A
Some people might argue that Steven Spielberg, known for creating feel-good movies, has found a positive aspect in the horrific events of the Holocaust by making Schindler’s List. However, it can also be argued that Spielberg aims to highlight the human side of this tragedy, despite the presence of pride and self-hatred.
However, it is important not to overlook the darkness that he brings to the clouds. Even after three decades, it is still remarkable how Spielberg, who was perhaps the only filmmaker that Hollywood would agree to fund for a movie about the Holocaust, aimed to portray both large-scale and everyday atrocities with unflinching honesty, only slightly softened by Janusz Kamiński’s black-and-white cinematography. This was a master of illusion and offscreen space – a man who became famous for not showing a shark for most of a horror movie about sharks – depicting the horrors of the Kraków ghetto and the Płaszów concentration camp in their rawest form. We witness Jews being randomly shot in the streets, bodies being humiliated in medical exams and later sent to gas chambers, and parents screaming as their children are taken away in trucks, waving as if they are on a never-ending field trip.
At first, we are introduced to Liam Neeson playing Oskar Schindler, dressed in a silk suit and wearing a small Nazi lapel pin. It is not overly ostentatious, but just enough to gain entry. Here, Kamiński’s lighting resembles that of Casablanca, with a key light shining across Schindler’s eyes, obscured by cigarette smoke. He is not a romantic hero, but he knows how to charm party officials who are willing to profit from the war. As the Nazis take over the city and force Jews into ghettos, Schindler takes advantage by using cheap labor in his enamelware factory, with the wages going to the Germans.
Schindler provides the flashy and extravagant image for the business, while the actual work is carried out by Itzhak Stern, a Jewish man with strong connections in the city who is able to manipulate vulnerable individuals into becoming “essential workers”. It is only after witnessing the forced relocation of Jews to the Płaszów camp that Schindler’s conscience begins to awaken. Up until then, his primary concern was maintaining profitability, even if it meant providing shelter for Jewish workers such as Stern. However, finding a balance between both objectives becomes difficult when dealing with monstrous figures like Amon Göth, an SS camp commandant who takes pleasure in randomly shooting people from his balcony. Göth’s relationship with his Jewish maid, Helen Hirsch, reveals a hidden affection that he suppresses with cruel acts.
Steven Zaillian’s script, adapted from Thomas Keneally’s historical fiction Schindler’s Ark, is expertly brought to life by Spielberg. The film portrays Schindler’s realization of the atrocities being committed with a steady hand, highlighting how easily even respectable businessmen can turn a blind eye for the sake of their business transactions. Despite feeling shame at being praised as a “good man” by his employees, the film daringly draws parallels between Schindler and Göth, only to illustrate their eventual divergence from a mutually beneficial relationship. Schindler manages to briefly deceive Göth into believing in the power of “pardoning” his subordinates, akin to a nobleman to his serf, but the flow of bribes continues.
The film pays tribute to the significant number of 1,100 individuals saved by Schindler, with even more lives affected by his actions. However, its uplifting storyline does not disregard the lives that were lost. In fact, director Spielberg meticulously portrays the Nazi’s systematic killing process, from the ghettos to the building of Płaszów and the transportation of victims to Auschwitz-Birkenau. He documents the mundane bureaucracy and logistics of evil, as well as the brutal looting of Jewish property and the organized humiliation, torture, and murder. Even a seemingly sentimental scene, where Schindler notices a young girl in a red coat, ends with another life being callously taken away.
Five years later, Spielberg would once again explore the emotional impact of World War II with Saving Private Ryan. In both cases, the message is disguised as a source of inspiration, but its true purpose is to expose the brutal reality of events like Operation Overlord and the Holocaust to the general public. After leaving behind the celebratory scenes of Schindler and his parties, the camera takes on a more realistic quality, reminiscent of Gillo Pontecorvo’s renowned documentary The Battle of Algiers. Its intention is to present the unvarnished truth and serve as a powerful rebuttal to those who deny or downplay the atrocities of a genocide on an unimaginable scale.
There are errors in Schindler’s List. Spielberg’s ability to manipulate emotions is used in a negative way in a scene where women are forced into a shower for disinfection. They fear being gassed, but only water comes out. Another group of women face a darker fate, but the tension of a possible escape feels inappropriate, similar to Indiana Jones overcoming obstacles. It is clear that Schindler is remorseful for exploiting Jewish labor, but his speech about saving more lives by giving up his possessions seems excessive. A scene like the one in Sansho the Bailiff, where slaves are liberated, would have sufficed.
However, Schindler’s List serves as a widely accepted defense against those who spread conspiracy theories and anti-Semitic views, as well as individuals who try to downplay or erase the reality of historical atrocities. In addition to winning the Academy Award for Best Picture and six other Oscars, Spielberg’s film was a huge hit at the box office, adding to the success of his earlier blockbuster, Jurassic Park. He transformed a dark subject into a must-see film, serving as a powerful reminder of the potential for human cruelty. This can be seen as art fulfilling a public duty.
Source: theguardian.com
