So recently German director Uwe Boll, arguably one of the worst directors of all time, released a trailer for a new film about the infamous Nazi camp at Auschwitz.
I won't post a link to the trailer here since it's gruesome (think watching people die very slowly in the gas chamber, gold teeth pulled out of corpses, etc.).
Boll is famous for making bad movies based off of video games, but claims that the movie is meant to illustrate the horror of the "final solution" in brutal detail.
Obviously, movies can be made about horrific events that are tasteful and adequately somber while still illustrating the terrible things that happened. "Hotel Rwanda" managed to be both a good movie and educate millions of people who were ignorant about what happened there (I, for one, had practically never heard of the Rwandan Genocide before the movie came out.) Boll is correct in that there aren't many movies that cover the Holocaust without also having a "good side," like "Schindler's List." But do we need one? It's not like no one knows about the Holocaust.
I'm not curious about what people think of the legal aspect of this. Uwe Boll legally can make movies about whatever he wants, really. But should he make a movie about this? Is there any way a director could cover this subject, or another similarly tragic one, without being exploitative, and if there is, can Uwe Boll?
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Mr. Pedantic
