My first viewing of Heimat 1 and 2 left me convinced that Reitz had created a masterwork of cinema. Heimet 3, while engrossing, was of a lesser standard, and there was much in it that I found either misleading or unintentionally laughable. For example I couldn't believe that the East Germans who Hermann and Clarissa brought in to rebuild their ancient house would have done such a fantastic job -- my expectations were all in the other direction. And I found the thematic use of the Berlin Wall and the Millennium boring and predictable, like all those excruciating Thanksgiving dinners in a certain type of American movie. (I suppose the same was true of the historical benchmarks in Heimats 1 and 2 -- street riots, assassination of Kennedy, etc. -- but the personal and individual stories were so powerful and convincing that these historical background notes were perfectly accommodated within the whole). Anyway, the series kept me watching to the end. With Heimat Fragments I was seriously tempted to switch off, particularly during the new footage, which mostly showed Lulu wandering through Shabbach and environs wielding a power drill like a shotgun, or staring at her own image through forest pools or holes drilled into marble columns. In essence the film was an excuse to tack together a lot of random footage -- mostly from Heimat 2 -- that had not been seen before. If the film was meant to be about how Lulu was shaped by her family's past, then it was an abject failure-- there was no point at which she became a character in her own right. Of course the Heimat out-takes were fascinating, and often brilliant, but they didn't need a spurious 'arty' framework to make them watchable. I don't really know why Reitz did this; I wish in a way that he hadn't.