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.

This movie could've been so much more but fell way short.

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.

This is the worst film ever made about WW2 and the Holocaust. It's probably been shot at a farmhouse somewhere, no resemblance to Auschwitz whatsoever. The scenes are ridiculous, acting is dreadful. They didn't even bother with hiring enough extras to fill up a train cart and the gas chamber. It all looks like a field trip that ended up a bit badly.

Uwe Boll apparently wanted to raise awareness about the Holocaust with the younger generations in Germany, but has blundered monstrously. This is a joke, and instead of raising awareness it raises your lunch. In my case, it was just some yogurt, but bad enough nevertheless.

As noble as Uwe Boll's intentions might be, please use some quality cinema on the topic and numerous "genuine" documentaries. There's a lot of those about, high-quality and accurate ones, so just chuck this one out immediately. In case you were stupid enough to cough up some cash for this joke. I was, for one.

You get actually two movies here. The one is a movie about the Ausschwitz camp (which as many have stated does not look exactly like the original camp -> he didn't have the money to built it) and the other one is interviews with kids about the holocaust and the Hitler in general. The latter is pretty intriguing and would have made for an interesting view if it had stayed alone.

But I had to vote and review both parts and the other one just isn't good enough. Boll tries to be as real as possible (he has stated that this is not Schindlers List, but a real depiction of what went on back then, though Budget restrictions did not really allow him to be faithful to what he wanted to accomplish), but never achieves his goal fully. Due to the budget restrictions the tone is gritty, which helps the documentary style, but does not add acting value, which on the other hand brings the movie down again. Points for trying ... or maybe not ... up to you to decide ...