-scientific crap on genetics.

It seems that St Vitus Cathedral (and dedicated to Wenceslaus the 'good king' and Adalbert) was only completed 1929, after Kafka's death, so he could never have seen it completed. The Cathedral scene with Anthony Hopkins playing a prison chaplain may have been too new. I couldn't interpret the Cathedral scene and Kafka's guidebook; was it a hostile enemy to Jews? Was it understood to be in symbiosis, keeping the goyim down, feeding them booze and keeping whores as a Jewish monopoly? Part of international activity? Part of a triangle with Moslems?

I was struck by the rather trite activities of the goys—'stairman', court usher, washer woman, verger, doorkeeper. In eerie echoes, they seemed to live again as a script supervisor, clapper loader, whatever.

Much of the action shows bafflement across status and class and legal and religious differences. The court painter scene must show incomprehension at western art—I'm pretty sure it's not power-making enough for Talmudic 'scholars'. We have a mostly one-way conversation on actual acquittal, ostensible acquittal, and indefinite postponement, and generally there's puzzlement at procedures. I'm tempted to suggest that Kafka was a simpleton; maybe his notes were an attempt to make sense of things. We see enraged people, obviously intended to be unsophisticated and ugly, bellowing about wearing black clothes, or generally not sitting down.

There's a lot on legalities, which may even hint at Jewish policies of not explaining things, or, as in the USSR, having too many complications for anyone to understand. Arresting ithout charge of course was standard with the NKVD or Stasi or whatever they called themselves. The 'examining magistrate' may have been a view of a low-grade Jew thug. It may have had something to do with Inquisitions, always presented by Jews as monstrously unfair. We have indirect 'pragmatic truth' stuff: "Is it true? I'm asking you. Is it true?"
Punishments are to a large extent socially determined. There's a scene with floggers, judging by their promotion concerns anxious for money, where the reasons for floggings are more or less incomprehensible. Naturally, a common Jewish concern; watch people online, either Jews or their hirelings, demanding money for Israel with a completely straight face, or asserting that their hate is not really hate. The film ends with a ritual knife killing (with a large knife, clearly used re-sharpened for years. I'd guess this i Biblical/Torahesque, Abraham or something. It's filmed in an apparent quarry, which appears very near an urban area. The two murderers seem to be untouchable types in black Polish garb, but I don't know (or care particularly) what it's about.

One of the impressions of this film seems to be to make Prague look a dump. Barrandov film studios, Prague, must have been in control; the credits include matte painters, and I'm guessing many of the scenes had painted fake backdrops. DVD owners will see the film has 16 chapters, each with short titles; these may (or may not) resemble the book's structure.

Rae West 18 Nov 2020