When the war breaks out, Annika lives with her parents in Värmland, close to the border to Norway. Her cousin Harald is a dealer in the black market but has to escape from the police to Norway. Annika moves to Stockholm and gets a job as a waitress. She meets the happy-go-lucky Berit and together they have a wonderful time. She also meets a young man, Bengt, whom she marries. But almost immediately she discovers that her husband is different from the man who was courting her. Plot by Mattias Thuresson.

In Between two wars, Harun Farocki attempts to interlock the logic of war with the logic of production as determining dynamics of the years 1918-1933, the period between the two "world wars". By way of didactical acting, voice-over reflections and by applying a associating and analytical montage the film develops its thesis, that in the early 1920's the "necessities" of capitalistic production have become more and more ignorant of the actual needs of the people. Rationalization and the forming of trusts finally lead to a point where the capitalist production machine directly transformed into a warfare and destruction machine. 　　Farocki's film is relevant for the discussion of "The Lost Moment", both in terms of its narrative and in formal and aesthetic terms. Farocki tries to reconstruct the enabling conditions of a historical period, which was to manifest itself as an ultimate catastrophe and which was often not understood or straightforwardly mystified. While the political and economical decision makers are trying to perfect their use of the capitalist machinery, the workers are confronted with the question how come they always and at any rate serve this machine as canon fodder. 　　The narrator Farocki explains in the film that he had intended to tell the story at the original historic sites, but that these were mostly destroyed and had vanished. The war, which was produced there, had swept them away. Instead the artist Farocki, who in one scene we see at his money job as a picture editor for a print publication, abstracts from the call for "authenticity" and thus clears the table for an argumentative editing of the images. One could say that the film re-interprets the distance to the lost historical moment and turns it into a freedom of thought. Instead of searching the archives, Farocki searches the historical consciousness. This way, the film – even in its primness - also bears testimony of its time and the way in which certain films were made in Germany then. 　　In Between two wars, Harun Farocki attempts to interlock the logic of war with the logic of production as determining dynamics of the years 1918-1933, the period between the two "world wars". By way of didactical acting, voice-over reflections and by applying a associating and analytical montage the film develops its thesis, that in the early 1920's the "necessities" of capitalistic production have become more and more ignorant of the actual needs of the people. Rationalization and the forming of trusts finally lead to a point where the capitalist production machine directly transformed into a warfare and destruction machine. 　　Farocki's film is relevant for the discussion of "The Lost Moment", both in terms of its narrative and in formal and aesthetic terms. Farocki tries to reconstruct the enabling conditions of a historical period, which was to manifest itself as an ultimate catastrophe and which was often not understood or straightforwardly mystified. While the political and economical decision makers are trying to perfect their use of the capitalist machinery, the workers are confronted with the question how come they always and at any rate serve this machine as canon fodder. 　　The narrator Farocki explains in the film that he had intended to tell the story at the original historic sites, but that these were mostly destroyed and had vanished. The war, which was produced there, had swept them away. Instead the artist Farocki, who in one scene we see at his money job as a picture editor for a print publication, abstracts from the call for "authenticity" and thus clears the table for an argumentative editing of the images. One could say that the film re-interprets the distance to the lost historical moment and turns it into a freedom of thought. Instead of searching the archives, Farocki searches the historical consciousness. This way, the film – even in its primness - also bears testimony of its time and the way in which certain films were made in Germany then. 　　The meeting point for the film screenings is always at 9 pm in the exhibition space on the 2nd floor of GfKFB, Kunstfabrik, Am Flutgraben 3. The film screening will then probably take place in a former sales and presentation building in the immediate vicinity. The incomplete emptiness of this room conveys an impression of the parasite use which a globalized economy makes of space and how the appearance of urban space becomes subject to the strategic decisions of a company. 　　Florian Wüst, as a film curator, is interested in political filmmaking in Germany and specifically in the ways in which films deal with the peculiar identity of a "Post-War" society. I see interesting parallels to Farocki's work in the 70's (of which Between two wars is a good example) in Florian Wüst's own artistic production – also in "Belated Advocacy", which deals with the ideology of production in post-war "Wirtschaftswunder" Germany. Especially the use of historical documents, the interest for the linguistic forms of quotation and statement, the use of abstraction and re-enactment and also the self-confident positioning in the distance to the historic moment suggest interesting connections between both oeuvres. 　　Florian Wüst, as a film curator, is interested in political filmmaking in Germany and specifically in the ways in which films deal with the peculiar identity of a "Post-War" society. I see interesting parallels to Farocki's work in the 70's (of which Between two wars is a good example) in Florian Wüst's own artistic production – also in "Belated Advocacy", which deals with the ideology of production in post-war "Wirtschaftswunder" Germany. Especially the use of historical documents, the interest for the linguistic forms of quotation and statement, the use of abstraction and re-enactment and also the self-confident positioning in the distance to the historic moment suggest interesting connections between both oeuvres.

In Between two wars, Harun Farocki attempts to interlock the logic of war with the logic of production as determining dynamics of the years 1918-1933, the period between the two "world wars". By way of didactical acting, voice-over reflections and by applying a associating and analytical montage the film develops its thesis, that in the early 1920's the "necessities" of capitalistic production have become more and more ignorant of the actual needs of the people. Rationalization and the forming of trusts finally lead to a point where the capitalist production machine directly transformed into a warfare and destruction machine. 　　Farocki's film is relevant for the discussion of "The Lost Moment", both in terms of its narrative and in formal and aesthetic terms. Farocki tries to reconstruct the enabling conditions of a historical period, which was to manifest itself as an ultimate catastrophe and which was often not understood or straightforwardly mystified. While the political and economical decision makers are trying to perfect their use of the capitalist machinery, the workers are confronted with the question how come they always and at any rate serve this machine as canon fodder. 　　The narrator Farocki explains in the film that he had intended to tell the story at the original historic sites, but that these were mostly destroyed and had vanished. The war, which was produced there, had swept them away. Instead the artist Farocki, who in one scene we see at his money job as a picture editor for a print publication, abstracts from the call for "authenticity" and thus clears the table for an argumentative editing of the images. One could say that the film re-interprets the distance to the lost historical moment and turns it into a freedom of thought. Instead of searching the archives, Farocki searches the historical consciousness. This way, the film – even in its primness - also bears testimony of its time and the way in which certain films were made in Germany then. 　　In Between two wars, Harun Farocki attempts to interlock the logic of war with the logic of production as determining dynamics of the years 1918-1933, the period between the two "world wars". By way of didactical acting, voice-over reflections and by applying a associating and analytical montage the film develops its thesis, that in the early 1920's the "necessities" of capitalistic production have become more and more ignorant of the actual needs of the people. Rationalization and the forming of trusts finally lead to a point where the capitalist production machine directly transformed into a warfare and destruction machine. 　　Farocki's film is relevant for the discussion of "The Lost Moment", both in terms of its narrative and in formal and aesthetic terms. Farocki tries to reconstruct the enabling conditions of a historical period, which was to manifest itself as an ultimate catastrophe and which was often not understood or straightforwardly mystified. While the political and economical decision makers are trying to perfect their use of the capitalist machinery, the workers are confronted with the question how come they always and at any rate serve this machine as canon fodder. 　　The narrator Farocki explains in the film that he had intended to tell the story at the original historic sites, but that these were mostly destroyed and had vanished. The war, which was produced there, had swept them away. Instead the artist Farocki, who in one scene we see at his money job as a picture editor for a print publication, abstracts from the call for "authenticity" and thus clears the table for an argumentative editing of the images. One could say that the film re-interprets the distance to the lost historical moment and turns it into a freedom of thought. Instead of searching the archives, Farocki searches the historical consciousness. This way, the film – even in its primness - also bears testimony of its time and the way in which certain films were made in Germany then. 　　The meeting point for the film screenings is always at 9 pm in the exhibition space on the 2nd floor of GfKFB, Kunstfabrik, Am Flutgraben 3. The film screening will then probably take place in a former sales and presentation building in the immediate vicinity. The incomplete emptiness of this room conveys an impression of the parasite use which a globalized economy makes of space and how the appearance of urban space becomes subject to the strategic decisions of a company. 　　Florian Wüst, as a film curator, is interested in political filmmaking in Germany and specifically in the ways in which films deal with the peculiar identity of a "Post-War" society. I see interesting parallels to Farocki's work in the 70's (of which Between two wars is a good example) in Florian Wüst's own artistic production – also in "Belated Advocacy", which deals with the ideology of production in post-war "Wirtschaftswunder" Germany. Especially the use of historical documents, the interest for the linguistic forms of quotation and statement, the use of abstraction and re-enactment and also the self-confident positioning in the distance to the historic moment suggest interesting connections between both oeuvres. 　　Florian Wüst, as a film curator, is interested in political filmmaking in Germany and specifically in the ways in which films deal with the peculiar identity of a "Post-War" society. I see interesting parallels to Farocki's work in the 70's (of which Between two wars is a good example) in Florian Wüst's own artistic production – also in "Belated Advocacy", which deals with the ideology of production in post-war "Wirtschaftswunder" Germany. Especially the use of historical documents, the interest for the linguistic forms of quotation and statement, the use of abstraction and re-enactment and also the self-confident positioning in the distance to the historic moment suggest interesting connections between both oeuvres.

Maria Schell (Sophie) and Paul Scofield (Alexander) turn in magnificent performances as former patients of Freud who meet for the first time in Vienna in 1970. Sophie convinces a wary Alexander to meet after she sees him interviewed on TV about his experience with Freud. In their one-day encounter, in a reluctant Alexander's cluttered apartment, the two sit down to talk. 　　Sophie is now a divorced New Yorker of nearly 70, Alexander is a lonely widower; both still harbor resentment of Freud's treatment of their youthful "problems." Their personal narratives, shown in flashback, are poignant; Freud is an unseen but vivid presence in the therapy scences.

Maria Schell (Sophie) and Paul Scofield (Alexander) turn in magnificent performances as former patients of Freud who meet for the first time in Vienna in 1970. Sophie convinces a wary Alexander to meet after she sees him interviewed on TV about his experience with Freud. In their one-day encounter, in a reluctant Alexander's cluttered apartment, the two sit down to talk. 　　Sophie is now a divorced New Yorker of nearly 70, Alexander is a lonely widower; both still harbor resentment of Freud's treatment of their youthful "problems." Their personal narratives, shown in flashback, are poignant; Freud is an unseen but vivid presence in the therapy scences.

抗日战争期间，白雪岭支队在崇山峻岭之间频频出击，给日寇以重大杀伤。日寇为了从内部瓦解白雪岭支队，特意派遣了一支以著名女间谍中田秀美为队长的日本特工队。他们通过打入我军内部、收买叛徒等手段频频出手，给白雪岭支队造成了巨大损失。 　　后来，党中央从延安红色特工训练班派驻白雪岭支队的全能型反间谍的女特工，代号“夜来香”。“夜来香”机智过人，干出了许多令鬼子惊魂丧胆的壮举。最后，“夜来香”和中田秀美终于在一次重大的侦察与反侦察的间谍战中狭路相逢，“夜来香”发现中田秀美竟然是自己的双胞胎妹妹。此时，中田秀美已服毒自尽，死在了“夜来香”面前，两个亲姐妹在无形的战线上你死我活地拚杀数载，相认时却是永别。

该剧讲述了抗日战争期间，日军决定实施代号“1855”的行动，企图将细菌武器应用到战场。以许马和赵依娜为代表的我党情报人员针对敌人的种种伎俩，启动代号为“夜来香”的行动，最终将敌人的阴谋彻底粉碎。

这是斯大林的御用导演Mikheil Chiaureli在1950年获斯大林奖金(《攻克柏林》www.douban.com/subject/1790593/)之后，继续为领袖服务的成果。依然由Mikheil Gelovani饰演斯大林，I. Molchanov饰演列宁。在这部影片中，列宁在关键时刻举棋不定，是依靠了斯大林同志，才取得了最后的胜利。和《攻克柏林》一样，其中的情节大多属于“艺术虚构”。值得一提的是，这两部影片都是由苏联作曲家肖斯塔科维奇谱曲的。 　　 　　“年青的苏维埃政权，在1919年粉碎了白匪叛乱，保卫了彼得格勒的历史事件，当时英美法等帝国主义支持白匪叛乱，但苏联人民在列宁斯大林的领导下，镇压了反革命活动，沉重地打击了帝国主义武装干涉。”

这是斯大林的御用导演Mikheil Chiaureli在1950年获斯大林奖金(《攻克柏林》www.douban.com/subject/1790593/)之后，继续为领袖服务的成果。依然由Mikheil Gelovani饰演斯大林，I. Molchanov饰演列宁。在这部影片中，列宁在关键时刻举棋不定，是依靠了斯大林同志，才取得了最后的胜利。和《攻克柏林》一样，其中的情节大多属于“艺术虚构”。值得一提的是，这两部影片都是由苏联作曲家肖斯塔科维奇谱曲的。 　　 　　“年青的苏维埃政权，在1919年粉碎了白匪叛乱，保卫了彼得格勒的历史事件，当时英美法等帝国主义支持白匪叛乱，但苏联人民在列宁斯大林的领导下，镇压了反革命活动，沉重地打击了帝国主义武装干涉。”

This documentary focuses on 1939, considered to be Hollywood's greatest year, with film clips and insight into what made the year so special.