Tags
Auschwitz, Cannes, film, Géza Röhrig, Holocaust, Jew, László Nemes, Oscars, Son of Saul, Sonderkommando
I left the movie theater queasy and shaken to the bone. These are, perhaps, appropriate responses to the winner of the 2015 Cannes Grand Prix and the 2016 Oscar for Foreign Language Film. Son of Saul follows Sonderkommando Saul on his journey through and around the crematoria of Auschwitz in 1944.
Selected by Nazi concentration camp officers, Sonderdommandos were male Jewish prisoners who received slightly better food and conditions in exchange for their distasteful job of ushering fellow Jews into the gas chambers, confiscating and turning over their clothing and valuables, and transporting the bodies to crematoria for disposal. These men were vilified for their role in the executions. But in reality, they were just men, trying to survive madness and delay their own trip to the pyre for as long as possible.
Hand-held cameras closely follow Saul, played by Hungarian-born poet and scholar of Jewish theology, and former orphan, Géza Röhrig, through dark corridors and claustrophobic cubicles, creating nauseatingly unpredictable and chaotic confusion. Director László Nemes plays with viewers’ minds by occasionally shifting focus from Saul’s ravaged and inscrutable face to the mostly merciful, soft-focus of the surrounding human debris.
I was confused about what was happening during a good portion of the film, but eventually I realized that Saul had glimpsed the body of his young son in a pile of corpses. From that moment on, Saul is driven by an obsession to rescue the boy’s body and to locate within the prison, a Rabbi to perform last rites. To the exclusion of all other needs, Saul’s obsession endangers his life and the life of fellow Sonderkommando, who are in the midst of a covert plot to instigate a camp rebellion and prisoner escape.
Some viewers sing the praises of Saul’s bravery and determination and describe the film as “one man’s mission of mercy.” To me the film portrayed one man’s mission of lunacy. Saul’s behavior exemplified the utter despair and shrunken reality that results from the horrors of enforced depravity. In focusing on religious ritual to “save” the already dead, Saul retreats inside his own silent head and forsakes his fellow prisoners. It is not even really clear if the boy is, indeed, Saul’s child. The body could simply be emblematic of all the sons of all the Sauls.
The stunning and graphic cinematography in Son of Saul manages to handle scenes of human desecration with rare eloquence. Son of Saul is an important movie in the ever expanding body of work that addresses the Shoah. But it is not for the faint of heart.
Thom Hickey said:
Thanks for your thoughtful and sensitive review. I’ll have to steel myself to see such a powerful film. Regards Thom.
LikeLike
rangewriter said:
Thanks, Thom.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Keith said:
Linda, thanks for sharing this tough story. I think you captured the feelings well. I think, I too, would be close to lunacy if I was in his shoes. Keith
LikeLike
rangewriter said:
I think they were all hovering between lunacy and death. I hate what humans are capable of doing to each other.
LikeLike
Keith said:
Linda, we can rationalize anything, so yes it is scary. The Trump mania is representative of a disenfranchised group of people who will believe anything this man says, even when it is proven to be untrue more than 3 out of 4 times. Keith
LikeLike
rangewriter said:
As you know, the Trump mania really frightens me because it is so parallel to how Hitler rose to power. Disenfranchised people really will believe anything. This country has got to remedy the problem of having so many disenfranchised citizens.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wolfe, Carolyn S. (USTP) said:
What a beautifully thought-out and written review. I’ve been avoiding the film because I think I have enough horrors in my mind. Although I haven’t seen the film, I agree that the dead are dead and it’s the living Saul should be concerned about. I recently rewatched Brideshead Revisited (after rereading the novel, a favorite of mine), and found myself agreeing with the narrator that the last rites offered to a dying man were a lot of mumbo jumbo. Of course I’m responding after years of revelations about the many crimes committed by the Catholic Church from the mistreatment of pregnant Irish girls, to the lies about adoptions of out-of-wedlock children, to the treatment of nuns, to the molestation of so many children and the subsequent coverup by church officials. It’s actually worse than mumbo jumbo. It’s all a puppet show to distract the viewers from what’s going on behind the curtains.
LikeLike
rangewriter said:
Yes, as the action was happening I was getting increasingly more frustrated with Saul’s stupid focus on this dead body. But the reality is that mired in such horror, the human heart has little to hold onto. This pointless effort kept him going and living a wee bit longer. One sees from his shell-shocked face that never changes, that he is on the edge of sanity. It’s all just so sad.
LikeLike
Susan said:
I’m so torn. I would love to see that movie but I’m not so sure I could handle it.
LikeLike
rangewriter said:
Susan, it might be one that would be better viewed at home on a smaller screen, where you can walk away for a moment if you need a break. It is INTENSE. Rohrig’s face is a monosyllable through the whole thing. But at times it almost feels like you’re lying in one of those carts, being ushered down strange corridors and through frightening doorways.
LikeLike
moondustwriter said:
Yes your review is thoughtfully written. Ive been wondering if I wanted to see it in the theater. I like your idea to wait and be able to take the harsh bits in increments.
LikeLike
rangewriter said:
I almost wish I had done that. I’m pretty unflappable, but this one really got to me.
LikeLike
Lynz Real Cooking said:
What a wonderful review! wow a gripping movie! Sounds so sad and not for the faint of heart!
LikeLike
rangewriter said:
True. It takes a lot to rattle me, but this did.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Lynz Real Cooking said:
I can see why!
LikeLiked by 1 person
CineMuse said:
I enjoyed your review thanks. Its not widely acknowledged that this film is also a study of madness as Saul never had a son. Drop in for a read of my review and compare notes. I’m now following you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
rangewriter said:
Will do. Soon! Thanks. Excited to explore your thoughts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Otto von Münchow said:
Thanks for this review of Son of Saul. I haven’t gotten to see it yet,but after this I definitely will have to get a copy of it.
LikeLike
denisebushphoto said:
Now on my ‘to see’ list. Great summary and review!
LikeLike
rangewriter said:
Why thanks, Denise.
LikeLike