I am.
I consider this a very important movie about the Holocaust, and I think my son is old enough to watch it now.
Granted, this isn’t a movie you pop in because you’re bored on a rainy Saturday. You have to gear yourself up emotionally to watch it.
I’m definitely gonna buy it. That’s the type of movie I like to own simply so I know I have the possibility to watch it anytime. Won’t be one I watch on a weekly basis, but I can imagine popping it in a couple times a year maybe.
Nope.
Saw it once. That was ample.
For sure purchase. This movie is one of the great films; it’s on my short list of movies I can watch again and again without tiring of it. It is an emotionally intense movie, but ultimately a very uplifting one.
Buy the DVD, don’t buy it, who cares?
The Holocaust is irrelevant.
So 6 million men, women, and children were slaughtered by the machineries of 20th century civilization–that happened 60 years ago. Supposedly, the world learned the lesson that bigotry and intolerance breed monsters.
So what?
In the intervening decades, genocide and massacres have happened with depressing regularity. Schindler’s List was released in 1993, and Spielberg set up the Shoah Foundation so that the lessons of the Holocaust would not be forgotten.
Guess what happened in 1994–the genocides committed in Bosnia and Rwanda. Nobody stopped the slaughter of innocent people, killed because they were the wrong religion or tribal affiliation. Bosnia had concentration camps, but Rwanda went insane. Even Tutsi priests and nuns helped kill Hutus.
Spielberg didn’t make a movie about that.
What’s the purpose of getting weepy over the grim fate meted out to Jews murdered decades before most of us were born, when we ignore the mass destruction of innocents happening today?
Schindler’s List means nothing because we’ve learned nothing from it.
You want to do something useful? Take the 20 bucks you would have paid for the DVD and send it to the International Red Cross for Haitian and Iraqi relief.
Wow, gobear. I had no idea. 
I can’t say I enjoyed the movie, but I can say it affected me deeply, and I want it in my movie collection. I’m sorry if you feel it hasn’t done enough to stop future atrocities, but it is a movie about a part of history and I think, on that note, it is important.
I think saying SL means nothing is a little harsh, IMO. With all the dreck movies out there, from the Jason flicks to Club Dread :rolleyes:, a film that documents the past in an honest fashion is something to be treasured. I also have Saving Private Ryan and the CBS documentary on 9/11 for the same reasons.
gobear: re-read your post and you’ll see that it doesn’t make a lick of sense. Spielberg makes a movie, and because it failed to change all of humanity–within a year!–it is somehow a colossal failure that deserves to be forgotten.
Then you condemn not just the movie, but the very fact of the Holocaust itself as irrelevant.
That’s just nonsense, and you know it.
It’s deplorable that humanity has not learned to conquer its darker impulses. Yet the very best way to guarantee that that will never change is to forget the past, or dismiss it as irrelevant.
And certainly the best way to convince people they could do more to prevent atrocities is not to crap all over them when they’re trying to learn more about them.
Yes, I know: you were trying to make a point. But nonsense is nonsense, and deserves to be branded as such.
We now return to our regularly scheduled DVD discussion.
I think I’ll buy the ‘Schindler’s List’ DVD just so I can make out during it in the privacy of my own home!
It’s worse than you think – Schindler’s List enforces the myth that ONLY 6 million Jews, and nobody else, died in the Holocaust. Gypsies? Nope, only Jews. Poles? Russians? Nope, only Jews. Gays, blacks, handicapped, political dissidents? Nope, only Jews. 5 million non-Jewish people died, and nobody seems to know or even care that they existed in the first place.
Of course, there’s a reason we never see genocide films aside from the Holocaust, and that’s because Kosovars, Rwandans, and Cambodians don’t own film studios.
Ill certainly be buying the dvd so when my children are old enough they too can learn one of histories lessons.
I will however make sure they understand how the holocaust was used by the zionist movement including there bumping up the jewish casualty count by adding other minorities to there own.
Oh and while the film shows the that only germans killed jews ill be telling my kids that the other europeans killed as much of 3/4 of all jews killed. (i wont be glossing the fact it was the NAZI’s that instigated it all, believe me there evil will come across loud and clear)
Don’t forget to mention what Denmark did. Focusing only on the evil and the dark is as much of a mistake as forgetting the evil.
Gobear, you seem to have a different interpretation than I gathered from news at the time, and even now. There are some major differences between the Holocaust and the genocides in Rwanda and Bosnia. First and foremost, while no international forces went in immediately to take control and prevent the massacres, there wasn’t worldwide ‘benevolent’ ignorance, either: In both instances there was considerable international pressure and attention brought to bear on both atrocities. In both cases, international troops were sent to try to ameliorate and stop the killings. In both cases a lack of a clearly responsible local government prevented effective international intervention.
The Rwandan massacre lasted only a period of months, and if you honestly believe that an international invasion can be set up in less time than that, you’re living in a dream world. The Bosnian situation lasted much longer, but to ignore the fact that Russia has a rather clear (if perhaps irrational) commitment to Serbia makes the use of international force in the Balkans something that requires a lot of finesse. Sending in troops to control the situation would have been the worst thing possible, if Russia had perceived that as prelude to an invasion of Serbia. And once the ethnic cleansing began, what other course of action could be taken? The arms embargo was a mistake, IMNSHO, by preventing the Bosnians of all strips from being able to defend themselves, but the intent was to assist, and prevent the situation from worsening.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that neither atrocity occurred in the kind of news blackout that was part of the situation with the Holocaust. And, certainly, I can’t think of any American heros saying we should just let them deal with their own people as they see fit.
It is progress. We just need more.
By the way, why don’t the estimated 20 million North Koreans killed by their government over the past several years make your list of atrocities? That is a humanitarian crisis, ongoing, that still has damned little by way of media attention focused on it.
Odd, I thought that The Killing Fields was a genocide film, too. And I don’t know anyone who claims that only jews were killed in the Holocaust. But don’t forget the Belorussians, Ukrainians, Romanians, Croats, Serbs, Albinians, or French, either.
Though, I think there is a qualitative difference between the attention focused on the Jew, Romany, and blacks, and the other ethnic groups: With the three I mention the intent was genocidal, rather than (relatively) isolated punitive disappearances. The attention to gays was just as virulent, but I can’t say that I believe gays are an ethnic group. I don’t think that there was a belief that biology caused homosexuality - it wasn’t seen as a genetic strain to be removed, but a crime to be expunged. Doesn’t change either the effect or the vileness, but it is a different intent.
Don’t forget to mention what Denmark did. Focusing only on the evil and the dark is as much of a mistake as forgetting the evil.
Gobear, you seem to have a different interpretation than I gathered from news at the time, and even now. There are some major differences between the Holocaust and the genocides in Rwanda and Bosnia. First and foremost, while no international forces went in immediately to take control and prevent the massacres, there wasn’t worldwide ‘benevolent’ ignorance, either: In both instances there was considerable international pressure and attention brought to bear on both atrocities. In both cases, international troops were sent to try to ameliorate and stop the killings. In both cases a lack of a clearly responsible local government prevented effective international intervention.
The Rwandan massacre lasted only a period of months, and if you honestly believe that an international invasion can be set up in less time than that, you’re living in a dream world. The Bosnian situation lasted much longer, but to ignore the fact that Russia has a rather clear (if perhaps irrational) commitment to Serbia makes the use of international force in the Balkans something that requires a lot of finesse. Sending in troops to control the situation would have been the worst thing possible, if Russia had perceived that as prelude to an invasion of Serbia. And once the ethnic cleansing began, what other course of action could be taken? The arms embargo was a mistake, IMNSHO, by preventing the Bosnians of all strips from being able to defend themselves, but the intent was to assist, and prevent the situation from worsening.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that neither atrocity occurred in the kind of news blackout that was part of the situation with the Holocaust. And, certainly, I can’t think of any American heros saying we should just let them deal with their own people as they see fit.
It is progress. We just need more.
By the way, why don’t the estimated 20 million North Koreans killed by their government over the past several years make your list of atrocities? That is a humanitarian crisis, ongoing, that still has damned little by way of media attention focused on it.
Odd, I thought that The Killing Fields was a genocide film, too. And I don’t know anyone who claims that only jews were killed in the Holocaust. But don’t forget the Belorussians, Ukrainians, Romanians, Croats, Serbs, Albinians, or French, either.
Though, I think there is a qualitative difference between the attention focused on the Jew, Romany, and blacks, and the other ethnic groups: With the three I mention the intent was genocidal, rather than (relatively) isolated punitive disappearances. The attention to gays was just as virulent, but I can’t say that I believe gays are an ethnic group. I don’t think that there was a belief that biology caused homosexuality - it wasn’t seen as a genetic strain to be removed, but a crime to be expunged. Doesn’t change either the effect or the vileness, but it is a different intent.
“Of course, there’s a reason we never see genocide films aside from the Holocaust, and that’s because Kosovars, Rwandans, and Cambodians don’t own film studios.”
Obviously your conspiratorial rantings must be correct. I mean, Hollywood would never dream of making a movie about Cambodia , let alone award it a bunch of Oscars. And surely an internationally acclaimed director would never dare tackle the subject of the Armenian massacres. Clearly they’d never touch the subject of Rwanda , either.
Why, I hear that there’s such a massive cover-up in Hollywood that they won’t even let the Kosovo massacres be used as a plot point in cheesy action movies.
:rolleyes:
What the hell is wrong with you? They say anti-Semitism is making a comeback. Congratulations on being at the forefront.
First of all, there is no “myth” that only Jews were killed in the Holocaust. A myth is something created for a reason – the lack of knowledge in the populace about the deaths of five million or so others is due to ignorance and an unfortunate failure by those groups to educate others. Your choice of words suggests that Jews have intentionally tried to hide the fact that homosexuals, the disabled, Roma, Russians, and Poles were murdered in the millions, when this is completely untrue. Schindler’s List is not intended to be an all-encompassing historical lesson about the Holocaust.
And Jews own film studios? Perhaps they do – Jews have worked hard, and worked hard in the entertainment business, since fleeing persecution to come to this country and facing Anti-Semitism here. But they don’t own all the studios, and you know it.
You could really use an education. Anti-Semitism may be on the rise, but the fact that you are on this message board suggests you are worldly enough to know not to jump on the bandwagon. Perhaps you think I am sitting at my computer, hunched over in a tattered black coat, with a hook nose?
And gobear, perhaps the Holocaust is irrelevant to you, but my grandfather might not be so lonely at night if he still had the cousins he grew up with to call on the phone in Poland. They and everything they owned were obliterated. So fuck you. You have no qualms about blathering on to advance the gay rights cause – well now your credibility is gone. I and most others on this message board have plenty of gay friends and associates to listen to who can advance their causes without striking at others.
Sorry for the double post
Wait, what?
In the occupied territories, the Germans relied upon neighbors to point out who were the jews. Particularly in Poland, where anti-semitism was very strong, and there were so many former Russian jews who’d escaped to Poland from the pogroms of the Tsars. But also in France. In addition to the monetary rewards the Germans offered informers, there was also a feeling that such collaboration would help protect one’s own interests. Not to mention that the property of persons siezed would be stolen after the Germans took out the untermenschen. In several accounts the Germans had to press their way out of the houses against a tide of looters coming in.
Boy did you miss the point. The Holocaust was a monstrous tragedy, and yet the world putters on, killing and maiming, having learned not a damned thing about how to treat each other better. I am sorry for having posted so negatively last night.
Fine by me. Support gay rights, don’t support 'em–it doesn’t matter. Nothing does. That you think I’m striking at anyone shows how little you understand.
My point is that lamenting the past is pointless if we don’t learn from it.
So which is it? If you posted negatively, I didn’t miss the point. Your word of choice was “irrelevant”. Because some of our political leaders seem to go on killing and maiming, does not mean that everyone on this Earth has not learned from the past.
I wasn’t the only one who took offense.
For the second time, many have learned from it. I see you as someone so hopelessly starved for intellectual praise that you have taken on a faux-nihilistic demeanor . . . since the smart people are the ones who believe in nothing, have no hope, and shit on other people, right?
Besides, who are you to say we have learned nothing at all? Are you telling me you somehow have the power to see an alternate reality? Perhaps we’ve learned a great deal, and the world is a far better place than it would be without learning what he have? Or is this a worthless place to exist, until we can assure there will never be one more murder?
No, you didn’t think. You just ran your mouth to create controversy.