The Grey Zone (2001) User Reviews

Gritty and though provoking

[peter-ramshaw-1 · 8/10 · 7 February 2007]

The Grey Zone is so full of horror and anguish that it's a hard movie to watch in some ways.

The basic premise is 'how far would we go to save ourselves' in situations such as those faced by the Jews in Nazi concentrations camps. The answer is, of course, almost as far as necessary. This film concerns the crews of Jews who were forced to lead their countrymen into the gas chambers at Auzcwitz and then dispose of the bodies in cematoria afterward.

With the only option death, what would you do? It's a tough question to answer but this film gets it about right. By the halfway mark you are so immune to seeing piles of dead men, women and children around that I think you actually can start to feel just a tiny bit of how desensitized these men must have become as they tried to buy themselves just a few more months of live.

Most of the performances are very good though I disagree with some that Harvey Keitel's was up to his usual brilliance. The German accent didn't seem quite right to me but there you go.

Great film, great message.

How far will people go to survive?

[JoeytheBrit · 7/10 · 27 June 2008]

The Grey Zone explores well-covered territory from a unique angle: that of the Jewish prisoners who prolonged their lives by four months by becoming members of a unit used to herd their fellow prisoners into the gas chambers. Inevitably, such a subject matter raises the question of to what lengths the viewer would go in order to stay alive, and the cost to the people who found themselves capable of colluding with their captors. When one new arrival to Auschwitz, ferried straight from the train to the shower's changing room, loudly challenges Hoffman (David Arquette) over his and his friend's breezy instructions to remember the number of the hook on which they hang their clothes so that they can find them after the shower, Hoffman beats him to a bloody pulp – as if for forcing him to confront what he is doing to his people. Despite this, the performances are subdued for the most part, the prisoner's attitudes to their situation almost matter-of-fact. Given fine food and alcohol in payment for their work, they live in ivory towers that have been stained by human ashes.

The survival of a young girl after showering in the Nazi's deadly gas just as the men are preparing to stage their revolt triggers an emotional crisis amongst the members of the unit, with some insisting she be killed for their protection and others demanding she be allowed to live. They face a dilemma that is mirrored by those of the German soldiers who mill around the girl uncertainly after the protesters have all been killed. There is a line beyond which even those who have grown almost inhumanly inured to killing will hesitate to step. The girl, alone and defenceless, unlike the masses herded into the showers, forces them to put a face to their victims and ejects them from their oddly cocooned existence.

The film is an adaptation of a stage play, apparently, and this fact is evident in the dialogue, which sometimes seems unreal, as if the speakers are somehow detached from the emotions they are supposed to be feeling. This may be deliberate, another example of the tamping down of their true emotions, but its sometimes distracting. Despite this, the performances are good, especially that of Harvey Keitel who seems to grow into the part of the German officer who knows he has lost touch with everything that made him human.

A Fine Study Of Collaboration, But ...

[sddavis63 · 6/10 · 16 August 2003]

I wasn't at all familiar with this movie, but because of an abiding interest in the history of the Third Reich and the Holocaust, I decided to rent it. The true story was one that I wasn't familiar with: the rebellion of a group of Jews at a Nazi concentration camp. The jacket of the DVD placed the focus of the movie on the rebellion, but that was a bit misleading. The bulk of the story had much more to do with the mindset of collaboration than with the rebellion, which really received very little focus, until the end of the movie.

In this film, we learn about the "Sonderkommandos" - groups of Jews who helped the Nazis maintain order at the concentration camps in exchange for a few extra privileges and a few extra months of life. The look at the mindset of collaboration was fascinating. The sonderkommandos are - understandably - looked down on by the rest of the Jews; the sonderkommandos themselves have some definite moral qualms about their work and - in spite of their own collaboration with the Nazis - they are definitely antagonistic toward Dr. Nyiszli (Allan Corduner), a Jewish doctor who gets even more privileges by co-operating in Nazi medical experiments on some of the captives. They're Jews who just don't fit in with the victims of the Holocaust (although they, too, will become its victims), and yet, even though they help the Nazis, they obviously don't fit in to that circle, either. Their existence was lived in a true "grey zone," in other words. This is a troubling story in many ways (as surely any movie about the Holocaust should be!) with some scenes being quite graphic.

And yet, somehow the movie didn't keep me glued to the screen. It was interesting, but really not more than that, and I had hoped to learn more about the rebellion itself, which was passed over rather quickly I thought. For those interested in the subject, it's worth watching, but certainly not a masterpiece.

6/10

Incredible film

[bri-80 · 2 November 2002]

I've seen this film twice. The first time it was such a shocking,

horrifying spectacle I vowed to never see it again. It is absolutely

among the most graphic, violent films ever made, save slasher/horror films. I saw it again to see what was buried

underneath the gore. It was surprising. As a historical document

alone The Grey Zone is unique and impressive. Countless small

details contribute to its originality: the blue-green color of the

Zyklon B crystals, the sprinklers constantly working the lawn

beside the crematoria, the clear, pretty daylight when the trains

arrive, the intimate building-to-building geography of Birkenau --

only the film Shoah manages to make these small historical

details count so much. What's left to be said about the Holocaust?

These things. Small things. Details. The grass, the sound ovens

make, sunlight hitting brick. Shoes. Luggage.

The Grey Zone is so unique that it has been misinterpreted. There

is virtually no music, nothing to tell you how to feel. It is exactly the

opposite of melodrama. The mundane repetition of the killings

actually numbs you after awhile, and this is intentional since this is

how the main characters are affected. There is no uplifting

message, and no cliched Zionist coda like Schindler's List

suggesting that all the suffering had a destination and a design.

There are some awkward elements in the film. But these are

minor next to the clarity of purpose and originality. The Grey Zone

should not become marginalized in the canon of Holocaust art

because it refuses to be sentimental. Hopefully it will be

referenced and reviewed for a long time.

A horrifying camp drama which leaves you breathless...

[jeroenberndsen1 · 6/10 · 1 August 2003]

The Grey Zone

summary (no real spoilers)

The story tells of a group of Jews in a German destruction camp (Birkenau) which is responsible for guiding their fellow-jews right into the gaschambers and the disposal of their bodies. In return the Nazis give them a socalled better treatment and they receive things like alcohol and sheets and better food. Each of them copes with his own feeling of guilt that they lead their own people into the gaschamber in return for some vodka. While one man is planning an escape, another is thinking of how to commit suicide, because he can't imagine a life after the gruesome acts he has comitted. Of the Thirteen SonderKommand groups in charge of those duties, the twelfth group is planning an uprising, not to escape, but to destry as much of the camp as possible, before they are destroyed themselves. but with the limited means they have, this turns out to be quite difficult.

My opinion:

I just finished watching this movie two minutes ago and I still feel a bit sick to my stomach. i watched it with two friends and normally when the credits begin to roll we immediately ask each other ''and?'' or ''what did you think of it?''. This time we just shut up.I didn't really know what to say. Was this a good movie? I think it was, but it is difficult to say when youre food wants to come out from the wrong direction.

Off course, this movie was meant to 'shock people', or at least show some truth, director Tim Blake Nelson first made this piece as a Broadway Play. And film gives the opportunity to bring forward different aspects of such a tragedy and it has more visual possibilities.

This film is dramatic, the acting is sufficient, but only Harvey Keitel splashes of the screen as a drinking Nazi Oberschaufuhrer. Steve Buscemi never plays a bad role, and neither does so in this movie. David Arquette, which I only saw in scream and some other movie wasn't bad at all (which I expected him to be). And the supporting roles where fine too.

Music cool have been better though and cinematography too, in my opinion the photography was a bit simple.

But all this doesn't really matter because the message this movies carries comes out anyway. perhaps with a dramatic score, they considered it to get too emotional. I don't know, but it's fine as it is.

in a nutshell, this is a very dramatic and horrifying movie which shows the troubles of a small group of the jews in the camp and especially their guilt for what they are doing. it all seems quite realistic and a small note: This is not a feel good movie.

Other titles:

NUREMBERG: even with alec baldwin this is a very dramatic picture especially in the middle where you get too see original bergen belsen shots which are really horrific.

Schindlers List: a must see, no explanation needed.

Empire of the sun: japanese camp, very different in comparison to other camp movies we're used to see, but still a good Spielberg movie with John malkovich.

La vita e bella: Academy award winning italian movie about a camp in the second world war. Don't let the italian language fool you. I don't speak italian either, but this movie is a must see. first half is almost comedy and second half (in the camp) is very dramtic. about a father who tries to save his son from the cruelties inside their camp by telling him al kinds of stories and giving him other explanations about everything that is happening.

Bridge on the river Kwai: a bit older, but still a very good movie, with alec guiness. about a group of prisoners being held by the japanese to build a bridge, which is a enormous fysical 'challenge'.

Numbing horror

[=G= · 7/10 · 5 June 2003]

"The Gray Zone" transports the audience to the epicenter of evil during WWII's final solution to the Jewish question. The film deals with a group of doomed Jewish Auschwitz POW's who do the death camp's dirty work, herding unsuspecting Jews into the showers, carrying cadavers to the crematorium, harvesting the dead for gold dentalwork, etc. The film takes on a challenging subject with countless moral issues to ponder as it scrutinizes the nuts and bolts of mass extermination. However, it doesn't quite measure up to the potent subject with its theatrical presentation, clipped dialogue, time wasting filler, staginess, poor character depth, confusing language and dialect issues, and a rather contrived monologue at the end. Nonetheless, the films treats the subject with dignity, does not exploit or sensationalize, and recreates enough of the horror to impart a sense of what it must have been like giving it docudramatic value. Worth a look for anyone interested in the holocaust. (B)

A magnificent film about Auschwitz's Sonderkommandos, being splendidly played

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 27 May 2021]

An eerie and downbeat film with a group of unfortunate characters, most of them members of a Sonderkommando : David Arquette, Daniel Benzali, Steven Buscemi, among others . Along with a Jew doctor : Allan Corduner and doctor Mengele himself . And a brutal Nazi sergeant : Harvey Keitel. Things go wrong when they discover and hide a 14-year-old girl and become involved themselves into the grey zone. The story you haven't seen!.

A terrific and extraordinary movie dealing with the inferno of the camps of death located in Auschwitz . Here we watch the astonishing work of the Sonderkommandos by executing the deadly and forced assignments. It contains a fabulous cast giving vigorous performances, outstanding Allan Cordunier as the Jew doctor who must decide a complex situation , Harvey Keitel as a ruthless Nazi and David Arquette whose fury outbursts at the gas chamber against a distressed condemned by means of a sudden explosion of grisly violence . And two female prisoners Natasha Lyonne and Mira Sorvino. The motion picture was competently directed by Tim Blake Nelson. He is a notorious secondary who has written, produced and directed a few films.

A must see film

[myschrec · 10/10 · 18 April 2004]

Many Holocaust films present the ethical dilemna of trying to stay alive at the cost of allowing others to die or even sending others to their death. A few films might focus on the dreaded Kapos in the camps -- or on the elitist Jewish Council members who helped organize the transport groups -- or on the musicians/performers who entertained the Nazis -- all of whom hoped that they would be allowed to survived. But this film focuses on the Sonderkommandos -- the special workers -- who ushered Jewish victims to the gas chambers and burned the bodies. They too hoped to survive. But they must have known that they were going to be murdered eventually, if only because they had become the most dangerous witnesses to the cold Nazi horror. And the film begins by informing us that these groups of Sonderkommandos were never allowed to live longer than four months.

There are several reasons you must see this film. First, it is based on the diary of Dr. Miklos Nyiszli, a Hungarian Jew chosen by Josef Mengele to be the head pathologist at Auschwitz. And it dramaticizes the true attempt by Sonderkommandos to destroy the Auschwitz gas chambers.

Second, it focuses on ethical dilemnas faced by Dr. Nyiszli and the various Sonderkommandos who are trying to save themselves, their families, or ... just someone ... anyone. To say that these men were "co-opted" by the Nazis is to ignore the horror of the coercion, debasement and dehumanization that the Nazis inflicted -- not only on their prisoners, but upon themselves. One can imagine that some Sonderkommandos were selfish -- just as some Kapos were cruel and some doctors who assisted the Nazis were accomplices. But the question remains -- what would you have done in the face of such coercion and duress?

Third, the film -- based on Tim Blake Nelson's play -- is not the typical Holocaust film. There is very little redeeming behavior. There is no uplifting ending. The grey zone of moral ambiguity is presented as a cold, unfeeling, horrifying place -- where you are damned if you do, and damned if you don't -- which means that they are all damned! For the first third of the film, the script is obtuse, confusing, and disconnecting -- as it should be, considering that we may as well be taking the point of view of someone who just arrived on a train and entered the gates of hell. How can any of this make sense? In the opening scene, the Doctor is asked to save the life of a Jew who attempted suicide. How absurd can that be -- to save the life of someone who will sooner rather than later be murdered by the Nazis anyway?!

In conclusion, the play/film contains dialogue and scenes that are memorable. This is one of my favorites. One Jewish leader is demanding that they destroy the gas chambers as soon as possible. But another Jewish leader is still planning on escape, arguing that he has every right to expect to live. The first leader replies, something to the effect that, after what he has seen and done, he does not want to live!

Today is Holocaust Memorial Day, April 18, 2004. Last night, after seeing a Holocaust documentary on Kurt Gerron ("Prisoner of Paradise") a friend of mine asked me what I would have done? I told her that it would depend on whom I was caring for -- my wife and my daughters -- my parents. It was then that I realized that I would have probably done everything that every Jew did during the Holocaust. I would have tried to save myself and my family. I would have abandoned others -- even betrayed others. I would have killed. I would have fought the Nazis. And I would have probably been killed for it. I would have despaired -- tried suicide -- become depressed, useless to everyone. I don't think I would have survived. I think the only question in that regard -- and it shows how irrelevant the question really is -- is "how soon would I have died." That is why I remember Holocaust Memorial Day -- so that I will never forget -- and I can help work towards a time when such a hell will not occur in Europe, in Africa, in the Middle East, in the US, ... anywhere.

Harrowing film with plenty of questions

[rosscinema · 7/10 · 15 January 2004]

If you have seen plenty of Holocaust films like I have then you can expect the usual bleakness and horrors but this film asks its viewers what they would do if they were in the same predicament and before you make a hasty response you should rethink your answer. Story is about the true story of a revolt at the Auschwitz II-Birkenau where many of the ovens were destroyed that would end up saving lives. Inside these camps the Nazi's had Sonderkommandos who were Jews that would help gas other Jews in exchange for better living conditions and food and liquor. David Arquette is Hoffman and he and others are in charge of the Sonderkommandos and they must live with the fact that they help with the murder of countless other Jews. Doctor Miklos Nyiszli (Allan Corduner) is also a Jew but he is liked by Josef Mengele and in order to keep his family alive he must perform experiments on the prisoners and he is under the watchful eye of an alcoholic Nazi Officer SS-Oberscharfuhrer Eric Muhsfeldt (Harvey Keitel) and he hears rumors that an uprising is going to occur.

*****SPOILER ALERT*****

In the woman's camp some of the female prisoners have taken some gunpowder and hidden it but the Nazi's find it and they start to torture Dina (Mira Sorvino) and Rosa (Natasha Lyonne). After gassing many Jews Hoffman discovers a young girl (Kamelia Grigorova) that has survived and he sneaks her into Dr. Nyiszli's office where she is revived and they decide to try and hide her.

This film was directed by Tim Blake Nelson and its based on his play and also the book about the real Dr. Nyiszli who survived the war and Nelson had this filmed in buildings that were especially designed to be just like the real Auschwitz buildings. I was hesitant to see another holocaust film but after watching this I came away thinking about two things. The first are the questions that this film asks its viewers, What would I do in that situation? It would be so easy to say that I would just allow myself to be executed but for many this wouldn't be that simple. Also, if you stay around you can help others by being involved in an uprising that will save many. These are hard questions and I commend Nelson for also reminding everyone that the Jews did everything they could to stop what was going on. They did manage to destroy many ovens and the end result was many lives being saved. The second thing that I was reminded of is that David Arquette is a very good actor that doesn't get enough chances to show it. He's shown good performances in small roles such as "Ravenous" but he always has to appear in usually dumb comedies to make a living. I hope future filmmakers remember him when they cast their next film. The big flaw of this film is the casting of American actors as either Germans or Hungarians and they don't even speak with accents. Keitel is the only one that speaks with one and its not all that convincing. If you can get over that and still sit through a film that you know is going to be bleak and depressing than you might appreciate what Nelson is trying to do. I did and I think this is a film that shows an event that everyone should be aware of.

THE GREY ZONE is so good it's literally painful to watch.

[stedrazed · 10/10 · 11 April 2003]

This might not sound like a recommendation, but when you consider the film's subject matter, "painful" is actually a good word to describe THE GREY ZONE's brilliance. Director Tim Blake Nelson has crafted a fascinating portrayal of the Sonderkomando, Jewish concentration-camp prisoners who help the Nazis in order to ensure for themselves a few extra months of life, as well as creature comforts denied to the other prisoners. The script and cast are equally effective. David Arquette proves himself to be not merely the idiot bastard son of the Arquette family with a powerful performance; Harvey Kietel and Steve Buscemi are brilliant as always. The film's real strength, making it the greatest Holocaust film I've ever seen, is its relevance; we may think ourselves to noble to sell out our brethren to save our own lives, but we would certainly reconsider if actually faced with this choice. In the end, Nelson brilliantly implies that perhaps the nightmare world of the Sonderkomando is really not so different from our own workaday reality.

Dark exploration of man's inhumanity to man...

[Doylenf · 7/10 · 8 December 2006]

Despite all the realism depicted in THE GREY ZONE amid the actual day to day operations of a Nazi prison camp, there's a certain stage quality in the dialog that serves as a reminder that you're watching the screen version of a stage play and not what should seem more like a true life documentary. That's the fault of the script taken from David Mamet's play and other eye-witness sources--but the acting is excellent.

And yet, it does manage to convey just how those prison camps used other prisoners to operate the gas chambers, to carry out the deed with false promises--"Just be sure to remember where you hook the clothes so you can pick up your belongings when you leave"--and the backbreaking jobs of loading trucks with dead bodies and depositing them on chutes that go directly into a blazing furnace. Amid all this, various stories are entwined involving the petty quarrels among the men assigned to these tasks so they could prolong their own lives for at least four months of assured survival.

The story involving a girl who does not die during the twenty-minute gassing and is then revived and how the men argue over how to protect her from further harm, is intense and touching in that it shows the humanity that is still in their souls. Her story and how it ends is one of the film's most memorable and touching elements.

This is more of an in depth look at "the final solution" than any other recent films dealing with the extermination of Jews has ever been, with the exception of SCHINDLER'S LIST and THE PIANIST in which the accent was more on the triumph of the human spirit and a much broader view of the war itself in epic mode.

This is a darker, intimate look at the actual operation of the camps as experienced by a handful of prisoners--the brutality, the torture, and raises the question: how far would you go to survive? It also shows how not all the Jews were as passive about their fate as some have claimed, often opposing the Nazi officers and paying for it with their lives.

In the hands of a greater director, it might have been an even more impressive film than it is, so that I'm unable to place it in the same class with the two films mentioned above. The cast is uniformly good, but HARVEY KEITEL is outstanding as an SS Commander keeping strict tabs on the camp's hard-working doctor.

In its own way, it's just as important. Young students of history would be well advised to view this one for a better understanding of how "the final solution" was supposed to occur and the methods used to carry out an enormous project known as "the holocaust".

You will never be the same after watching this movie

[gejfay · 10/10 · 11 August 2009]

This is truly one of the most disturbing films I have ever seen. If the goal of a great movie is to make its viewer changed forever, "The Grey Zone" certainly has succeeded. Yes it is not "Schindlers List". It has no uplifting theme, other than that in the face of no hope, doomed individuals tried desperately, if for nothing else, to save one life among millions of doomed. In the end even that effort is futile.

It's images are haunting.

Do to its depressing topic and even more disturbing ending others have criticized this movie as not being "entertaining". In fact it is entertaining. It is a horror movie of the real kind. The horror of human evil based on prejudice and hatred.

Everyone needs to see this movie, with the exception of those who lived through it, as they already know!

David Arquette is terrific in this film.

[prettykitty724 · 7/10 · 18 November 2006]

David Arquette is terrific in this film and the set design is amazing. I have read many books on the Holocaust, including the one on which this movie is based (Auschwitz, A Doctor's Eyewitness Account by Dr. Miklos Nyiszli). This movie shows a part of Auschwitz/Birkenau never seen before on film (the Sondercommando-Jewish work detail in the gas chambers and crematorium)and it is riveting. The scenes are graphic and authentic. The only downside to the film is that some of the characters are miscast (Steve Buscemi, Natasha Lyonne), though talented actors to be sure. This takes a bit away from the searing dramatic effect of the film, but it is still a must-see movie for anyone interested in the history of the Holocaust. If you like the film, I strongly recommend reading the book as well.

Harrowing era of history Hollywood style

[alanh-03959 · 1/10 · 3 February 2024]

The Americanised dialogue in a film based upon a terrible and horrific time in history is disrespectful. During arguments the term goddam being used by the Sonderkommandos is ridiculous . The actors are mainly American and they bring American attitudes with them in their acting . I found the whole movie boring and lacking any emotional content . I had zero empathy for the characters in the film , there was no connection to them or their plight . The film was just a shallow fest of a bunch of actors pretending to be in a concentration camp. This film really did a disservice to those that suffered the oppression and brutality of the Nazi regime .

A Very Good Film

[fakemag · 25 May 2003]

I was a little wary of this film because of the cast - but David Arquette was surprisingly good. I happen to like films that have a theatrical uality - so that was fine with me. At first I wondered why Harvey spoke with an accent, and no one else did - then midway through the film I got that the idea was that the Jews HEARD his German accent - and since the story was from THEIR perspective, they had no accents from their point of view. To convey this to an American audience, they spoke like Americans. I despise Shindler's List . That film turned a horror into a feel good event. Disgusting. THIS movie doesn't manipulate you with sappy speeches and ridiculous violin crescendos, nor does it get sweet and sentimental like Saving Private Ryan. This movie is about horror - and it ends horribly. It doesn't cheapen the death, it forces you to feel all of the terrible weight.

Good, but not like the book

[szandrea-45678 · 7/10 · 17 October 2021]

The movie try to reflect the atrocities from the K. Z. and does it very well, but being based on Nyiszli Miklós's book, they should have kept the story line and all the details. I read the book and watched the movie, and many details are distorted from reality.

I saw another review saying that apart from the Doctor no character is real, and I want to contradict, because all the characters are real, only certain actions of the characters differ from the book.

But apart from the distorted storyline and different actions of the characters from the book, the film is a very good one and worth watching to enrich the knowledge of those interested in this subject.

An Upbeat Little Flick

[jzappa · 7/10 · 12 October 2010]

The Grey Zone furnishes soul and significance for an episode that's little more than a postscript in history books, the story of the Jewish work units in the Auschwitz concentration camp. These prisoners were made to assist the camp's guards in shepherding their victims to the gas chambers, then disposing of their bodies in the ovens. Nelson attempts to utilize the past to remind us of the fragile vagueness of our own principles, that most of us will never have to know what we might have the capacity for in particular conditions.

And yet Nelson's dialogue is like a horse race. It sounds like American slang and divulges its theatrical roots, which works against the potent acting and the intrinsic impact of the subject matter. His screenplay needs to show more of the catch-22, instead of have his characters put on hostile debates about it. No doubt there is much tension created through all the tug of war, but characters are too graceful and fluent while speaking under pressure and in conflict. I don't feel anyone's true nature comes through in their words, except perhaps Harvey Keitel's surprisingly becoming SS officer. You can virtually hear the components of his principled device stirring as characters rap their adages and aphorisms. There's an affected purpleness to everything. Sometimes it works and sometimes shrieks of pretension. Nelson takes an emotionally inconceivable situation and comes close to sterilizing it with self-conscious technique. But ultimately, these are defects that, ironically, make fodder for subsequent discourse.

Nelson, an actor himself, knows experientially how to stimulate and inspire his cast, which is comprised of other strong performances than just Keitel's. Needless to say he must also know how to make an actor seem not to act, how to put him or her at their ease, bring them to that state of relaxation where their creative faculties are released. I think for every time that's done successfully here, there are just as many instances where we see through the baroque artifice.

Whether its sense of style seems to trivialize the authenticity of its situations, that's not to say it aims for the heart and misses. There are nevertheless many extraordinarily bleak and, most significantly, unflinchingly emotional scenes and moments that it's out of the question that you'd not be moved by the film. The violent rebellion, played not for hero worship but with somber fatalism, using minor key tonality in its score. If this story must be told and retold, and to be sure it must, then The Grey Zone is to be praised for discovering a new approach. The film's feeling for images gives it a grave intensity, but it's thrust by the acting, self-conscious or not. And not like many mainstream Holocaust films, even great, monumental ones, The Grey Zone is actually frank enough to renounce the prospect of hopefulness in Auschwitz. Or the world.

The film sneers at how we, most of us, more than we'd like to know, feel we can generalize about groups of people, races, nations, ethnic and religious groups, how in the bleakest of examples of this shameful human weakness gone to the extreme, it is all self-fulfilling prophecy. When you take away the rights of people, when you dehumanize them, they will of course work as corruptly and extremely as you to survive your oppression. One day sit down and make a list of groups of people in any or all countries, not least of which ours, that can be equated to this, and you may see a less distilled, less explicit holocaust that may or may not end.

So much could have been done here

[tkropla · 6/10 · 5 May 2003]

I expected great things from this film. There is so much potential in stories such as these to make a meaningful comment on our society and the things we do to our fellow human beings. Potential to make the audience wake up and change the way they behave in this world. Sadly this film fell far short of this goal. If indeed that was even it.

Finding the point of this movie was difficult if not impossible. The characters were superficial, lacking any emotional breadth or depth. We are given little to no background information that would help us grasp the horror of their actions or even the necessity of them. There is nothing to help us, as viewer, connect with the characters who seem to be suffering so much. I am always moved by these stories of senseless death. And yet I could barely maintain interest here. There certainly were no tears. And important details like names slipped right past because there was no point in remembering them.

So much could have been done with this film. On the other hand perhaps we were meant to be left in a sort of limbo. The film is after all called The Grey Zone.

If you really want to be moved by a story of the Holocaust rent Schindler's List or the new classic The Pianist. If you really want to be moved by a story of resistance during World War II watch Uprising. Despite it's many flaws, the emotional current is much stronger, the sense of achievement much greater.

The Best I have seen

[scott-stevens-1 · 9/10 · 23 February 2006]

I think I am approaching this film with a slightly different perspective than a lot of people here. 2 months ago I visited both Auschwitz, and Birkenau as I passed through Poland. It is arguably the most horrifying and at the same time the most important thing I have done in my life. I watched the 'Grey Zone' some months before I left, and yes to echo some I found the acting somewhat overdone in places and the first bit of the movie rather confusing. Having come back, it is a different story. The acting is heavy because the emotion of the place is heavy. The confusion you might feel in the first part of the film is what you *should* feel. Never forget, that Auschwitz is where the rule of law, decency and normality ceased to apply. This movie will not make you feel good, so don't expect it too...it is not its intent to present a happy victorious story. Its intent is to show those who have not lived through or visited Auschwitz just a small part of the horror of everyday existence, the juxtaposition of what may be right, and what you would do for another day of life. Having seen the cells in Block XI, having seen the womens camp, having stood in the remaining gas chamber and crematoria at Auschwitz I, I can assure you that this movie does its best to do justice to the memory of those who died. It is well worth seeing.

Scott

Stark and Unflinching!

[KUAlum26 · 10/10 · 4 August 2005]

Tim Blake Nelson takes his stage play--an adaptation of a book by Miklos Nyiszki--to the big screen,and what a story it is!

An unthinkable,unconscionable deal has been worked out between a certain group of Nazi death camp inmates and their captors: in order to avoid the ovens(in all likelihood,only temporarily),these inmates would use their talents(among them,musical) to placate and ease along the funneling of other Jews and "undesirables" into the death chambers. A strong cast and an even stronger screenplay/script is augmented by very intelligent cinematography. Particularly good turns by David Arquette,Steve Buscemi,Daniel Benzali and Mira Sorvino as the inmates,all desperate,all convinced of what they have to do to survive and in Arquette's character's case,not even certain if it is even worth it.

It would be tempting to slam "Schindler's List" after seeing this,but I won't. SL is meant as an epic,a tribute,a story of the upside of surviving through the most dense of human tragedy,whereas GZ is a decidedly darker exploration of what happens to people in the same situation but are pushed into much less noble,much more selfish and desperate devices. Both are strong examples of the genre,but where GZ triumphs is that that it explores the most damning actions through the consciences of people faced with decisions that nobody should have to make. It is an unflinching portrait of a dark chapter in human history,rife with detail and completely lacking of lecturing. THis film is for anyone who wants to see an unvarnished and stark portrayal of the human condition brought to its lowest denominator. A must-see for college classrooms and Holocaust museums anywhere!

Important Story of the Sonderkommando

[ETO_Buff · 9/10 · 30 December 2004]

This is an important film because it depicts an event and an aspect of life in the extermination camps that is little-known. It is not meant to be a tear-jerker, or a film on the level of Schindler's List, especially since it does not tell the same story. What it does tell is the brutal reality of the only armed revolt staged by the Jews in Birkenau (the extermination camp attached to Auschwitz). The Sonderkommando ("Special Detail") were the prisoners that were forced to assist in the annihilation of their own people by taking the bodies from the gas chambers to the crematoria. In order to keep their crimes against humanity a secret, the SS liquidated each Sonderkommando every six weeks. This is the story of a group that stashed away weapons and explosives and revolted just before they were scheduled to be liquidated.

After having read Eyewitness Auschwitz, written by a member of the Sonderkommando, and "Auschwitz: A Doctor's Eyewitness Account" by the completely self-absorbed doctor (in reality, not the movie) upon which this film is based, I'm glad this project was undertaken. It is a well-made movie that tries to portray too many of the complicated issues that involved with the subject. It has received some harsh criticism, especially by some who claim to be interested in the subject, but obviously missed many points in the movie. Since I don't know of any other films about the revolt of the twelfth Sonderkommando of Birkenau, I think this one is very good.

One final note: Some people seem to think that the title refers to some moral dilemma faced by the characters. While that certainly was an issue for some who were there, and while the movie title may convey a double meaning, the main reason Birkenau was referred to as the Grey Zone was due to the coating of ash from burned human corpses that covered everything, including those who lived and worked there. It was on the ground, on the buildings, and on their clothing. They literally ate and breathed it 24 hours a day.

Great Story. Terrible Acting/Directing.

[mmmn_mdhansen · 4/10 · 31 March 2009]

If it weren't such great story, i would give rate this movie as a 2. The cast has many great actors (Keitel, Buscemi), but they are overshadowed by the range of terrible popcorn comedy actors (Arquette, Sorvino). The casting overall was terrible. The acting, surprisingly even from the good actors, was mediocre at best. I blame this mostly on the directing as the lines ALL seem to be forced. It is no wonder that this movie went almost straight to DVD. Its just too bad that they had waste such a great story, and disgrace the people who committed such brave acts during one of the most barbaric acts in the history of the world. If you want to learn about a great rebellion that took place in Auschwitz and you don't want to read a book about it, then watch this movie. But just beware that the movie sucks.

One of the best holocaust movies ever made

[marievevir · 10/10 · 20 December 2002]

Absolutely one of the most powerful, disturbing and brutally honest movies on the holocaust ever made, this is far superior to such glossed over Hollywood portrayals as ceaselessly produced by Steven Spielberg and his group. Though those films certainly have their moments of merit, The Grey Zone is the absolute last word on Holocaust movies, a picture that so endlessly dives into the terror and banality of death that eventually absorbed the prisonners. VERY DISTURBING, and beautifully made, this film is too grim to have the Hollywood machine to support it, but it NEEDS to be heralded so it will live on. It is definitely up there with THE NIGHT PORTER and IN A GLASS CAGE as one of the most disturbing movies on the holocaust.

Also it is quite clever in the manner that it gets away with everyone speaking English, an obvious commercial constraint. Interesting that a company like Nu Image, which usually backs First Degree Monster On The Loose movies and No Brainer action films (with the exception of the surprisingly enjoyable Undisputed), would produce this.

A film to be cherished, though with a thoughtful warning...

It is EXCEPTIONALLY disturbing.

Best Holocaust movie ever

[knakker · 10/10 · 20 March 2003]

This movie is by far the best holocaust movie ever. It covers an aspect of the holocaust is rarely seen in other Holocaust-movies, namely the destruction and cleaning of gassed Jews by other Jews.

The acting work of David Arquette, Harry Keitel and Steve Buscemi is excellent. The setting is perfect (very depressing, as it should be). The music fits superbly in.

You should pick a right night for this evening though, because everything, from the gassing to cleaning to burning, is shown uncensored in this movie. The ruthless executions by the German SS is uncensored. As you can imagine, it's quite heavy on the stomach, but this is a MUST-SEE movie.

Stunning

[dispet · 9/10 · 5 April 2004]

This is the second film from writer/director/actor Tim Blake Nelson to disappear into film limbo. Known for his leading role in O Brother Where Art Thou, he also wrote and directed O, which was shelved after the Columbine massacre. It has taken 3 years for The Grey Zone to arrive on Australian shores, and it has now gone straight to video. This is a great shame as this is a stunning film worthy of far more attention. It is the true story of the Sonderkommando groups in Auschwitz, the most infamous of all Nazi concentration camps. The Sonderkommandos were Jewish prisoners who volunteered to work on the gas chambers and furnaces in exchange for better treatment and extended life. No team ever lasted more than 4 months, and would themselves be added to the groups herded into the gas chamber by the next sonderkommando group. This is the tale of the 12th group, who used their position to revolt against the Nazis and blow up the two primary gas chambers/furnaces. There are many flaws within the film; the dialogue feels too much like a play which makes the discussions somewhat static, everybody has an American accent except for Harvey Keitel who somehow manages to sound like Mel Brooks impersonating a German, and the details of how they select Sonderkommandos and their lifestyles are not very well dealt with. However, these faults do very little to diminish the power of this film. For above all else, this is a story that not only succeeds in answering the question of why Jews would volunteer for such a duty, but also allows the viewer a stunning and horrifying look into human psychology and the politics of oppression. While a film like Schindler's List allows us a broader view of the overall situation, it failed to truly give any insight into the individuals who allowed the machines of war to keep operating. How could people not rise up and at least to try fight knowing they were going to die anyway? The Grey Zone gives the viewer a very clear and very painful view of the weakness within humanity, of how humans allow themselves to be convinced that everything will be ok, no matter what evidence we have in front of us. In telling the story of the one uprising to occur within the most destructive of all concentration camps, we get to show the good in man, and the evil. And in this the film succeeds above many other films, and is worthy of praise far surpassing the melodramatic tripe that Hollywood usually tries to feed us in regards to the second world war. And, in our current political climate, it is more important than ever to understand how easily we fall back on our ability to turn a blind eye and believe the lies that even our next door neighbour will tell us.