Benutzerrezensionen

The Zone of Interest takes a unique angle in approaching the Holocaust. Certainly an angle I haven't seen before in a film. This different approach gives the film a really sinister quality that frames the evils of the Holocaust in a new and terrifying way.

It achieves this approach through stark juxtaposition. It compares the relatively banal, matter-of-fact homemaking of the Hoss family against the utterly horrendous tragedy being perpetrated just over their garden wall. By doing this, it is not an overly graphic or in your face film. Instead, the violence and evil is primarily heard and not seen, as the horrifying sounds of the camp constantly bleed into the Hoss family home. It is in this way that the film makes its mark. To have such tragedy and horror ignored by this family and their guests. To normalise the mass murder over the garden wall. The glib and matter of fact way it is treated by them all. That is where the horror lies.

Whilst this is all a very effective way of framing the horrors of the Holocaust, I do think this film lacks any storytelling merit. There is no real plot to speak of, so once the point the film is making has been made it is easy to want it to be over so as not to sit with these evil characters and horrendous events for too long.

Then again it is a tricky point because I think this is definitely a story worth telling. Looking at the Holocaust from this angle to understand how normalised it became to certain people is vital to reflect on, but I'm not sure if a feature film was necessary to convey this.

So overall, I thoroughly appreciate what this film was doing and the angle it took. The direction is class in creating this juxtaposition and drilling this point home, but beyond it's core message there is nothing in this film to get stuck into. No real plot. No characters you want to understand or connect with. As a result it feels like it overextended itself as a film, but delivers it's message nonetheless.

Glazers movie is loosely based on Martin Amis' novel The Zone Of Interest, extracting just one aspect out of it, the so-called normal life of the Höss family, living next to Auschwitz Concentration Camp, which was under Höss' command. Their life is being shown in an almost documentary style, in absolutely realistic reconstruction of the historical setting. Everything about their home is so bluntly normal, average and pseudo idyllic that it would be even boring, if we weren't be aware of the concentration camp hell just behind the wall around their garden.

What we don't see we're getting to hear on the background sound. While garden parties are being celebrated and children play at the pool side, we hear the barking of dogs, brutal shouting, the shooting, the permanent sound of industrial murder, as a constant reminder of the atrocities the family doesn't ever seem to notice.

The banality of evil is based on ignoring the murderous Nazi reality all around.

What we get to see sometimes are smoking chimneys and the smoke of incoming trains in the distance, transporting more victims to the gas chambers.

The erasing horror is a result of Glazers concept of refusing any empathy and subjective involvement to the viewer, with disturbing effect, because we, unlike the Nazi family, are unable to suppress the obvious.

For some this might be an unbearable patience test, for others it might raise the question of how much we're suppressing and ignoring nowadays to be able to continue our average daily life.

It's rare that I say this but 'The Zone of Interest' is a film where the more you know going in, the more you will likely enjoy it. I always try my best to know as little about a film going in as possible, however I think that really hurt my enjoyment of this film. I kept waiting for a story to develop, for some kind of conflict or plot or just... something. In hindsight I now see what the film was going for and if I had known that I think I would've enjoyed it a lot more (or at least a little more).

I had to watch a few explanation videos to fully grasp what they were going for. This is clearly a very intelligent and well thought out piece of cinema, but it certainly isn't going to be for everyone. Watching those explanation videos made me realise that I myself am nowhere near smart enough to fully appreciate a film like this on a single viewing.

I think I like the idea of 'The Zone of Interest' more than the actual film itself. This one won't be for everyone, however if you are able to grasp what they're going for and connect with it, I imagine it could be quite a special experience. 6/10.

This is one of the most unsettling films I've seen in a very long time. Rudolf Hoess was the Kommandant of Auschwitz, and oversaw the murder of around three million people.

At the same time, he was a devoted family man, who lived with his wife and children in a large house just outside the camp. The camp itself is hinted at but not seen. Instead, we see Hoess taking his children on picnics, boating trips and horse rides. His wife and her mother talk about how wonderful the garden is, oblivious to the sound of gun-shots and columns of smoke rising from the crematoria just beyond the garden wall.

Christian Friedel's Hoess is nothing like Ralph Feinnes' Amon Goeth in Schindler's List. The latter radiated sadistic evil; the former is terrifyingly normal. He sees the running of a concentration camp as a job and nothing more; a series of practical problems to be overcome through hard work and organisation. The Hoess children seem terrifyingly well-adjusted as well. The worst that can be said of any of them is that one boy can be mean to his younger brother.

There's no real plot. The only significant events are Hoess' wife becoming upset because her husband's transfer might lead to her losing her idyllic house and "idyllic" lifestyle; and Hoess' later re-appointment to Auschwitz. Thanks to that nice Mr Google, I can reveal that these events took place in November '43 and May '44. The film ends shortly afterwards. We see nothing of Hoess' trial or execution. Just a family man with an odd haircut.

It's easy - all too easy, probably - to regard Hoess and his ilk as one-dimensional villains; evil in the way that Bond villains are evil, or Darth Vader is evil. Nothing to do with us at all. The Hoess we see here IS like us. He can oversee the deaths of thousands of people during the day (and off-screen), then come home to read bed-time stories.

Nor are Hoess and his ilk firmly in the past. For all I know there are Israeli politicians and leaders of Hamas who think nothing of bombing their perceived enemies, yet who love their children and are loved in return.

Towards the end of the film there's a scene shot in the Auschwitz of today - but even here expectations are defied. We see the early-morning cleaning shift arrive before it's opened to visitors. It's a place of horror, but there's still a need to sweep the floors and clean the windows. Why? It's a very human contradiction.

The message of the film is simple but profound - and also terrifying. We're ordinary people, but so was Hoess, at least on one level. That thing we call civilisation is a wafer-thin veneer. If we don't look after it, we'll lose it.

Director Jonathan Glazer isn't very prolific with only three prior films over the past 23 years, but each is marked by a distinctive vision (SEXY BEAST, BIRTH and UNDER THE SKIN). ZONE OF INTEREST is no different with an even more controlled conception.

Loosely adapting Martin Amis' novel, Glazer creates a setting, a tableu, and never lets go. Opening with a long ominous musical overture by Mica Levi the viewer is plunged into a seemingly tranquil German family home. Uniformed Nazi officers are about, served by compliant women. A commandant, Rudolf Hoss (Christian Friedel) returns home to his family including his wife Hedwig (Sandra Huller, superb as she also was in this year's ANATOMY OF A FALL) and five children. Hedwig's mother, Linna (Imogen Kogge) comes to stay with them. Their yard is idyllic save for a high concrete fence that partially masks an industrial looking building just behind it. Auschwitz.

Lukasz Zal's (IDA, COLD WAR) camera never moves. The set-ups are often at quite a distance, as if it were all a set-piece on a stage. As officers come and go, the viewer overhears snatches of conversation about how to more efficiently run the camps, Rudolf attententively leads the discussions. Hedwig runs the home, with a determined, yet outwardly calm demeanor. The banality of evil has rarely been depicted with such domesticality. The children play outside as most kids would do, only with a faint everpresent chimny smoke wafting into the sky. There are a couple of departures from the regimented compositions when dark children's fairy tales are depicted as if a camera negative. Levi contributes additional chilling music cues.

As placidly chilling as the visuals are Sound Designer Johnnie Burn creates a malevolent maelstrom of audio effects mixing in gunshots, dog barks, mayhem and human voices. Glazer never shows the insides of the camp, yet the sound and visions more than carry his intent. Even more so, since they burrow into the audience's subconscious.

Glazer has crafted a movie with a precise, if a bit self-limiting, goal. There are some moments that don't work (particularly late in the film), but one never doubts that it is uniquely his own. For those willing to take the bleak journey, Levi's exit music will haunt one long after it fades out.

The film focuses entirely on the Hoss family, in which we mainly see the daily events passing in review. Mrs. Hoss is very satisfied with what she has achieved, a beautiful life, a few children and a beautiful garden + a large greenhouse that she herself has built, when her mother comes along at one point she proudly shows her what she has achieved, at a certain point you wonder whether she knows what is happening behind that wall, but later in the film she places a comment to a domestic helper that shows that she is indeed aware.

The director has consciously chosen not to show any horror of the camp itself, the only indications that something is wrong are through sounds, the barking of dogs, the cries of children, shots in the background, and the screams of camp guards. But nothing is shown.

That is a choice you make but I didn't think it was a strong choice, the contrast between camp and the happy home is never shown, what remains is a rather boring succession of family scenes combined with a bit of drama when Mrs. Hoss is upset as it turns out that they might be transferred.

That this film is so acclaimed is a bit of a mystery to me, I don't find anything special about it and at times the film is even quite boring.

This movie gave me the shivers in a big way.

I don't even know how to articulate my thoughts on this film. I didn't really think it was possible to show me a story about the Holocaust that felt like something I hadn't already seen, but Jonathan Glazer manages to do just that with this film. I tried to read the Martin Amis novel this is based on and got almost all the way through it, but I bailed with about 50 or so pages to go. Just couldn't force myself through that last bit. But I read enough of it to know that the film is a very loose adaptation. It's more like Glazer took the general idea and then made his own story out of it.

I had just watched "All the Light We Cannot See" shortly before seeing this film, and I was so irritated in that series that the Nazis were all portrayed as such cartoonish villains. Every single one was a ghoulish monster who monologued while terrorizing whoever they happened to be in the room with. My problem with that is that it makes the Nazis look like aberrations rather than as normal people who were somehow brainwashed into thinking that what they were doing was on the right side of history, so it's easy to dismiss the Holocaust as something that couldn't happen again. But in "The Zone of Interest," Glazer does the exact opposite. The Nazis in this are banal, ordinary people who tend their gardens, bicker about the things spouses bicker about, spend the day bathing in the river with their kids. It just so happens that literally outside their backyard is daily mass murder which they can conveniently ignore because it's out of sight. We hear the screams, gunshots, the trains bringing in fresh batches of people to be slaughtered, but we don't ever see it. The film creates a portrait of the most banal kind of evil, and it's hard for me to get my head around it.

Christian Friedel and Sandra Huller give sensational performances as the commandant of Auschwitz and his pampered, spoiled wife. The film demands full attention from its audience, as frequently the most important thing happening on screen is happening in the background, or up in the far corner of the frame. We'll see a column of crematorium smoke hovering in the distance, or see some hazy ash floating by as the Nazis wander around their flower garden that they're so proud of.

In the film's final moments, we get a glimpse of what might be a conscience in the commandant, a hint that he might not be as utterly indifferent to what he's doing as he appears throughout the rest of the film. It's a haunting scene to cap off a haunting movie.

And can I just say that reading about the making of this film makes it all the more impressive. Everything happening on the other side of the concentration camp wall is visual effects projected onto green screens. Now those are the kinds of special effects that really impress me.

Grade: A.

Christian Friedel is quite effective in his portrayal of the Nazi commandant Rudolf Höss here. He and wife Hedwig (Sandra Hüller) offer us one of the most stark contradictions I think I've ever seen on screen. The beautifully manicured garden of a delightful family home with an unique next door neighbour. That would be the Auschwitz concentration camp of which he was in control. We follow his selection to run the place, his increasing role in implementing the extermination processes and then gradually, as he is promoted again, their realisation that the idyllic life they want for themselves is doomed. It's the brutal comparisons that work best here. We don't really see anything graphic on screen, that's all left to our already well enough developed imagination. The blissful ignorance of their children, the ample supply of food and the prevailing attitudes that nothing at all is amiss compares frighteningly with the real life ghastliness of those just a few feet across a large concrete wall. I suppose it could have more meat on it's bones - maybe just a little too much is left to our own interpretation and it can be a little slow at times, but it still delivers well as a template for just how many people thought the mass killings was hardly more important than whether or not they'd run out of eggs. It's not an history lesson - there are corners cut and licence is certainly taken with some of the timelines, but it's still a poignant look at human behaviour that's well worth a watch.

The medium of 'Cinema' is widely recognized as a means of visual storytelling, where a series of moving images move the narrative forward, with background sound playing a secondary role. However, there are instances where the audio takes control of the sequences and defies conventionality.

Jonathan Glazer's "The Zone of Interest" serves as a prime example of this phenomenon. The director skilfully employs a variety of sounds, such as the constant arrivals of trains, gunshots, and the burning of chimneys, creating an atmosphere that is undeniably terrifying.

Whilst there are a few noteworthy cinematographic elements, including effective use of juxtaposition, it is the background score and sound design that bear the brunt of the storytelling.

For those interested in watching this film in the comfort of their homes, I would personally recommend finding the quietest possible environment, utilizing proper sound systems or headphones (preferably noise-canceling ones), and try to watch the entire thing in one sitting, without interruptions.

Trust me, this approach will significantly enhance your perception of the film.

However, it is important to note that the film heavily relies on visual as well as auditory 'insinuations,' such as suggestive sounds and framings, to convey its message. As a result, individuals who are might be unfamiliar with historical events, particularly those lacking knowledge of "The Holocaust," may struggle to grasp these subtleties.

In essence, it is not a readily accessible feature for all viewers out there. Bear that in mind.

Hannah Arendt's famous phrase may have been the springboard for the almost talented Martin Amis, son of the brilliant Kingsley Amis, to write a novel about the domestic life of the Commandant of Auschwitz. We've certainly been treated to many mean movie Nazis over the years, but Nazism as mere bureaucracy is fairly new. (Terrence Malick offered a far superior example of the genre with "A Hidden Life" (2019). In a world divided between cognoscenti and "deplorables," the point is well made that the bourgeoisie may co-exist and function comfortably with genocidal horror nearby. The sets and costumes seem genuine and the many long takes are certainly banal enough.

There exists a series of clips of Adolf Hitler that, to a lot of people, is actually a lot harder to stomach than his enraged speeches and hateful bellows followed by thundering cheers. They show him during his downtime, playing with his kids and charming Eva Braun, acting not altogether unpleasant. As nauseating as the more well-known footage of him may be, there is something singularly disturbing -- even horrifying -- about the reminder that, yes, this monster was in fact human.

The Zone of Interest, in a way, does for Holocaust films what that haunting clip does for WW2 footage. There are untold movies about this point in history that are horrific to watch; yet, they are movies we can accept. There is a disconnect between us and the ferocious, clearly evil Nazis. This movie, though it depicts next to no actual barbarity, may go down as the most harrowing of them all.

Like Klondike, it is a war film whose horror comes not from images of violence, but from the casual way that violence is treated by those at the center of war, only this time, it is not from the vantage point of traumatized innocents. As Jeff Zhang's review points out, this is not the sort of Holocaust film that puts the atrocities of Nazi Germany in the preferred blunt terms: "Its acts of evil -- oozing on the periphery of domestic rigamarole -- are designed to needle and splinter in the brain rather than suck the air out of the room: ashes of the dead in the river as nuisance, installing Auschwitz ovens like they're dishwashers, gunshots and wails of anguish heard but not seen..."

More precisely, the movie follows a German man as he simply, well, spends time with his loving family at their lovely home -- which, as it happens, is situated right by the walls of one of the deadliest concentration camps of The Third Reich, whose death and suffering are acknowledged only when they "intrude" on the family's peace. The man is Rudolf Höss, who was the Auschwitz commandant 1940-1943. One of the biggest stirs in the family is when he learns he may be promoted, possibly forcing them to move.

In a genre that often forces us to look into Hell, this movie forces us to remain blind. To be clear, that's not to say that the truth is hidden; we're painfully aware of what's being kept from us as we're put in the comfort in which people sat, and continue to sit, while watching genocide from afar. And it isn't just the audience that Glazer puts into this position:

The actors, particularly the leads Christian Fiedel and Sandra Hüller, are eerily convincing and they may have ended up eerily CONVINCED during filming. All but forced to immerse themselves in the lives of the Hösses, they sometimes weren't informed where exactly the cameras were located -- only that certain rooms in the Höss household contained cameras (sometimes they didn't even get to hear which ones). The actors go about the family's routines, presented to us in real time. This Caché-esque cinematography only strengthens the feeling that we're sitting somewhere in the house, watching; hearing what they hear; forced to ignore what they ignore.

Basically, this is not akin to such Holocaust dramas as Schindler's List, Son of Saul, or Come and See; however, it isn't quite a film like Shoah either -- a movie that, whereas some would insist that we have a duty to "depict" Nazi violence so that it's clear to future generations this mustn't happen again, suggests that it cannot be done, and so relies solely on the words of survivors, letting our minds fill in the rest. In the words of David Ehlrich, The Zone of Interest "splits the difference between the two opposite modes of its solemn genre"; other reviews view it as a reaction to Godard and Haneke's statements re: Schindler's List, accusing Spielberg of trying to make suffering entertaining.

This is indeed a film that sticks in your brain. It leaves us horrified, not that people like the Hösses existed and still exist amongst us, but that the movie may simply be a mirror -- here we sit, in a warm building in comfortable chairs as lives are ended by the day in Palestine, Congo, Sudan, and several others that most of you probably haven't even heard of yet. There is a world of difference between being uninformed and being an SS officer of course, but complicity takes many forms and both types of person are victims of the same propaganda. Now, will you look past the wall?

By design, the movie doesn't have the sort of nightmarish visuals we may expect from Glazer; yet, there are shots of dark hallways and other pitch-black images where the darkness seems as alive and all-consuming as the liquid void from Under the Skin. (The music, by Mica Levi, during these moments was succinctly described by a YouTube commenter as "the Universe mournfully sighing".) While I recommend seeing the film in theaters -- in a setting where you can truly appreciate the sound design and purposeful imagery -- these particular sequences may work even better at home.

On certain screens, when you stare into pitch blackness, you eventually discover your own face in it.

Coming off watching Claude Lanzmann's 9 hour documentary on the Holocaust, Shoah, I'm not sure how I'll take to The Zone of Interest. First of all this is dramatic, cinematic and stylish. All things that feel a bit fluffy with a part of history like this, but hang on. The same could be said of Schindler's List and that worked rather well. A dissident ambient score softly introduces a young German family, enjoying the countryside on a fine day as a slow discomforting rumble takes over. Scenes of idyllic family life, slowly interrupted by glimpses of razor wire and lookout towers. For this family live next door to Auschwitz. Where the father, Rudolph Höss (Christian Friedel) murders Jews. It's unnerving to watch as the family get gifts of new clothes and food, clearly taken from those recently gassed and burned. Each scene held under a kind of stark microscope, with the camera locked off like Roy Andersson film. The children reenact executions with toy soldiers and proudly wear the uniform of the Hitler youth. The point is, they're all evil 'bar stewards' really iMDB, a little profanity is sometimes warranted), keeping their hands clean, pretending some faux sophistication. In a picture perfect world they've created, whilst ignoring the horrors that we can only hear on the other side of the camp wall. That is until Höss finds out that although he's powerful in this fabrication, it's only that. On finding out they're to be transferred, his wife Hedwig (Sandra Hüller) is not best pleased. For she thinks they live in paradise. It's unclear what this film is trying to say. It tells a different side of the story and although it doesn't glorify it, it's doesn't exactly condemn it either. It feels almost eerily indifferent. Soulless. Heartless. Like the people it portrays. It's an odd film, not one that I can say I enjoyed, although it has something about it. It just struggles under the weight of its history, which is perhaps why the jarring final scenes of present day Auschwitz are tagged on in a surreal twist. It's beautifully shot though and the sound design is fantastic.

This incandescent film portrays the idyllic life that the family of Nazi commandant Rudolf Hoss enjoyed in a sumptuous house right next to the concentration camp in Auschwitz right in the middle of the Holocaust. There is very little soundtrack and it all unfolds at a deliberate pace that is in keeping with Jonathan Glazer's slow-burn, disquieting style. A rigorous sense of order and calm is prevalent throughout.

We never actually see any of the Holocaust taking place even though it's right next door. The barbarism and butchery are only apparent from the screams in the distance or from fires at night or smoke during the daytime. The pristine, lush surroundings of this family bely the mass extermination that is taking place in the immediate vicinity. It's a masterful work in which conveys horrible events by leaving them to the imagination.

A repeat viewing might be helpful as subtitles in this film are sometimes rapid-fire. But overall, this is an extraordinary and memorable film from start to finish. Recommended to everyone, without exception.

I decided to check out this movie for its renowned sound design and got a better movie than I bargained for. I expected it to be semi-boring and focus relentlessly on the house next door to Auschwitz where the commandant and his family lived.

But it's actually an eerie and highly effective exploration of Hannah Arendt's "banality of evil" concept. Holocaust movies almost always are focused on the actual camps, and the Nazis are strutting goons or at best, conflicted headcases who are easy for the audience to dismiss.

But what if the Nazis are beige bureaucrats who are just trying to do their jobs and fill their quotas? It just so happens their quotas are dead bodies going up smokestacks. Makes you wonder what's just out of sight over that wall in your own life.

I was anticipating this. The idea seemed tremendously potent, ingeniusly simple. So much so, dozens of well known filmmakers must have slapped themselves. How would it be to be at Auschwitz but on the other side of the wall?

The idea is so potent you could take a hundred people with some decent exposure to cinema, and they'd probably come up with some of the same scenes as we find here. Unhurriedly tending a garden while periodic screams come from over the wall. Kids playing, German, clean, well-groomed kids.

I do like the effort, and the long camera style, the silent unfolding. Some will say it borders on affectation, the artificial; but that maybe mirrors the stylized artifice you have to concoct to be able to inhabit the Nazi side of the wall.

There's one extra; and that's seeing in the camp commander's wife not just ideological duty to be there but a good life she would hate to leave behind. They were, as we observe her mother too, among the many lower-class working poor who climbed upward in the Nazi upending of the old established order.

The ambiguty about the extent of what the family knows is happening on the other side of the wall is welcome too. Every German who could claim ignorance after all, did.

We do know, of course. It works because we do, and have harrowing images for it. The wall as screen for memory, all we know.

Are we placed farther from the Auschitz horror eventually? Nearer? What is it to receive at abstract distance, over the wall?

It's a fine movie with solid elements and I completely understand the message they are attempting tonl convey. Duality of man, two sides of a coin, man's ability to be cruel, it's all there. I was looking for a hero of some sort and while the dog was a welcome distraction from the cold, there was one person who I'll not name who showed compassion but that narrative felt unfinished as well.

I know there is a good story in here and perhaps this was better told as a limited series but it felt like a lot of loose ends were left when the credits showed. I won't call this Oscar bait because it's much better than some of those movies "Maestro" comes to mind but not even sure this was best foreign film for me this year.

I'd never rewatch this but I'd say it's a fine weekday movie but I wouldn't hang my hat on this for a weekend night at the movies.

I knew nothing about this film before the screening and during the first minutes I was afraid it would be overly long, bland, and boring. Then I realised what it was about.

We have arrived at the point where the horror of the Holocaust is so well-known that there is no need to show the inside of the camps anymore. The mere suggestion is enough to imbue the banal with meaning. The Zone of Interest is a bland film and a gruesome audio play in one, twisting everything into a nauseating double-entendre.

Cinematographer Lukasz Zal lets a static camera capture wide frames. He deliberately keeps his distance so we, the audience, can observe. This objective point of view is then contrasted with several artistic moments with negative images or monochromatic slates. Such interpretative inserts don't add anything to the film but don't hurt it either. It underlines the horror. However, the soundscapes by composer Mica Levi push this feeling through much more effectively.

This film is not for the squeamish, even though there is no gore, only sounds. But that is more than enough.

Again, lots of "100" ratings by critics, which I believe to be societally pandering. It was a somewhat powerful statement flick, but I thought it needed to go farther and deeper to earn all the lofty praise from so-called "experts."

The juxtaposition of a "normal life" outside the walls of Auschwitz is the obvious hook here, and it's handled deftly by director Jonathan Glazer... but that was handled neatly enough in a handful of family scenes. The horror of "the other side of the wall" should have been more (and better) explored. It's not shown at all. Adding the kids and what they saw or knew, or the thoughts of local Poles would have added needed depth. I can only surmise that an extremely low budget led them to completely disregard shots of people being herded from trains, etc. Much of the film is "nothing" background stuff, which detracts from the whole... and while I applaud the sounds of screams and distant (and ignored) gunshots, the film didn't delve far enough into the horrors to truly present a view of life outside the walls. For the most part I was anxiously waiting and ultimately disappointed, not just by what was IN the movie, but what was left out. A 6.5 rounded up for trying to take an inventive look at horror being dismissed. "Conspiracy" was a better movie about the German nonchalance of the Holocaust.

There's a house that looks and feels like any other, with a mother and her children who are brothers - and there's a wall around this plot, the other side people are not, and they will not get the chance, to rediscover. As the father is the commandant of death, responsible for taking their last breath, though he lives without a care, just like his wife who loves it there, and it's clear they're very proud, of their success. After all, you have to have a certain mind, to exterminate a race of humankind, and then live a normal life, without guilt, or strain, or strife, in a house, with a big wall, to hide behind.

I respect Jonathan Glazer's idea for this movie and the themes of the banality of evil, but I feel there is a problem with the final product. People who need to see this movie, especially in today's climate, either won't, or if they do, they may not pick up on anything. Yes, it's obvious it takes place outside of Auschwitz, but anything more than that is very subtle. I don't think it would have hurt to actually make the Nazis seem bad at least once just to hammer the point home.

There are a couple of powerful scenes such as when you can hear the guards find a prisoner who stole an apple, but those scenes are rare. The different filming choices were interesting, but I found that they took away from the movie rather than add. It seems like I'm in the minority for how I feel about this movie and that's ok. I think the ideas this movie presents are strong, but only for people that might already understand those ideas and that's the problem. There are other Holocaust movies that show the true horrors much better and I think that's more important at the end of the day.

This film was definitely different than I expected. Yes, it's a little slow. But you have to go into the screening not waiting for something big to happen. The whole point of the film is to show us that while all the horrific events of the Holocaust were happening and Jews were being murdered just for existing, there were plenty of folks that lived like everything was normal.

The fact the the Hoss family didn't even register the screams, cries, gunshots, dogs barking and massive amounts of fire and smoke shooting into the air right next door, just shows how self involved, entitled & oblivious they were. Thank goodness for Grandma who realized things were not right even after wondering aloud if her ex employer was "over there."

The most telling bit of action that I thought was genius was the dog, Dilla. The household is calmly going about their days. Servants are stoically doing their jobs, kids are playing and Mom is busy revelling in how great she has it. There's a bit of unrest in the house because of a disturbed sleep-walking daughter and a baby girl that obviously knows this world is f-ed up and is crying nonstop hoping Mom will let her go back into the good place.

But Dilla! She is trying to get anyone's attention! She is running, scratching on doors, whining and barking in every shot. Obviously she is the only one who REALLY hears what's going on next door and knows there are very bad people there. She can hear the cries and screams. Why won't anyone pay attention to her and listen to what she has to say? Somebody pay attention to the dog! Listen to Dilla! She's trying to tell you something and she's the only one that sees the truth.

"The Zone of Interest" is a film that delights at first contact and is incredibly boring after a long while. And it's not just about the slow pace of the story, but about the realization, where nothing more was attempted than to show "the everyday idyllic life of torturers and murderers".

The plot is the story of commandant Rudolf Höss, who, together with his wife Hedwig and a bunch of children, created a house full of love and family warmth, which is separated only by a wall from the Auschwitz camp. And it's literally a movie about their lives. There is nothing more than that.

These images strike only once. At the beginning of the film. Then the next scenes of laundry, walks in the garden and children playing in the Nazi house begin to tire. At some point, you realize that this film is just like that. There is nothing more to it. What you saw is all.

I liked the cinematography in this film and the largely very good dialogues, which in a balanced way presented the approach of the family to the fact that a mass murder is being committed a few meters from their idyllic home.

The characters are extremely interesting because they are so ordinary and simple. If we were to discard the issues of place and time of the film's action, they could be considered well-portrayed "upper-class citizens" at that time. Unfortunately, this is not enough to make an interesting full-length film.

It's not a bad movie. This film is simply unbelievably boring. "The Zone of Interest" has absolutely no other flaws. The actors are perfect, the frames are very nice, the sound is good and the editing is good. Even the final scene does not save anything.

Wasted potential.

Because of the topic of The Zone of Interest, the movie automatically receives a lot of praise by the critics. But be warned - if you expect a strong story or plot, you will not get much. Certainly, in a certain sense, the movie's approach to the theme of the Holocaust is thought-provoking, but that's simply not enough for a full length movie - there are some strong pictures and scenes, but observing a family and staff doing their daily routines and stuff just can hold one's attention so far (at least mine) - some scenes are overlong and just bored me a lot. What else? Production and cast are solid on a TV-movie scale. The Zone of Interest reminds me of The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas; the latter one is far more suspenseful and entertaining (despite the serious theme), and last but not least, the way better movie. Final words: an interesting experiment but just not executed (and thought thru) well enough to make a lasting impact.