|Page 1 of 138:||          |
|Index||1371 reviews in total|
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
The Nazis in Schindler's List are portrayed as evil heartless demons
who seem to lack any kind of soul (well, Amon Goeth was pretty evil),
while Schindler and other "goodies" are portrayed as saints with hearts
of butter; It's time to wake up people! My grandfather who is now 85
served in the war verses the Germans. I've had many talks with him and
his war buddys and I can promise you that what you see in this film
(and many others that are "based on truth") is purely fictional and
shouldn't be allowed to even claim it is based on truth. And if it must
it should have to give us a percentage of truth that it is based on,
eg: based on 6% truth. Honestly, just take a look at the war on Iraq to
see a current example of how the victors completely turn the truth on
its head and sell it to the masses; who readily accept it as fact.
Schindler at the end of the film is seen giving away his watch and a few rings (last of his possessions) as to save a few more Jews. Well, truth is Schindler made off with A LOT of money in reality. He profited from the Jews slave labor just as much as they profited off his humanity. I'm not saying that Schindler wasn't a good man for saving the many Jews that he did, I'm just saying lets not go overboard with the exaggeration. And this is just one of the many liberties the director took with this story to spice it up a bit. Some of the scenes which were designed to shock the audience with brutality from the Nazis towards the Jews were so over dramatized and fake they made me want to blow chunks in my popcorn. I don't mind fantasy but for gods sake don't mix it with truth, especially when you have an audience which sadly seem to often refer to this film when they are in a debate about world war 2 or the holocaust, as if it was some kind of historical reference with any credibility.
PS: For a good film about world war 2 and the Nazis, check out "DownFall", a German film which is very, very well made.
when i say overrated, really i mean it..
i just watched this movie and i found it boring 3 hours for nothing this movie is just to make people feel sorry about the Jewish i want to say we must feel sorry about any human .. Jewish have made many holocaust in Palestine and no one said a word.
and why they screen it in black and white i don't know i think there is better movies about war and Nazis or Jews i wonder why this movie have this high rating i think Liam neeson and Ralph fiennes acting was very good specially for ralph but there is many actors in the movie they not good .
Spielberg is now the Numero Uno director of schmaltzy cinema. I thought
Saving Private Ryan was the ultimate good guys save the poor soul, but this
one outdoes Ryan in every conceivable heart-tugging,
noble humanity fashion. Don't view this film as accurate history, if
Private Ryan is any guide. Historical accuracy is not a Spielberg characteristic. It's the heartstrings he keeps tugging. I next expect a new Pollyanna by Spielberg any day now. The problem with Spielberg's characterizations is that people are either black or white, no inbetweens are allowed. But even old Adolph can be presented in a way that makes him the human being that he was, regardless. This is what makes Shakespeare such a genius in his plays - he never failed to see all sides of a personality. Spielberg's characterizations are cartoons. This could have been a really good movie, if it had acknowledged the
humanity in every person and been realistic.
This is honestly one of the most overrated films of all time. Stephen
Spielberg (one of the most overrated directors of all time, who has not
made ONE honestly good film (yes, even including "Jaws")) knew that
nobody could objectively criticize this movie, and basically exploited
the memory of the Holocaust in order to guarantee himself a
I am rating this movie as 1(awful), because of all the undeserved praise. If this film were being judged solely on it's own merits, I would probably rate it a 2 or 3 at best, for being exploitative, dishonestly emotionally manipulative, historically inaccurate, and artistically bankrupt.
Ah, Spielberg's favourite theme: every single Germans pre 1950 was utterly
evil and/or calculating and self serving. Still, at least after being
bludgeoned around the head with this one note message for the best part of 3
hours, I had stopped noticing that the acting consists of just reading lines
and not tripping over the furniture.
The cinematography is admittedly impressive, but the sound is either overbearing or cynically manipulative, and the emotional crecendo at the end is so overdone as to be positively irritating.
And lastly, while the history is substantially correct, there are enough errors or omissions to shove a stick in the spokes of any claim to authenticity. This isn't entertainment, and it's not accurate enough to be documentary, so what does that leave? Sadly, propaganda.
As a (Jewish) professor of mine once said, "Spielberg doesn't have a glimmer of what it would take to do this material right." Don't be suckered by the subject matter--it's still schlockified for mass consumption. And worse still, it's likely the reason why every year since then we have to put up with some sappy Spielberg backed Holocaust movie or documentary winning another Oscar. Is this really how we want to respond emotionally, intellectually and otherwise?
Just in case you didn't learn from the first 4000 holocaust films that the
holocaust was really bad........Speilberg goes out on a limb and hits you
over the head with the fact that the holocaust was really bad. He also did
it in a very exploitative pandering manner...to the point of being
grotesque. If you didn't learn from those 4001 holocaust films that the
Nazis also exterminated gypsies, gays etc.... Well the Nazis wiped out a lot
of other groups beside jews too. This sort of thing tows a very dangerous
line...that it was more significant not that 6 million plus people were
exterminated but that it was 6 million jews....according to the majority of
these films and various holocaust memorials the gypsies and gays etc. do not
Where are the numerous memorials documenting the genocide that happened in this country? (native americans...also numbering in the millions) That would make a historically relevant film. You think perhaps if native americans had a very powerful militaristic state that is subservient to u.s. power there would be more native american genocide memorials? Probably. The fact that much of this comes from elite american jewish organizations reeks a bit of hypocrisy, since historically American jews haven't suffered at all at least compared to native and afro americans (and to even suggest to the contrary would be a joke). So how does this film function? One might conclude that it panders to American jews, exploiting guilt perhaps for their lack of sufficient suffering? If you are interested in actual holocaust history (one might be shocked that it has very little to do with american jews). I would suggest reading more serious, less pandering sources. 'the Seventh Million' by Tom Segev, an Israeli journalist, is very good...'the Holocaust Industry' by Norman Finkelstein is very good too. One might be shocked to find that the jews aren't one big group but a bunch of very diverse groups with radically varying histories etc.
for gods sake this movies is not THAT good, of course no one will say that because to say anything that isn't "best movie of blah blah" would be antisemitic and the words of a nazi. This movies does not deserve to be so highly ranked. I could direct a claymation nazi death camp movie with a budget of $7 and probably get on the top 250. I write this in hope when you go to vote for this movie you remember that NO ONE IS WATCHING feel free to actually vote your thoughts on the movie not the events it shows.
Here is Barbara's List of all the reasons why Schindler's List is the most
annoyingly overpraised film of all time.
2.Spielberg's most self-indulgent film, which is pretty pathetic,
considering that he also made Saving Private Ryan
4.overabundance of cheesy filmmaking gimmicks.
If I had more time, I could go on forever....
Schindler's list is not a bad film per se - Liam Neeson is very good as
Schindler and if you edit out some of the more overblown scenes - the
is still riveting. Yet it could have been so much more if the story just
told simply and if the central theme were fully understood and
Before the war Schindler and his friend, Goeth were boozy, flirtatious German businessmen. Both would have likely been uninspired failures had there been no war. In a kinder world, Goeth's and Schindler's moral differences might have manifested themselves in the size of the tip that they would leave the barmaid. In war, the consequences of moral choices are greatly magnified, resulting in Schindler becoming a most unlikely heroic figure, and Goeth becoming a loathed prison commandant. In the film, Spielberg elevates Schindler to sainthood status and portrays Goeth as a sadistic psychopath. By sanitizing Schindler's many faults (boozing, gambling, womanizing...) and by demonizing Goeth, Spielberg severs our connection with them and, ironically, blunts the conflict between them. Adolf Eichmann was far more chilling than Charles Manson. Unlike Manson, whom we could dismiss as psychotic, Eichmann was the faceless functionary that we have all experienced, whose defense of "following orders" is one that we have all heard, a defense that was used by many during the war, and one that we might see ourselves using under similar circumstances had we not Schindler's courage. By making Schindler a saint, Spielberg diminishes both his accomplishment and his inspiration to us - saints have no problems making the right decision - the rest of us do. Rather than a gaping chasm, there is but a fine moral line between Schindler and Goeth - one that we tread every day, which fortunately for us, rarely does more than determines a barmaid's salary.
Spielberg does not develop this simple theme, preferring to impress us with a grandiose view of a great moral tale. Instead, he comes off as the underskilled sous-chef drowning a wonderful filet mignon in an overly rich sauce. The quality of the ingredients still shine through despite the clumsy handling but does not approach its great potential. In the end, the best thing about the film is that it reminds Americans of a monstrous event in history. It is unfortunate that this reminder is necessary and that it reduces such a timeless parable to a useful public service announcement.
|Page 1 of 138:||          |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Official site||Plot keywords||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|