just like they had done when Adolf Hitler had seized power

[EngLearner]

Source: "The Third Reich In Colour", a documentary (timestamp: 00m00s).

The narrator is commenting on what's going on in the video:

Berlin, mid-August 1933, SA formations march camera perfect through the Brandenburg gate just like they had done the previous January in the night when Adolf Hitler seized power.

If I rewrite the above text like this:

Berlin, mid-August 1933, SA formations march camera perfect through the Brandenburg gate just like they had done when Adolf Hitler had seized power.

Does it sound right with the two past perfects "had done" and "had seized"?

 

[SoothingDave]

Yes.

 

[EngLearner]

How about the original version from the video:

Berlin, mid-August 1933, SA formations march camera-perfect through the Brandenburg gate just like they had done the previous January in the night when Adolf Hitler had seized power.

I understand that the bolded "had" isn't needed because there are the words "the previous January in the night" which make the sequence of events clear, but I still wonder if the sentence sounds correct with it included.

 

[jutfrank]

Yes, it does.

 

[EngLearner]

Berlin, mid-August 1933, SA formations march camera perfect through the Brandenburg gate just like they had done when Adolf Hitler had seized power.

In the version I wrote, there are no words like "the previous January in the night." Is the past perfect "had seized" mandatory, or can the simple past "seized" be used while still making it clear that the seizing and the doing both happened earlier, with the doing resulting from the seizing?

 

[jutfrank]

No. Yes.

We know that the doing resulted from the seizing not by aspect but by common sense (you don't march through the streets before you seize power) and by the logic of the conjunction 'when'. The perfect aspect merely shows that the doing and seizing come before the marching.

 

[5jj]

you don't march through the streets before you seize power

I think this often happens.

 

[EngLearner]

Berlin, mid-August 1933, SA formations march camera perfect through the Brandenburg gate just like they had done when Adolf Hitler had seized power.

In the version I wrote, there are no words like "the previous January in the night." Is the past perfect "had seized" mandatory, or can the simple past "seized" be used while still making it clear that the seizing and the doing both happened earlier, with the doing resulting from the seizing?

No. Yes.

Do you mean that it's a stylistic choice whether to use "had seized" or "seized" for the second bolded verb, and that either can be used?

 

[jutfrank]

No, I don't think it's a stylistic choice. Yes, the past simple suffices.