I first became aware of the “Downfall” Meme when Marc Randazza posted about it at the Legal Satyricon. If you have just emerged from a hole, these are spoofs based on a film called Downfall about Hitler, where people add in their own subtitles to the same 4 minute film snippet. Youtube has a bunch of them.
My initial reaction to the meme was that it was very wrong to use a Hitler film for such frivolity, but I got over it after watching a few. It was a spoof at Hitler’s expense, and after letting go of my initial revulsion, I came to find many of them very funny and an excellent way to take what may be the lowest point in human engagement and recreate it in a way that shows its wrongfulness through humor. Others will no doubt disagree, and I respect that as well, but I’ve come to be something of a fan.
Yet, everything has limits. And when new Legal Blog Watch author Eric Lipman, who apparently just emerged from a very deep hole yesterday, posted about a who used the Downfall meme as their firm advertisement, it pushed the limits too far, in a number of different ways.
Before getting to the video, a blue screen emerges with the lawyers taking credit as director and producer of the video. What the…? That was just a plain lie. This was an actual 2004 foreign film, produced by Constantin Film Produktion GmbH. and nominated or an Oscar for Best Foreign Film. They added subtitles, as have dozens of other people, none of whom tried to take credit for the production of the video. Opening with a patent lie is hardly the best idea for lawyers to promote themselves.
As to the spoof aspect of the video, the subtitles added for the meme, it just wasn’t funny. It might have been. Many others are. This one wasn’t. It was heavy-handed and witless. Perhaps they weren’t shooting for funny, but then, without the humor component, the use of Downfall to convey their message is no longer salvageable by dint of the meme. It’s just an offensive use of Hitler for self-promotion.
What of the inherent comparison between the government here and Hitler? It’s a comparison I reject entirely and diminishes all associated ideas. I won’t let people draw the comparison here in comments, and delete any comment that tries to do so. The use of Hitler in that respect offends me beyond compare, and I find it intolerable. I realize that others draw the comparison regularly, but there is nothing that this country does, no matter how bad it is, that reaches the depths of the Nazis. Nothing.
Finally, the question arises whether this is a good idea for lawyer advertising. I imagine that it will appeal to a select group, whether because they are inclined to enjoy a video portraying Hitler or have such a strong hatred of the government that they will agree with the comparison between the two.
No one, however, familiar with the Downfall meme will be impressed by this effort. No one with any wit or sense of humor will find this attractive. No one who seeks a good lawyer will be swayed by the judgment demonstrated by this take-off, and no one who expects their lawyers to be honest will find this acceptable.
No, this falls below the level of taste and good judgment that I would expect from criminal defense lawyers, even if they limit their practice to DUI. If you wondered what might be worse than lawyers strutting about in hot pants, now you know. The race to the bottom is on.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Brevity being the soul of wit if it had stopped after about 40 seconds with “My Fuhrer that would probably be considered unconstitutional” that would have got the whole joke in.
It definitely would have been better had it stopped there. Still, even if it had a spark of wit, this was just in really bad taste for lawyer advertising.
Too long but fun.
Fortunately, there is also “nothing that this country does, no matter how bad it is, that reaches the depths of” (or, rather, the scale of) what this country’s founders did to African-Americans and American Indians. Therefore, let us avoid comparisons not only to the Nazis but to the founders, although a comparison of the Nazis to the founders isn’t so out of line.
Couldn’t control yourself, could you? I’ll let your comment remain, but these wrongs began long before there were “founders”, making your point factually dubious, though there is no dispute that they were monumental wrongs.
I did not know this was a “meme,” but I remember the Hillary one from election time, which was absolutely hilarious.
The Hitler-finds-out-Michael-Jackson-is-dead one was pretty funny too.
A lot of them were funny. I just didn’t think this one was. And nobody (at least as far as I know) has every tried to claim production of the movie before. That’s low.
No, this one wasn’t funny, and the claim of directorship was very strange. Also, I’m pretty sure there’s a big fat legal line between the fair use exception for parody and use for commercial purpose (such as advertising a law firm). But they’re all lawyers at Cowan Kirk Gaston, so they must know what they’re doing…
This looks to me more like an in-joke for a conference or something than an actual TV ad- “Bianchi’s house” is a reference to another well known defense lawyer in the area. I doubt this was actually shown on broadcast TV.
I don’t think it was ever used (or intended) for a TV ad, but for their website.
It’s also not a fun game to play “My wrongs were bigger than your wrongs.”
I think people just need to call out people they hear using hyperbolic smilies more. Self regulation is the only way.
No matter what wrongs were done in the past by law enforcement (the government)doing things to citizens that were unconstitutional; the fact that law enforcement is doing things to us now that is unconstitutional is the worst. This is because it means that none of us are safe from government oppression “now” and to “us”!
If the government can pull over cars now without probable cause, then it can do anything that it wants to, whether the Constitution allows it or not and we have no “real” Constitutional protections.
Using Hitler in a commercial for lawyers is stupid, no matter how apt it is because lawyers should not want themselves put in any context where they are connected to him in any way.
The reason that this particular video should not be used in a commercial for lawyers is because the video is poorly done. The person who plays Hitler does a bad job. Hitler was very articulate and a good speaker.
Also, if you want to compare Hitler with any part of government or big business that comparison should be easy to identify. Have the character playing Hitler be in a Nazi uniform but at a big desk and in a big office. He should be very articulate but of course, incensed that his power is limited in any way by a Constitution.
The lawyers opposing Hitler should be very articulate and strong characters so that those watching the commercial would want to hire them to protect them from Hitler like oppression.
Then in the video, you would want defense lawyers being successful at limiting the Hitler character.