La Zone d'intérêt

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.

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 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.

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.

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.