C4 unfinished from C1
documentary, by first-time Israeli director Yael Hersonski, is an en- grossing study in the slippery power of a visual record, a power that, as Hersonski acknowledges in a recent interview, is ultimate- ly in no one’s control. Hersonski, speaking by phone from a hotel in New York, says that with the background she provides in “A Film Unfinished,” she hopes to restore some in- trinsic force to images of suf- fering that had become, over years of being excerpted and used in other documentaries, mere “illustrations for so many different stories.”
“I was amazed how the mean- ing of the images was changing before my eyes in the full con- text,” she says. “A Film Unfinished” scores a
delicate achievement. In expos- ing how the Nazis warped reality in a propaganda film they made about the hell they created, it un- covers new emotional territory in the Holocaust, about which some of us may feel we have seen and felt enough. The clouded eyes of that brittle, birdlike boy on the sidewalk— twice victimized, hav- ing been starved and then turned into a prop — will surely con- vince viewers otherwise.
Outtakes reveal staging The documentary shows, in its
entirety, an hour-long film the Nazis made about the Warsaw ghetto, where some 400,000 Jews from occupied Poland and other parts of Europe were con- fined, creating a clash of cultures, languages and classes. The Nazi film is a sprawling work, de- picting streetscapes and home life, mass graves and the circum- cision of a tiny, doomed baby. But, oddly, it was left incomplete, without sound or production credits. Years later, there were discov- eries: Outtakes were found in 1998, revealing how certain scenes were staged and shot over and over. “A Film Unfinished” in- cludes these, as well as recently unearthed testimony from a cam- eraman about the fakery. The emotional impact of this tale is all the more remarkable given that the 34-year-old direc- tor had never made a feature documentary film before. Her- sonski is a freelance editor for Is- raeli television, where she has worked on Israeli versions of “The Office” and “In Treatment.” (No one can accuse her of limited range.) In turning her attention to the
Holocaust, Hersonski says she wanted to explore “the way we view atrocities through a visual document.” “We are today bombarded with so many images of atrocities,” Hersonski says. “I think we have developed some blindness. . . . I
S
KLMNO
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2010 Holocaust movie reexamines Nazi propaganda OSCILLOSCOPE LABORATORIES TRUTH EMERGES:Missing footage that was discovered much later showed filmmakers shooting multiple takes in the Warsaw ghetto.
don’t know how capable we are to see what witness they bear.” According to Hersonski, much of the footage shot by the Nazis was destroyed during the last days of the war. Of the reels that survived, the Warsaw ghetto film, shot in May 1942, was considered the most mysterious: Questions persisted about its purpose, its makers and why it was aban- doned. Clues have been uncovered in the intervening years, and “A Film Unfinished” slips some of the missing pieces into place. It unfolds in the form of a detective story, starting with the 1954 dis- covery of the film in an East Ger- man archive.
Survivors watch
The film was much studied by historians as a record of unthink- able misery, though in later years some had raised alarms about its questionable intentions. In fact, the film had a worse story to tell, confirmed when a researcher stumbled upon 30 minutes of ad- ditional footage in a Library of Congress storage facility in Ohio, where other German archives
seized after the war had been housed. These fragments, identi- fied by experts as belonging to the main Warsaw ghetto film, showed do-overs of many scenes. One example: Two skeletal chil- dren stare into a shop window as a well-dressed woman, hat tipped just so, brushes past them and goes in, over and over, the merci- less minidrama filmed from vari- ous angles.
Some of the most wrenching,
yet also triumphant, moments in “A Film Unfinished” occur when we enter a darkened theater and see elderly survivors of the ghetto watch the Nazi film. Hersonski combed Israeli records to find survivors in Israel who had wit- nessed the Nazis making these films — and in some cases, even recognized people in them. “Not all were certain they were strong enough to watch it,” Her- sonski says. “Not only strong enough — some of them didn’t want to watch it.” A few survivors said no. Some hesitated, and to those, Hersonski said no. They were all around 80 years old and, she says, “I didn’t want to take re- sponsibility for what might hap-
pen to them at the screening.” The five survivors who agreed to see the films felt it was urgent to do so, Hersonski says, “to have the final word.” The words they offer are poign- ant — and even dryly humorous: Watching a scene that the Nazi filmmakers had staged in a hand- some apartment, with a vase of
as filmed by their captors, Her- sonski says in the interview, was “the most intense emotional ex- perience that I had during the making of the film.” She recalls escorting one of the
survivors out of the theater as the woman suddenly starting mut- tering to herself in Polish. She ap- peared to be daydreaming, Her-
seeing history in black-and- white, far-away images, but these images, if you give the time and the context to show them, they become extremely alive.” But the survivor testimony has become an unintentional flash- point. While watching scenes in the ghetto film of garbage mounded outside an apartment building, one survivor explains that people had grown too weak to take the trash downstairs, so they dropped it out the windows. She adds, “Hungry people be- come apathetic.” Those words, and another survivor’s recollec- tion of having to look away as she stepped over corpses on the side- walk, have concerned some histo- rians. They should have been framed more carefully, not “left open to misinterpretation,” says Raye Farr, director of the Steven Spiel- berg Film and Video Archive at the U.S.Holocaust Memorial Mu- seum. Portraying Jewish indifference “was part of the longstanding Nazi propaganda,” Farr says. “This is where it gets tricky, be- cause you don’t want to support the Nazi view. . . . I think the woman is speaking genuinely, but if you’re putting this in a film where you’re trying to debunk the propaganda, maybe you have to help that somewhere.” Hersonski says the survivors’ comments reflect the true human experience of the ghetto, and this is precisely what the Nazis ex- ploited. “That’s what makes their film- making so sophisticated,” Her- sonski says. “Effective propagan- da will never be based only on lies, it will be based on the combi- nation of truth and the way it’s manipulated.” Then what are we to make of
what we see? In the end, “A Film Unfinished” is a study in the elu- siveness of documentation. No matter the subject, what the lens captures will become layered in meanings a filmmaker cannot control. As Hersonski’s film at- tests, the Warsaw prisoners man-
“We are used to seeing history in black-and-white, far-away images, but these images, if you give the time
and the context to show them, become extremely alive.” — ‘A Film Unfinished’ director Yael Hersonski
flowers on the table, one of the survivors is incredulous: “Who had a flower?” she sputters. “We would have eaten the flower!” These survivors were the tru- est authorities: Some of them told Hersonski they had stood within steps of the filmmakers, just outside the frame — children at the time, now near the end of their lives. (One of them has died since Hersonski filmed him.) Watching them relive their youth
sonski says, until she sensed the director staring at her. “She told me, ‘Oh my God, I
didn’t speak Polish since the war was over,’” Hersonski says. Plunged back into the childhood she’d tried to forget, she had ex- perienced the return of her na- tive tongue. It was a jolt for the filmmaker.
“I realized what a physical space these images can create,” Hersonski says. “We are used to
aged to slip the Nazis’ grasp, in a matter of speaking, after all. “Just look at the people,” Her- sonski says. “The people and the expression in their eyes is ex- tremely real. That’s what’s so powerful about the layered na- ture of every image, that within the decision to create a certain message, there is something that the cameraman cannot control — the sheer existence of reality.”
kaufmans@washpost.com
B
THEATRE B THEATRE The Studio Theatre
"Class act!" -TheWashington Post Tonight at 8:00pm
CIRCLE MIRROR TRANSFORMATION
by Annie Baker directed by David Muse
studiotheatre.org • 202-332-3300 MetroStage
New Jazz Age Musical “Pop, fizz, deliriously good…”
dctheatrescene.com
THE MOON 800-494-8497/
www.metrostage.org
GLIMPSES OF
ROUND HOUSE THEATRE Bethesda
Final week! Tonight at 8:00
“A high-end spine-tingler” —–Peter Marks,TheWash Post
THE TALENTED
MR.RIPLEY Performance added Sun, Sept 26 at 8pm
$10 & $15 tix for age 30 & under
TKTS/INFO: 240-644-1100
roundhousetheatre.org n 4545 East-West Hwy. x
American University presents
ALMOST MEAND OUTTA HERE Amusical version of the trials and
NEW STUDENT SHOWCASE:
tribulations of the freshman year of college SEPT 24&25AT8PM Greenberg Theatre
Tix/info: 202-885-ARTS
american.edu/auarts SF 1-800-753-POST
Home delivery is convenient.
FRIDAYS & SATURDAYS AT 7:30 PM Ronald Reagan Bldg, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave,NW
INFO: 202-312-1555 Tickets available through TicketMaster at
(202) 397-SEAT
www.ticketmaster.com Group Sales: 202-312-1427
n Tues– Fri at 8, Sat at6&9,Sun at3&7 x Student Rush TicketsAvailable
TKTS:202-467-4600 / GROUPS: 202-416-8400
www.kennedy-center.org/shearmadness
B COMEDY B B
“Shrieks of laughter night after night.” -TheWashington Post
B
Post-divorce, she fears being somebody’s ‘rebound girl’
he feels about you and more of how you feel about you. Don’t date him, or anyone for that matter, past the point where it’s dragging your self-image down.
B CONCERTS AMERICAN UNIVERSITY presents
THE GORENMAN BEETHOVEN PROJECT
Internationally acclaimed concert pianist Yuliya Gorenman presents the seventh in a series of eight concerts performing the complete cycle of sonatas for piano by Ludwig van Beethoven.
SAT,OCTOBER 2AT 8PM Katzen Arts Center - Abramson Family Recital Hall
Tickets/info: 202-885-ARTS
american.edu/auarts
FREE CONCERT FRIDAY MORNING MUSIC CLUB
Friday, Sept. 24 - Noon Sumner School Museum 17th andMStreetsNW
Opening Concert and President’s Reception SCHUBERT,SCHUMANN, FAURÉ, DEBUSSY: Selected songs.
Program
KOMITAS,KHATCHATURIAN: Folk Songs. ALBÉNIZ: Sevilla.
DOPPLER: Fantaisie Pastorale Hongroise, op. 26. SCRIABIN: Sonata-Fantasy No. 2, op. 19.
Friday Morning Music Club
www.fmmc.org
Sunday in Arts. deadline:Wed., 12 noon Monday in Style. deadline: Friday, 12 noon Tuesday in Style. deadline: Mon., 12 noon
The Guide to the Lively Arts appears
Wednesday in Style. deadline:Tues., 12 noon Thursday in Style. deadline:Wed., 12 noon Friday inWeekend. deadline:Tues., 12 noon Saturday in Style. deadline: Friday, 12 noon
For information about advertising, call: Raymond Boyer
Rates: Daily H $134.28 per column inch Sunday H $187.44 per column inch
202-334-7006 FAX 202-496-3814
guidetoarts@washpost.com
B CAROLYN HAX
Adapted from a recent online discussion:
Hi, Carolyn: I divorced, found myself again,
and I’m out there dating. After a lot of dead ends, I’ve met someone with whom I really connect. He has been separated about six months after 15 years of marriage. I know he likes me (a lot), but he also says he’s not looking for a long-term relationship. Eventually I do hope to find a partner, though if I don’t I’ll still be fine enough. But I don’t want to be Rebound Girl. What to do? It seems like a hopeless scenario, but I don’t want to give up the best thing I’ve had in a long while.
Washington
You have to take him at his word. If you don’t think you can handle sharing or losing him, then you need to back off, if you’re able — or break up. If you do think you can handle it — if you’re not afraid to feel like roadkill if this flops — then take the chance and see where it goes. You’ve recovered from a divorce, so you can recover from this. The question is whether he’s worth that kind of effort. In fact, try to think less of how
Dear Carolyn: My boyfriend and I have been casually looking at engagement rings for him to see what I like, but I’ve asked him if I can be involved in picking it out, and he has agreed. He has this endearing habit of bringing home presents I’m allergic to, can’t use, don’t like to eat, etc. His heart is in the right place, so I appreciate every one of these gifts, but for something this expensive, I’d rather we both put thought into it.
When I mentioned this to my
mother, she told me I was greedy, ungrateful and “you’re lucky you’re getting anything.” It hurt my feelings to no end. Now, she didn’t get an
engagement ring from my father, so I’m guessing this is colored by jealousy a bit, but . . . I feel horrible. Am I an ungrateful wench because I want something on my finger I’m not allergic to and would actually like to look at for the rest of my life?
N.Y., N.Y.
Is your mom always this tough on you? I can see her disagreeing, fine, but, “Ooh, I hope you didn’t hurt his feelings when you asked that... ” would have gotten her point across without trashing your character. That phrasing also would have allowed for the possibility that there wasn’t anything wrong with it, and left you room to explain your rationale. To answer your question, your
NICK GALIFIANAKIS FOR THE WASHINGTON POST
rationale sounds fine to me. You can be pragmatic without being presumptuous. That said — when you
presented this to your mom as a matter of avoiding an ugly ring, that might not have helped your cause. From now on, if the subject comes up, consider leaving out your fiance’s knack for bad gifts, and stick to the logic of your decision: “For something this expensive, I’d rather we both put thought into it.”
Read the whole transcript or join the discussion live at
noon Fridays on www.washingtonpost. com/discussions.
Write to Tell Me About It, Style, 1150 15th St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20071, or
tellme@washpost.com.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89