Grey Wolf: Hitler's Escape to Argentina

This is a vile little pseudo-documentary. The kind of movie that makes a mockery of 'serious history'. Anyone with a general understanding of the fall of the Third Reich would notice issues with this as soon as it begins. In terms of the voice overs and the acting, the 1.5m that the courts seem to have trouble clawing back for the defunct investment fund have been woefully spent. Don't waste your time. Watch DOWNFALL or read Hugh Trevor Roper on the subject.

This is effectively a "daytime TV movie" based on pure speculation and not a shred of remotely convincing factual evidence, despite the blurb on the cover stating "based on interviews with eyewitness and years of dedicated research".

If the evidence for this scenario was so compelling, why didn't they make a documentary?

"Iron Sky" (Nazis on the moon)is only slightly less fanciful.

I'm disappointed Dan Snow has allowed his name to be printed on the front cover of this guff.

Avoid this at all costs.

After DNA test of a skull in Russia proved to be that of a woman and not Hitler, I have had doubts that he died in Berlin. This could be fiction but quite a lot of high profile Nazi's escaped to south-america and a tunnel from Hitlers bunker was discovered that connected to railway so it was possible that he could get out. This movie continues with those rumors and is based on a book where its author tracked down real eye witnesses. These people if real and telling the truth have proven he did survive and claims C.I.A were also tracking him and maybe knew where he was.

I hated this film. Why? Well, let's dive into it, shall we??

First, 95% of this film consists of reenactment by people who down't look like the real people at all. It all looks and feels like a bad C-grade movie with voice overs telling presumed testimonies or (even more vague) "stories" by people who are very sure they saw Hitler in Argentina after WWII.

So, Hitler is there and Eva Braun (sorry, Eva Hitler) is there too. While Hitler plans to build up a Fourth Reich, Eva records everything like she did on the Obersalzberg (remember those color images?).

The whole time I wonder: "Yeah, okay, but why should I believe all that? Where is the evidence? Where is a source, even a face of one of those witnesses?" And then, at one point, one of those witnesses, a maiden who says she served food to Hitler, tells us "Hitler ate sausage and ham like all the other people".

Really? He did? That's strange, isn't it. Because Hitler was a proclaimed VEGETARIAN. So, maybe they just got this wrong? Maybe she didn't remember correctly? (The filmmakers did neither, since they show us how Hitler eats a chicken or something.)

The further this "documentary" (if you want to call it that) goes, the more fictitious stories pile up. Nothing is backed up by some evidence, nothing feels any more real as the wet fever dream of some Neonazi who really does not want to believe, "the Führer" committed suicide.

Is it that what this film is all about? To cash in on the fascination on Adolf Hitler? give Hitler fans some hope, their idol might have survived? show some new images from a happy, yet determined Führer accompanied by Eva Braun (sorry, Eva Hitler), their dog and their daughter (because of course they have one)?

I can't tell you, only the filmmakers could.

All I can tell you is, I felt irritated, offended, disgusted - and probably most problematic of all - highly bored by this nonsense. Do not watch.

This is for sure a very interesting, documentary, styled reenactment. For any one who enjoyed the rather excellent 'Hunting Hitler' series TV series (me included) will obviously find this of great interest. I wonder though about a lot of the information they deem as fact and the dramatization is padded out, on what we are told as "factual testimony". We do know for sure that 30,000 high ranking Nazis escaped to South America and most lived out very peaceful lives, as well as the ones who ran very successful companies in a Post War Germany.