The Boy in the Striped Pajamas

I don't think that it has ever been so quiet in my room after one of our film festival movies. This film obviously had an impact on those that participated on Tuesday. Was Boy in the Striped Pajamas a sad movie? Disturbing? Maybe even frustrating? The answer is yes to all of those questions. But Hollywood produces lots of sad movies, not to mention all of the disturbing stuff that they turn-out. What makes movies like this different is that it also an important movie for kids today to see. Important, not just because it deals with an important historical event like the Holocaust, but because it demands that we watch it with a questioning eye.

That means that whenever we watch a movie that deals with history, we should not take it as the full story on the issue. Sometimes a movie is biased toward one side of the issue, and could give a distorted picture to the uninformed viewer. For example, read the following excerpt from Wikipedia that includes criticism about our movie from a Jewish rabbi:

The book is a novel: it is not historical fiction. The very premise of the book - that there would be a child of Shmuel's age - is, according to critics, an unacceptable fabrication that does not reflect the reality of life in the camps.

Rabbi Benjamin Blech condemned it: "This book is not just a lie and not just a fairytale, but a profanation." His chief complaint is that it supports the idea that ordinary people were unaware of the horrors of the Nazis' mass extermination of Jews. He argues that everyone for miles around could smell the stench of death and expresses doubt that the 9-year-old son of a Nazi official could be unaware of what a Jew is (or whether he himself is one).

He writes, "Note to the reader: There were no nine-year-old Jewish boys in Auschwitz -- the Nazis immediately gassed those not old enough to work. Also, the Auschwitz death camp was surrounded by electric fences, making any attempts to crawl in through a hole impossible."^[2][3]. Such alleged falsification of history has important consequences, say Boyne's critics, for the way that the victims of the Holocaust might be remembered and commemorated, thus reviving arguments that were previously aired about Steven Spielberg's Schindler's List and the manner in which that film sanitised and falsified aspects of the concentration camp experience too.^[4]

So, what does this mean? Does it mean that the movie is worthless for use in a history class or history film festival? I don't think so, but some would probably disagree. One of the goals that I have for my film festival is to teach you all to look more critically at information that is presented in a movie, or in music, or even on the news.

Now, after you have thought more critically about the movie, what level of importance does it carry? Do you think that this kind of movie should be seen by kids today? What can they learn from a movie like this? What does a movie like this say about things we may learn from people that are close to us - even sometimes parents? Does the movie leave you wanting to learn more about this horrible episode in history? What kinds of questions, if any, does the film leave you asking?

As always, I appreciate that you have taken the time to watch this film with us and to give me your thoughts on it.

Apollo 13: Good history or a look at the future?

I hope you all enjoyed our movie from last week, Apollo 13. As is usually the case, true stories make the best movies.

For us, it is an especially important time to be thinking about the space program. As you may know, the space shuttle (our current space vehicle) is reaching the end of its life. It will soon be taken out of use, and there is a huge debate raging over what - if anything - will replace it. With a return to the moon being put forth as a goal of NASA, any future space vehicle would have to be more like those in the Apollo program. Our space shuttles are incapable of going to the moon.

As you might imagine, any new program would involve billions of dollars. One side of the debate argues that the benefits to science that would be realized are worth all of the money needed. The other side argues that in a time of such difficult economic problems, it would be irresponsible to spend money in space.

Your generation will have to pay for much of whatever is decided in this debate. Whether it's paying the billions that the program will cost if we decide to return to the moon, or the potential scientific advances if we decide to cancel NASA's plans. What do you think we as a country should do? Should we make the investment necessary to return to the moon? If so, why? If not, why not?

Again, I hope you enjoyed the movie. We'll be scheduling the next one in the next few weeks.