Critical Analysis Of Schindler's List

Almost 25 years have passed since Schindler's List went out in theaters and from the time the movie released, opinions on the film have not changed much if any. As seen originally, critics view the film as a superb film capable of capturing the horrific elements of the holocaust. Critics don't see it as a film. They see Schindler's List as art (Kehr). A supreme film about Nazism (Zavoi). A visually powerful war film that deserved the praise received 25 years ago (Mattia). One of the most important American films ever made (Wisniewski). Just a sample of what critics today feel of Schindler's List.
A consistent view that Schindler's List does a fantastic job at portraying the Holocaust shows. It is a difficult task and is not accomplished without

Not only the lead roles and their performances, but the background characters as well. Star roles such as the dynamic Liam Neeson, the exceptional Ben Kingsley, and the charismatic Ralph Fiennes are commended for their performances (Zavoi). However, other elements of the cast are commended. For one example, the liquidation of the Krakow ghetto is viewed above most. While it is a scene of terror, certain staging elements are commended. For one, the inclusion of the little girl in the red coat is an interesting choice of symbolism. Her being the only object in color in the whole scene is noticed by the audience and Schindler himself. The coat is “... firstly a symbol of life.” as she wanders the streets. However, later when she is found among the pile of bodies of the Krakow ghetto, her coat “... becomes a symbol of blood and death.” (Mattia). Even the style of chaotic scenes is looked at. In the Krakow liquidation, the German speaking soldiers are looked at. While it seems pointless and just part of the chaos, a critic sees that it “...enhances the spiraling, disorienting effect.” of the on-going chaos (Mattia). As seen previously, views on the cast have also not

Some on the way the Jews are portrayed in how they are “...stereotypically greedy, weak, or feminized...” in some aspects (Wisniewski). There are also controversies surrounding the film. Some have “...critiqued for sentimentality, for turning the Holocaust into an entertainment, and Schindler, a Nazi, into a figure of sympathy.” (Mattia). Spielberg “...was also criticised for focusing on the 1,200 saved, rather than the six million murdered, for effectively deforming history and giving the Holocaust a 'happy ending'” (Mattia). Even other directors have criticized this film. The director of another Holocaust film, Claude Lanzmann, criticized the film “...for showing the Holocaust through the eyes of a German, for turning horror into Hollywood melodrama.” (Mattia). It is true that the film “...does struggle... with the ethical question of how to depict or represent a human catastrophe that continues to defy understanding or explanation.” (Mattia). Which is expected out of a film about the Holocaust. Though, this film is not only about the way the story is structured. The film “... works not only on the intellect but also on the heart, to affect, through artistic choices, an emotional response.” (Mattia). While the film has had some added criticisms in its near 25-year lifetime, the film has stood the test of time to be one of the greatest films