Most expensive reenactment ever

Rating: Null/10 (18 April 2001)

To me "Schindler's List" is more of a reenactment than a movie. A movie has something new to offer - some fresh insight to bring to the discussion. "Schindler's List" doesn't. I knew going in that the holocaust was one of the most horrific and disgusting chapters in the history of the world. The movie only served to reinforce what I already knew. None of the characters were developed. We saw Jews suffering, but we didn't know them as characters. Their plight seemed just as distant as reading about it in a history book. The stories weren't personal. The drama was just melodrama. The choice to colorize one extra that never speaks was ham handed at best. A real director could have brought focus to her without colorizing and taking the audience out of the movie. The movie amounts to little more than just endless scene after endless scene of atrocities connected by the thinnest shred of actual plotline. Did it change my attitude about anything? No. Did it reveal anything about the holocaust that I didn't already know? No. It's a lot of money to spend and a lot of awards to receive for a film whose ultimate message seems to be "The holocaust was really bad." Well no kidding. Even TV movies like "Haven" do a better job of making the holocaust real in an emotional way than "Schindler's List." In "Haven" you know the characters. You laugh with them. You cry with them. Then when you understand what they have been through the impact is massive. "Schindler's List" never engages on a personal level. It is a reenactment and nothing more.