The Zone of Interest (2023)

I was stunned as I left the theatre and didn't know what to make of it. Initially I thought it was a bit of an art house gamble that was muddled. Then I had a think about it, read this article that really puts meat on the bones of some directorial choices, and 2 days later I was thinking it's the film of the year and won't be beaten,

Warning SPOILERS:

https://screenrant.com/zone-of-inter...-director-why/

Again, speaking as someone who has not seen the movie but knows more about the history than most people want to know, my comment would have to be that, unless the movie is horrifying beyond most people's imagination, it misses the point. If you don't feel sick to your stomach when you get a half mile from the theater, it misses the point there too. "Art House Gamble" misses the point.

Again, not having seen it, this is a question and not a challenge....what did you like about it enough to see it three times?

Even if it were a challenge, I usually don’t mind (unless it’s in bad faith). I was always going to see it for the subject matter, I watch most films about Nazi Germany. It’s not that I believe one can ever really ‘learn’ anything from history or anything like that, but I do think such films somewhat enhance one’s perspective on life.

Not all of them, but I did think ‘The Zone of Interest’ pulls off the ‘view from the inside’ differently. ‘The Conformist’ might just be my favourite film, and imo it definitely glamourises this sort of regime evil and adds a sordidness to it, which ‘The Zone of Interest’ doesn’t. I liked its clinical, detached style, partly because I think such unsentimental films about people committing atrocities hit harder (I’m with Terry Gilliam on ‘Schindler’s List’ being sentimental and the ‘happy ending’ being tacky, for instance), but also because I think it allows the viewer to suspend judgment and simply be in the space with these people, their everyday life. I think that’s exactly how it should be done. I don’t think that alienates the viewer (which is what I see argued in reviews). Or I guess it doesn’t alienate a viewer like me.

I suspect people just feel uncomfortable with something so graphic being left out of the frame, but this is a classic horror move, leave it to imagination. It then stays with you. (I am now watching two shows on and off, but nothing sticks, ‘The Zone of Interest’ still occupies my brain).

Separately, I think Hüller is a phenomenal actress, and at this point I’d watch her in a Colgate ad. The second time around I was thinking that ‘The Zone of Interest’ had been in the works longer than ‘Anatomy of a Fall’, and that I had even more respect for Hüller now, knowing she could pull off two such different films in one year, more or less. And actually I think I liked her more here than in ‘Anatomy…’.

My mother is Russian, and after watching the film twice, I showed it to her. She saw some parallels with friends her age who are still living in Russia and who just do not see what’s around them right now. In fact we discussed whether she would suggest that any of them watch it, and she said (and I quote): ‘They would watch it and say “These are the Nazis Russia is fighting against in Ukraine”’. That one left me gobsmacked, though she’s right. I almost wondered if anyone would have the guts to see themselves in this film (don’t have an answer to that). In that sense, I think the film succeeds in that ‘apple strudel’ psychopathic housekeeping admin ****ing horror of it, showing Arendt’s banality of evil.

And that’s actually how I ended up thinking about how much Hedwig’s mother knows, which, I still think neither Hedwig nor her mother would actually go over the wall, go inside and watch. In which case, do they actually know?

(I don’t know if I’m breaking the rules or what, but this is the conversation my mother and I had about ‘The Zone of Interest’ pretty much verbatim. I’m just making a broader point about why I think this approach works.) But anyway, even that aside, I think it has pure artistic value too. It’s beautiful, and does things very differently, I think, to most of what I’ve seen. That in itself I think is worth something.

That said, I tend to rewatch films in general, three times isn’t that much of an aberration.

Interesting comments. In my case, I've seen some of the worst of the actual film shot there and I can't help but think that some people could benefit from seeing that....look it in the face, exactly what it was.

People I've met who were there understandably did NOT want to talk about it. Especially, they did not want to scare the kids. They didn't know why they survived but wanted to find a way to move forward and have some sort of "normal" life.

The films I saw (documentary footage) did not avoid the graphic stuff, no horror movie could ever come close...there was no "out of frame". It seemed like the ones I saw that did avoid the graphic stuff just didn't tell the whole story, which WAS the the horror.

I think that it was precisely because such documentary footage exists that this film didn't feel the need to recreate it. Recreating atrocities for entertainment can be exploitative. That also wouldn't have added anything to people's understanding of the holocaust. This film assumes we know all of that and it has a different focus, which is the people who lived with it and ignored it and their mindset. I think that's interesting, just like one of the things that struck me as particularly chilling in Shoah was the interviews with the people who lived nearby.

Maybe you should see the film?

You have managed to miss the entire point of the film.

I've been to concentration camps. I've been to war memorials from Germany to Cambodia. I've seen the horrors and I've watched the documentaries. Do yourself (and this thread) a favour and watch the bloody film and try and get the point.

I've also seen all the major documentaries about the Holocaust. I also know a Holocaust survivor who talks about her experience in death camps at our Christmas dinners. And I also have not seen the movie.


Sounds like I need to start weighing in on what Zone of Interest did wrong too.

When I can stream it easily. I could not get anybody I know to go and I don't like seeing movies alone in the theater, especially something like this. It's clear to me at least that most people in general as well as most movie goers, just don't want to see this. It's "gone and past" (sort of) until next time, but, for weekend "dinner and a movie" entertainment, it's a tough sell.

There's no way something like this should be entertaining, but you do have to admit that most movie tickets are sold to people like me, wanting some entertainment and a night "out". They don't want to go home having lost their faith in humanity. I've never had much of that and I do know how (on a factual basis) this story goes, so I can't sell this to anybody looking for an evening at the movies. I honestly don't know how anybody in the movie making world would want to revisit this in a detached way so they could do a script and production. I know how this went and don't want to go back there, so I'm not the person to convince anybody else to go.

I'm good with monsters and demons but not THOSE monsters.

I feel sorry for you. To miss out on a film of this quality, magnitude and importance because of the reasons you state.

I really do not want you to feel sorry for me; it's condescending and misunderstands my motive. Having been close to real people who were actually there, my need to re-enact this horror is really low. I'll stick with vampires since I know they're cheap thrills.

I will probably see it when it's available to stream without a premium price, but really, I'm OK with living in a time and place where that is not happening.

I'd suggest avoiding commenting on films about it that you haven't seen in that case.

I can't help but find it somewhat tragically funny that one of the concerns about Zone of Interest, is that it might spoil the dinner someone wants to have after it on their night out.


I actually don't know a whole lot about the movie, but doesn't it have something to do with how people prefer to carry on with the banality of their everyday existence than reckon with the tragedies that are happening in plain view?


#SaveDinnerAndAMovieNight


Now it's not like I don't get not wanting to confront certain subject matter. I don't like Alzheimer or cancer movies. They cause me anxiety and so I either don't watch them, or resist them for a long time.


But, I also don't step into conversations and say how these movies that I haven't watched and frequently have no intention of watching, are supposed to be made. Or question why anyone would want to make them. Or watch them. It's more than obvious why having movies about these things are important. These issues aren't suddenly passe or irrelevant because there have already been other movies made about them. Or because we are deluding ourselves that this is a topic of discussion that is all 'gone and past'


Because it isnt gone and past. And dinner isn't that important

Clearly, this man has not eaten my enchiladas.

__________________

Turning this around, how many people died in concentration camps due to the fact that they closed their eyes to what was actually happening under the Nazis until it was too late?

__________________
I’m here only on Mondays, Wednesdays & Fridays. That’s why I’m here now.

This film is next in line for me as far as BP noms are concerned. Will watch it in the next day or two...

Enchiladas are great.


Having the despair of humanity perfectly articulated in a film is even better.

I have heard good things about this movie, but after sixty years of Holocaust inspired films, books and documentaries, I am out.
There's always real socially constructed horror going on somewhere. My eyes are not closed. I am just tired.

Yeah, that's where I am on it. As I said, I will probably see it on video at some point when I can turn it off or take a break, but I've seen plenty of that stuff in my life. I admit to having an interest in discussing it with someone who was born way after those days, to see how much of an impact it might have on their mindset.

On the one hand, I've sat in the room with people that were really there, and on the other, younger people who were not outright ideological deniers, but who did not appreciate the enormity of it all.

I can see it being somewhat parallel to people who came aboard way after the American Civil War and who think that conflict was about parades and re-enactors.

I guess, at some point, every conflict gets trivialized, otherwise it would be hard to go on, being part of this warped species that we are.