23 (1998) – 3/5

Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not after you.

Or so it says. The 1998 movie „23“ centers on paranoia, hacking and government involvement. Even if the references related to the number are interesting, I’m not too fond of the title. They could have come up with something better here. What I am very much fond of though, is August Diehl’s performance. He plays young German hacker Karl Koch whose death is as mysterious as his life to this day, a man who starts out as a true revolutionary, but finally becomes just a pawn in the hands of the mighty and powerful. And I was not the only one who was amazed by Diehl’s portrayal. He had not acted in movies before, was in his early 20s, not even 23, when this film was made and won right away Best Lead Actor at the German Film Awards that year. This film was the cinematic birth of one of the finest German actors of the last 15 years. Because of his looks, many compare him to the young Christopher Walken and to this day that Diehl slowly approaches 40, you’ll have a hard time to find another actor in the German-speaking parts of the world who’s that gifted in portraying the abysses of the human soul (you could maybe make a case for Daniel Brühl in „Das weiße Rauschen“). He’s starred in many German films since his breakthrough and also, here and there, in Hollywood. His turn in Tarantino’s „Inglourious Basterds“ was a real highlight and he showed tremendous screen presence that makes you regret he was in it only for so little time.

But Diehl is not the only impressive component: „23“ was Hans-Christian Schmid’s second film for the big screen and he was only in his early 30s at this point as well. Just like Diehl, Schmid made it to the top of his branch in the last 15 years. At least in Germany. The two reunited for Schmid’s film „Distant Lights“ a couple years later, but Diehl only had a supporting part there and I truly hope we’ll soon get another Schmid/Diehl movie starring Diehl as a meaty lead character. Another actor I love is Burghart Klaußner, but his part here was just too small and insignificant to really make a difference. It’s all about Diehl. Story-wise the film is fine, especially in those moments where the fine line between paranoia and actually being followed blurs. Another highlight are the many references to political events this movie includes (like the Palme murder).

It’s a decent film. I wouldn’t say it’s one of my favorite German movies or best films I’ve seen from 1998, but for those interested in the (by now not so) new wave of German Cinema, it’s truly worth a watch. Let me close this review by saying another thing I liked was the famous „Ton Steine Scherben“/Rio Reiser song used for the ending credits. It fit the tone of the film nicely and is just such a classic. Sometimes German films struggle with their choices of music, but this was a perfect pick.

Those three paragraphs were my review for this film from 23rd November 2013 and yesterday, 23rd November 2023, I rewatched this film on the big screen on the occasion of an event linked to the number 23 that brought many people working on this film together again: Schmid, his co-writer Gutmann, producer(s) and several actors such as Diehl, Busch, Landuris, Joswig, Klaußner and Tschörtner were there for the occasion. Really nice idea, something that should be done for more films and I think all the people on stage enjoyed it as well to see each other again and talk about the movie in front of a sold-out theater. Not a small one, so this shows you how much people appreciate some of the classics and it was not the film „Lola rennt“ that was maybe the only reason why „23“ did not win the big prize at the German Film Awards back then. Anyway, I will share some thoughts that I had while watching yesterday and first I must apologize for not mentioning Fabian Busch in my original review. He played his part well and turned a bit of a nothing character into something memorable. There is surely more to him than initially catches the eye, but pay attention to Karl’s comment on one occasion how Busch’s character is more talented than all of them together. As for Diehl who played Koch, I still liked his performance, even if I was not as enthusiastic about him last night as I was back in 2013. But Diehl’s recognition value is undeniable. In any movie he’s in. Glad to see he is having a strong career still and has worked with some great directors, even if I somehow hoped for him to maybe have an even bigger impact. But playing the lead in a Malick film is surely nothing too shabby. A bit surreal that now more time lies between the year 2023 and his Tarantino film than between „23“ and said Tarantino film. Diehl is twice as old now as he was when he starred in „23“, so he has been acting in films for more than half his life now. Back then, he was still a film student.

What can also be added about this movie here is that a lot of it is fictitious. Several characters are, but at the same time a great deal about Koch is close to what happened back then during his lifetime, even if he never burned any money. The fate of his parents is authentic, maybe not what he said towards his dad. Despite this, the first half of the film is a bit on the light side, mostly thanks to Landuris‘ character, even if this man also turns out pretty hostile towards the end. Pay attention to the scene in which Kremp’s character knows his own method to open a door and how it is a bit foreshadowing to his aggressions and how much a threat he may pose. We see this in one of the final scenes when the characters meet again. To this day no one knows for sure what happened to Koch the day he died. No foul play still seems most likely, but with all the time passed now since May 1989, there will probably never be any news related to this death. This also means by the way that the film came out approximately a decade after the young man’s death. He was about as young when he died as Diehl was when he portrayed him. Another depiction here that was not too far away from reality was Koch’s worrying drug addiction sadly. This way the film almost felt like an anti-drug statement. Or anti-cocaine statement I should say maybe as it wasn’t against marijuana or so and the people in it were smoking the latter as well. The ending came very abrupt. I mean Koch was now away from those who posed a threat to him, but if you did not know about the case, you probably would not have thought the character died all of a sudden in the end, so the ending was as mysterious as the real case at hand.

One thing I quite liked about the film was all the music: This does not only include the Ton Steine Scherben song I mentioned in the original review, actually a cover version by Freundeskreis, but both interpretations are good, but also for example the song from the train scene. Or a song about money that I had to look up afterwards. The Deep Purple number at the beginning is considered crucial by some, but did not leave a lasting impression on me, maybe because I don’t have much of a connection with the band. I guess some will also remember the Iggy Pop classic included here. Another thing we must of course elaborate on is the concept of conspiracy theories that plays a vital role in this film. I actually liked that not all of what we see in here is just in Koch’s head apparently, like we understand in the party scene that the landlord intervenes if something goes against his liking, so it makes no sense how he just doesn’t care when Koch stops paying his rent. I thought so when Koch mentioned it and the confrontation scene in the street when the landlord only wants to get away from him was also very telling. Could very well be true that the government was spying on Koch, we even see the bug getting removed towards the end, so for once he was right. Maybe on other occasions too? It was maybe those moments when Diehl managed to shine the most. Another one was the meltdown scene with Landuris‘ character having the number 23 on his buttocks and it was so clear to us all in the audience that he was pranking or mocking the young man, but to Koch it was not. He was certainly a bit on the naïve side, but at the same time he just hoped to find somebody who would remotely understand him. His girlfriend (if we can call her that) didn’t, actually her reaction to borrowing the book was a bit funny how she lacked enthusiasm entirely, and same is also true for Busch’s character who was a loyal friend to Koch, but just not as deep in all that as Koch himself.

Finally, a fairly interesting inclusion here is the late Robert Anton Wilson who played himself as the man who through his writing planted many thoughts in Koch’s head. This means that Wilson was not too opposed to the movie and did not see it as negative criticism, but maybe saw it in a way where it could perhaps even make him more known, at least in Germany. And not in a bad way. I would agree. Koch is never really depicted as evil and some other characters clearly are. He is mostly suffering. Look at the car glass scene The mention of replacing 7 days of 24 hours each by 6 days of 28 hours each was also interesting. Makes you think how the day/night schedule is determined by society. Or rather those running it. You cannot have a normal (what is normal?) job for example if your week has six days and those days are longer than 24 hours. Just like that you will find many interesting references. Look at Busch’s character how he sits and what he holds in his hand and how he holds it when another character tells him and Koch to be quiet. There is way more than that, so from this perspective it is a good film for a rewatch. From the quality perspective, it maybe isn’t. I was a bit hesitant here this time to keep up my original positive recommendation from a decade ago, but I will do so, even if it was a close call. I do think though that after two or three watches the chance here is very slim that I want to give it another go. Still nice that this 95-minute film is not forgotten.