Auschwitz

"Everybody wants to make a movie and my stupid brother too", goes the famous quote by Orson Wells. True enough but the real problem arises, when the proverbial stupid brother imagines himself to be Orson Wells – which brings us to the issue of Uwe Boll.

It's easy to make light of Boll's films, dilettantism and talent (pardon the sarcasm) when talking about his video-game "adaptations" or hackneyed attempts to rip-off blockbusters like "Lord of the Rings". However, when tackling a serious issue like the Third Reich and the atrocities committed in the concentration camps, it becomes difficult to keep a review light and funny.

So, to what film could we compare "Auschwitz" to? "Schindler's List"? Sure, in Bolls wildest dreams and delusions. The TV-series "Holocaust"? That would be to compare melted Belgium chocolate to something of similar colour and consistency (but not taste). No, for a comparison we have to reach back to a rather obscure, almost forgotten sub-genre, namely the "Nazi-exploitation films" of the 1970's. We're not talking the sleazy highlight, "Ilsa, She-Wolf of the SS", we're talking the low points like "Beast in Heat" and "The Last Orgy of the SS". The major differences are that the exploitation films actually intended to be exploitive. Boll handles the material with utter seriousness – albeit, free of talent or passion. Plus, if you expect nudity and acts of depravity like in afore mentioned exploitation films, you'll be disappointed – there are none.

There is no law in Germany – for once, I say unfortunately – that could prevent a hack like Uwe Boll from taking on a serious issue like the holocaust or WW2. To sum it all up: it's simply a bad film with a serious topic – too serious as to speak of unwanted humour in a bad film.

And that's already too many words wasted on a bad film.

The best I can say is that this gets people talking/thinking about Auschwitz and the Holocaust. That is why 2 stars, not one.

I have no idea if the intentions of Uwe Boll were noble. It doesn't feel to me like he was trying to be exploitative. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

I'm not sure attempting to show the true horror of Auschwitz in this way is useful or necessary. Either way, if this is the best you can manage as "realistic" and suggest as coming anywhere close to the true horror of Auschwitz you should not have bothered.

Nothing looks or feels right. The trains are not dark enough or packed enough. All the buildings are totally wrong. I could go on and on and on....... Admittedly budget probably prevented giving any idea of the true scale of the industrial conveyor belt of death that occurred at Auschwitz, but given that why not zoom in and follow one or two people as individuals with much narrower focus? Or better still just stick with the interviews of german teens along with some of the facts and archive images.

The interviews and, for the most part, stunning lack of knowledge about the holocaust are the only compelling parts. The problem is I'm not convinced by this film that Uwe Boll's knowledge of this part of history is much better than the majority of interviewees.

Something like Son Of Saul is far more effective at achieving what Uwe Boll claims to have wanted to achieve.

AUSCHWITZ is something atypical for a Uwe Boll movie. The German director notorious for making B-movies like BLOODRAYNE and IN THE NAME OF THE KING decided to try his hand at making a 'worthy' film a la SCHINDLER'S LIST. The end result is AUSCHWITZ, a look at what went on inside the infamous concentration camp.

Sadly, this film turns out to be just as poor - if not more so - than the rest of Boll's output. It's a short film with a documentary feel that aims to put across to the viewer what it feels like to be gassed in a chamber. It's suitably explicit and depressing, but Boll's direction is so poor and the acting so bad that it lacks the real power needed to convey the message properly. It doesn't help that with the running time coming up so short, Boll pads things out by having random German teenagers chatting about the Holocaust, which is indeed very random.

This movie has nothing to do with reality. It portrays Germans as polite and cultured soldiers, but they were actually degenerates, mercilessly torturing innocent people. Also, the death in gas chambers is depicted in a gentle, theatrical way. In reality, people died in convulsions, writhing in their own excrement and vomit, amid horrifying screams of despair, pounding on the doors. Death in the gas chamber was absolutely terrifying and nothing like what the movie showed. Its historical and educational value is zero, and it actually distorts history. I doubt if the author's intentions were actually as they were portrayed at the beginning of the movie. It seems more like an attempt to conceal the true scale of Nazi terror and cruelty. Such a film might be suitable for children at best. For those interested in the true picture of this inhuman Nazi invention, I recommend the movie "The Champion of Auschwitz.

There is a lot of bad press surrounding Ewe Boll, but just to buck the trend I find most of his work, a rewarding experience. Okay he did not have the budget to recreate Auschwitz 1 or 2 but the mechanics of the holocaust are exactly right. Other reviews rightly pointed out there should have been many more in the gas chambers but having less, gave them a grave individuality. The most disturbing aspect though, is interviews with German teenagers (of today), Their lack of knowledge and understanding (of what happened) is so stupid, it actually borders on the supernatural. Balanced out, right at the end, by one bright boy who knew more than all the rest put together. One downside, is I wish it had been a lot longer and with less interviews.