Schindler's List

Rating: 10/10 (20 August 2010)

I've been aware of the film for a long while and watched it somewhere in June this year. So it took me no less than two months to think the thing over and compose this review.
A lot is quite certain about SL - for example, it's an exceedingly good movie, well-made and harmonious. There are people saying that Spielberg is a professional, he knows how to influence his audience, that's why you like his movies. I can't say whether it's true or not, since the only other Spielberg movie I've seen is one of the films about Indiana Jones and it's impossible to compare these two genres. So I just enjoyed (as much as it's possible to enjoy a movie about the Holocaust) the film; it didn't seem repulsive to me or too distressing - it didn't even make me cry. I thought the topic to be well-told, all major parts wonderfully performed and the right conclusions made in the end.
But 'something was missing', as Schindler himself says in one of the episodes - though in this case it's neither war nor luck. Something that stayed my hand when it moved to give SL 10/10 on IMDb. Something that made me re-watch the film and separate episodes all over again. Something that excludes all possibility of blind, excited praise-singing.
Later I gave SL 10 points nonetheless but only because in me it evoked an interest in the Holocaust, WWII and everything connected with them. I no longer tried to avoid this subject and understood that without any knowledge about this dreadful catastrophe there's no understanding of History. That's all very well but it doesn't free SL of certain drawbacks.
Generally, they all are about character study. With Oscar Schindler it's OK. It's a Nazi that shifts from blind money-making and using cheap labor of the Jews to the true understanding of the situation, to compassion and at last to saving over 1000 human beings from certain and cruel death. Liam Neeson's performance was good though not exceptional (there's Ralph Fiennes to compare him with). We see what he was at the beginning - through his manners, style, conversation. He changes gradually, and it's not true with Goeth. What a shame - such amazing a performance and such shallow a look at human psychology. Yesterday Goeth shot people from his balcony without breaking a sweat, today he decides to become 'a good emperor' and pardons everybody he happens to meet. Then, he looks at his nails and all of a sudden he's the main villain again. I love this scene though - the look in Goeth's eyes changes dramatically and betrays his true nature at once - that's more than professional acting. But all the same such a quick and shallow change couldn't befall a personality like this.
That's what concerns the main counterparts of SL - Schindler and Goeth. They represent two chief lines of behavior and world-view in the movie. They are friends and enemies at the same time. One is the savior, the other is the torturer. One is capable of compassion and understanding, the other does his bloody duty without questions and his sole attempt to act otherwise is a failure. But who are they saving and killing? To whom the movie is dedicated?
Where are the Jews?
You can say - here they are, Stern, Helen Hirsch, Poldek and Mila, the Rosners, the Dresners... Yes, they are here, all of them with their own names and destinies - but at the same moment they are absent. No Jew could become a main character in a movie about Oscar Schindler, for the latter would overshadow him; there had to be a good Nazi and a bad Nazi and a humble mass of people they are struggling over. But who if not a Jew should be the main hero of a Holocaust movie? You can say - what about Stern? Isn't he the third point of view, the third power, so to speak, equal to those of Schindler's and Goeth's? Well, he's surely a very significant character, but he is not shown and told about as deliberately as Schindler, for instance. Izhak Stern is not much looked into. The viewer can't penetrate into his inner nature and personal life. He's just the chief representative of the Jews, who - especially nearer to the end of the movie - become just examples, not characters, even Helen Hirsch. While Stern is reserved and strong, Helen is weak and tortured but that's all we can say about her. If the film had been based upon the opposition Goeth-Helen there would have been the possibility of telling about what were her losses, what were her hopes and and thoughts. Unfortunately or not, that's not the case. Helen too remains an example.
The main hero is Schindler and this determines the specificity of the film. This also makes the phrase 'In memory of the more than six million Jews murdered' a bit illogical. It is clear that the line should be 'In memory of Oscar Schindler, a Nazy who found strength and will to oppose the killings and saved more than one thousand Jews'. That would've been more appropriate.