Harvey Weinstein And Stephen Daldry Hit Back At "The Reader" Criticism

Supporters and producers of "The Reader" are hitting back at criticisms of the Oscar-nominated film and speaking out for the film, just two days before the Academy Awards.

In a length joint statement posted below, Harvey Weinstein, director Stephen Daldry, Elie Wiesel and others defend the film, saying in part, "The greatest films elicit great debate and conversation."

FULL STATEMENT:

NEW YORK, NY - (February 20, 2009) The following is a joint statement from Stephen Daldry, Donna Gigliotti, David Hare and Harvey Weinstein, who condemn the fringe criticism of THE READER:

We are proud of THE READER and everyone who made this film. It is outrageous and insulting that people have called it a "Holocaust denial film." While entitled to their opinion, these allegations are fueled by ignorance and a misunderstanding of the material, and are based on unsubstantiated arguments.

The greatest films elicit great debate and conversation. Unfortunately, the recent attacks on THE READER have generated debates, not about the substance of the film, but about what people believe to be the intent of the filmmakers. To take a piece of art that was constructed with the hard work of many talented people and turn it into propaganda is plain ignorant. No one is suggesting that THE READER must be beloved by everyone. On the contrary, there is always room for criticism. If one does not like the film that is one matter; but to project one's personal bias on the filmmaker's objective is wrong and something we could no longer remain silent about.

THE READER is a film about how a generation of Germans lived in the shadow of one of the greatest crimes of the 20th century. Some detractors of the film have said that it is a piece of Holocaust revisionism; however Holocaust survivors, children of Holocaust survivors and a Nobel Peace Prize winner feel differently.

Elie Wiesel, a Holocaust survivor and Nobel Peace Prize winner, has praised, THE READER as "a film that deals powerfully with Germany's reconciliation with its past." He said that "it is not about the Holocaust; it is about what Germany did to itself and its future generations." He called it "a faithful adaptation of an important book, that is still relevant today as genocide continues to be practiced around the world."

Abe Foxman, the ADL National Director and a Holocaust survivor agrees with Mr. Wiesel. "As we move further away from the Holocaust we must continue to tell the story of the Shoah in ways that will reach and touch new generations. The Reader, which takes place in post-WWII Germany, clearly portrays the horrors of the Holocaust, not visually but intellectually and emotionally. There is no doubt to what Kate Winslet's character, Hannah Schmitz, did during the war. Her guilt is given. At her trial her crimes are portrayed in detail and she is brought to justice for them. The Reader is not meant to be a factual re-telling of the Holocaust; for that we have documentaries. Rather it is about guilt and responsibility that is as important for our times as it was for post-war Germans."

Unfortunately we live in a world where Holocaust denial still exists. Just a few weeks ago, the Vatican made headlines when the Pope lifted the excommunication of a Catholic Bishop who made statements denying the full extent of the Holocaust. In today's world, with the recent genocides in Darfur, Cambodia, Rwanda and Bosnia, there are enough signs that bigotry still exists to an alarming degree. Denial and revisionist history of some of the greatest atrocities of our time can only lead to further violence and horrors.

THE READER is a film that has sparked controversy and it is not something we are shying away from. In this day and age we need healthy debate but what some have written is mudslinging at its worst and we think it is time to rise above it.

Comments

[alenaspoppa]

The banality of evil. That a lot of atrocities that were committed were not carried out by jackbooted movie-villains, but by ordinary citizens.

I have a friend from Germany who said something similar to the point of this movie many years ago...he told me that his grandmother told him that she didn't know what was going on during the war. His response was "Bullshit! She f***ing knew!"

I think that "The Reader" makes several points about human behavior, about the danger of groupthink and collective denial, about the rationalization of evil acts. Think about the simple fact that Hanna is more ashamed of being illiterate than the fact that she let a church filled with women and children burn to the ground. The human race has the ability to rationalize anything (every atrocity ever committed on a large scale was enabled by a large group of people rationalizing why it was okay and others rationalizing why they couldn't step in to stop it), and this is a film that forces us to think about that.

[mamacat]

I truly loved The Reader. I feel sorry for people who just don't "get it."
I wish Ralphe Fiennes would get more credit for his work; once again, he was brilliant.

Some years there are no films worthy of the Best Picture award, but this year they could have handed out at least four awards for Best Picture. 2008-2009 is a year in which movie lovers can have a feast at the theatres.

That was quite an underhanded compliment that Anthony Hopkins gave to Brad Pitt; "character actor," Indeed! Those two won't be exchanging Christmas cards this year.

Quite a few actresses wore dresses which reminded me of Michelle Obama's Inaugural gown. Her influence on American fashion is considerable.

Thank you Oscars, it was a lot of fun.

[myna]

If you can't handle ambiguity and must have things--life--in black and white, then don't see this move because although it is fiction it is more about humanity than most Hollywood movies.

[jazzman]

Best film of the year and yes, the Holocaust was implemented by flesh and blood human beings and not Nazi cardboard super villians with sinister cartoon German accents. Coming to terms with how human beings, who have ordinary lives, little education, primitive thought structures, resentments, and psychological complexes can commit atrocities is something that we have not come to terms with yet.

This movie shows us something that we've rarely experienced before; the human side of the perpetuators of this great evil. To look into that side of the mirror is to see ourselves and the possibility of what we, as a race, are still capable of today.

[metivo]

I haven't seen the film but heard that the ending presented a disturbing contrast between a stereotypical weathy NY Jewish woman who is also a survivor of the death camps and a dying berift Nazi in the form of Kate Winslet. The unsettling effect being that the audience primarily identifies and sympathizes with the Winslet character's sad lot in life. What?

I can see where this could be 'controversial.'

[avocats]

"I haven't seen the film but . . . . " You're kidding, right? Why not see it before launching into a comment about it?

[metivo]

I DID go and see the film last night and in my opinion, the review was exactly right. The first half of the film is the Winslet character having sex with the teen. The second half is her on trial for being a SS Guard. Oh, and lingering shots of a grief-stricken Ralph Finnes looking not a thing like he did as a teen! Very implausible. They do a good job of making you forget about the victims and instead sympathize with the Winslet character's 'sad' lot in life. Thinking it over, it really is a dumb movie.

[JBCinSD]

Best to see the film before offering your observations on it.

[myna]

You should definitely stick with Disney films and Nickelodeon channel.

[InternationalObserver]

This statement has been released too late to have any impact on voters, so I can only conclude they know they haven't won and are doing damage control now.
(Sorry, I took a double dose of my cynic pills this morning)

[VOTER]

Milk?

[averygard]

Nazis + booty (female, of course) = Oscar. Didn't you know that?

[GiancarloJones]

This is one of the most powerful films produced in recent memory. The characters portrayed struggle with their own guilt, the guilt of others and their own embarrassment in revealing that truth. It is not some cookie cutter movie that moves along predesignated plot points . It is a deeply personal treatment of how a handful of people deal with the one of the most heinous crimes in human history. Before anyone tears into the intent of the film makers, I would urge them to see "The Reader" and judge for themselves. This is a film made for adults-it is not some escapist-fantasy drivel to which the American movie going public seems addicted. The film makers and actors should be applauded for their courage for bringing us such an emotionally challenging and evocative film.

[cobraxus]

The Holocaust has been co-opted by a group of Americans who never experienced the event itself and consider any kind of personal criticism to be anti-semetism at its most flagrant.

[shedances]

The Reader was one of the best films to come out in a very long time, I think.

No ~ I did not see it as an apology for Germany actions/inactions, behaviors, or horrific crimes set during the wars (esp. WWII). What I did see was an explanation for such behaviors ... by way of two main character's lives, during periods in history of social & political changes. More than anything else, though, The Reader was certainly about irony (and/or cruelty, I would add) concerning love & loss & hope & forgiveness ... even at the close of one's life.

Love for another human being.

Love for the written word or story.

An unspoken, youthful hope that wrongs are righted somehow.

Hope that one's life story (no matter how positive or terrible it may have been) can end with some kind of generous forgiveness that isn't necessarily expected ... or requested.

The extraordinary filmmakers have already said it much better than I ... "To take a piece of art that was constructed with the hard work of many talented people and turn it into propaganda is plain ignorant. If one does not like the film that is one matter; but to project one's personal bias on the filmmaker's objective is wrong ..."

Indeed.

[metivo]

The 'premise' of the film - that the Winslet character somehow became a SS Guard without ever having to read or fill out a form or notice a sign etc. is patently ridiculous. Then, she opts to go to prison for life rather than admit she is illiterate. Puleeez, give me a break. Also, mighty funny that Kate Winslet was the most babelicious of all the Nazi females shown. The movie is RIPE for a scathing parody.

[shedances]

That's certainly not the entire premise of either film version or book ... but was a closely guarded 'secret' & the story's ironic turning, among others (i.e., a story character more embarrassed about being illiterate than about her involvement in war atrocities/deaths).

And just to remind you, it is a work of fiction ... not non-fiction. I understood that going in. Did you?

[LMPE]

I haven't seen the movie, but I have read the novel on which it's based ("Der Vorleser", more accurately translated as "the narrator"). I never interpreted it as trying to hide Germany's crimes (or how the German government led people into its actions).

[zanzig]

What crosses my mind, when I read the various critics who accuse the filmakers of being apologists for Germans who were apparently ignorant of the Holocaust even though it occurred almost on their doorsteps and in their name, is what a future film-maker will make of the American people's ignorance of what has been done in Bhagram, Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, in their name.

[missjabez]

My dad--God bless him-is a World War II vet and he said many Germans didn't know about the death camps until after the war is over. I kind of wonder if they suspected something bad was occurring but didn't WANT to know.

On the other hand, the mother of a college friend of mine was a young girl living in Germany at the time of World War II. She said that though she and her family cheered Hitler at his rallies, they really didn't care for him and were afraid of him.

[metivo]

Granted many Germans didn't know about the death camps. However, the main character in The Reader is a SS Guard who knew exactly what she was doing. Big difference.

[shedances]

The Reader was a work of fiction (historical fiction, some might argue; but nonetheless, fictionalized); & a brilliant film at that. But I, too, appreciate and watch excellent non-fiction based works on political persons (liked or despised) of this period in history ~ such as Sophie Scholl (Die letzten Tage, 2005).

[bubbuh]

Sorry. It left me tired. Films which lean on the crutch of somber controversy to drive the plot should reexamine their scenarios. I read the Janeway translation of the Bernhard Schlink book. Schlink, for want of a better comparison, is Germany's John Grisham. This book is a departure for him. While his book was more appealing than the film, it was still tedious in the way that only philosophical drama through the German lens can be. I have always wondered if Wagner was a victim of this or if he was the original vector.

Anyway, for those who enjoyed it, wunderbar! But, just to be safe, watch Animal House or a Marx Brothers flick as an antiserum.

[dpiyjrtmfr]

I haven't seen the film yet. I do not know if I will. I did read and enjoy the book though. I must be old-fashioned.

[gmlaster]

As I read these comments I'm forced to wonder if those of you who are criticizing the film actually saw it. I just can't imagine that we saw the same film. It was a poignant and highly unusual take on a very sensitive and painful subject. What would you do if somebody you loved and thought you knew turned out to be a monster? Just how does a nation come to grips with state-sponsored crime, and what part will you play in it...victim, perpetrator or bystander? How do you explain the apathy of the people who stood by and did nothing as it happened? And what do you do when your job turns into a war crime?

It was brilliant and thought-provoking because it illustrates how easy it is to point fingers at others but how hard it is to confront the same faults within ourselves. For years we criticized the Germans for Auschwitz. But how many of us got together and stormed Guantanamo? We knew people were being imprisoned without trial there, and that Bush was torturing people. But a moral compass can malfunction. So when your government goes totally insane, what exactly are you supposed to do?