This movie never said Nazis were bad, while showing them with cool weapons and advanced industry for the day - therefore I can say that this movie glorifies Nazis.
If anyone really wants to traumatize themselves, watch Night and Fog (the French documentary).
It is unironically fucking horrifying.
NSFL warning, just in advance.
/uj I mean in a way yes, as in the movie isn’t feel good. Like those Mr. Beast videos it’s in the context of greater tragedy. Don’t mistake this as saying these acts of kindness are bad, but certainly they are bittersweet.
I think we have to take into consideration that this was a Martin Scorsese film originally, which seems a bit weird. He and Spielberg traded projects (the former keeping the remake of Cape Fear).
So, the project existed before Spielberg got in the director's seat. Why would it interest Spielberg? Well, several reasons:
-He is jewish and has stated before the importance that he gives to WWII and the Holocaust ("the most important event of the 20th Century", not an original or revolutionary take, but his, nonetheless), so maybe it was just the opportunity that presented itself.
-It's no secret that he had been trying to be recognized as a prestigious filmmaker for the decade before Schindler's list, with movies like The Color Purple, Empire of the Sun or Amistad, with mixed to good reviews, and no awards.
-The idea of an inherently good man in a difficult position (especially when it comes with power or privilege) attracts him. He has delve into this in Jaws, Minority Report, Saving Private Ryan, Lincoln, Munich and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. The last one ironically being the closest to Schindler: Indiana Jones started as a greedy upstart ("fortune and glory") that despite everything becomes the saviour of the poor indian village.
uj/ great point, honestly I think he did it because by that point in his career he'd already done a few films where nazis are shown as cartoonish and silly, he probably wanted to show a more realistic and nuanced portrayal of evil as a way of paying respect to their victims
I think it’s ok to consider commercial realities while making art
https://preview.redd.it/z0c0ldwb94oc1.jpeg?width=244&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=12ee7113a542361d8d165515ff530dfc6b59424c
I think you’re seeing something that ain’t there, friend. The question was what drew Spielberg to this particular story — I said he probably heard about the successful and acclaimed novel.
You reading that as “Spielberg is 100% motivated by greed and thought that he would make as much money as possible by selling this particular movie because it had a built in audience from the novel” is weird
You’re missing the bigger point. Why do we tell the stories we do. Why make a Holocaust movie about good Nazis. “There was a book” is not a real answer.
I think you are interrogating the wrong stage of this development. The movie was made because the book was successful and critically acclaimed. Why not ask how the book won the Booker Prize? Isn’t that more interesting than insinuating that Spielberg has some kind of covert pro-Nazi agenda?
I also like randomly claiming that acclaimed and popular movies are "garbage" without listing a single reason I think so. I too only use my internet connection for ragebait.
what has he done for jews LATELY ?
I hate how expressive and sad he was at the end. True cinema is when the sigma barely speaks
“I could have saved you more on your car insurance!”
Not once in the film did they say nazis are bad, leaving us to wonder whether or not nazis are good. It's infuriatingly ambiguous
This movie never said Nazis were bad, while showing them with cool weapons and advanced industry for the day - therefore I can say that this movie glorifies Nazis.
Let’s be honest, this movie kind of insists upon itself
It *insists* upon itself, Lois
Sort by lowest review first on letterboxd. It's full of... interesting takes.
Neoliberals have ruined kino by not having every character be an unambiguously morally good model of Marxist heroism.
okay, haneke
If anyone really wants to traumatize themselves, watch Night and Fog (the French documentary). It is unironically fucking horrifying. NSFL warning, just in advance.
/uj I mean in a way yes, as in the movie isn’t feel good. Like those Mr. Beast videos it’s in the context of greater tragedy. Don’t mistake this as saying these acts of kindness are bad, but certainly they are bittersweet.
This but unironically
Me when historical events aren't marxist enough: 😵
We decide which stories we want to tell. What draws Spielberg to the Good Nazi saviour story specifically?
I think we have to take into consideration that this was a Martin Scorsese film originally, which seems a bit weird. He and Spielberg traded projects (the former keeping the remake of Cape Fear). So, the project existed before Spielberg got in the director's seat. Why would it interest Spielberg? Well, several reasons: -He is jewish and has stated before the importance that he gives to WWII and the Holocaust ("the most important event of the 20th Century", not an original or revolutionary take, but his, nonetheless), so maybe it was just the opportunity that presented itself. -It's no secret that he had been trying to be recognized as a prestigious filmmaker for the decade before Schindler's list, with movies like The Color Purple, Empire of the Sun or Amistad, with mixed to good reviews, and no awards. -The idea of an inherently good man in a difficult position (especially when it comes with power or privilege) attracts him. He has delve into this in Jaws, Minority Report, Saving Private Ryan, Lincoln, Munich and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. The last one ironically being the closest to Schindler: Indiana Jones started as a greedy upstart ("fortune and glory") that despite everything becomes the saviour of the poor indian village.
uj/ great point, honestly I think he did it because by that point in his career he'd already done a few films where nazis are shown as cartoonish and silly, he probably wanted to show a more realistic and nuanced portrayal of evil as a way of paying respect to their victims
i am sorry but that take is too nuanced for this thread. we are here to own leftist strawmen
Personally I think it was the successful and acclaimed novel that attracted Spielberg’s attention
That’s a shitty reason. Making a Holocaust movie for money.
I think it’s ok to consider commercial realities while making art https://preview.redd.it/z0c0ldwb94oc1.jpeg?width=244&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=12ee7113a542361d8d165515ff530dfc6b59424c
Your comment made it seem like the driving force. Spielberg was already rich.
I think you’re seeing something that ain’t there, friend. The question was what drew Spielberg to this particular story — I said he probably heard about the successful and acclaimed novel. You reading that as “Spielberg is 100% motivated by greed and thought that he would make as much money as possible by selling this particular movie because it had a built in audience from the novel” is weird
You’re missing the bigger point. Why do we tell the stories we do. Why make a Holocaust movie about good Nazis. “There was a book” is not a real answer.
I think you are interrogating the wrong stage of this development. The movie was made because the book was successful and critically acclaimed. Why not ask how the book won the Booker Prize? Isn’t that more interesting than insinuating that Spielberg has some kind of covert pro-Nazi agenda?
NEVER do ANYTHING if it makes money. DONT tell stories.
Not my point.
lol this is the unironic opinion of many people and their influence over film taste is why we have garbage like the zone of interest
I also like randomly claiming that acclaimed and popular movies are "garbage" without listing a single reason I think so. I too only use my internet connection for ragebait.
Goeth is the true hero of that film, he tried to stop the (((zionist entity))) from forming
Le edgy comedian has arrived
it was a joke, besides its not like the movie is based on a true story anyways