Schindler's List (Full Screen Edition)

Rating:
Summary: Historically important and stunning
Review: This is, no doubt, the best film made in my lifetime. The first time I saw it, I was sitting in my living room with about 10 other things going on, and little by little I was captivated by the movie, drawn in until all I could do was watch and wait. I was so emotionally spent at the end, I couldn't do anything but sob. It's absolutely changed the way I deal with people in my everyday life. A must-see for all human beings.

Rating:
Summary: The best movie ever (in my lifetime thus far)
Review: A true story of love, hate, compassion, fear, and a million other emotions, all told in a beautifully directed way. Need I say more. It will touch you in more ways and places than you ever thought existed.

Rating:
Summary: Quite possibly the best movie of all time.
Review: One of the greatest works of all time, by the truly genius Spielberg. It's required viewing for a reason.

Rating:
Summary: Great story but flawed
Review: If Spielberg was going to make a realistic docu-drama in black and white why didn't he film it in German with English sub-titles? That was my main problem with the film. It was really hard for me to get past that. It really took away from the intensity of the film. Also, I think many people miss the point of the movie. It was not so much about the holocaust as it was about a man: Oscar Schindler. It is a wonderful story of a rather immoral, dispicable character metamophising into the savior of the schindler jews. The plot was very good and that it was true makes it even better. Over all Schindler didn't do much in terms of the scope of the millions who died. But 2000 jews he saved and their decedants his memory will live forever.

Rating:
Summary: Response to those who did not like it.
Review: You do not have to like Schindler's List. I have friends who thought it was too slow for them, or boring. But the reasons I have seen posted on this website are incredulous. One person complained of no character development. This is very untrue. Before we are taken into the concentration camps, we see Oskar Schindler, up close and personal. We see the way he acts with nazis, the way he manipulates Jewish business owners in the ghetto, the way he treats women, and the way he treats his wife. All of these are very important to the character of Oskar Schindler. We see who he is and what he does, and even how he changes. For the character of Amon Goethe, the Nazi camp comendent played wonderuflly by Ralph Fiennes, we are shown from his first scene that he is a cold hearted, evil man. We also see that he is incredibly down to earth, considering how evil he is. On one hand, with his friends, and around Schindler, he is just another soldier. Around the Jews, he is a killer of the worst kind. He doesn't care, and he never will. This is important to the character, and to the story. No character development? I think not. Each character is independent, completely. Not just the main characters either. Even the many minor characters, the Jewish families, the little boy, the rabbi, the Mother and daughter...all very important to the story. All are develped independently of each other, and we know who each of them are. As for them not speaking in germen, what about the WWI classic "All Quiet On The Western Front" which is also about Germans. They all not only speak english, but also have english accent. Is that a reason not to like the movie? of course not, it's just easier. this is an american made movie for american audiences. there would be no point in making every actor learn a foreign language, and it would not be good in getting the mood accross, especially knowing how american audiences react to "Foreign films". And if were all in german, that's what would it be labled as. As for nothing happening....Whatever happened to following a story? Did you want explosions? did you want more dead bodies at the hands of the Nazis? It's a real life story about real people in real situations. The movie Schindler's List is real. It is a masterpeice.

Rating:
Summary: Spielberg's best
Review: This is the film with which Spielberg broke his crowd-pleasing popcorn flick mold, and he did it in fine style. In a way that few films since Welles' "Citizen Kane" have, Spielberg invents a new language for film--grave, violent, steady. It is an enormous film with an enormous central character, and it takes an enormous actor to fill the role. Liam Neeson plays Oskar Schindler as a man of excesses who happens to also be brave and compassionate beyond even his own expectations; it is a performance of great subtlety and weight. In my opinion, Neeson in this film ranks with Brando in "On the Waterfront" and De Niro in "Taxi Driver". Spielberg finally won an Oscar, and though it shouldn't have been his first (how can you deny "Close Encounters"?), it is by far his most deserved. Of course, it probably helped his case that the film was about the Nazi Holocaust--if he'd directed another film of this quality on a different subject, he probably wouldn't have won--which doesn't mean he wouldn't have deserved to.

Rating:
Summary: Masterpiece...
Review: This movie is a very important document about the Holocaust horror. Tecnically it's the perfection, it's touching and very sad. The Best Picture of all times.

Rating:
Summary: One of film's masterpieces
Review: Now I came across this in fourth grade in a video store in Michigan. If my mum had seen it, which she hadn't, she wouldn't have let me. And to this day I prevent her from watching it, just so I can. This was the best movie I have seen. And living in a small town, there isn't much to do except see movies. I have seen lots. Up there with Citizen Kane, this is truly one of the best films Hollywood will ever come across. The film's Three Major Actors (Liam Neeson, Ben Kingsley, and Ralph-be-still-my-heart-Fiennes) are brilliant, and the '93 Oscars were screwed up not to give Neeson and Fiennes their 9-inch naked gold guys. I cannot get any of friends to watch it because one, the majority is in B&W, two, it stars actors over thirty-five, three, it has serious subject manner and doesn't star James van der Beek. Oh well. In thirty years they're gonna yell at me for not making them watch it.

Rating:
Summary: Something that everyone needs to see
Review: One of my teachers once told us that we needed to see this film. I agree. This is a disturbing film, but one we need to see. To prevent another holocaust we must have constant reminders how lucky the few are. This film proves how evil can be defeated by the hero working for evil. The black and white makes it seem like it's in the past, and whoever thought they were seeing a comedy should open up their eyes. The film is powerful, and makes us relize that bias effects everyone. I think they should show it in school, it's too important for them to say that the R rating makes it wrong to see this film in school, but if we never see it in school, or rent it, who will remember the Holocaust? Who will?

Rating:
Summary: Overrated
Review: I find it amazing how many people have given this movie 5 stars. I can see why, given the subject matter. I think this is a movie people are afraid to criticize publicy, for fear that they will be labeled anti-semitic or insensitive, and to say the movie sucked it like saying the Holocaust didn't happen. They're completely independent of each other. The subject matter in this movie is shocking and grim. But let's face it: this movie drags and there's very little character development. If this were a documentary, it would be one thing, and it would be far more powerful. But it's a movie: it needs to do something. It's obvious that Spielberg thought he could just recreate the Holocaust, roll the film and, voila, instant critically lauded film that no one would DARE detract from because of what it's about. Sorry, but you need to have a little more than that. This movie does not cut it.