DENIAL

UK, 2016,
Rachel Weisz, Tom Wilkinson, Timothy Spall, Andrew Scott, Jack Lowdon, Caren Pistorius, Alex Jennings, Harriet Walter, Mark Gattis, John Sessions.
Directed by Mick Jackson.

Younger audiences may not know who David Irving is, his writings, his denial of the Holocaust, the libel case against American author, Deborah Lipstadt. Perhaps Irving has now been relegated to the dustbin of history where he belongs. However, older audiences will remember his campaigns, his talks outbursts, his prejudices and his denial.

The film introduces us to Irving with a clip and his claim that there were more deaths in Edward Kennedy’s car at Chappaquicick and than during the Holocaust. We have been introduced to Deborah Lipstadt, conducting a class at a university in Atlanta, strong statements about the Holocaust, with Irving present and offering $1000 to anyone who could prove the Holocaust. Deborah Lipstadt refuses to debate with him.

The action of the film takes place from 1994 to 2000, opening with the class, Lipstadt clashing with Irving, then Penguin Books ringing her in Atlanta to tell her that Irving had instituted a libel case – and her discovering with a visit from Anthony Julius, the solicitor for Penguin Books, that English law requires the defendant to prove the case.

Over the coming years, Deborah Lipstadt visits London a number of times, is introduced to Anthony Julius’s team, young lawyers, research assistants (who have to spend years going through David Irving’s vast diaries). She also meets the barrister who will conduct the case for the defence in court, Richard Rampton.

The film has a very strong screenplay written by playwright, David Hare. It also has a very strong cast, British, although Rachel Weisz is playing a strong American woman with a Queen’s accent, vigorous in her personal stances. Tom Wilkinson gives one of his best performances as Richard Rampton. Andrew Scott plays Anthony Julius. However, the striking performance is from Timothy Spall as David Irving.

A key scene is a visit by Rampton, Deborah and the associates to meet a Polish professor at Auschwitz. It is Auschwitz in winter, bleak, the entrance, the events, the ruins of the gas chamber and the steps leading down to it. Rampton asks serious questions for the defence and Deborah is upset, thinking him insensitive and almost desecrating the memory of the survivors. After his personal interventions, she apologises to him.

The issue of the survivors is important with Deborah wanting them to take the stand and give testimony. Anthony Julius is against this as well as her testifying, reminding her that the case is against Irving and that there should be no opportunity for him to humiliate her or the survivors. A character played by Harriet Walter is a survivor requesting Deborah to let the survivors speak.

Alex Jennings plays the judge, the defence team having requested judement rather than a jury. The court proceedings are very interesting, Irving never feeling abashed but vigorously asserting himself and his theories, challenged by a history professor about his books and his defence of Hitler, the Polish professor giving testimony about the gas chambers, cyanide, the chimneys – with Irving asserting that there were no holes in the roof and the journalists reporting “no holes, no Holocaust�. In these scenes Tom Wilkinson is excellent in his handling of cross examinations.

There is an awkward moment when the judge asks Rampton whether Irving truly believed that there was no Holocaust and therefore he was in good faith in his denials. Ultimately, the judgment was against Irving, the defence team and Deborah overjoyed, the survivors satisfied – and an ironic sequence where BBC interviewer, Jeremy Paxman is himself, interviews Spall as Irving with Irving trying to twist the judgement that it was really in favour of him.

Appropriately, the final scene of the film, drawing the audience back into the key issue, is that of Auschwitz.

1. Based on a true story? The story of Deborah Lipstadt, her writings, the court case and the judgement? David Irving, his reputation, historian, Holocaust denier, the case?

2. The screenplay by David Hare, his reputation in theatre and cinema? Political themes?

3. The Atlanta settings, the University, lecture rooms, house, streets? The London setting, offices, the streets, hotels, the court? The sequences in Auschwitz, in the Fog, the entry, the perimeter, the buildings, the ruins? The musical score?

4. Audience knowledge of David Irving, Holocaust deniers? The anti-Semitic attitudes, the neo-Nazi support? Irving and his books, investigations, history? His being the victim? Libel? The court case? The beginning of the film supplying necessary background information, Irving and his TV comment about deaths in chapter critic and Auschwitz? Deborah and her lecture and the students?

5. Introduction to Irving, Timothy Spall’s presence and performance, the statement, his attending Deborah’s class, defining her, offering the thousand dollars for any historical verification of the Holocaust? Deborah’s reaction, refusing to dialogue with him?

6. The action from 1994 to 2000, the court case, the research, the investigations, the role of the lawyers, the visit to Auschwitz, the court sequences, the cost? The verdict?

7. Rachel Weisz as Deborah Lipstadt, strong American, Queen’s accent, her explanation of her mother, the Biblical background of Deborah as a warrior? Her mother saying she was born for a special situation? Her career, research, her books, attacking Irving, the encounter with him, the refusal to debate? A strong personality? The Atlanta settings in the University?

8. Penguin Books, the phone call, the news of the case? The visit of Anthony Julius, his explanation that he was a solicitor not a barrister, his reputation with Princess Diana’s divorce, his explanation of the situation, the libel case, English law and the burden of proof on the defendant?

9. Deborah going to London, determined, her hotel, jogging, meeting Anthony Julius and his staff, the range of those present, the researchers, James Libson and Laura Tyler?

10. Her meeting Richard Rampton? Caution, the strategies, her being silent, David Irving being the case, not exploiting Deborah, nor the survivors of Auschwitz?

11. The visit to Auschwitz, the sense of place, the memories of the past? Rampton and his walking around the perimeter and later use of the mileage, Deborah thinking he was late, rude, his looking at the mound of glasses, shoes? The audience looking with him? Meeting the professor and his assistant, the explanation of the steps, down into the basement, Rampton asking questions and Deborah saying he was insensitive? Her being upset?

12. The portrait Irving, as a person, the background as a boy, during the war, his interest in Hitler, idolising Hitler? Leading to the denial of the Holocaust, saving Hitler’s reputation? His books, research? His book in 1977, the changes in the 1991 edition, the influencing of investigations Leucht? The issue of cyanide in the walls…? Irving as a performer, always talking to the press, interviews, his manner? The scenes of him at home with Jessica, playing with her – the later evidence of his teaching her the racist rhyme? Range of clips of his talks, racist, his dismissing some of his speeches as jokes, his downgrading of women?

13. The style, the visit to his home, James Libson and Laura Tyler, seeing the vast room of his diaries? The three researchers to examine the diaries?

14. The role of Vera, the survivor, talking with Deborah, getting Deborah to promise that there would be a voice of the survivors? Anthony Julius telling Deborah to break the promise? Her presence in court, the emotional response? Her presence at the final press conference and some vindication?

15. Richard Rampton, as a barrister, his methods, interviews, in court, being assertive, not looking Irving in the eye? The issue of the books, of the accusation about his change of perspective? The interview with the professor of history? Rampton and his objectivity? As a fisherman, enjoying wine – and the sandwiches in his office? His response to Deborah, seeing her with Vera, his visit to her hotel room, the wine? Deborah and her apology? His explanation of what he was doing?

16. The issue of Auschwitz, the Polish professor, the explanation of the gas chambers and how they worked, the cyanide, being poured in – and the visual reconstruction? The response of the journalists? Irving saying there was no evidence of holes in the roof? The headlines, Deborah seeing them when jogging?

17. The professor, the issue of the books, Irving’s responsibility, a detailed look at texts, German? The phone call to Heydrich, the notes by Goering? Irving contradicting himself?

18. The effect on Irving, the discussions with Rampton about the gas chamber, Irving’s assertion that it was to wash the cadavers because they had brought lice to Auschwitz? The question of why there would be washing cadavers which were immediately burnt? The issue of the gas chamber being an air raid shelter for the Auschwitz staff, and its great distance from the SS headquarters?

19. The decision to appeal for a judge rather than a jury? The judge, listening, notes, is question to Rampton about Irving believing that the Holocaust did not exist, in good faith? Rampton’s response, the responsibility for Irving? The time taken for the judge’s verdict? Deborah coming to England, the report of 300 pages, the time and waiting? The reading of the verdict?

20. The end, Rampton’s achievement, Anthony Julius and his staff? Deborah’s exhilaration? Deborah, her talking to the media, praising the teamwork?

21. The irony of the reconstruction of Jeremy Paxman interviewing Irving on the BBC – and his trying to make a case that he had won the court case?

22. The final sequence, showing Auschwitz – and the reminder for the audience what this film has meant?