The Boy in the Striped Pajamas (2008) | a Review
originally published on 30/05/2022;
Hello everyone, I am the currently quite somber G.E.M.Simov, a magnificently dreary grinch come to tell you about the 2008 film “The Boy in the Striped Pajamas”, henceforth referred to as BSP, because I’m lazy.
Simple review details - I rank movies on an out of 10 basis, granting up to 3 points in 3 categories, as well as a last, single point from my own self, depending on my experience with it. I will use ‘movie’ and ‘film’ interchangeably.
Presentation
This is a holocaust movie. Knowing that much presents a tool that very few other films have the opportunity to utilize, that being knowledge that the audience has BEFORE the audience is meant to have that knowledge, as well as knowledge that the audience has without needing to be introduced to that knowledge by the movie itself. Thus, that kind of movie, although limited in a certain set of dimensions, happens to have a very specific set of advantages to off-set the limitations.
I’m speaking, of course, of the knowledge the audience has of the Second World War, as well as the Holocaust itself. This is, as far as I can allow myself to tell, one of the only TRULY globally known parts of history. Then again, I could be wrong, but it seems to be such an incredibly permeating part of culture and history that it could be such. If it isn’t, well, that means it isn’t such in the places more distant to Germany, even if the whole world was embroiled in the conflict, supposedly.
In any case, that knowledge of the Nazi party, the knowledge of what took place at the camps,all of it - it helps immensely, because it establishes an incredible setting for any movie - especially one presented in a manner such as BSP. What is the manner of presentation? Why, of course, it is a relatively bright and vibrant one.
I say that simply because of the fact that many scenes in this movie were beautiful, purely from a visual standpoint. I look at the still frame of that scene, and I appreciate how rich the colors appear to me, how wonderful the scenery itself is. There was a large multitude of shots featuring a forest or nature, and these shots looked incredibly pleasant - the way one would expect them to look in late spring or early summer. Thus, I conclude that this movie looks far too vibrant to be a Holocaust movie. Or, rather, it looks far too vibrant FOR a Holocaust movie.
In reality, it seems bright and colorful, but there is a masterful, I dare say, utilization of sets, as well as the way sets are lit. There are scenes that look incredibly wondrous, the lighting and colors of the props and sets themselves so intoxicating that the whole experience turns into something magical, however there are also scenes that look downright horrible, in a masterful way, for they are filled with color, yet that color is pale and cold, as though void of life.
There’s a plethora of swaps, which serves to truly help the audience get in the headspace of the main character. At least that’s what it seems to be. See, we start off in Berlin, and the main character is truly happy, for he has his friends to play with, his family is loving and able to afford pretty much anything, and everything is wonderful. The vibrancy of the town, the richness of the colors, the lighting - it all works to indicate that the character is comfortable and happy. There’s no way of knowing that if we abstract ourselves from the story and performance, however there is a very clear connection between the means of presentation and the story itself.
Then, however, the family moves, and the lighting changes. Or, rather, it doesn’t, but the set changes. The colors of the set change. The house in Berlin had bright colors, the house they move to is very muted, very cold. The gravel in front of the house, by merit of being gray, helps in emphasizing it. Then there’s the addition of the walls, the iron bars, the guards. When they enter the house, it is empty, it is not a home. It is cold and void of things, void of feeling, safe for the unwelcome sensation that the main character gets.
I might have needed to point that out earlier, but feeling here is incredibly important, as the main character is an 8 year old child. Not only that, but the sheer fact that the main character, through whose eyes we get to experience the story, is an 8 year old child. This comes into play when we start off the movie.
How does it start off? Well, it’s an incredibly ambiguous beginning, from a visual point of view. The main character rushes through Berlin (I should really start calling Bruno by his name, instead of saying ‘the main character’), and everything is bright and colorful. Wonderful, even. The kids running through the streets, which, mind you, do not look like streets, because everything is so warm (it’s all orange-y), and pass by men in uniforms, Nazi uniforms, of course, with the Nazi flags billowing in the wind.
That, however, is not portrayed as dangerous or bad or scary. It is not portrayed in a different manner from the remainder - it is, for all intents and purposes, being portrayed as normal. And it is, for Bruno, this 8 year old boy who has only recently come into sentience. What has he known? Nothing else, really, other than Nazi Germany. So seeing these things is totally normal for him. He even passes by a scene of Nazi Soldiers forcing Jewish people into trucks, yet there was no change in his demeanor. He ran and ran, giggling and having fun with his friends. There was no audio queue to hint to the audience that ‘this is bad’, nor was there any lingering that left an impression.
Things do slow down and change, however, whenever Bruno gets back home, for something is off. And those means of depicting things are incredibly interesting - of course, it might be something I’m just now noticing, but has been present for a very, very long time in movies I’ve watched. Nevertheless, this makes me giddy with excitement.
Another bit of excitement that I find is the presentation of the characters. They are all interestingly human, even if they are Nazis. The main villain, if he can be called such, of the movie is also given a vast number of opportunities to BE human, to show that he is not a monster in the sense of the word that he’s just evil. No, he’s a human monster - incredibly complex and sophisticated in his own right, yet monstrous all the same. The application of the gray paint when it came to people was fantastic. They have good qualities and bad qualities, yet they, themselves, can’t be wholly bad or good… Or so it seemed.
I have to admit that my means of watching the movie were unfavorable, at best, and I got very few moments to listen to the music itself - as in, I did not watch it in a cinema, nor did I watch it with headphones on my ears. I watched it with an open window, because it’s very summery, and the noise of the city made it a bit difficult. Yet I cannot lie and say that the music was not fitting. In fact, I’m under the impression that the music was very well picked out and utilized in this film, because of its lackluster intrusiveness - it was just there, more ambient than anything else.
In fact, the sounds that one would usually call ambience were far more important and impactful for the movie, BECAUSE of the aforementioned specifics of the presentation. A child reacts to stimuli, right? And these stimuli are sounds, much of the time. That was a nice bit, I’d say.
In addition to all of that, I must confess that there was a very decent amount of showing, rather than telling, in this movie. Not just in the direct manner, but also in the visually metaphoric one. The bars through which people are shown looking at things are very valuable here, because there’s this easy reading of: “hey, look, bars! Character’s in prison, or not free!”
Even if it is an easy jab, it is a very good one. There are also other goodies, but I’ll stop my gushing. This movie presents things very well. I liked the sight of it.
But, well, there’s one last thing. The element of unease. The element of tension, of suspense, of menace, even. The queasy feeling that accompanies this movie is incredible. The little boy embracing his father, who is in Nazi uniform… It ought to be heartwarming, but it fails to be such, because the Nazi aspect of it looms over, dreadful and frightening. 3/3
Acting
Acting was good. Not just good, excellent. The kids were my greatest concerns, but it turned out they did pretty good. The immense amounts of awkwardness and uncertainty that a child feels were present, but there was also a great joy over things that seemingly shouldn’t make one that joyful. I can’t readily think of a character who did not get well portrayed by the actor burdened with the task of portraying them, so, with my limited experience here, I’ll just say: very good job.
At the very end, I must admit that the way Vera Farmiga delivered her desperate wailing failed to make me cringe and turn away from the screen, as happens often whenever I end up watching a woman do that kind of thing in film - because it’s, oftentimes, simply wrong and unconvincing - was astounding. I actually found myself emphasizing with the character, not just on a conceptual level, but on a conscious and subconscious level. I got a bit sad for her. That was truly impressive. 3/3
Story
The story of this movie is quite good, frankly. As mentioned previously, things start off in Berlin, where the main character lives and enjoys life. Then the status quo is adversely affected by the sudden revelation that his family, including him, is moving. It is very easy to connect that to the first step of the hero's journey. The story begins in a stereotypical, almost, manner, which serves it well, for then there is a very clear potential for a subversion. That subversion is expected by the audience from the moment the movie begins, though. As a Holocaust film, there is no joy to be found. The name of the movie itself suggests something to the audience, and what the audience gets to see in the first few minutes of the film further indicates that something will happen.
In any case, it seems as though the main character, Bruno, is not the boy in the striped pajamas. He is shown carelessly running past Nazi soldiers, who are rounding up Jewish people. His father is not only a member of the party, not only a soldier, but a recently promoted soldier. He's important, Bruno is told, and so the audience knows that the boy's life seems to not be in jeopardy. Unfortunately, expectations are a very good tool when it comes to subversion.
I am going to spoil this movie, so flee if you want to watch it. It is recommended that you do watch it, as, so far, a measure of impressive competence has been displayed, and, as mentioned, the story is good.
With that disclaimed, let me continue. The introduction of characters, their disappearance, it all works wonders in favour of making the story more and more suspenseful. The fact that Bruno is so crushed by the conditions he is subjected to, even though his life is, technically, spent in luxury, is splendid. He can not go outside, there are no other children to play with, there is very little reading that he can do. All of those are caused by the system that is in place.
The Nazi party wants him to learn 'history', modern of course, it wants him to get his brain drilled in by the filth that is spewed by its leader. The Nazi party, thus, does not like it when he reads adventure novels, which are his favourite, so he doesn't get many of those to read.
The Nazi party needs people to run the concentration camps, but those can't be too close to civilization, otherwise things could go sour, public perception or outrage and all that, so they're slightly hidden. Thus, no other children for Bruno to play with.
The fact that the Nazi party does these things and touts it as very reasonable to despise Jewish people is harmful, because when that is the norm a parent's efforts to protect their child from the evils and injustices of the world can become far too suffocating. Bruno can't go in the backyard or beyond the walls of the front 'lawn', because he could find out more about the camp. He could see these evils, and that's not good.
This all serves to convey to the audience that these ideological trepidations of Nazi Germany, and by extension any ideological trepidations that end up sparking violent conflicts, are harmful for children. Funnily enough, that's a message that can be derived from the movie, and it is not that bad a message, though it can also be misconstrued to be used in certain ways. Though it goes as far as it needs to - when doing things that are, supposedly, meant to make the world a better place for one's children, consider whether or not in the process of doing said things you're not taking away the childhood, or the childness, of these children.
That winds up happening with Bruno. At first, he finds things strange. Why are these farmers wearing pajamas? Why can't I leave home, why can't I go to the back yard, why shouldn't I talk to that sickly old man? Why is he walking funny?
That confusion only grows more pronounced as things move along, storywise. Why is this old man, Pavel, peeling potatoes when he says he was a doctor? Bruno tries to find an explanation for it in his own head - well, he wasn't a very good doctor, so now he's a farmer.
Then the opportunity presents itself, and Bruno takes it. Sneaking away, he reaches the 'farm' and meets Shmuel. Their worlds are unbelievably different, as is conveyed by their appearances and priorities, but they are children. Bruno wants to play with Shmuel, totally unaware or unconcerned with much of anything. Shmuel, well, he's hungry and crushed by the things that have happened.
All that is very well conveyed, and the confusion that only mounts and rises and reaches a boiling point at the end is spectacular. A child doesn't have the capacity to understand these things. Isn't a child innocent? And, seeing as innocence suggests an aversion to evil, then what happens next?
The moments when Bruno manages to ask questions, those who provide answers fail to do so satisfyingly. The teacher says that all Jews are evil, but Bruno has been helped by Pavel, a Jew, and he is friends with Shmuel, a Jew. Bruno then suggests that maybe not all Jews are evil, and the teacher tells him that, if he were to find a good Jew, then he would be the best explorer in the world.
It is evident that there is no sense in this explanation and in this manner of viewing the world. After all, even a child can tell! But he wounds up confused by this answer. How come the teacher, who knows things correctly, said that? Bruno knows that it is not so. That is very strange.
And then when he finds out that his father runs the 'farm', he can't quite believe the conditions Shmuel describes. The Jewish boy claims that those running the camp are horrible. But how can Bruno's dad be horrible? Indeed, there is a phenomenal thing done in this movie. Characters behave incredibly kindly and gently to certain other characters that they value, but then they behave horribly to characters they do not value.
Bruno's father is a wonderful father to Bruno and his sister, and be seems to be a good husband, as good as a practicing Nazi can truly be, but he is vile and evil when speaking to Jews, or when addressing his underlings, especially if there is a supposition that they've failed in some way. So truly, Bruno's dad is not bad… But Bruno is confused, because what Shmuel says is true - if the place is as Shmuel says it is, then those running it are horrible.
The audience gets to see things even more clearly. Bruno's sister, who at the start of the movie is playing with dolls and being quite stereotypically girly, ends up becoming an incredibly engaged Nazi. She throws her dolls in the basement, sticks posters of Hitler and other Nazi symbols all over her room's walls, she vehemently studies and regurgitates what the teacher, a Nazi himself, is teaching her. Her childhood is shown to us, only to then be ripped apart and thoroughly destroyed by Nazism.
And then, at the very end of the film, after everything is through and through, there is a long, long shot, lingering on the metal door. Beyond it, we know, are corpses. The corpses of a certain pair of boys and a large number of other innocent people. It's a very… telegraphed, in a way, ending, when one thinks about it. How was the movie going to end, otherwise? How would things wind up going? The name, itself, is somewhat indicative. The boy in the striped pajamas… Well, to those of you who have seen the film, does that not apply to more than one person, especially at the very end?
I really liked the story. I had one little peeve, however. It might not even be a peeve, but it is something that confused me. Bruno's family, or at least his mother, is Christian, and both he and his sister are taught to be Christian as well. When a character passes and is buried, the burial is very Christian. I was left with the impression that the Nazi party did not appreciate religion, and it is true, but then it also turns out that they did not mind it all that much, as long as it was kept to a more individual level.
Still, that appeared to me so strange that I want to call it inappropriate, but the more I think about it, the more it becomes apparent that it isn't inappropriate at all. It was, simply, very weird. 3/3
Legendary Point
Does this film get the legendary point, so craved and wanted by all and none at the same time? Well, the answer is a regretful NO.
I've seen movies about the Holocaust. I've seen movies about the Second World War. I don't know if I've become desensitized, or if I've grown acclimated to them, but I can't find them truly remarkable. Maybe because I know that this is not something simply imagined, but a strikingly real thing that did occur. Maybe because I recognize it as a fact of the past, as a potential direction in which humanity can go, that I dread it so…
In any case, I can't give it the legendary point. It touched me, perhaps, but I did not like its touch. Twas cold and deathly, and not at all pleasant. Mayhap that was intended, but I cannot grant the past legendary status, for that would distance it from reality.
And that, well, that should remain reality. 0/1
Conclusion
9/10. A masterpiece, I'd say, but then as I think to myself, I realize it's simply a competently made movie. It is done as movies ought to be done, with relatively great care and a great effort. I'd say everyone needs to watch this movie, if only to remind themselves of what has transpired.
I tuck it under my belt, another shining achievement that I proudly display.