'Saul fia' is a masterpiece that goes deep into the horrors of the Holocaust. Director László Nemes makes a feature film debut that is spectacular. The camera is astonishing and the performance of Géza Röhrig is breathtaking. Without showing much, we can hear the screams of all the innocent men, women and children who were massacred and gassed by the Nazi Germans & Austrians. The macabre task of the Sonderkommando is brilliantly depicted in Saul fia. In my opinion this movie should have been nominated in all the categories and should have won ALL the OSCARS (Best Movie, Best Director, Best Cinematography and Best Actor in a Leading Role). 'Saul fia' is a MASTERPIECE with capital letters. Something for never forgetting what Germany & Austria did and never payed for.
Oh my goodness, this film is just fantastic. It's hard hitting, realistic and just a well made movie. I love the use of the full frame format and the way it was shot which made you feel like you were with Saul throughout the whole film. This is actually the first foreign language film I saw at the cinema that's currently nominated for the best foreign language film Oscar. Overall I hope it wins the award. I can't wait to see what Lazlo Nemes does next for his future projects. Definitely a filmmaker to keep an eye on.
+Ian Bulaclac This was a first for me too in the foreign film category, but that's also because none of the other ones are playing anywhere in the Chicago area. Hopefully, I'll get to see a few more soon, but I have a hard time believing they will be able to dethrone _Son of Saul_. You'll hear me talk about it more in my Oscar favorites video - I think it should have been nominated in more categories.
+Impression Blend I agree. I think the closest movie that could be the spoiler is Mustang. I hope to see that one, A War and Theeb before the Oscars. Which other categories would you say it should've also gotten nominated in? I'm thinking cinematography.
You do what any great critic does. An informed, intelligent critique which is fascinating enough on its own, but also makes me want to sit down and discuss it with you even more. Great job!
No worries, if it interests you, I wrote a short essay talking about the film, see what you think if you can find the time for it! filmpravdablog.wordpress.com/2016/05/04/son-of-saul/
This film is so much more than what it appears on the surface. Just like the Holocaust itself. It's easy to shrug off some things but when thought about more the layers present themselves. It's a very important film about the human condition.
A 40mm lens isn’t wide but it isn’t narrow. This was 35mm film in 4:3 aspect ratio. That’s why there are black bars on the sides. They also shot it wide open so the depth of field was shallow (i.e., everything outside of it was blurry).
thank you for the review! i agree strongly with everything you say in your video,stunning camera handling, sound editing, new-ish story telling techniques and have myself the same dilemmas, if he had the right to "betray the living for the dead" in such a situation... i have read all the articles, reviews and the interviews in English, French and Hungarian the director , the actor, the cameraman, the sound editor gave since the Cannes Festival, so i got a good understanding now what the original purpose of the director was with these strory-telling features. While I was watching the movie, i was there too, my arms and legs moved with Saul, and at least 2-3 weeks after the movie, i still had several ongoing flashes about what WE did in the camp ... wow! So I loved it. and the story is a very personal one to my own family, too. Still, i felt very bad about Mustang, A War, Theeb, Embrace of the Serpent, the all the other nominated films in the Foreign Language Film category, they should have won too, those issues are maybe much more current than the the story of the Holocaust. If I look around the world today, female rights and also the wars in the Middle-East and how Europeans react to those, and the cruel living circumstances of the Native Americans would deserve much more attention and withan Oscar more attention could have been raised.... :( (You were almost perfect in your pronunciation of the name of the director, Laszlo Nemes, the correct one is simply: "laslo nemesh")
+Noemi Molnar Thanks for watching! I'm happy to hear you enjoyed the movie as much as I did :) I still need to catch up the other films you mentioned, but I've heard amazing things about all of them.
Your review is great. I was in Jerusalem 2 weeks ago and I went to a cinema to watch it, it is a great movie, I want to watch it again when I have the chance. The movie is very shocking and for me it was even more shocking as I saw the reactions of the jewish people around me. This movie cannot be compared to other Holocaust movies, it is a totally different approach. In Europe 2 out of 3 jews were murdered during the Holocaust. Most of other Holocaust movies present the lucky 1 who survived, but this movie presents the 2 which didn't survive. That is why I think that this movie is closer to the sad reality. I recommend this movie to everybody to watch it as soon as possible and I hope that tomorrow evening it will be an Oscar winner.
This is true. Most Holocaust films want to have a happy ending, lifting up the survivors as more heroic than the victims. Which is unfair to learning about the Holocaust. We like to look at WW2 as being a Nazi defeat but the Nazis made absolutely sure that it 'won' the Holocaust
Great review. I'm definitely interested in seeing this, even more so after hearing seeing your video. I knew it was going to be a heavy film, so I definitely need to mentally psych myself up to go see it.
I watched this movie before watching your review and i totally agree with your comments. Its such a powerful movie. From the direction to the cinematography and acting. Seeing less is so much more powerful. Great movie.
I saw Son of Saul this weekend (I actually have it reviewed on letterboxd) and I think this movie was outstanding too, and also very disturbing. I didn't think I'd say this given the themes and subject matter, but I think I will get this film on blu ray because the way it handles its themes and characters makes me want to rewatch it. I personally thought the way the film blurred was a way of showing that Saul had detached himself from the horrors around him. Yet when you see the boy who is struggling to breathe because he came out of the gas chamber alive, only for it to then blur again when the boy is being killed, he just tries to ignore it but he simply can't! Thats why he forms such an attachment, its like theres just that little bit of humanity left in him. The ending was heartbreaking :(
+Metal Movie Magic I'm glad you finally got the chance to see this film! Honestly, one of the best films I've seen in a while. And I totally know what you mean with wanting to re-watch it even though it's pretty horrifying.
I saw this film too, but I can't understandbut i don't understand this film why deserve Oscar. I'm a hungarian huy and i glad that a hungarian movie won an award but why this movie. We have better films than Son of Saul.
+Nándor Gremsperger ...as far as i can understand from reviews from many professional forums all around the world, among others, the new, fresh, unexpected, genuine movie-making techniques made the film earn Oscar and numerous other prizes in the cinematogrophy industry
I saw this movie, it was so haunting. It is different to see a holocaust movie focused on a prisoner working in the unit of those who took the deceased out of the chambers. Also the small details that were true such as a prisoner taking photographs in secret of bodies that were being cremated.
I like what you said about the ambiguity and the about the director trusting the viewer. That's why a lot of the modern blockbusters disappoint me time and time again, because they assume the viewer is a complete idiot
Extraordinary film. Very moving, very harrowing and incredibly shot. Don't watch any reviews of this - watch the film first - otherwise you leave yourself open to spoilers and it take away some of the impact.
+Ouriel Ohayon I think there are a few ways to interpret it, but I thought it's because he saw hope in the boy. Which made the ending even more heartbreaking. What did you think?
+Impression Blend agreed. i think a way to see that is to understand Saul did not have a real son and that the sight of this blond children is the signal for us the movie watchers. Indeed he s looking at the boy as it it was his own boy saved from the river, which we know is not. So we re left to understand that Saul is happy to see again the boy he did not have. Another less compelling way is to let us know that Saul became actually insane, something that may have a started a while ago but that is revealed to us only now. Or finally something we can also understand is that Saul is relieved at this stage (morally and psychologically) and that seeing a normal boy is the first opportunity for him to express this relief. in any case it is a compelling ending
Another great movie I am glad you saw instead of me. Not sure my soul can take any more of other people's suffering. I'm getting too tender in my old age :))
Wow, this one is definitely high on my radar now. By the sounds of it, it looks very powerful. Not released in uk cinemas until the end of April, so I hope we get it locally :) I actually get to see quite a few foreign films now as we get one either foreign/indie film released locally every week, but usually heavily delayed. So I'm hoping to see a lot more. This week I finally get to see The Lobster as well :)
+Metal Movie Magic This one seems to be the only nominated film that's currently available for me, but I don't know how anything can beat this. We don't get _The Lobster_ until March, but I can't wait!
+Impression Blend finally seeing The Lobster today so, I'm really looking forward to it. And I will definitely seek out Son of Saul before the year is out for sure. Mustang sounds really good too :)
This is why I won't be making my Top 2015 list (podcasts not included) until July. There's just too many movies I missed; especially movies I haven't heard of. Like this one. I have no recollection of hearing about this film... Maybe the title, but that just reminds me of "Better Call Saul"; I had no idea what this was about. Here's how you're selling this film to me, it is with that premise of deciding for ourselves our opinions of the actions of the main character. I'm interested by that. It doesn't sound clear cut, possibly he does some morally reprehensible things? That within the confines of a Holocaust film is intriguing as I feel all too often characters in such films tend to be geared more one-sided-y. Whereas it's the perfect setting for exploring the grey of human nature (those that aren't on the side of the Axis anyway). So I'm interested by that question of: How did you react to it? Maybe I don't side with him? Or maybe I feel bad that I do? Not sure when I'll catch this, but now knowing the title, I expect to see it pop up all around me now. Cause that's how that works. '^_^
+Rob Iwataki I've given up on seeing every single film before making a top 10, to be honest lol I'm really looking forward to yours, whenever you post it! Pretty sure it will be very different from mine, which is always interesting. I think you'll really like _Son of Saul_, it definitely gives the viewer a lot to think about. Their twitter says it will go into a wider release in April, but hopefully you can watch it sooner!
Is it so brutal and dour that the re-watch ability is affected? Because there are plenty of films that I think are incredible but the bleakness of it make it tough to ever want to watch again.
+Justin Casias this is a good question, I've been thinking about that myself. Obviously, it's not something I'm just going to pop in on a Saturday night for fun... But I can see myself re-watching this some time down the road because of the themes and cinematography. Does that make sense?
+Impression Blend Makes a lot of sense. Lord Of The Flies is that movie for me. I think it's a fantastic film but it frightens me enough to where I can only watch it maybe once a year haha
Cannot wait to see this film, heard nothing but great things about it. Have you seen Phoenix? That is a german film that deals with a holocaust survivor which I thought was really great from last year.
The unit he was put in was called the Sondacomando. It's set in Auschwitz concentration camp., and it was the only the Photograph to survive of the fire pits the gas chambers scenes are horrific . I don't think she has seen this movie . the Boy is his son
wait wait..just because it was shot on 35mm film does't make it "limited" or closed you can shoot on film and have wide frame. The reason it was "limited" was because the film-makers decided to go with a 4:3 aspect ratio instead a generic 1.85 or 16x9 wide screen, this gave a 1st perspective look from our protagonist also having shallow depth of field to create a claustrophobic feel to the film. did't mean to be a dick but just clearing the deets. Laszlo and Matyas can shake things up, check our their 1st short film together.
+Impression Blend Well I should have added in the previous comment that this film is an example of top notch film-making where sound, cinematography, editing and acting all come together as 1 to create the enviroment where the director brings in his story. To answer your question, No aspect ratio is independent from whatever format one chooses to tell the story but I understand why you thought of 4:3 only limited to film, its because mid 80s early 90s most content was shot on film and the majority of the audience viewed the film on their television which for the most part were of 4:3 aspect ratio, but that does't mean that film was only shot in 4:3 look at lawrence of arabia or any other major film shot on film, they are mostly in 1.85 aspect ratio which is the TV standard of US, some are 2.35 which are wide screen and some are Anamorphic, but the point is it does't matter what the format it is in, you can shoot 4:3 on digital and it won't make a difference to the format. In this day and age choosing a aspect ratio like that is more for creative purposes as shown in Son of Saul to give a 1st perspective claustrophobic feel, but what is equally brilliant is the sound scape that was created to translate the horror of the environment without even seeing it .
Frederick Bourbon Ah, that makes sense. Basically, it used to be that way but it doesn't have to. Thanks for clarifying! Totally agree with you by the way, _Son of Saul_ is a great example of all of the elements working together to tell a story.
its not that great to be honnest it's a 6/10 movie i didn't get along or sympathise with the character at first i was asking my self if the kid was his son why he didn't react at the first place before he's dead then i was like wait it's not his son then why this kid out of all the people there maybe he have illusions maybe he have another kid back home maybe maybe maybe i didn't bite it the cinematography is greate at the 10 first mins i had great expectations because of the way and unique cinematography style thats all
I had high expectations for this movie. It is a good movie, but It didnt hit me emotional at all. The boddies look'd too "clean" as it where sleeping persons. The main actor was good: because of the horror he had no emotion anymore, but why than caring for a child... (not clear if it is his son) while he was so emotion-less in the whole movie(?) It made me feel like I was watching Birdman... too much at the same time for the main actor going on, like the other actors who want it to much from him. I hope'd it was an role like he was more one of the slaves then a inportant person too deal with.
The son is a metaphor only. He was trying to save that last bit of humanity which was left inside him. That is why he carries the boy with him. His last chance to feel like a human again.
‘Son of Saul’ doesn’t get released in the UK until the start of April, so I can’t give you my opinion of the film quite yet. However, the trailer, and aspects of your review, strongly reminded me of a Russian WW2 film from the 80’s called ‘Come and See’. A quick bit of googling revealed that it was indeed an influence on ‘Son of Saul’. I’m not sure if I’d recommend ‘Come and See’, as whilst brilliant, it’s also an uncompromising, brutal film. But should anyone be curious, subtitled versions can be found elsewhere on UA-cam. If you’re interested in the subject matter of ‘Son of Saul’ something I would wholeheartedly recommend is the writing of Italian Auschwitz survivor, Primo Levi. Levi is best known for ‘If This Is A Man’ & ‘The Truce’ which detail his time in Auschwitz and his journey home after liberation. But I’d suggest starting with ‘The Drowned and the Saved’ a collection of essays published forty years later, shortly before his death. It’s some of the most powerful, intellectually honest writing I’ve come across. Whether it helps answer some of the questions you’re pondering after watching ‘Son of Saul’ I’m not sure. Perhaps it will just pose more? Perhaps with the Holocaust that’s all there is, questions without answer.
+Kenny Shovel Thank you so much for the suggestions! I think I've seen _Come and See_, but if I have it was a long time ago. I've seen quite a few Russian WWII films when I was a teenager, so some kind of blend together at this point. I'll need to re-visit it.
+Impression Finally got a chance to see Son of Saul in the rather incongruous surroundings of a beautiful riverside art house cinema. Without question a masterpiece. The choice to concentrate focus on Saul, allowing the insanity of Auschwitz to play out in the background, worked brilliantly. Huge credit to Géza Röhrig who gave the perfect performance by not trying to give a performance. Again I was reminded of Come and See, a comparison that a number of reviewers seem to have made as well.
A history professor I had in college taught a World War II themed film class, and Come And See was one of the films he made us watch and write a paper on.
I actually found the obsession with shallow depth of field amateurish and simply there to tire the viewers, the character was completely unrelatable - hard to imagine any character than that one less worthy of redemption, and reducing the horrors of the holocaust to a first person entertainment was a morally appalling decision. I have no idea why this film is getting so many accolades, it may be without exaggeration the worst film I have ever seen. It's nothing but more than a string of cheap tricks engaging only with cliches. If it was about any other topic other than the holocaust it would be called out for what it really is. The emperor's new clothes, indeed!
Oh, please don't remind me that god-awful film. It was so terrible that I truly regret the time I spent seeing it. Apart of the collection of cinematographic gimmicks it had nothing to offer.
***** I spent a lot of time trying to find out what it was that film had that I might be missing - read reviews, analyses, interviews, discussed it the whole lot. However there is nothing that is really novel (that is not a reference to the style of some other director) surprising or interesting. Antisemitic? One of the things that disturbed me is that it tried to make entertaining murder porn out of a true atrocity. But I suppose it is easy to extract praise when every single shot is out of focus.
Fellini is one of my favourite filmmakers and I have utmost respect for Bergman and Tarkovsky - but I wouldn't go so far as to compare the drivel that is 'Saul' with these veritable giants of cinema. In fact the techniques Nemes's film does rely very much on Béla Tarr's style, to the point that it seems derivative. So your criticisms are nothing but senseless insults. 'Saul' was nothing but a film that relied on eliciting knee-jerk reactions, the lowest form of entertainment. In its core it *was* an easy-to-digest thriller, similar to the sort you criticise, and which I despise. If you wanted to make me change my mind you could try to reveal some aspect of the film that I had failed to notice. But that would be very difficult because it had nothing to offer beyond the confused wanderings of a not-so-interesting madman, whose only claim to character is the historical context. A truly chameleontic character, intrinsically shallow and empty. And the effects that Nemes overuses in order to get a 'visceral' reaction, it's just cheap, cheap, cheap. It is miles, no megaparsecs even from the nearly apocalyptic torrent of emotion you get for example, at the end of 'Andrei Rublev' (since you seem are so (rightfully) fond of Tarkovsky...)
***** Ridiculous, absolutely ridiculous. Why would I be jealous? It doesn't affect me in any way. I am just surprised of how such a poorly made and extraordinarily shallow film has extracted so much undeserving praise. And a friendly word of advice, keep your personal insults to yourself, they're more than a tad annoying.
***** I suggest you to simply stop. Get used to the fact that not everyone will like things that you like, even things that you think are pretty good such as 'saul'. However you have done nothing but insult me for no reason. There is a good reason why I made such a strong critique of that film - because everyone is showering it with undeserving praise and not giving any reasons for it! I do not know why it has done so well, but my guess is that because it used a handful of tricks that some critics enjoyed it created a massive support movement. Plus it takes place in a setting that is already infused with historical meaning. And I don't care how intentional it was (which it was, but still) any film where every single shot is blurry and out of focus is not an aesthetic choice that I will ever condone.
'Saul fia' is a masterpiece that goes deep into the horrors of the Holocaust. Director László Nemes makes a feature film debut that is spectacular. The camera is astonishing and the performance of Géza Röhrig is breathtaking. Without showing much, we can hear the screams of all the innocent men, women and children who were massacred and gassed by the Nazi Germans & Austrians. The macabre task of the Sonderkommando is brilliantly depicted in Saul fia. In my opinion this movie should have been nominated in all the categories and should have won ALL the OSCARS (Best Movie, Best Director, Best Cinematography and Best Actor in a Leading Role). 'Saul fia' is a MASTERPIECE with capital letters. Something for never forgetting what Germany & Austria did and never payed for.
Oh my goodness, this film is just fantastic. It's hard hitting, realistic and just a well made movie. I love the use of the full frame format and the way it was shot which made you feel like you were with Saul throughout the whole film. This is actually the first foreign language film I saw at the cinema that's currently nominated for the best foreign language film Oscar.
Overall I hope it wins the award. I can't wait to see what Lazlo Nemes does next for his future projects. Definitely a filmmaker to keep an eye on.
+Ian Bulaclac This was a first for me too in the foreign film category, but that's also because none of the other ones are playing anywhere in the Chicago area. Hopefully, I'll get to see a few more soon, but I have a hard time believing they will be able to dethrone _Son of Saul_. You'll hear me talk about it more in my Oscar favorites video - I think it should have been nominated in more categories.
+Impression Blend I agree. I think the closest movie that could be the spoiler is Mustang. I hope to see that one, A War and Theeb before the Oscars. Which other categories would you say it should've also gotten nominated in? I'm thinking cinematography.
Ian Bulaclac That's one of them for sure. I think there are others as well. You'll see :)
You do what any great critic does. An informed, intelligent critique which is fascinating enough on its own, but also makes me want to sit down and discuss it with you even more. Great job!
+PK AVA Thank you so much! :)
No worries, if it interests you, I wrote a short essay talking about the film, see what you think if you can find the time for it! filmpravdablog.wordpress.com/2016/05/04/son-of-saul/
This film is so much more than what it appears on the surface. Just like the Holocaust itself. It's easy to shrug off some things but when thought about more the layers present themselves. It's a very important film about the human condition.
A 40mm lens isn’t wide but it isn’t narrow. This was 35mm film in 4:3 aspect ratio. That’s why there are black bars on the sides. They also shot it wide open so the depth of field was shallow (i.e., everything outside of it was blurry).
Son of Saul one of the greatest film I've ever seen. It's really thought-provoking movie. It must be seen by everyone!
thank you for the review! i agree strongly with everything you say in your video,stunning camera handling, sound editing, new-ish story telling techniques and have myself the same dilemmas, if he had the right to "betray the living for the dead" in such a situation... i have read all the articles, reviews and the interviews in English, French and Hungarian the director , the actor, the cameraman, the sound editor gave since the Cannes Festival, so i got a good understanding now what the original purpose of the director was with these strory-telling features.
While I was watching the movie, i was there too, my arms and legs moved with Saul, and at least 2-3 weeks after the movie, i still had several ongoing flashes about what WE did in the camp ... wow!
So I loved it. and the story is a very personal one to my own family, too. Still, i felt very bad about Mustang, A War, Theeb, Embrace of the Serpent, the all the other nominated films in the Foreign Language Film category, they should have won too, those issues are maybe much more current than the the story of the Holocaust. If I look around the world today, female rights and also the wars in the Middle-East and how Europeans react to those, and the cruel living circumstances of the Native Americans would deserve much more attention and withan Oscar more attention could have been raised.... :(
(You were almost perfect in your pronunciation of the name of the director, Laszlo Nemes, the correct one is simply: "laslo nemesh")
+Noemi Molnar Thanks for watching! I'm happy to hear you enjoyed the movie as much as I did :) I still need to catch up the other films you mentioned, but I've heard amazing things about all of them.
Your review is great. I was in Jerusalem 2 weeks ago and I went to a cinema to watch it, it is a great movie, I want to watch it again when I have the chance. The movie is very shocking and for me it was even more shocking as I saw the reactions of the jewish people around me. This movie cannot be compared to other Holocaust movies, it is a totally different approach. In Europe 2 out of 3 jews were murdered during the Holocaust. Most of other Holocaust movies present the lucky 1 who survived, but this movie presents the 2 which didn't survive. That is why I think that this movie is closer to the sad reality. I recommend this movie to everybody to watch it as soon as possible and I hope that tomorrow evening it will be an Oscar winner.
+Gáspár Erőss I think it will win for Best Foreign Film, I just wish it was nominated in more categories.
This is true. Most Holocaust films want to have a happy ending, lifting up the survivors as more heroic than the victims. Which is unfair to learning about the Holocaust. We like to look at WW2 as being a Nazi defeat but the Nazis made absolutely sure that it 'won' the Holocaust
@@ImpressionBlend check wikipedia you will see the vast amount of awards and nominations this film got.
Great review. I'm definitely interested in seeing this, even more so after hearing seeing your video. I knew it was going to be a heavy film, so I definitely need to mentally psych myself up to go see it.
+Lindsay Weimer Thanks, friend :) I think you will really appreciate this. I can't wait for you to see it so we can be depressed about it together.
I watched this movie before watching your review and i totally agree with your comments. Its such a powerful movie. From the direction to the cinematography and acting. Seeing less is so much more powerful. Great movie.
It's one of those films that really stays with you, I still think about it sometimes.
I saw Son of Saul this weekend (I actually have it reviewed on letterboxd) and I think this movie was outstanding too, and also very disturbing. I didn't think I'd say this given the themes and subject matter, but I think I will get this film on blu ray because the way it handles its themes and characters makes me want to rewatch it. I personally thought the way the film blurred was a way of showing that Saul had detached himself from the horrors around him. Yet when you see the boy who is struggling to breathe because he came out of the gas chamber alive, only for it to then blur again when the boy is being killed, he just tries to ignore it but he simply can't! Thats why he forms such an attachment, its like theres just that little bit of humanity left in him. The ending was heartbreaking :(
+Metal Movie Magic I'm glad you finally got the chance to see this film! Honestly, one of the best films I've seen in a while. And I totally know what you mean with wanting to re-watch it even though it's pretty horrifying.
I saw this film too, but I can't understandbut i don't understand this film why deserve Oscar. I'm a hungarian huy and i glad that a hungarian movie won an award but why this movie. We have better films than Son of Saul.
+Nándor Gremsperger ...as far as i can understand from reviews from many professional forums all around the world, among others, the new, fresh, unexpected, genuine movie-making techniques made the film earn Oscar and numerous other prizes in the cinematogrophy industry
I saw this movie, it was so haunting. It is different to see a holocaust movie focused on a prisoner working in the unit of those who took the deceased out of the chambers. Also the small details that were true such as a prisoner taking photographs in secret of bodies that were being cremated.
Great review. Just watched the movie a while ago.
I like what you said about the ambiguity and the about the director trusting the viewer. That's why a lot of the modern blockbusters disappoint me time and time again, because they assume the viewer is a complete idiot
Extraordinary film. Very moving, very harrowing and incredibly shot. Don't watch any reviews of this - watch the film first - otherwise you leave yourself open to spoilers and it take away some of the impact.
loved the movie and its humility on the topic. i was interested in how you understood the end and in particular saul's smile just before the end?
+Ouriel Ohayon I think there are a few ways to interpret it, but I thought it's because he saw hope in the boy. Which made the ending even more heartbreaking. What did you think?
+Impression Blend agreed. i think a way to see that is to understand Saul did not have a real son and that the sight of this blond children is the signal for us the movie watchers. Indeed he s looking at the boy as it it was his own boy saved from the river, which we know is not. So we re left to understand that Saul is happy to see again the boy he did not have. Another less compelling way is to let us know that Saul became actually insane, something that may have a started a while ago but that is revealed to us only now. Or finally something we can also understand is that Saul is relieved at this stage (morally and psychologically) and that seeing a normal boy is the first opportunity for him to express this relief. in any case it is a compelling ending
Do you have the eyes of two colours? two differents kind of green?
+carolina lopez I do :)
Another great movie I am glad you saw instead of me. Not sure my soul can take any more of other people's suffering. I'm getting too tender in my old age :))
+paper kay Understandable :)
his saul/sole goal in this film... .34secs...where's the no pun intended????
Great review!!! I agree 100% with everything you said. It totally deserved the Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film.
Thank you!
***** You're welcome.
Wow, this one is definitely high on my radar now. By the sounds of it, it looks very powerful. Not released in uk cinemas until the end of April, so I hope we get it locally :) I actually get to see quite a few foreign films now as we get one either foreign/indie film released locally every week, but usually heavily delayed. So I'm hoping to see a lot more. This week I finally get to see The Lobster as well :)
+Metal Movie Magic This one seems to be the only nominated film that's currently available for me, but I don't know how anything can beat this. We don't get _The Lobster_ until March, but I can't wait!
+Impression Blend finally seeing The Lobster today so, I'm really looking forward to it. And I will definitely seek out Son of Saul before the year is out for sure. Mustang sounds really good too :)
This is why I won't be making my Top 2015 list (podcasts not included) until July. There's just too many movies I missed; especially movies I haven't heard of. Like this one. I have no recollection of hearing about this film... Maybe the title, but that just reminds me of "Better Call Saul"; I had no idea what this was about.
Here's how you're selling this film to me, it is with that premise of deciding for ourselves our opinions of the actions of the main character. I'm interested by that. It doesn't sound clear cut, possibly he does some morally reprehensible things? That within the confines of a Holocaust film is intriguing as I feel all too often characters in such films tend to be geared more one-sided-y. Whereas it's the perfect setting for exploring the grey of human nature (those that aren't on the side of the Axis anyway). So I'm interested by that question of: How did you react to it? Maybe I don't side with him? Or maybe I feel bad that I do?
Not sure when I'll catch this, but now knowing the title, I expect to see it pop up all around me now. Cause that's how that works. '^_^
+Rob Iwataki I've given up on seeing every single film before making a top 10, to be honest lol I'm really looking forward to yours, whenever you post it! Pretty sure it will be very different from mine, which is always interesting. I think you'll really like _Son of Saul_, it definitely gives the viewer a lot to think about. Their twitter says it will go into a wider release in April, but hopefully you can watch it sooner!
Thank you for a good review. Looking forward to see it.
+appelsinsaft Thanks for watching!
Is it so brutal and dour that the re-watch ability is affected? Because there are plenty of films that I think are incredible but the bleakness of it make it tough to ever want to watch again.
+Justin Casias this is a good question, I've been thinking about that myself. Obviously, it's not something I'm just going to pop in on a Saturday night for fun... But I can see myself re-watching this some time down the road because of the themes and cinematography. Does that make sense?
+Impression Blend Makes a lot of sense. Lord Of The Flies is that movie for me. I think it's a fantastic film but it frightens me enough to where I can only watch it maybe once a year haha
Great review!!!!
Thank you!
Sounds like a powerful movie that i need to see. I'll be on the lookout. Thank you.
+Jerry the Targaryen Steamboat Definitely a powerful movie. Thanks for watching :)
***** can't wait to get a chance to see it, and you're welcome for the gif =p
Can someone tell me what happened at the very end of this movie I didn’t get to see
Cannot wait to see this film, heard nothing but great things about it. Have you seen Phoenix? That is a german film that deals with a holocaust survivor which I thought was really great from last year.
+TheApproximation Haven't seen _Phoenix_ yet, but added it to my Netflix queue :)
Thanks, I'll be watching this. You're really pretty by the way.
The unit he was put in was called the Sondacomando. It's set in Auschwitz concentration camp., and it was the only the Photograph to survive of the fire pits the gas chambers scenes are horrific . I don't think she has seen this movie . the Boy is his son
wait wait..just because it was shot on 35mm film does't make it "limited" or closed you can shoot on film and have wide frame. The reason it was "limited" was because the film-makers decided to go with a 4:3 aspect ratio instead a generic 1.85 or 16x9 wide screen, this gave a 1st perspective look from our protagonist also having shallow depth of field to create a claustrophobic feel to the film. did't mean to be a dick but just clearing the deets. Laszlo and Matyas can shake things up, check our their 1st short film together.
+Frederick Bourbon Hold on, this is confusing me now. As far as I read, filming on 35mm film was directly related to the 4:3 ratio. Is that not true?
+Impression Blend Well I should have added in the previous comment that this film is an example of top notch film-making where sound, cinematography, editing and acting all come together as 1 to create the enviroment where the director brings in his story. To answer your question, No aspect ratio is independent from whatever format one chooses to tell the story but I understand why you thought of 4:3 only limited to film, its because mid 80s early 90s most content was shot on film and the majority of the audience viewed the film on their television which for the most part were of 4:3 aspect ratio, but that does't mean that film was only shot in 4:3 look at lawrence of arabia or any other major film shot on film, they are mostly in 1.85 aspect ratio which is the TV standard of US, some are 2.35 which are wide screen and some are Anamorphic, but the point is it does't matter what the format it is in, you can shoot 4:3 on digital and it won't make a difference to the format. In this day and age choosing a aspect ratio like that is more for creative purposes as shown in Son of Saul to give a 1st perspective claustrophobic feel, but what is equally brilliant is the sound scape that was created to translate the horror of the environment without even seeing it .
Frederick Bourbon Ah, that makes sense. Basically, it used to be that way but it doesn't have to. Thanks for clarifying! Totally agree with you by the way, _Son of Saul_ is a great example of all of the elements working together to tell a story.
I'm from Hungary, it was a delight to watch your review. Btw, his name is pronounced 'Nem-ash' ;-)
+Zsolt Thank you! Sorry for mispronouncing the name, could find a definite answer on how to say his name. Thanks for letting me know :)
My pleasure. :-)
the director is Laszló Nemes(h) , english "S" pronounced "esh" in hungarian language
Hey, Marianna! This one has the subs on already! Take care! =)
+Noe Conci Thank you! You're the best :)
Would you suggest going with friends? I went with a couple of my friends to the revenant and they thought it was the most boring film ever :/
+Ryan Lee Depends on whether or not your friends are interested in something like this. Obviously, not a fun popcorn movie, you know?
This one is a poem. Thanks 🙂
its not that great to be honnest it's a 6/10 movie i didn't get along or sympathise with the character at first i was asking my self if the kid was his son why he didn't react at the first place before he's dead then i was like wait it's not his son then why this kid out of all the people there maybe he have illusions maybe he have another kid back home maybe maybe maybe i didn't bite it the cinematography is greate at the 10 first mins i had great expectations because of the way and unique cinematography style thats all
I wanna watch this so bad
+Monty Datta Is it not playing anywhere in your area?
I had high expectations for this movie.
It is a good movie, but It didnt hit me emotional at all.
The boddies look'd too "clean" as it where sleeping persons.
The main actor was good: because of the horror he had no emotion anymore,
but why than caring for a child... (not clear if it is his son) while he was so emotion-less in the whole movie(?)
It made me feel like I was watching Birdman... too much at the same time for the main actor going on,
like the other actors who want it to much from him.
I hope'd it was an role like he was more one of the slaves then a inportant person too deal with.
The son is a metaphor only. He was trying to save that last bit of humanity which was left inside him. That is why he carries the boy with him. His last chance to feel like a human again.
‘Son of Saul’ doesn’t get released in the UK until the start of April, so I can’t give you my opinion of the film quite yet. However, the trailer, and aspects of your review, strongly reminded me of a Russian WW2 film from the 80’s called ‘Come and See’. A quick bit of googling revealed that it was indeed an influence on ‘Son of Saul’.
I’m not sure if I’d recommend ‘Come and See’, as whilst brilliant, it’s also an uncompromising, brutal film. But should anyone be curious, subtitled versions can be found elsewhere on UA-cam.
If you’re interested in the subject matter of ‘Son of Saul’ something I would wholeheartedly recommend is the writing of Italian Auschwitz survivor, Primo Levi. Levi is best known for ‘If This Is A Man’ & ‘The Truce’ which detail his time in Auschwitz and his journey home after liberation. But I’d suggest starting with ‘The Drowned and the Saved’ a collection of essays published forty years later, shortly before his death. It’s some of the most powerful, intellectually honest writing I’ve come across. Whether it helps answer some of the questions you’re pondering after watching ‘Son of Saul’ I’m not sure. Perhaps it will just pose more? Perhaps with the Holocaust that’s all there is, questions without answer.
+Kenny Shovel Thank you so much for the suggestions! I think I've seen _Come and See_, but if I have it was a long time ago. I've seen quite a few Russian WWII films when I was a teenager, so some kind of blend together at this point. I'll need to re-visit it.
+Impression Finally got a chance to see Son of Saul in the rather incongruous surroundings of a beautiful riverside art house cinema.
Without question a masterpiece. The choice to concentrate focus on Saul, allowing the insanity of Auschwitz to play out in the background, worked brilliantly. Huge credit to Géza Röhrig who gave the perfect performance by not trying to give a performance.
Again I was reminded of Come and See, a comparison that a number of reviewers seem to have made as well.
A history professor I had in college taught a World War II themed film class, and Come And See was one of the films he made us watch and write a paper on.
After watching your review, I'm already depressed :(
+Chester H Yea.... Not a very cheerful film.
what about in darkness
Like Bowie
hi
Do you have Heterochromia?
+Jesse N Depends... Is this something you're into? ;)
I think i save my money for kung fu panda 3, thank you very much ;)
It's worth checking out at least once. It really is that good.
vaikuttaa erinomaiselta holokausti luokan elokuvalta....
You always look so suspicious of the movie in your thumbnails
+Wesley Tomsky Well... It kind of depends on the film/show. In this case, smiling for the thumbnail felt inappropriate.
***** lol
I hated Saul, he was a freaking selfish and asshole
shot in 35 mm you dont get wide screen picture ?!!!! who told you about this stuff u should know well befor talking
Great terrible film
I actually found the obsession with shallow depth of field amateurish and simply there to tire the viewers, the character was completely unrelatable - hard to imagine any character than that one less worthy of redemption, and reducing the horrors of the holocaust to a first person entertainment was a morally appalling decision. I have no idea why this film is getting so many accolades, it may be without exaggeration the worst film I have ever seen. It's nothing but more than a string of cheap tricks engaging only with cliches. If it was about any other topic other than the holocaust it would be called out for what it really is. The emperor's new clothes, indeed!
Oh, please don't remind me that god-awful film. It was so terrible that I truly regret the time I spent seeing it.
Apart of the collection of cinematographic gimmicks it had nothing to offer.
*****
I spent a lot of time trying to find out what it was that film had that I might be missing - read reviews, analyses, interviews, discussed it the whole lot. However there is nothing that is really novel (that is not a reference to the style of some other director) surprising or interesting.
Antisemitic? One of the things that disturbed me is that it tried to make entertaining murder porn out of a true atrocity.
But I suppose it is easy to extract praise when every single shot is out of focus.
Fellini is one of my favourite filmmakers and I have utmost respect for Bergman and Tarkovsky - but I wouldn't go so far as to compare the drivel that is 'Saul' with these veritable giants of cinema. In fact the techniques Nemes's film does rely very much on Béla Tarr's style, to the point that it seems derivative.
So your criticisms are nothing but senseless insults. 'Saul' was nothing but a film that relied on eliciting knee-jerk reactions, the lowest form of entertainment. In its core it *was* an easy-to-digest thriller, similar to the sort you criticise, and which I despise.
If you wanted to make me change my mind you could try to reveal some aspect of the film that I had failed to notice. But that would be very difficult because it had nothing to offer beyond the confused wanderings of a not-so-interesting madman, whose only claim to character is the historical context. A truly chameleontic character, intrinsically shallow and empty. And the effects that Nemes overuses in order to get a 'visceral' reaction, it's just cheap, cheap, cheap.
It is miles, no megaparsecs even from the nearly apocalyptic torrent of emotion you get for example, at the end of 'Andrei Rublev' (since you seem are so (rightfully) fond of Tarkovsky...)
*****
Ridiculous, absolutely ridiculous. Why would I be jealous? It doesn't affect me in any way. I am just surprised of how such a poorly made and extraordinarily shallow film has extracted so much undeserving praise.
And a friendly word of advice, keep your personal insults to yourself, they're more than a tad annoying.
*****
I suggest you to simply stop. Get used to the fact that not everyone will like things that you like, even things that you think are pretty good such as 'saul'. However you have done nothing but insult me for no reason.
There is a good reason why I made such a strong critique of that film - because everyone is showering it with undeserving praise and not giving any reasons for it!
I do not know why it has done so well, but my guess is that because it used a handful of tricks that some critics enjoyed it created a massive support movement. Plus it takes place in a setting that is already infused with historical meaning.
And I don't care how intentional it was (which it was, but still) any film where every single shot is blurry and out of focus is not an aesthetic choice that I will ever condone.
Waste of time. This movie sucks, useless fool's storyline & the lead actor was so frustrating, irritating and disappointing.👎👎👎