Hotel Rwanda and Schindler’s List: a Doppelganger?
Why are people so cruel? “Hatred... Insanity... I don't know...” says Paul Rusesabagina. Steven Spielberg’s Schindler’s List (1993) and Terry George’s Hotel Rwanda (2004) shows us how cruel people can be to the point of an act of genocide. These two films share the same genres: biographical, war, drama, and historical. From this, it can be presumed that Schindler’s List bears some recognisable similarities and differences with Hotel Rwanda, specifically in terms of how they present the oppression of a certain ethnic/religious group, protagonist’s character, and accuracy of the experience.
Both movies show oppression against an ethnic/religious group in their own way, however they share a similar
…show more content…
theme. The Jews in Schindler’s List, who are forced to leave their homes by the Nazis into the ghetto and later into the labour camp, suffer from trying to process their current situation. A major example of denial occurs in the scene when Mila Pfefferberg speaks to the other women in the camp about the death camps she heard of such as Auschwitz. She tells the women how the Jews are being unfairly gassed to death, and their corpses shortly cremated after. The women respond heatedly in refusal that something like that could never happen. Nevertheless, their expressions convey their uncertainty of the truth. They have already been through enough to understand that mass extermination is probable. On the other hand, in Hotel Rwanda, the Tutsis are being oppressed by the Hutu militia in many ways. For example, there was a scene when the rebellion actually starts, the radio speaker says that they must “cut down the tall trees.” This is a code for the Tutsis, who were also considered to be a tall group of people. Through these ways, there was a system of classification. Also, the constant use of the word “cockroaches” for the Tutsis exemplifies a form of dehumanization. By comparing them to insects, it gives the hate groups justification to kill them. Oppression means to subjugate by cruelty. Both films contain oppression since it suggests genocide against the Jews and the Tutsis. Although they hold the same theme, they express oppression in different ways. The protagonists in the movies astonishingly have something in common: heroism, valor, and audacity. These commendable traits help the plot progress into a better ending for the underprivileged. When Oskar Schindler approached the Rabbi that worked in his factory. he quoted, "What's the matter with you? You should be preparing for the Sabbath, shouldn't you. I've got some wine in my office. Come." This quote proves that he has riskily acknowledged the Jewish community. Paul Rusesabagina in Hotel Rwanda also demonstrates courage. When General Bizimungu, who carried out the genocide, demanded Paul to tell the Americans that he hasn't committed any war crimes, Paul told him, "Are you stupid General? How do you think these people operate? You sit here with five stars on your chest! Who do you think they're coming after?" This clearly shows that Paul is straightforward and is not afraid of the general even when he withdraws his gun. Furthermore, Paul is very faithful and compromising to his wife. He shares a strong relationship with her even though she is a Tutsi. In contrast, Schindler from Schindler’s List is a playboy with a large ego, and routinely cheats on his wife. These two protagonists have their differences in character, however, they resemble heroically. Schindler's List, in comparison to Hotel Rwanda, provides not only a much more historically accurate depiction of genocide but also a better artistic quality than Hotel Rwanda.
This film follows Oskar Schindler’s establishment of an industrial factory that provides refuge to Jews during the Holocaust. However, the movie also includes a variety of characters ranging from Amon Goeth, the Nazi soldier, to a group of Jewish women surviving in Auschwitz, to deliver a more thorough perspective of Germany in the 1940s. The film captures all of these stories adeptly by involving the characters in entwined plots. By bringing forth different circumstances from many perspectives, the movie creates a rich context to the Holocaust. Schindler’s List frequently discloses the audience to the brutality and inhumanity of that time. It was commonly illustrated through the sufferers on their knees being mercilessly shot in the head by the Nazis, that brings an accurate detail to history that Hotel Rwanda lacks. Schindler’s List reveals an almost impossible accuracy to the methods of execution of the Jews, explaining the dehumanizing effects of the Nazi soldiers and the deliberate tormenting of the Jews. In addition to Schindler's List's accurate representation of history, its use of black and white filtering brings an artistic value to the film that creates a depressing effect. This absence of color, with the exception of a brief scene of a girl in a red dress, creates an effect that resembles the eerie reality of the genocide. This artistic detail helps in communicating the tone of the Holocaust to its audience. In contrast, Hotel Rwanda avoided depicting the violence that occurred in the past accurately which may appear a little indefinite and diminished. Overall, when judged on its ability to accurately portray history, Schindler's List is successful in
that.
Markus Zusak, author of The Book Thief (2005), and Steven Spielberg, director of Schindler’s List (1993), both use their works to portray the theme of racism in Nazi-era Germany. Racism today affects millions of people daily, with 4.6 million people being racial discrimination in Australia alone. However, in Nazi-era Germany, Jewish people were discrimination because they weren’t part of the ‘master race’, causing millions to suffer and be killed. To explore this theme, the setting, characters, conflicts and symbols in both The Book Thief and Schindler’s List will be analysed and compared.
are both set in a terrible time when the black community were slaves and treated like garbage. The only difference is one was successful and the other not so much.
The similarities are prolific in their presence in certain parts of the novel, the very context of both stories shows similarities, both are dealing with an oppressed factor that is set free by an outsider who teaches and challenges the system in which the oppressed are caught.
The book takes perspective in the eyes of a Jewish prisoner and the movie is through the eyes of a young german boy, there are many ways they still relate. Each grievous story takes place during the Holocaust. With just that factor of relation, you can already predict how similar they are.
One of the many themes that has arose is the theme of injustice. The theme of injustice stood out just by reading the back of the book. As stated before, this book takes place in the time of Hitler’s reign in Nazi Germany. If anyone had previous knowledge as to what Adolf Hitler’s “final solution” entitled, social injustice would evidently be pointed out. These prejudices could be something such as concentration camps, torture, discrimination of the Jewish race and the destruction of homes and shops. Although many Germans had no idea what was happening in Germany during Hitler’s reign, one would be quick to judge Germans as a whole. This is the perspective that is dominant in the novel, they never mention massacre or concentration camps, and they just lived their normal lives. After the author educates the reader about a Jewish man named Max Vandenburg, the narrator says: “You could argue that Liesel Meminger had it easy. She did have it easy compared to Max Vandenburg. Certainly, her brother practically died in her arms. Her mother abandoned her. But anything was better than being a Jew” (Zusak 161). This quote by itself shows how terribly the Jewish people were treated. In their daily lives, they are faced with destruction, social injustice, and discrimination. They are treated very disrespectfully; they live with racial slurs, house raids, as well as having the Star of David painted on
“A genocide begins with the killing of one man—not for what he has done, but because of who he is.” -Kofi Annan. The Holocaust and Rwandan genocide were based off of this quote because they were either killed because of religion or ethnicity. In the book, The Night, they tell us about the horrifying conditions in the concentration camps and the transportation to there. In the movie, Hotel Rwanda, they show us the awful scenery of dead bodies lying everywhere and the terrified lives of separated families.
The physical and mental intent to destroy another being often unveils the darkest side of human nature. In the memoir, “An Ordinary Man: An Autobiography” dedicated to the Rwandan genocide, war hero Paul Rusesabagina states: “A sad truth of human nature is that it is hard to care for people when they are abstractions, hard to care when it is not you or somebody close to you. Unless the world community can stop finding ways to dither in the face of this monstrous threat to humanity those words never again will persist in being one of the most abused phrases in the English language and one of the greatest lies of our time.” The United Nations promised never again would they allow genocide to occur after the Second World War. Unfortunately, less
Steven Pinker implied that, “As long as your ideology identifies the main source of the world's ills as a definable group, it opens the world up to the mass murder of people” (1). Steven Pinker revealed an interesting side to the controversial topic of mass murders and the causes of them. He revealed that as long as people in this world believe that they are better than other due to their race, religion, and everything else that defines a group of people as different from another group of people. People are and have been wrongfully treated differently due to the incompetence of some to realize that everyone is equal. They often believe that they were superior to others because of their physical attributes and beliefs that they had. The Holocaust is a major example of the ignorance of some in history. This ignorance often resulted in the murders and mistreatment of many. Elie Wiesel was one of the six million plus people who were wrongfully mistreated during the Holocaust. Many believe that this sort of event could not occur in the current time period because people have become more civilized and tolerable to the differences of others, but sadly the world is not ready to contain a social utopia. The mass murder, and violence that is occurring in Darfur is one of the many things that shows that the world is far from achieving this social utopia. Throughout history, many occurrences of genocide have occurred due to the diversity of people and even though society has evolved greatly, there are still people and places today that are suffering.
The atrocities of the Belgian Congo and the Holocaust are two of the main events in history that have been responsible for the mass murdering of millions of people. Although these events significantly changed the course of humanity, and the story behind each one is very different, there are significant factors that make them alike as well as different. Many would agree that comparing two atrocities that affected the lives of so many people and gave a 180-degree turn to each of their countries would be something very difficult to achieve. However, by comparing the behavior of both the perpetrators and the victims of both cases, we might be able to further understand the lack of morality and the inspiration that led to these awful events. The perpetrators in both atrocities tended to have a similar pattern of behavior when it came to the way they saw their victims.
The movie “Schindler’s list” is a compelling, real-life depiction of the events that occurred during the 1940’s. It illustrates the persecution and horrific killings of the Jewish people. It also exemplifies the hope and will of the Jewish people, which undoubtedly is a factor in the survival of their race. The most important factor however is because of the willingness of one man, Oskar Schindler, to stand out and make a difference.
These ideas all correlate with how we view World War II history and how Inglourious Basterds muddles our previous thoughts on how these events occurred. Many Americans have watered down the depiction of Jewish oppression during Nazi reign to swiftly round up concentration camps. What Quentin Tarantino and the Jewish film community wanted to illustrate through this film is how this is an incorrect overgeneralization. Inglourious Basterds illustrates more realistic Jewish life during Nazi reign and the constant terror they faced. This oppression was far more personal, intimate, and cordial yet brutal altercations invoked through self-defense and hatred.
The novel describes his family life in the Austro-Hungarian Empire and his rebellious teenage years in the newly created state of Czechoslovakia. The novel informs the reader of Oskar Schindler’s relationship with his father and how his father abandoned Oskar’s mother, in which Oskar never forgave his father for leaving his mother alone. This information of how Oskar Schindler became to be how he is, is all significantly missed with Schindler’s List, Because it gives the viewer a whole outlook of Oskar Schindler and a better understanding of the ...
A film bursting with visual and emotional stimuli, the in-depth character transformation of Oscar Schindler in Schindler’s List is a beautiful focal point of the film. Riddled with internal conflict and ethical despair, Schindler challenges his Nazi Party laws when he is faced with continuing his ambitious business ideas or throwing it all away for the lives of those he once saw as solely cheap labor. Confronted with leading a double life and hiding his motivations from those allegiant to Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party, Schindler undergoes numerous ethical dilemmas that ultimately shape his identity and challenge his humanity. As a descendent of a Jewish-American, Yiddish speaking World War II soldier who helped liberate concentration camps in Poland, this film allowed for an enhanced personal
From the first moment of Schindler's List to the very last, you will be amazed by the strength and resilience of the Jewish people during this horrendous time in their history. You will witness and feel their pain and horror in this very graphic, yet painfully true story. Steven Speilberg deserves all of the awards this film had brought him. It is a time in history we should never forget and pray that we will never witness again.
Thomas Keneally’s Schindler’s List is the historical account of Oskar Schindler and his heroic actions in the midst of the horrors of World War II Poland. Schindler’s List recounts the life of Oskar Schindler, and how he comes to Poland in search of material wealth but leaves having saved the lives of over 1100 Jews who would most certainly have perished. The novel focuses on how Schindler comes to the realization that concentration and forced labor camps are wrong, and that many people were dying through no fault of their own. This realization did not occur overnight, but gradually came to be as the business man in Oskar Schindler turned into the savior of the Jews that had brought him so much wealth. Schindler’s List is not just a biography of Oskar Schindler, but it is the story of how good can overcome evil and how charity can overcome greed.