Saw it today. Decent, but being incredibly overrated.

Outside of muslim countries, there are very few people who don't know and agree that the holocaust was bad. The movie is preaching to the choir.

A 3/10 is more like it. Yes on a technical level it's well made, but otherwise it's shit. There's no story or narrative. The whole movie is "watch this seemingly normal family go about life while gun shots and screaming go off in the background". It's a one note shitty art house movie made for white liberals who still think saying the holocaust is bad is profound. The ending scene in the museum was almost laughably bad.

It’s an 8/10 from me.

I thoroughly agree with you. It's a bit derivative (see Boy in Striped Pajamas), but more so it's repetitive and absolutely would've been better as a short. The sound design is worth making sure you're watching this with a good system, but the cinematography is a real mixed bag.

It adds very little to what has already been said.

Spoiler!

It has a great idea. The concept of this family living beautiful lives while you hear people dying in the background is an good and novel concept. The idea that that father is a good man who loves his wife and is involved with his children while carrying a genocide breaks from the typical cartoonish Nazi characters we normally see.

That last bit of him having nausea was interesting at it shows how disgusted he is with what he is doing.

But, in the end, the film fell flat for me. The concept got really tired quickly. And the characters are just not engaging. The pacing could’ve been much better.

So, 6/10 for me.

i gave it a 4.5/5 myself, & i guess i thought it was great, but i get where you're coming from.

a journalist i follow who knew martin amis ( who wrote the book - though the movie apparently barely resembles it) made a lot of the same criticisms, thought it was trite & shallow & didn't come close to capturing what amis laid out in the book. haven't read it yet, but i have it in my reader & will probably get to it this week.

personally, i saw it as almost a sister to under the skin in how it is mostly made up of scenes that are mundane, borderline tedious for some perhaps (i wasn't bored though), but then will take leaps into the unknown almost, with imaginative flourishes.

& i was really moved by the ending. thought that was perfect.

i look at it as something to be endured to get the cumulative experience. if you didn't have that 95 minutes of repetitious jabs, the ending wouldn't have landed its punch.

i don't know that i'll ever want to see it again. i'm grateful for the experience, but don't think it's one i need to repeat. & i think it's a movie that needs a theatre to get imposed focus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_cinema