Rating: 
Summary: A HALLMARK CARD VERSION OF THE HOLOCAUST
Review: I too used to think Spielberg's being snubbed at the Oscars was a question of politics, but then I saw "Schindler's List" and have since changed my tune. SL is not a bad film, but it is marred by that signature Spielbergian touch that worked so well in his earlier films, but is downright sickening here--that "Oh-look-what-a-clever-director-I-am!" precocious feel. In a strange way, Schindler's List is a "cute" film of the Holocaust, because it is slathered with the cuteness (the "Awww" factor)of the precociousness Spielberg once had but has failed to outgrow. Case in point--the scene when Schindler watches a little girl stumble through the streets of a Nazi ghetto being purged by the Nazis. A better, more mature director would have just let that scene play out on it's own--it's haunting enough as it is-- but, NO, Spielberg just HAD to have her coat hand-colored (in a Hallmarkian pink, no less!) to have us go, "Awwwwww!" On one hand, it's a cheap trick that dampens the powerful evocativeness it would have had if left alone (worse yet, it's not even original--the fact that he uses a well-known sentimental device used ad nauseum on gift boxes, cards and other gift shop items points to the obviousness of why he used it);but on the other hand, it has that, "Oh, look how clever I was to have used that device!" feel to it. Much of SL--despite the graphic violence and dark subject matter--is like that, just one big Hallmark Card; i.e., emotionally manipulative without letting the horror of the Holocaust play out for itself. In other words, we could have really felt the intensity of how bad things really were, if Spielberg had just stopped telling us how to feel about it; but that's classic Spielberg, and until he realizes that the precociousness that won him such fame in his earlier days has to be outgrown, he'll never get the recognition he thinks he deserves. But don't take my word for it; see the movie for yourself.
Rating: 
Summary: Best Movie Ever Made
Review: The first 20 minutes are spellbinding, the rest riveting. I've never seen a more compelling movie nor plausible explanation on why and how 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazi Germany (and Poland and Austria). Neeson and Kingsley provide masterful performances with Fiennes as the ultimate evil Nazi, but no stereotype. I've now seen the movie more than 50 times and never fail to be moved by the ending.
Rating:
Summary: Enchanting
Review: Although I have given this movie 5 stars it is not perfect. For example, I found the parting scene near the end unneccessarily sentimental and out of place in a film that otherwise had fantastically realistic scenes and dialogue throughout. But Schindeler's list is a cut above a majority of films produced this century. The acting, particularly Ralph Fiennes as Amon Goethe, is unsurpassed. The cinematography is excellent and the music is haunting (I would recommend buying the soundtrack as well as this video). I'll admit it's not for everyone because although it gives a glimpse of the better side of human nature it also shows the worst of humanity and can be quite disturbing. It is by far the most moving film I have ever seen.Horribly compelling viewing.
Rating: 
Summary: Spielburg's ego ruined the film
Review: This film is far from great because Steve Spielburg is a far from great director. He's basically a nerd, and his ego seeps through the whole film explaining everything of the relatively simple story, oversentimentalizing (the usual Spielburg method). This has the framework of a good film--black and white, on location, interesting subject matter--but so many flaws. Among them is no character development at all, ultrasimplistic dialogue, bad German accents, and this film tries to show Shindler as the ultimate hero, saving all the Jews. For good holocaust films I recommend Shoah and Sophie's Choice. Not this Spielburg schlock. And Stanley Kubrick left his Holocaust film unfinished because it was overshadowed by this one.
Rating: 
Summary: The Hollywood version of the Jewish Holocaust
Review: After making a fortune on silly but entertaining blockbusters like Jaws and the Indiana Jones movies, Spielberg decided to take himself seriously as a Jewish filmmaker and do a holocaust movie. The predictable reflex is to say the movie is great, because it is about the holocaust. But I find the BUSINESS of recreating the holocaust for Hollywood a disturbing and potentially dangerous endeavor. A re-enactment can remove the audience from the reality of the event, so authenticity is critical. This movie, which was purported by many to be realistic, was filled with flaws. It was in B&W, which was a big problem for me. There seems to be an ongoing debate about this issue with some of the other reviewers, but my feeling is that the holocaust happened in color, so the movie should have been in color to bring it closer to home. I sensed the B&W was an unnecessary and unsuccessful attempt at an artistic touch. The movie also should have been done in German with English subtitles. Imagine a German watching Schindler's List in Germany, reading subtitles to understand the English dialogue. Does that sound realistic to you? If you want to learn about the holocaust, watch Shoah or read a book by Primo Levi. Don't watch the Hollywood version by billionaire profiteer SS.
Rating:
Summary: Explanation of Black and White
Review: People (below) have been questioning why on earth Spielberg would put a film in black and white when he didn't have to. At least to me, it was pretty obvious that Spielberg knew he was writing on a very sensative topic and that he could still get his point across without dragging people to the theaters to see three hours of merciless, blood-and-guts massacring of innocent men, women and children. In fact, I thought the sparse colour (seen in only a few points throughout the movie) is used for more evocative (less brutal) purposes this way. I apologize to those of you who were disappointed with not being able to see the slaughter of hundreds of people in Braveheart like colour...maybe you should try another movie.
Rating:
Summary: How can you give it any less then five stars
Review: When I saw that people thought this movie was going to be funny, I felt sick to my stomach. Does the phrase "six million Jews killed mercilessly" mean anything to you brain-dead h***s? The movie is about the HOLOCAUST! And calling Schindler a "hustler" is an insult to me and every jew that he saved from certain death. This movie was not made to glorify the holocaust, it was made to say "don't forget!"
Rating:
Summary: good here, bad there
Review: Since seeing _Saving Private Ryan_ I've been forced to reconsider every Spielberg movie I've seen. While _Schinder's List_ is certainly better than SPR, I think it suffers from the same flaws. Most of the positive things written about this movie, I agree with. Some of the scenes are incredibly affective, and the emotions Spielberg evokes don't feel forced. The Holocaust was simply horrible and to a large degree that is reflected in this movie. But there are problems. Even in the first viewing I noticed how, whenever the Germans were doing something evil they spoke in German, but English the rest of the time, as if to emphasize how inhuman they were. As others have noted, Neeson has no German accent but Fiennes does. How stereotypical is that? Spielberg wants us to feel terrible for the Jews, which I have no problem with, but doesn't want to humanize everyone. And what's with the black and white? Hey, I have no problem with it, as a rule, but guess what: in real life, during the 1940's, people lived in _color_! Surprise! It's not more "realistic" by being on b/w, for God's sake. A strange movie. But better, I think, to read books about the Holocaust or watch the truly emotion-wrenching _Shoah_ than to watch SL, if you want to learn about this period.
Rating: 
Summary: Good- not great!
Review: Yes, the score was beautiful and haunting, yes the dialogue was good, yes the acting was good. However, good film-making is not so much the assertion of a truth as it is the making of that truth more evident to us. I failed to see the humanity of Schindler because Spielberg just doesn't know how to portray characters well. He is good at canvas but not depth (eg saving p. r.) Watch The Rules of the GAme (1939) or Come and See (1985)- which has very similar subject matter- as well. This film should be viewed, but it is not surprising that it is one of the best films of the 90's considering that the 90's are cinematography's worst decade. Good- but not a masterpiece. Spielberg is just too Jewish to make a film about the holocaust. Someone more detached could probably make the Holocaust more relevant on film because an outsider would present the humanity of both sides- and thus show that any human is capable of atrocities.
Rating:
Summary: A Masterpeice...!
Review: Steven Spielberg has captured in this film the story of a man who at first decided to capitalize on the misery around him during WWII and the German occupation of Poland. Liam Neeson, as Oskar Schindler is perfect as the womanizer, and neer-do-well. He is unscrupulous in starting his new business and yet discovers his own humanity, to the surprise of himself as well as his friends and family. He risks everything to save hundreds of Jews that work in his factory from the death camps, when everyone else was either complicit or turning a blind eye. The story also captures the essential elements of the Warsaw ghetto and how the final solution was put into effect. The part of the Camp Kommandant, is played with brilliance by Ralph Fiennes...a drunk, a zealot, a coward, and ultimately a monster...shooting people in the camp with a high powered rifle, simply for the sport. This film has been criticized, but it is the only film which faces the Holocaust without turning away, or making some kind of lame excuse. The scene in the ghetto where the Jews are being rounded-up for extermination, or shot on the spot, while one of the SS troops plays Mozart, will stay with me for the rest of my life.
|
